A Thoughtful Defense of Shaughnessy's Position

[Sluconn Husky]

I don't agree. He supposed to be a PROFESSIONAL. How is what he tweeted professional?

Lots of professional writers think along similar lines.

Regardless, suppose you think his opinion is wrong? It's okay for him to come out in a public forum and downplay the sport and everyone including media, fans and coaches are supposed to take it without a response?

Why not? Had one reporter not brought it up to Geno at the press conference almost nobody would've ever found out about it.

But in ANY sport including one, when a public figure who doesn't even watch/like the sport we love not only trash it BUT TRASH our team (UCONN is killing the sport.), you CAN understand harsh reply from MANY UCONN's fan that disagree with him will look to post about the subject, right?

He thinks a team--in this case UConn since they are the only ones doing it--winning so often and so easily hurts the sport. I don't think he has anything against the Huskies from a personal standpoint. This kind of thing comes up every now and then in sport. It happened in cycling when Lance Armstrong was winning the Tour de France year after year. Tons of people hated it, thought it wasn't worth watching the race because they felt assured of who would win and win handily every year. I get that "killing the sport" comes across as irritating hyperbole, but I still see where people like him are coming from. I used to have similar feelings when Tennessee was winning three straight and the favorite for a fourth. It gets tiring if you're not a fan of the team doing the winning.

 

[chuck.r]

We should all do ourselves a favor and stay away from the Boston media when they start writing/talking about women's college basketball. They know spit about it as they make so abundantly clear every year.

Boston is widely viewed as a 'pro sports city'. The college level scene, outside of the Beanpot Tournament, or the Head of the Charles, (which are strong local annual events) has always played 2nd string to the Big Four franchises. Maybe when Flutie was at BC they checked out college FB. The media paid some attention to Calhoun & UConn in the 90's, cuz, you know, New England, but I always got the sense Boston sportswriters had a somewhat disjointed relationship with the state of CT, I guess because a lot of the state's fans are seen as having a stronger allegiance to the NY pro teams. Boston never covered the Whalers, and then there was that feint by the Pats ownership about moving the team south....

At the same time, I always got a kick out of Boston sports fans ruthlessly mocking any local scribe known for their "beat sport" trying to join the bandwagon on any other local team happening to do well. Shaughnessy, for example, if and when he tried writing about anything other than the Sox (and particularly when he tried covering the Bruins) was told in no uncertain terms to "get lost and stick to what he knows", with a few "CHB's" thrown in for injury.

Dan isn't really interested in sports journalism anyway. He comes from that long tradition at the Globe of 'sports pundits' - guys who had some fair writing talent and could spin an entertaining & colorful narrative that tended toward "lore" as opposed to analysis - Leigh Montville on the Sox, Bud Collins on pro tennis, Bob Ryan on the Celtics, etc. Shaughnessy was entertaining on his home turf, the Red Sox, but his schtick wears thin and is overtly transparent when he wanders off the diamond. As someone noted on another thread, Dan must feel like a man lost at sea now that the Red Sox have climbed Everest (x3) and Boston has been Title Town, USA the past 15 years. Boston sports angst and the Curse of the Bambino are dead and buried forever. He's lost his mojo.

 

[hoophuskee]

Lots of professional writers think along similar lines.



Why not? Had one reporter not brought it up to Geno at the press conference almost nobody would've ever found out about it.



He thinks a team--in this case UConn since they are the only ones doing it--winning so often and so easily hurts the sport. I don't think he has anything against the Huskies from a personal standpoint. This kind of thing comes up every now and then in sport. It happened in cycling when Lance Armstrong was winning the Tour de France year after year. Tons of people hated it, thought it wasn't worth watching the race because they felt assured of who would win and win handily every year. I get that "killing the sport" comes across as irritating hyperbole, but I still see where people like him are coming from. I used to have similar feelings when Tennessee was winning three straight and the favorite for a fourth. It gets tiring if you're not a fan of the team doing the winning.

1-- And lots of professional don't. You heard an analyst, Burke, ripping him. You heard Lawson and Lobo disagree with him. Their opinions count to, right? So why do you htinkit's nothing if so many disagree?

2-- I think your point about the reporter is irrrelevant. The fact is, it was brought up and people disagree with Dan's point, right? They have a right to disagree. Wy can't they express that right publicly in the same manner Dan expressed his right?

