And so it begins: USA Today says the St. Francis blowout is bad for the sport

[tomcat]

Well, duh. It's one thing to win by an average of what? 36 points? and to view such wins as performance art. I do that, too, and I buy into that theory. I also buy into the concept that UConn has helped other teams improve their game, and that they nd their dominance are good for the sport.

But I guess I reluctantly agree that this game does the sport no good. Yes, it highlights the chasm between the top teams and the best of the bottom teams. Hell, they might as well play on different planets. But the trouble is, I don't know what anyone ca do about it. It's not as though St. Francis is going to seriously recruit, say, Napheesa Collier. It just ain't gonna happen.

The only consolation I can draw is that the lower level teams (despite this game, which I know, is an outlier because of St.Francis' style) seem better and more competitive than they used to be. Problem is that on a surface level, this game argues against it, for those sports fans (most of them) who do not look beyond the score and the headline.

Sigh.

 

[bags27]

I really disagree.

First, the first half was poetry in motion. there were so many great pick and rolls and other coordinated 2 and 3 man game. You can't shut that down.
Second, there was a lot of bench play in the 2nd half, and, by far, the bench played its best 4th Q of the year. That is really, really important. With Batouly and Meg looking good, it creates other possibilities going forward.

Who really cares about the score? sports news moves so quickly that everyone will forget about this in a day or two. Geno's only concern is giving his players some court time after the layoff and developing the bench as he wants to. If UConn wins the NC, no one will remember any score of any game, just that this is #12.

 

[BigBird]

Agreed, Bags. But what we have here is yet another male sportswriter who has difficulty accepting or acknowledging that women can, over the long term, compete and achieve at a very high level. How dare a group of women dominate a sport? I wonder if he would write the same rubbish about Alabama’s football team. Or the Duke men’s basketball team.

Funny how all of this male-driven “bad for the game” nonsense in the sports press started as soon as Geno passed Wooden.

 

[shizam]

Well, duh. It's one thing to win by an average of what? 36 points? and to view such wins as performance art. I do that, too, and I buy into that theory. I also buy into the concept that UConn has helped other teams improve their game, and that they nd their dominance are good for the sport.

But I guess I reluctantly agree that this game does the sport no good. Yes, it highlights the chasm between the top teams and the best of the bottom teams. Hell, they might as well play on different planets. But the trouble is, I don't know what anyone ca do about it. It's not as though St. Francis is going to seriously recruit, say, Napheesa Collier. It just ain't gonna happen.

The only consolation I can draw is that the lower level teams (despite this game, which I know, is an outlier because of St.Francis' style) seem better and more competitive than they used to be. Problem is that on a surface level, this game argues against it, for those sports fans (most of them) who do not look beyond the score and the headline.

Sigh.

Another problem WCBB has is there are sooo few really good teams. Teams like Texas and L’ville are rated high but aren’t really good. UConn is the only really good team. I am not a UConn fan. I watched several games yesterday and the games stunk. Today was better. More competitive and a few surprises. Quinippiac, Buffalo, C. Mich and FGCU were fun to see win.
Missouri, Syracuse, Miami, Virginia all stink. Yes I know Virginia won.

 

[CMC'72]

I really disagree. Who really cares about the score?

Exactly. It's the basketball ballet, and nothing but, that beguiles us all.

 

[HoopsFan21]

Nick Saban is bad for the game! His teams are always (five of the last nine) winning the national championship. What's the point of watching when you know who is going to win it all?

 

[shizam]

UConn is good for the game the problem is everyone else looks horrible compared to them. Pat Summitt is no longer with us and that was already changing when she was.

 

[HoopsFan21]

YConn is good for the game the problem is everyone else sucks

Is Alabama football good for the game and everyone else sucks? Is Duke men's basketball good for the game and everyone else sucks? Why is there so much criticism of women's basketball relative to other sports?

 

[lne001]

Second, there was a lot of bench play in the 2nd half, and, by far, the bench played its best 4th Q of the year.

