A Thoughtful Defense of Shaughnessy's Position

[RockyMTblue2]

http://ndsmcobserver.com/2016/03/uconn-hurts-womens-college-hoops/

"Although unlikely, it would absolutely be of great benefit to women’s college basketball if the Huskies were not the team crowned as champion next week at the Final Four in Indianapolis, and it would be delusional of any defender of the sport to not acknowledge — at least to some degree — the validity of such a statement."

 

[uconnfan68]

http://ndsmcobserver.com/2016/03/uconn-hurts-womens-college-hoops/

"Although unlikely, it would absolutely be of great benefit to women’s college basketball if the Huskies were not the team crowned as champion next week at the Final Four in Indianapolis, and it would be delusional of any defender of the sport to not acknowledge — at least to some degree — the validity of such a statement."

Consider the source. Bunch of whiny losers.

 

[CocoHusky]

Consider me delusional then.

 

[Padutch5]

http://ndsmcobserver.com/2016/03/uconn-hurts-womens-college-hoops/

"Although unlikely, it would absolutely be of great benefit to women’s college basketball if the Huskies were not the team crowned as champion next week at the Final Four in Indianapolis, and it would be delusional of any defender of the sport to not acknowledge — at least to some degree — the validity of such a statement."

The title for this is an oxymoron. A defense of Shaugnessy's rant can't be thoughtful by definition.
Just as the Bull's reign under Michael Jordan was not bad for the NBA, the Huskies reign is not bad for women's basketball.
End of story. He got his day in the sun. Let's move on.

 

[GoUconn7961]

I get the issue of competition. I understand that. The problem I have is blaming it on UCONN. That is the terminology that makes me grit my teeth. Don't blame UCONN for being too good. Blame other squads for not being good enough.

 

[Adesmar123]

http://ndsmcobserver.com/2016/03/uconn-hurts-womens-college-hoops/

"Although unlikely, it would absolutely be of great benefit to women’s college basketball if the Huskies were not the team crowned as champion next week at the Final Four in Indianapolis, and it would be delusional of any defender of the sport to not acknowledge — at least to some degree — the validity of such a statement."

When Notre Dame wins its next WCBB final four, it will be considered much more thoughtful. For now its sour grapes.

 

[GoUconn7961]

You know that I had to write him an email response right? I wonder if he'll have the guts to respond to me.

 

[diggerfoot]

I attempted to respond, but too many hoops for me, I'm mainly a quick hitter these days. Here is my response:

"Undeniably" is the sort of hyperbolic, rhetorical, emotional wordsmithing used in lieu of empirical standards. OK, then, let's run with it. It's "undeniable" that UConn is the most watched WCBB team, with a viewership that goes beyond Connecticut. As with many dynastic teams, this is a love/hate thing; some folks like watching the beauty or, yes, even the dominance of UConn, some are watching precisely because they want to see that dominance end. Thus it is "undeniable" that more people will watch UConn/Oregon State than Washington/Syracuse, even if the great majority do so with the ardent desire to see UConn get upset. That type of viewership "undeniably" does not occur without the dominance first having been achieved.

At some point UConn "undeniably" will be beat and, as this article suggests, that "undeniably" will be good for WCBB, but "undeniably" only because they were so unbeatable prior to that.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Hey, guys and gals, I'm just willing away the hours and trying to share what I find. You do know by now, I hope, that I think his position is misogynistic BS!

PS. More reading if you want it. SI's take on the Texas game.

http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2016/03/28/womens-ncaa-tournament-uconn-texas-final-four

 

[cabbie191]

I don't agree with some of the criticism leveled against the author of the Observer article. Before explaining why, I think we should acknowledge that it was a well written piece, especially for a student, even if you don't agree with its conclusions.

1). It is easy to be emotionally reactive to the title of the piece which I believe is misleading in that Klaus never said UConn's success hurts women's basketball. What he did say is that it would be beneficial if UConn had more legitimate challengers. This is a very fine distinction, and is really like trying to split a hair. As a side note, if the Observer is run like papers that I've written for, an editor chose the title, not Klaus.

2) If you don't like the idea that it would be good for WCBB to have someone else challenge UConn, then consider that you are in the opposite camp of Geno. When he has said repeatedly that other schools need to up their game, do you think he means they should get better but still lose to the Huskies by 20 - 30 points each outing? He understands that having good close competition is ultimately what is best for the sport, and part of this is Connecticut not winning every year.