3-- IMO your missing the entre point. He doesn't follow wcbb. He ano cle "what is hrting the sport." But he did say UCONN IS. If I were to say "I don't eman to insult so-and-so, but then go ahead and insult him," I meant to insult him. If I'm not mistaken Dan is a HOF writer. He chsoe his words very direct "UCONN is killing the sport."

4-- And as a fans as what you have said vs Tennessee, are you trying to say as many people follow you that follow Dan? Dan has a bit of a following. Why are you bringing up what you said? What Dan says has the chance to be big news. You and I are much different, aren't we? A reporter isn;t going to report what you and I said "about the game" are to Geno during the NCAA Tourney, are they? So hwy are you comparing your comment vs his?

5-- What if there those that don't think UCONN is hurting game and think domination is fine. Why do you feel they shouldn't express that opinion once it got brought up by a National Sporstwriter?

And you have mentioned to me this wasn't much news before- yet you don't have a problem posting now about Armstrong. So you have an opinion. I disagree with it. Why is it so wrong to discuss this? You say "you see where people like him are coming from." I say from an experieccned writer to proclaim what is killing th sport from someoen who doesn't care one iota about wcbb is plain silly. IMO if LeBron James, Chris Paul Anthony Davis were ot have been same year in high school, chose a team and get guys like a style of a young Ginobili and a young Klay Thompson, and they ripped through mcbb, there may be some scuttle about it - but by-and large imo thisowuld be hailed great for mcbb.

 

[nd2tty]

I think the question of whether it would be good or bad for WCBB if UConn loses Sunday or Tuesday night might not be a simple "yes" or "no". I think the manner in which they lose - which they won't - would matter too. Say, for example, if UConn brings its B+ game (plays well, hard, maybe a slightly off shooting night, maybe foul trouble, etc...) and Oregon State or Syracuse/Washington brings their A+++ game and plays out of their minds. I think that could also be good for WCBB, i.e. to see a really good competitive game, really well played on both sides, close down to the finish.

 

[BRS24]

Boston is widely viewed as a 'pro sports city'. The college level scene, outside of the Beanpot Tournament, or the Head of the Charles, (which are strong local annual events) has always played 2nd string to the Big Four franchises. Maybe when Flutie was at BC they checked out college FB. The media paid some attention to Calhoun & UConn in the 90's, cuz, you know, New England, but I always got the sense Boston sportswriters had a somewhat disjointed relationship with the state of CT, I guess because a lot of the state's fans are seen as having a stronger allegiance to the NY pro teams. Boston never covered the Whalers, and then there was that feint by the Pats ownership about moving the team south....

If DS is going to write about college sports, perhaps he should look into his backyard and write something about the BC football and MBB programs going winless in conference play this past season in the ACC. The "team (FB) of New England" certainly has made it's mark - NOT!

 

[ctdad]

This thread only shows that Shaughnessy got what he wanted: he writes/says what he does in order to draw attention to himself. The number of positive things he's written over the past 30+ years could probably be counted on one hand.

The best way to handle Shaughnessy is to ignore him completely. Back when the Globe site was free, I got to the point where I refused to click on any article/column with his byline on it. Now that he's behind a pay wall, it's even easier to ignore him.

 

[BRS24]

UConn women offer a clinic on how game should be played

 

[Sluconn Husky]

1-- And lots of professional don't. You heard an analyst, Burke, ripping him. You heard Lawson and Lobo disagree with him. Their opinions count to, right? So why do you htinkit's nothing if so many disagree?

2-- I think your point about the reporter is irrrelevant. The fact is, it was brought up and people disagree with Dan's point, right? They have a right to disagree. Wy can't they express that right publicly in the same manner Dan expressed his right?

Who said you weren't free to disagree? I simply think a mountain was made out of a molehill. The guy didn't say much of anything that hasn't been said many times before, and the reporter obviously wanted a reaction from Geno which he got, and the subsequent consternation followed. I linked to another Boston Globe writer's
piece the other day which was a hundred times more inflammatory than what Shaugnessey tweeted, but nobody got a reaction from Geno to it so it's a blip on the radar.

"UCONN is killing the sport."