Of course, they were playing against the bench from St. Francis. I should hope they would show something. My question is how would the UConn bench (sans Stevens) fare against the St. Francis starters. That would have been a much better 'contest'.

 

[shizam]

Is Alabama football good for the game and everyone else sucks? Is Duke men's basketball good for the game and everyone else sucks? Why is there so much criticism of women's basketball relative to other sports?

There is a much larger disparity between UConn in WBB than Bama in college fball and Duke in men’s b-ball. UConn loses once every 3 years and play fewest competitive games than Bama and Duke by far

 

[HoopsFan21]

There is a much larger disparity between UConn in WBB than Bama in college fball and Duke in men’s b-ball. UConn loses once every 3 years

UConn has won 6 of the last 10 titles. Alabama has won 5 of the last 10 titles. Not a huge difference yet almost no one has ever claimed Alabama and Nick Saban are bad for football. Why?

 

[shizam]

Is Alabama football good for the game and everyone else sucks? Is Duke men's basketball good for the game and everyone else sucks? Why is there so much criticism of women's basketball relative to other sports?

UConn has won 6 of the last 10 titles. Alabama has won 5 of the last 10 titles. Not a huge difference yet almost no one has ever claimed Alabama and Nick Saban are bad for football. Why?

It will soon be UConn winning 5 of last 6 titles and good for them. In the last 6 years (if UConn goes undefeated which they certainly will) how many total games will they have lost in 6 years?

 

[shizam]

UConn has won 6 of the last 10 titles. Alabama has won 5 of the last 10 titles. Not a huge difference yet almost no one has ever claimed Alabama and Nick Saban are bad for football. Why?

UConn has won 6 of last 9 titles
2009,2010,2013,2014,2015,2016. Lost 2011,2012 and 2017.
Soon 7 of 10 and VERY good for them. It’s how uncompetitive the seasons and championship games are. Have any of the 2009-2016 championship games been less than 15 point margins? Most are 29 or more. In a title game. That sucks

 

[HoopsFan21]

It will soon be UConn winning 5 of last 6 titles and good for them. In the last 6 years (if UConn goes undefeated which they certainly will) how many total games will they have lost in 6 years?

In the last six years, Alabama football has a winning percentage of .906 while UConn WCBB has a winning percentage of .952. Not a huge difference, but there is a huge difference in the calling out of WCBB. Why?

 

[tomcat]

Another problem WCBB has is there are sooo few really good teams. Teams like Texas and L’ville are rated high but aren’t really good. UConn is the only really good team. I am not a UConn fan. I watched several games yesterday and the games stunk. Today was better. More competitive and a few surprises. Quinippiac, Buffalo, C. Mich and FGCU were fun to see win.
Missouri, Syracuse, Miami, Virginia all stink. Yes I know Virginia won.

I guess that's the point I was making, but did not do it very well.

 

[shizam]

In the last six years, Alabama football has a winning percentage of .906 while UConn WCBB has a winning percentage of .952. Not a huge difference, but there is a huge difference in the calling out of WCBB. Why?

That’s a good stat. How many single digit margins were UConn games? Bama easily has more competitive games. The spread on a Bama championship game is going to be much closer than a UConn spread. A UConn spread will more than likely be 30 points in a championship game. Why? Because they win by that much! Shaughnesy was right when he wrote that article after UConn beat Miss St by 60 in a late tourney game.

 

[tomcat]

In the last six years, Alabama football has a winning percentage of .906 while UConn WCBB has a winning percentage of .952. Not a huge difference, but there is a huge difference in the calling out of WCBB. Why?

In this case, the calling out is not over one team winning a lot, or almost always, but beating another supposedly tournament-ready team 140-52. That is a very different thing. Do not answer the old Dan Shaughnessey b.s. about UConn being bad for basketball because it wins all the time. That is not the accusation this time and besides, you and I and everyone else on this site agree that watching UConn is watching poetry in motion and that the scores, most of the time, are irrelevant.