3) The Connecticut coaching staff has also repeatedly said that they won't apologize for pushing their players and team to be the best they can be, and to strive for perfection in the pursuit of excellence. Reread Klaus's article - he doesn't say this in so many words but the sentiment is there in the 4th paragraph when he says it is a shame Auriemma has to defend himself about the excellence of his teams.

 

[bags27]

I get the issue of competition. I understand that. The problem I have is blaming it on UCONN. That is the terminology that makes me grit my teeth. Don't blame UCONN for being too good. Blame other squads for not being good enough.

I agree that's the main point. The article is specious in arguing that there is greater rotation of championships in the men's game. OF COURSE, there is: at the very top level, where most championships are won, it's largely a game of rent-a-player-for-a-year.

One of the great things about WCBB is that coaches have 4 years to develop the talent of their recruits. As much as it is on the skill of the recruits, the game is a reflection of the teaching ability of the coach. Does anyone criticize a teacher for having terrific students?

 

[Plebe]

The whole "anybody but UConn" argument reeks of loser's jealousy. Would the author be writing this if it were Notre Dame going for 4 straight? Methinks not.

 

[CocoHusky]

I don't agree with some of the criticism leveled against the author of the Observer article. Before explaining why, I think we should acknowledge that it was a well written piece, especially for a student, even if you don't agree with its conclusions.

1). It is easy to be emotionally reactive to the title of the piece which I believe is misleading in that Klaus never said UConn's success hurts women's basketball. What he did say is that it would be beneficial if UConn had more legitimate challengers. This is a very fine distinction, and is really like trying to split a hair. As a side note, if the Observer is run like papers that I've written for, an editor chose the title, not Klaus.

2) If you don't like the idea that it would be good for WCBB to have someone else challenge UConn, then consider that you are in the opposite camp of Geno. When he has said repeatedly that other schools need to up their game, do you think he means they should get better but still lose to the Huskies by 20 - 30 points each outing? He understands that having good close competition is ultimately what is best for the sport, and part of this is Connecticut not winning every year.

3) The Connecticut coaching staff has also repeatedly said that they won't apologize for pushing their players and team to be the best they can be, and to strive for perfection in the pursuit of excellence. Reread Klaus's article - he doesn't say this in so many words but the sentiment is there in the 4th paragraph when he says it is a shame Auriemma has to defend himself about the excellence of his teams.

I have to disagree Strongly. The Author started with an insult: " It would be delusional of any defender of the sport to not acknowledge — at least to some degree — the validity of such a statement."
Translation: If you don't agree with me you are delusional. Downhill from there IMO.

 

[terif831]

I agree that it would be great for women's basketball in general, if another team won the national championship (although I would probably go into a deep depression if that were to happen, because oh I really want this for the seniors).
However, it would be great IF AND ONLY IF the winning team beat UCONN, and UCONN didn't beat themselves. In other words, if another team rose to UCONN's level and beat them? I would congratulate them and take a lot of consolation in the fact that the sport had evolved to that point. And I would need a whole lot of consolation.

 

[Wally East]

A post with this title is what I expected on Friday

 

[CL82]

I get the issue of competition. I understand that. The problem I have is blaming it on UCONN. That is the terminology that makes me grit my teeth. Don't blame UCONN for being too good. Blame other squads for not being good enough.

If the issue were recast into "Why haven't other teams stepped up to challenge UConn's national dominance in Woman's college basketball?" it would be less whiny.

Programs use a host of excuses, notably Connecticut's all- Americans, as to justify their inability to be competitive with UConn. My response to them, to paraphrase the Bard, is that "The fault lies not in our (UConn's) stars, but in yourself." Dedicate $$ to woman's basketball. Make sure they have facilities and resources. Pay for coaches and staff as well, set concrete performance goals and if they don't don't succeed fire the staff, just the way they do on the men's side. In the end parity doesn't exist because most college's don't care enough about woman's sports to do the thing necessary to make it happen.

UConn is what woman's ought to look like. If you don't like our annual championship runs, step up and commit to the resources and hard work necessary to challenge us. We'll be waiting.

 

[bags27]

I have to disagree Strongly. The Author started with an insult: " It would be delusional of any defender of the sport to not acknowledge — at least to some degree — the validity of such a statement."
Translation: If you don't agree with me you are delusional. Downhill from there IMO.

Written by a teenage boy....I recognize that point of view....

 

[Wally East]

I agree that's the main point. The article is specious in arguing that there is greater rotation of championships in the men's game. OF COURSE, there is: at the very top level, where most championships are won, it's largely a game of rent-a-player-for-a-year.