I think be both know his point is that UConn filleting teams and winning 116-117 is what he's concerned is "killing" the sport. Again, there are lots of people who agree that their dominance makes it boring and not worth watching. It's a point of view I'm not outraged by because I understand what he's getting at even if I don't agree with the premise.

5-- What if there those that don't think UCONN is hurting game and think domination is fine. Why do you feel they shouldn't express that opinion once it got brought up by a National Sporstwriter?

Again, I never said people can't express their opinion. I'm saying the reaction and week-long drama doesn't fit the "crime."

And you have mentioned to me this wasn't much news before- yet you don't have a problem posting now about Armstrong. So you have an opinion. I disagree with it. Why is it so wrong to discuss this? You say "you see where people like him are coming from." I say from an experieccned writer to proclaim what is killing th sport from someoen who doesn't care one iota about wcbb is plain silly. IMO if LeBron James, Chris Paul Anthony Davis were ot have been same year in high school, chose a team and get guys like a style of a young Ginobili and a young Klay Thompson, and they ripped through mcbb, there may be some scuttle about it - but by-and large imo thisowuld be hailed great for mcbb.

I don't know what you are saying about my Armstrong comments. I was relaying a situation that was similar in type and reaction to the one UConn is involved in. My point is that when a team or individual dominates to the extent UConn has some people get sick of it, bored by it, and refuse to watch because they feel the outcome is all but determined. As for a powerhouse men's team, that scenario would be one team for a few years. If one school dominated over a 10-20 year period like UConn has there would be many complaints.

 

[hoophuskee]

I think the question of whether it would be good or bad for WCBB if UConn loses Sunday or Tuesday night might not be a simple "yes" or "no". I think the manner in which they lose - which they won't - would matter too. Say, for example, if UConn brings its B+ game (plays well, hard, maybe a slightly off shooting night, maybe foul trouble, etc...) and Oregon State or Syracuse/Washington brings their A+++ game and plays out of their minds. I think that could also be good for WCBB, i.e. to see a really good competitive game, really well played on both sides, close down to the finish.

I'll wait for one game at a time but regarding if Oregon wins, it stretches the imagination / the universal world of gravity that we believe we know, that the game will all of a sudden jump to being so much more popular.

Oregon State plays games primarily in the 60's. Why do you think that is? If they were an explosive offensive team, they would push pace much more. They are a good defensive team. They don't seem super-athletic. So the chance this is some super game where both teams play terrific is slim. If UCONN plays well (b+) game, the chance Oregon State can beat them -- they would have to play/be something they really haven't been all season. At least the other two teams - Cuse with deep bench and shoots many three's and with Wash maybe Plum can control pace and be prolific. Oregon State is solid -- very good ball club. They don't play a style that will "change the landscape" and attract a significant number of fans.

If they win, more that likely would have slowed down the pace and muddied up the game a bit. IMO that isn't "good for the game" without a super player. They have very good player's that can play super but not the type to be universal - and getting more to watch.

 

[hoophuskee]

Who said you weren't free to disagree? I simply think a mountain was made out of a molehill. The guy didn't say much of anything that hasn't been said many times before, and the reporter obviously wanted a reaction from Geno which he got, and the subsequent consternation followed. I linked to another Boston Globe writer's
piece the other day which was a hundred times more inflammatory than what Shaugnessey tweeted, but nobody got a reaction from Geno to it so it's a blip on the radar.




I think be both know his point is that UConn filleting teams and winning 116-117 is what he's concerned is "killing" the sport. Again, there are lots of people who agree that their dominance makes it boring and not worth watching. It's a point of view I'm not outraged by because I understand what he's getting at even if I don't agree with the premise.



Again, I never said people can't express their opinion. I'm saying the reaction and week-long drama doesn't fit the "crime."




I don't know what you are saying about my Armstrong comments. I was relaying a situation that was similar in type and reaction to the one UConn is involved in. My point is that when a team or individual dominates to the extent UConn has some people get sick of it, bored by it, and refuse to watch because they feel the outcome is all but determined. As for a powerhouse men's team, that scenario would be one team for a few years. If one school dominated over a 10-20 year period like UConn has there would be many complaints.

