Boatright

[UCweCONN]

I suspect someone from West Virginia in the Boatright case. No evidence, just a couple of factors which make me think. He signed with them and then backed out so they might not be happy or know about the incident already from their recruitment (also could be why they signed another guard) and might want to hurt the Huskies, especially so close to the start of the season. The other factor is WV's move to the Big 12 and possible issues with UCONN if UCONN is one of the schools giving them a hard time over leaving. I haven't heard any other alternate theories posed so until the facts come out I'm going to think this is what happened.

I have to wonder if it is the NCAA who seems to focus on UConn recruits/players, or is there someone out there who has a vendetta against Calhoun and they 'tip off' the NCAA on the UConn players and that causes what seems to be an 'over-sampling' of UConn players looked at by the NCAA. I am guessing it is the later of the two options above.

 

[nomar]

First of all, they won 30 games. It wasn't like they were a bubble team and they beat 14 big East teams in a 16 game schedule, so I'd argue that they beat a lot better teams than George Mason. to me the secondary ballhandler stuff was an excuse someone dreamed up after the fact to try and explain the unexplainable...I think Calhoun was more honest when he made his comment about so many guys being more interested in 3 letters than 4.

An excuse someone dreamed up after the fact? Like, say, chemistry issues? That's the #1 most popular excuse used in hindsight. Look at the 2011 Red Sox. It wasn't chemistry or egos that did them in. It was, among other problems, crappy pitching. But when you lose, people point fingers and say things like "they weren't winners."

Remember the Nova game that we lost? Where they picked our pockets all game long? From that point forward, I questioned the team's ability to handle the ball well enough to win the title. Sure, we killed them the next time around by relying on our superiority inside, but the earlier game exposed a fatal weakness.

Look, we were much better than George Mason. We should have won. GMU was running the same simple plays over and over and we couldn't stop them. But UConn did not dominate all tourny long, and we simply weren't going to win the whole thing with Rashad as our #2 ballhandler.

IMO, if AJ Price had played for that team, we would have made it to the Finals, "egos" and all. I also totally believe that had we beaten GMU, Florida would have smoked us.

 

[rbny1]

I have to wonder if it is the NCAA who seems to focus on UConn recruits/players, or is there someone out there who has a vendetta against Calhoun and they 'tip off' the NCAA on the UConn players and that causes what seems to be an 'over-sampling' of UConn players looked at by the NCAA. I am guessing it is the later of the two options above.

Maybe UConn self-investigated and self-reported the Boatright situation. The school may feel it has to be squeaky clean because of its recent problems with the NCAA. Just a thought.

 

[Fishy]

Cam Newton never missed a game.

Suspended one afternoon, reinstated before lunch the next day.

Just wondering aloud to no one in particular.

 

[BLUEDOGHOUSE]

The AAU circuit consists of a high percentage of very poor kids who seem to fly around to different cities every week all summer. Does the NCAA really want to look into who is paying for all of that?

With high profile AAU teams"Sponsors" usually foot the bill. They pay for all the team members flights or maybe if 1 of the parents can't afford it they will pay for that player. In this case it wasn't a car wash or a bake sale selling Toll House cookies. The catch here usually is that the "sponsors" sometimes are entities with other ulterior motives.

 

[floridahuskie]

Cam Newton never missed a game.

Suspended one afternoon, reinstated before lunch the next day.

Just wondering aloud to no one in particular.

well you just have a disorted vision of realtity

cam/newton/ncaa div 1 f$$tb$all

ncaa/wehatejchuskiesstorrsetc/com

you are a bright guy - do the math

 

[intlzncster]

An excuse someone dreamed up after the fact? Like, say, chemistry issues? That's the #1 most popular excuse used in hindsight. Look at the 2011 Red Sox. It wasn't chemistry or egos that did them in. It was, among other problems, crappy pitching. But when you lose, people point fingers and say things like "they weren't winners."

Wrong. It was beer and chicken wings (Popeye's...if I'm not mistaken). Clearly you are uniformed.

 

[ctchamps]

An excuse someone dreamed up after the fact? Like, say, chemistry issues? That's the #1 most popular excuse used in hindsight. Look at the 2011 Red Sox. It wasn't chemistry or egos that did them in. It was, among other problems, crappy pitching. But when you lose, people point fingers and say things like "they weren't winners."