The pool of teams that win titles in the men's game is very shallow, too.

Since 1990:
10 different women's teams have won at least one title
13 different men's teams have won at least one title

 

[cabbie191]

I have to disagree Strongly. The Author started with an insult: " It would be delusional of any defender of the sport to not acknowledge — at least to some degree — the validity of such a statement."
Translation: If you don't agree with me you are delusional. Downhill from there IMO.

We can certainly agree to disagree on these things, but do you really believe that it wouldn't be good for the sport if we lose Sunday or Tuesday?

I proudly fly a UConn flag in front of my house, wear a UConn sweatshirt most days at work, and have a UConn hat that sits atop my cubicle here in Ann Arbor in the middle of Michigan Wolverine territory. I will be devastated if we lose and will absolutely hate the gloating that will show up on other team boards.

But I also accept the fact that if we do lose, that would be a good thing for WCBB. Just as I also think that the bar Geno and company have set for the rest of the schools is also a great thing.

 

[HuskyNan]

Another perspective:

When asked Tuesday, Washington coach Mike Neighbors had this to say about UConn and its dominance:

“What they’re doing right now is incredibly hard, and the fact that we’re not celebrating it like John Wooden’s success was celebrated back in the ‘60s — we’re calling him the greatest coach to ever live; the greatest thing to ever happen. … I don’t think it’s terrible for the game. I think we should be celebrating it.”

UW coach Mike Neighbors says UConn women’s success should be celebrated, Seattle Times

 

[CocoHusky]

We can certainly agree to disagree on these things, but do you really believe that it wouldn't be good for the sport if we lose Sunday or Tuesday?

I proudly fly a UConn flag in front of my house, wear a UConn sweatshirt most days at work, and have a UConn hat that sits atop my cubicle here in Ann Arbor in the middle of Michigan Wolverine territory. I will be devastated if we lose and will absolutely hate the gloating that will show up on other team boards.

But I also accept the fact that if we do lose, that would be a good thing for WCBB. Just as I also think that the bar Geno and company have set for the rest of the schools is also a great thing.

Yes I really believe that it would be bad for the sport if UCONN lost on Tuesday and worse if UCONN lost on Sunday. Fans are drawn to excellence like UCONN. A championship game on Tuesday without UCONN would probably lose at least half the audience ( TV & Stadium) from a year ago. How is that not bad for the sport?

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I agree that's the main point. The article is specious in arguing that there is greater rotation of championships in the men's game. OF COURSE, there is: at the very top level, where most championships are won, it's largely a game of rent-a-player-for-a-year.

One of the great things about WCBB is that coaches have 4 years to develop the talent of their recruits. As much as it is on the skill of the recruits, the game is a reflection of the teaching ability of the coach. Does anyone criticize a teacher for having terrific students?

Actually, the article from 538 I cite in the "help please" thread does conclude that today the women's game is absolutely more mature than the men's because of the large #es of the best who jump to the NBA each year; a phenomenon that Charles Barkley says has diluted the NBA and stilted player development.

 

[Beemer]

I get the issue of competition. I understand that. The problem I have is blaming it on UCONN. That is the terminology that makes me grit my teeth. Don't blame UCONN for being too good. Blame other squads for not being good enough.

Damn straight.

It is up to the other programs to raise themselves up to UConn's level. Yes, the bar is high but that is where it should be. And it can be done.

 

[GoUconn7961]

Someone posted a video on Twitter about the topic and it featured some footage with Shaunnessey, Brenda Frese & MD, etc. She came off as a huge whiner too. Wish I could find it..

 

[CL82]

Way back when, Pepperdine coach Gary Colson led the chorus of men’s coaches who bemoaned the UCLA run of titles from 1964 to 1975. It was ruining basketball, they harrumphed. To which Wooden, of course, had an answer:

“The same thing was said about the Yankees in baseball,’’ the iconic coach said after beating Kentucky for his final title in 1975. “Whether it’s an individual or a team, whenever you reach a plateau of excellence, there are always a lot of people who want to see you knocked down. Then, when that happens, they don’t know what they were complaining about. There were those who wanted to see Joe Louis get whipped when he was heavyweight champion all those years. Then, when he did, they were sorry.”

I don’t think anyone would be sorry if Connecticut got knocked from its lofty perch. But much of the complaining going on now needs to be re-directed toward embracing the challenge of getting it done.
​

Think the UConn women are too good? Quit whining and beat ’em (Larry Stone - The Settle Times.)