1--- If you are okay with disagreeing then what's the problem you are having? Why exaggerate and call it "mountain out of mohill?" IMO people disagree with Dan and when they disagree - is that "Mountain of a Mohill?" He is defending his comments too. Geno for example said "don't watch." That is "a Mountain out of a Mohill?" People want to know how a HOF sportswriter could claim that he knows "what's good for the game" for a game that he readily admits he never watches. He has the forum to back up his comments and explain even though that UCONN's has higher ratings overall - he just says "I like close games." Do close games ensure a sport is vibrant? What does he say about those sports. There are many sports that games are close. Anyhow, if people disagree with Dan, how can they appease your view of not going too far? And when Dan replies back? Where is the lien between "being okay to argue" and "making a mountain out of mohill?"

2-- The link you provided - was that writer a HOF Sporstwriter too? Does he have the national following that Dan has? That's the same point I got back to you about before when you spoke of Tennesse. Nobody cares what you and I say. And weren't a few replies to your link; "Who is this guy?" I didn't know who he was. I googled him and read a bit that he got into an argument on the air with someone and walked off the set - I think live. Dan is a HOF writer. Shouldn't we expect more from him? So if we agree that should, then why again did you bring up this other guy that no one cares about? Your link might as well come from a blog that you or I wrote.

3-- ANd I'm sorry -- NO-- we BOTH don't KNOW. I think your opinion on this is wrong and I think you are exaggerating points and twisting Dan's points - why I don't know. It's okay your opinion your prerogative. When you and I argue always has been civil I hope it continues- but when you say "I think we both know" - I have to respond in kind. Hopeful this doesn't get contentious. I disagree with you a LOT but we always have been very, very civil.

Per below- Dan has specifally mentioned UCONN. He said UCONN is killing the sport. The link below he is singling out UCONN. No OTHER TEAM. Notre Dame has made how many successive final fours before this year? How many losses have they had other than to UCONN for the past 4 or 5 or 6 years etc? So when he says "I don't like to know who is going to win before the game starts," why is it Just UCONN then that he singles out? He said -- just said "Just give UCONN the trophy." If someone were to come on the board last year and tell YOU that UCONN has nothing to worry about vs ND in the finals, what would you say/think? And this is from a HOF sportswriter? This time of idiotic comment shouldn't be challenged from a guy that you'd think should know better? This isn't some newbie-hack from ESPN. Here is the link he continues to speak of UCONN and not other teams.

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-b...rs-no-apologies-connecticut-huskies-dominance

I am so surprised - you of all people question things from so many -- which is GREAT!!! Yet here we have a National Sportswriter admitting he doesn't watch the game (yet feel like he knows who is killing the sport- of which many doubt if it were close he still wouldn't give a dman.) and he is saying stupid things from the link above like --

"They sign up for the championship like you sign up for gym class," he said, smiling. "They just say 'OK, we're here this year. Hand over the trophy.'"

YOU thought the game between UCONN vs ND was pretty tough this year, right? And the ND game was close last year, right? Do you really think the stamen made above is coming from someone that knows what he is talking about pertaining to wcbb? He is the one that spoke of "the game" and what needs to be done.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

1--- If you are okay with disagreeing then what's the problem you are having? Why exaggerate and call it "mountain out of mohill?"

It has gotten national media coverage. National. Don't think it's an exaggeration to say it's been blown out of proportion.

Dan is a HOF writer. Shouldn't we expect more from him? So if we agree that should, then why again did you bring up this other guy that no one cares about?

Sounds like it's not about the comment but about the person to you. The other guy's comments were far closer to offensive, imo. And I don't really expect anything from Shaugnessey. Don't care about him. If he feels UConn's dominance ruins it for him and he doesn't want to watch, so be it. His loss.

3-- ANd I'm sorry -- NO-- we BOTH don't KNOW. I think your opinion on this is wrong and I think you are exaggerating points and twisting Dan's points.

...

Per below- Dan has specifally mentioned UCONN. He said UCONN is killing the sport. The link below he is singling out UCONN. No OTHER TEAM.

UConn has won 5 of the last 7 titles with perhaps another coming soon, 122 of 123 games by double digits, has three winning streaks of over 70 games, five undefeated seasons, and the top 6 scoring differentials in WCBB history. No other team has done or is doing what UConn is and I'm surprised you are kinda acting otherwise. Notre Dame's done some nice things but has one title.