Remember the Nova game that we lost? Where they picked our pockets all game long? From that point forward, I questioned the team's ability to handle the ball well enough to win the title. Sure, we killed them the next time around by relying on our superiority inside, but the earlier game exposed a fatal weakness.

Look, we were much better than George Mason. We should have won. GMU was running the same simple plays over and over and we couldn't stop them. But UConn did not dominate all tourny long, and we simply weren't going to win the whole thing with Rashad as our #2 ballhandler.

IMO, if AJ Price had played for that team, we would have made it to the Finals, "egos" and all. I also totally believe that had we beaten GMU, Florida would have smoked us.

Stated as well as anything I've read about this subject. People are accurate when they say haters are going to hate. Well people hate losing. And rather than accepting the situation (players lack skill sets), or just analyzing the situation, they want to hurt the entity that caused them pain. And the best way a fan can do that is to attack the character of the players that they felt let them down.

Expectations were as great as ever for a UConn team before and during the 2006 season. When we expect something and fail to get that something it results in disappointment. If someone has the personality that will not accept that life is unpredictable, if that same person is needy and is prone to blaming the situation (in this case failed expectations) on others as opposed to themselves, this type of person will turn on a player or team.

This season has the same ingredients as 2006. People are coming off a high. Most of the players involved in the NC are back. And the recruiting of RB, DD and AD has people expecting nothing less than a final four. Hopefully the situation will turn out better than 2006. But if it doesn't people with the same characteristics in their personalities I've listed will play the blame game and character assassinate.

Like most of us with flaws (and we all have them), we quite often don't realize we have a flaw, even as others can readily see them. And if someone does not see or believe they have a flaw, pointing it out will not get the person to recognize said flaw, never mind change said flaw. But thats the beauty of this forum. We are a family of misfits with a wide spectrum of perspectives, that have an intense appreciation of a team and that, for the most part, manage to tolerate one another.

 

[HuskyFan32]

The 2006 team lost to George Mason in part because Williams was their only ball handler. They also didnt have a go to guy. Rudy Gay was very good that year, but he struggled to score in the half court offense. Also, Hilton Armstrong and Josh Boone really weren't that good. Boone got destroyed by the 6'6' PF that game (cant remember his name). That team was very good but had a lot of flaws (ft shooting, no ball handlers, no go to guy, nobody cared). Its funny that of all UConn teams, that was the one that had its eyes on the NBA most, when looking back on it the only true NBA prospect was Rudy Gay. Boone wasn't that athletic and had limited offense. Hilton had one good year and not much offense. Williams wasn't athletic (I expected him to have a good NBA career tho; hes been a huge disappointment). Rashad couldnt handle the ball as a 2 guard, and Denham was good at everything, but great at nothing. With that said, Denham Brown was the most underrated Uconn player of all time. Uconn has had numerous teams with more NBA level potential (at least it appeared so at the time).

 

[Donyell]

Why the hell should he miss any. John Wall was able to pay back $600 and was cleared the next freaking day.What about this is so different and don't know why we keep going over 2006 it is old news and I know the connection with only one pt guard but we will have Boat back sooner than later if it comes to that. 2006 was a great year in many respects until the Mason game no matter how you slice it sometimes things just don't go your way. If Mason shoots 65% instead of 70% we win and it's on to the final 4. happens.

 

[sparky]

I hate the whole circus around AAU.As a bball official I have seen so much of that sort of crap. These kids do not learn how to play basketball. They are essetially exhibiting their offensive wares for coaches and losing real contact with their HS coaches and mates. These kids are good athletes and enter college with P POOR fundamentals and have no concept of team and loyalty or committment.

 

[johnhuskies95]

I'm sorry, but I just don't think any team was going to "smoke" UConn that year. Nobody.

That Marquette game that year was a fluke.

 

[traitor71]

Why do some people always want to believe there is some vast conspiracy afoot?" The NCAA is out to get UConn", "they" are out to destroy the Big East, etc. Why can't it just be what it is? In AAU, shady things go on and maybe something did here. The APR is what it is, a lot of other programs seem to be doing fine with it. The Big East had zero vision at the top and has struggled perception wise as a result.