No, this writer's point is that an 88-point beatdown does the sport no good. The writer is saying that the difference between #1 and #64 is 88 points, which indicates the stratification of the sport.Not that UConn isn't good, but that he lower part of the women's game offers no competition with the UConns of the world. It's true.

As opposed to the men's game, I might add, where (finally!) #16 beat #1` last night. The writer is not wrong. There is a huge distance between 1 and 64, much more than on the men's side. The most I can say is that the women's game is developing and has a ways to go before it reaches the competitive level of the men, but that it's improved in that way recently.

 

[mhshuskies]

What is UCONN supposed to do, take a page from the Virginia playbook? They always choke and take an early exit from the tourney.

 

[GoUconn7961]

As I said in another thread. This is getting old. USA Today barely covers women's sports let alone WCBB. They're morons and their opinion is meaningless in this instance. They're a cartoon version of a newspaper and they know it. None of the trolls that peek out from under their rocks this time of year follow the women's game or even understand it. And none of them understand, or want to understand, the work that goes on behind the scenes in a program like Connecticut. Why we even give them the time of day is beyond me.

 

[shizam]

What is UCONN supposed to do, take a page from the Virginia playbook? They always choke and take an early exit from the tourney.

No. UConn is to do exactly what they do. Play great. The rest of WBB sucks compared to them. That is a fact unfortunately.

 

[HoopsFan21]

In this case, the calling out is not over one team winning a lot, or almost always, but beating another supposedly tournament-ready team 140-52. That is a very different thing. Do not answer the old Dan Shaughnessey b.s. about UConn being bad for basketball because it wins all the time. That is not the accusation this time and besides, you and I and everyone else on this site agree that watching UConn is watching poetry in motion and that the scores, most of the time, are irrelevant.

No, this writer's point is that an 88-point beatdown does the sport no good. The writer is saying that the difference between #1 and #64 is 88 points, which indicates the stratification of the sport.Not that UConn isn't good, but that he lower part of the women's game offers no competition with the UConns of the world. It's true.

As opposed to the men's game, I might add, where (finally!) #16 beat #1` last night. The writer is not wrong. There is a huge distance between 1 and 64, much more than on the men's side. The most I can say is that the women's game is developing and has a ways to go before it reaches the competitive level of the men, but that it's improved in that way recently.

Every single NEC team is not tourney ready. Go look at who is in that conference. I mean any team from that conference would get destroyed by a top 25 team. It's really a question of why does every conference deserve an auto bid ?

 

[shizam]

As I said in another thread. This is getting old. USA Today barely covers women's sports let alone WCBB. They're morons and their opinion is meaningless in this instance. They're a cartoon version of a newspaper and they know it. None of the trolls that peek out from under their rocks this time of year follow the women's game or even understand it. And none of them understand, or want to understand, the work that goes on behind the scenes in a program like Connecticut. Why we even give them the time of day is beyond me.

I think you are correct. They, like me see a 60 point blow out and get all charged up. I respect UConn because they are great. There games also get higher TV ratings. I just rarely watch much of the games due to scoring margins

 

[HoopsFan21]

No. UConn is to do exactly what they do. Play great. The rest of WBB sucks compared to them. That is a fact unfortunately.

So Baylor sucks? ND sucks? Texas sucks? Louisville sucks? Come on man I know it's not your position to call everyone else a crappy team. You really can't judge by these first round games.

 

[jcoton56]

USA Today is bad for journalism.

 

[HoopsFan21]

I think you are correct. They, like me see a 60 point blow out and get all charged up. I respect UConn because they are great. There games also get higher TV ratings. I just rarely watch much of the games due to scoring margins

They get higher TV ratings because they are in big TV markets. UConn lives in the #31 TV market while bordering the #8 and #1 TV markets. Of course they are going to get big ratings. Ohio State football dreams of having the media exposure of the UConn WCBB team.