You seem to be assuming his comment is personal about the program. Why would he have anything against the program? Occam's razor would suggest he'd have the same beef if UConn's domination came at Georgetown or Nebraska.

 

[hoophuskee]

It has gotten national media coverage. National. Don't think it's an exaggeration to say it's been blown out of proportion.



Sounds like it's not about the comment but about the person to you. The other guy's comments were far closer to offensive, imo. And I don't really expect anything from Shaugnessey. Don't care about him. If he feels UConn's dominance ruins it for him and he doesn't want to watch, so be it. His loss.





UConn has won 5 of the last 7 titles with perhaps another coming soon, 122 of 123 games by double digits, has three winning streaks of over 70 games, five undefeated seasons, and the top 6 scoring differentials in WCBB history. No other team has done or is doing what UConn is and I'm surprised you are kinda acting otherwise. Notre Dame's done some nice things but has one title.

You seem to be assuming his comment is personal about the program. Why would he have anything against the program? Occam's razor would suggest he'd have the same beef if UConn's domination came at Georgetown or Nebraska.

1-- I do believe you ARE exaggerating - calling it "A Mountain of a Mohill" - this issue IS debatable. Unlike the ESPN guy you provided a link to, his points were so idiotic that there is no national debate. People have agreed with Dan and others have taken the opposite point. You have two sides that disagree and they are media-types. How are they supposed to express themselves if they disagree? Crawl under a rock? If both have valid points, then let's hear them.

2-- I agree with you about Dan. But did you listen to the last game which Doris spoke? She asked the play-by-play announcer his opinion. He fence-straddled the issue because "he has so much respect for Dan," blah blah blah. I still don't get why you say this is nothingness and a mountain of a mohill if other media people agree with Dan while many other media people don't. Along with as you indicate Dan makes good points- and it seems you think the other side has good points too. So how is this all -- "nothing?" And do you think UCONN is killing the sport? From your reply it sounds like you don't.

3-- There is a little discussion about the guy that is offensive because it is so obvious that he is, so there is nothing to debate. Who comes to his defense? Other Tenn fans? Because people agree with Dan and he is a HOF writer there is more national conflict on the subject. It is MORE THAN just Dan's loss of not appreciating domination regarding those of us that disagree with him. And on a public/national stage some of us like that there are other public media people attacking his opinion/ sticking up for our POV. That's a good thing.

4-- Telling me what UCONN has done is nice -- but you missed my point. And I think you are missing the overall point of why many of us have such an issue with Dan. You mention that Dan just doesn't like dominance - end of story. Dan has elaborated on his comments of which I gave you link/ specifics comments he said. It's your choice to ignore the comments and give me UCONN's data. I choose NOT to ignore them and want other national media people to call Dan out. He specifically said he doesn't want to watch games he knows who will win. He specifically said UCONN is killing the game. I asked you about Notre Dame. You gave me UCONN's data. That isn't the same. Don't we know many, many. many, many. many, mnay, mnay, many, many times Notre Dame is going to win before the opening tip? If it is just ONE TEAM that is killing the sport -- then his comment is MORE THAN "I don't like to know before the start who is going to win." So is Notre Dame also killing the sport too- or as Dan likes to think he is the voice of the rank-and-file fan, and that the sport is more about being fun if you don't know who is going to win the championship.

Well then if it is about titles only, then didn't Notre Dame give us a good run last year? And you also thought this year. So his statements - just hand them the trophy - are full of crap, aren't they? Two years prior Natalie from ND got hurt. Undefeated teams squaring off and coaches publicly at war with another on a National Stage. Prior to that ND took it to UCONN four out of the past 5. UCONN won by a lot but there was no Natalie. The teams were undefeated - BATTLE of the Titans who hated one another!! The SPORT was WONDERFUL at that moment before the Natalie injury - was it not? And UCONN won't be dominant next year, will they? SO why shouldn't a national sports writer be called out for his idiotic comments especially when you have other idiots agreeing with him? His reasoning/logic is so wrong. It is more than just he doesn't like dominance. It's the attack of the SCHOOL and the GAME.