I find it hard to believe that someone woke up one day and said "let's get UConn".

 

[nelsonmuntz]

An excuse someone dreamed up after the fact? Like, say, chemistry issues? That's the #1 most popular excuse used in hindsight. Look at the 2011 Red Sox. It wasn't chemistry or egos that did them in. It was, among other problems, crappy pitching. But when you lose, people point fingers and say things like "they weren't winners."

Remember the Nova game that we lost? Where they picked our pockets all game long? From that point forward, I questioned the team's ability to handle the ball well enough to win the title. Sure, we killed them the next time around by relying on our superiority inside, but the earlier game exposed a fatal weakness.

Look, we were much better than George Mason. We should have won. GMU was running the same simple plays over and over and we couldn't stop them. But UConn did not dominate all tourny long, and we simply weren't going to win the whole thing with Rashad as our #2 ballhandler.

IMO, if AJ Price had played for that team, we would have made it to the Finals, "egos" and all. I also totally believe that had we beaten GMU, Florida would have smoked us.

Ball handling and chemistry were both big problems, as was that team's tendency to play up or down to their competition. While Marcus Williams was as good a ballhandler as you will see in college, the rest of that team literally couldn't dribble against even weak pressure. Williams freezing out Gay at the end of games was another significant problem, as was Boone and Armstrong not showing up for the George Mason game.

I think UConn would have killed Florida. UConn was the better team and would have played up because Florida was a better team.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

The President of the NCAA, Mark Emmert, is a former UConn employee. You'd think we'd have a direct line to him to expedite matters when needed. Did he leave on extremely bad terms or something?

 

[ctchamps]

Ball handling and chemistry were both big problems, as was that team's tendency to play up or down to their competition. While Marcus Williams was as good a ballhandler as you will see in college, the rest of that team literally couldn't dribble against even weak pressure. Williams freezing out Gay at the end of games was another significant problem, as was Boone and Armstrong not showing up for the George Mason game.

I think UConn would have killed Florida. UConn was the better team and would have played up because Florida was a better team.

And here is part of the problem. What do you mean Armstrong not showing up for that game?

 

[Ts5034]

Bottom line with the 2006 team was they were not playing well at all down the stretch. I remember they even struggled to beat ND at home in late February that year. They should not have lost to Syracuse in the BET, and every game in the NCAA was a struggle. Albany led by like 12 points in the first round game. Thats why i think a lot had to do with off the court issues and the team losing focus down the stretch. I dont buy the excuse of no other ball handler either. They played great with Austrie as the only PG when Marcus was suspended.

 

[ctchamps]

Bottom line with the 2006 team was they were not playing well at all down the stretch. I remember they even struggled to beat ND at home in late February that year. They should not have lost to Syracuse in the BET, and every game in the NCAA was a struggle. Albany led by like 12 points in the first round game. Thats why i think a lot had to do with off the court issues and the team losing focus down the stretch. I dont buy the excuse of no other ball handler either. They played great with Austrie as the only PG when Marcus was suspended.

So what was the off the court issue? Part of the thing coaches do is examine tape of teams. At the end of the season teams make adjustments in how they play teams that were different than the way teams played earlier. Once a team figured out to play UConn, other teams were able to make the same adjustments.

It is just as easy to say UConn's weaknesses were finally exposed at the end of the season. There was no loss of focus or off the court issues.

 

[Ts5034]

I kind of worded that the wrong way. I think it was the fact the players were absolutely more focused on their NBA future instead of the team. A lot of people have said that including Calhoun

 

[ctchamps]

I kind of worded that the wrong way. I think it was the fact the players were absolutely more focused on their NBA future instead of the team. A lot of people have said that including Calhoun

I rewrote my post. In case you didn't see it: Part of the thing coaches do is examine tape of teams. At the end of the season teams make adjustments in how they play teams that were different than the way teams played earlier. Once a team figured out to play UConn, other teams were able to make the same adjustments.

It is just as easy to say UConn's weaknesses were finally exposed at the end of the season. There was no loss of focus or off the court issues.

I'm a fan of JC. But his communication skills are not as great as his coaching skills.

Focus on the NBA is just an excuse he and others make when they want to blame someone. Even if this assertion was true than who is responsible for it. The coach is responsible for all aspects of the team. So are you saying JC couldn't get his players to focus?

I just don't buy that. These kids play for the tournament and to win it all. During the long season the players might lose focus, but not during money ball. If the kids want to get in the NBA they aren't thinking about the $$ they will make the following season, but the game they are currently in to get great exposure so they can make the $$ next season.

 

[M_Funkhauser43!]

I wanted to throw in my two pennies on the 2006 team yesterday, but it wasn't clear at that point if this thread had been totally hijacked yet. It's clear now that it has.

I think all the talk about a lack of a second ball handler being the downfall of that team is a load of crap. First off, Rashad Anderson wasn't the starting 2G on that team; Denham Brown was. Denham may not have been Bob Cousy with the ball in his hands, but he wasn't Gheorghe Muresan either. Even if you consider his handle sub par, I don't see how you can look at that team's strengths and weaknesses and say, "Jeez these guys are stacked with NBA-caliber talent at every starting position, but the 2G doesn't handle the ball that well. I just can't see them winning the national title with that handicap."

That team's Achilles heel was its defense. When JC says things to the effect that the team's best players were thinking of three letters instead of four, the underlying message of such a statement is that they weren't committed to playing defense. Someone earlier in this thread pointed out that George Mason was just on fire that day, inferring that there was no way of beating a team that shoots 70%. How does a team of NBA-caliber athletes allow George ****in' Mason to shoot 70%?!?! It sure as hell isn't because the starting 2G didn't have elite D1-level point guard skills.

Defense was 2006's ultimate undoing and it had everything to do with a few of those guys not fully committing themselves to doing what they needed to on both sides of the ball to win. Playing poor defense in college doesn't affect draft position.

 

[jcf2000]

2006 was a major disappointment, as that team had tons of individual talent. Donyell's missed FT year, and Ray's year vs UCLA were also squads that should have been final 4 at least. Kemba's team made up for a few of those if not all 3.

My view on 2006 was they didn't have the player/leader that refused to lose. 2010 team could have been sweet 18 elite 8 with one of these types of players.

1999 Khalid/Moore
2004 Okafor
2011 Kemba

Along with talent, you also need at least one player that refuses to lose. It remains to be seen if somebody this year has that fire in their belly. Maybe the captains, we'll see.

 

[nomar]

I wanted to throw in my two pennies on the 2006 team yesterday, but it wasn't clear at that point if this thread had been totally hijacked yet. It's clear now that it has.

I think all the talk about a lack of a second ball handler being the downfall of that team is a load of crap. First off, Rashad Anderson wasn't the starting 2G on that team; Denham Brown was. Denham may not have been Bob Cousy with the ball in his hands, but he wasn't Gheorghe Muresan either. Even if you consider his handle sub par, I don't see how you can look at that team's strengths and weaknesses and say, "Jeez these guys are stacked with NBA-caliber talent at every starting position, but the 2G doesn't handle the ball that well. I just can't see them winning the national title with that handicap."

That team's Achilles heel was its defense. When JC says things to the effect that the team's best players were thinking of three letters instead of four, the underlying message of such a statement is that they weren't committed to playing defense. Someone earlier in this thread pointed out that George Mason was just on fire that day, inferring that there was no way of beating a team that shoots 70%. How does a team of NBA-caliber athletes allow George ****in' Mason to shoot 70%?!?! It sure as hell isn't because the starting 2G didn't have elite D1-level point guard skills.

Defense was 2006's ultimate undoing and it had everything to do with a few of those guys not fully committing themselves to doing what they needed to on both sides of the ball to win. Playing poor defense in college doesn't affect draft position.

 

[M_Funkhauser43!]

There are a couple facts in there, so suck it Dude.

 

[Huskymaniac]

I have to wonder if it is the NCAA who seems to focus on UConn recruits/players, or is there someone out there who has a vendetta against Calhoun and they 'tip off' the NCAA on the UConn players and that causes what seems to be an 'over-sampling' of UConn players looked at by the NCAA. I am guessing it is the later of the two options above.

His name is Dan Wetzel. If I ever see that dopey bastard he is going to be crying for his mommy.