5-- This is just another example of the many ways you and I look at things -- we disagree often. You say/imply I am taking this a bit personal yet you seem to ignore the questions I gave you about Notre Dame. Why should Notre Dame be ignored when the same applies that before opening tip - Dan should know that many, many. many, many many times Notre Dame is going to win? Why would he single out UCONN and only UCONN? Why would he ignore the close games Notre Dame gives UCONN? Why is he ignoring next year where it may very well be wide open? Why are all these unanswered questions characterized as me taking it personal? Only one team can be dominant? All the other wcbb games are boring at the moment they play because maybe at some point in the future they might face UCONN? Oregon State vs Baylor was boring because the next week they have to face UCONN? Last year's game ND vs USC was boring because the next game they would have to face UCONN? And this guy is a supposedly HOF sportswriter?
Thee is NOTHING thoughtful as this thread 1st indicates with his POV -- other than he doesn't like domination.

 

[ME Husky Fan]

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..

Did you ever come across that footage you were looking for? I watched one this morning with Frese and Dano and Frese did come off as a whiner.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

1-- I do believe you ARE exaggerating - calling it "A Mountain of a Mohill" - this issue IS debatable.

I think this whole thing has been exaggerated but not on my end. Way too much emotion being put into a twitter comment that's a version of what many have said they've felt for years.

I choose NOT to ignore them and want other national media people to call Dan out. He specifically said he doesn't want to watch games he knows who will win. He specifically said UCONN is killing the game. I asked you about Notre Dame. You gave me UCONN's data. That isn't the same. Don't we know many, many. many, many. many, mnay, mnay, many, many times Notre Dame is going to win before the opening tip?

What do you want Shaugnessey to do? Change his opinion? Pretend to change his opinion and apologize? And while we may know ND is the favorite in the vast majority of regular season games they play--something he probably wouldn't be thrilled with either--it's still not the same as winning 10 titles in 20 years.

And UCONN won't be dominant next year, will they?

No, UConn is unlikely to be dominant next year but he doesn't know that. He has a general impression based on the end results and the amazing things UConn does. He's not an expert of the game which is another reason I shrug off his comments.

Why would he single out UCONN and only UCONN?

They haven't won a game by less than double digits in more than three years. They've lost 12 games in 8 years overall. Who else was he going to point out as a "sure thing" to win the title?

All the other wcbb games are boring at the moment they play because maybe at some point in the future they might face UCONN?

Thee is NOTHING thoughtful as this thread 1st indicates with his POV -- other than he doesn't like domination.

His comments indicate he's only referring to the NCAA tourney and its eventual winner. And yes, he clearly does not like domination to the point that he thinks the end champion is all but a given. Had he simply said that rather than use the "killing the sport" line I think fewer people would've been rankled.

 

[UcMiami]

What I would like him to do is just say plainly 'I don't like women's basketball. Doesn't matter if it is a blow out or a very tight game, does't matter if it is college, WNBA, or the Olympics, I'm not watching it because I don't like it. Doesn't matter if my daughter or niece or grand-daughter decides to play, I'm not watching.'
He has said that, but mixed up in a lot of justifications and obfuscations.

 

[UConn79]

Shaughnessy's 15 minutes of fame are long over. Let's put this to rest and get back to the business at hand, winning number 11.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

What I would like him to do is just say plainly 'I don't like women's basketball. Doesn't matter if it is a blow out or a very tight game, does't matter if it is college, WNBA, or the Olympics, I'm not watching it because I don't like it. Doesn't matter if my daughter or niece or grand-daughter decides to play, I'm not watching.'
He has said that, but mixed up in a lot of justifications and obfuscations.

The puke has a very vested interest in keeping sports male dominated. I thoroughly agree with Geno that a guy who never watched the game tweeting his rancor says a lot about the tweeter.

 

[bags27]

On another thread, I estimated there are about 4200 D-1 WCBB games/year (I multiplied the number of teams times 25 [low estimate of games/season] and divided by 2 [it takes 2 teams to play). The point is, you can't watch any of the 4200 games, because you think you know who's going to win the last one of these?

 

[hoophuskee]

I think this whole thing has been exaggerated but not on my end. Way too much emotion being put into a twitter comment that's a version of what many have said they've felt for years.

What do you want Shaugnessey to do? Change his opinion? Pretend to change his opinion and apologize? And while we may know ND is the favorite in the vast majority of regular season games they play--something he probably wouldn't be thrilled with either--it's still not the same as winning 10 titles in 20 years.

No, UConn is unlikely to be dominant next year but he doesn't know that. He has a general impression based on the end results and the amazing things UConn does. He's not an expert of the game which is another reason I shrug off his comments.

They haven't won a game by less than double digits in more than three years. They've lost 12 games in 8 years overall. Who else was he going to point out as a "sure thing" to win the title?

His comments indicate he's only referring to the NCAA tourney and its eventual winner. And yes, he clearly does not like domination to the point that he thinks the end champion is all but a given. Had he simply said that rather than use the "killing the sport" line I think fewer people would've been rankled.

There is emotion because the issue isn’t about “nothing” as you proclaimed in one of your earlier posts. I guess we are just going to have to agree to disagree. So many people are in on the discussion because it is FAR from nothing and imo that is why you’re Mountain out of a Mohill comment is an exaggeration.

Why is it “all about Dan?” You said earlier to me when someone challenges his comment “Who said you weren't free to disagree?” Many are disagreeing with him and as you’ve already posted to me that anyone has a right to disagree with him, right? You just brought up irrelevant facts like “it’s getting emotional.” So what? We both agree that both sides have a right to express their opinion, correct? Well Dan said in so many words WCBB stinks and UCONN is killing the sport. Why can’t we hear from many in wcbb that disagree? As you said to me “Who said you weren't free to disagree?” Dan attacked THE GAME. Are you trying to stifle the many that are a part of the women’s game that differ from his pov? Why should they be shut out from hearing their pov expressed?

When you speak of "what Dan’s supposed to be doing?" Really? Is your answer that he needs to be going on talk shows and giving interviews while continuing to go after UCONN and WCBB? He is CHOOSING to do this. He can decline. If he continues to say stupid stuff, why can’t there continually be a counter? As I said above, is it all about Dan? He threw the first stone and continues to throw them.

And again I disagree with how you look at things. You politely accused me of taking things too personal from all of Dan’s comments. I pointed back to you the many times Dan singled out UCONN and asked you why did he not also include Notre Dame. So now your reply to me is “probably Dan does not like them too,” --- but then you come back at me at UCONN again - ignoring the Notre Dame point in which he has continually said NOTHING? You avoided my question just to comeback at UCONN. So singling out UCONN from an experienced HOF writer guy like Dan, I’m supposed to take it just because you do? Nah. If you wat to - that's your perogative. I liek it when Dan is challenged. And the UCONN team is supposed to take it? The people that disagree with him are supposed to take it? Let’s not turn the other cheek, instead let's hold the idiot accountable for his logic so maybe next time other idiots with a National voice won’t go out and say some things that are so ignorant that it gets many that disagree in an uproar.

You’re right I agree with you he is not an expert of the game. But he is a HOF NATIONAL sportswriter and as YOU have mentioned many others have agreed with him. So why is he still fighting this? HE is a HOF sportswriter. Yet he is talking about (and continues to talk about) UCONN killing the game of which the game he knows little of? If you know he is wrong and keeps up saying stupid stuff in which he gets such national exposure, shouldn’t it be countered on a National Level as a counter? To defend wcbb from complete idiots of the game, imo that subject is much more than “nothingness” as you call it.

And as you mention when you say “His comments indicate he's only referring to the NCAA tourney and its eventual winner,” imo you have twisted his comments. He specifically said he doesn’t like to know who is going to win before the game starts. Where are you coming up with that his comments ONLY are referring to NCAA’s? That’s what I mean about you are over-exagerrating. Here is what he said from the link:

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/15090810/geno-auriemma-offers-no-apologies-connecticut-huskies-dominance

"For women's college basketball, it's probably good to have a goal and have a great team, but for the rank-and-file sports fans, it's not good to have a team that just kills everyone, every game, every week, every year."

He says every game every week every year. Where does it say NCAA? Are you trying to imply that regular season he is okay with blowouts? He has told us that when he watches he doesn’t want to know who will win before the start. How is that interpreted to only NCAA’s? This is an experienced writer. His JOB is specifically dependent upon the words he uses. The phrases he uses. You seem to want to excuse many of his words and phrases and re-write them into your own– yet he doesn’t seem to want to do what your re-write when elaborates on other talk shows etc.