Congrats to Courtney Ekmark

[Fiftyish]

Truth to tell, though, this current crop of naysayers is VERY small taters to some of the greats of the past. Different old-timers will have different choices as to whom they consider the champ of all time; me, I am not sure. One nominee would certainly be BBall***** (numbers forgotten) who spared no pain to his fingers in trying to share with the rest of us his absolute conviction that Maria was a hopeless case and would never see a minute of significant playing time. He was absolutely evangelical about it. Then there was (as I recall; correct me if I am wrong here) Stop-n-Pop (he had a previous handle, too. This was back in the days when a poster could have as many different handles as he chose). I can't seem to recall whom his particular bete noir was, but he was persistent, beligerent and verbose. (And, of course, wrong.) Then many would favor the candidacy of OOVY, akd SonofOOVY, who was sufficiently obnoxious for the most refined taste and Newby1, who turned out to be the step-father of Brittany Hunter, (now former step-father) who had wanted to come to UConn but whom he had browbeaten into going to Duke instead, and he kept up a steady drumbeat about what a schmuck Geno was for many, many months. (I forget exactly how Geno had offended him, but seem to recall that it had something to do with Koolaid. Real Koolaid.) He kept it up just about up to the time when Brittany transferered to UConn.) There are probably other nabobs whom I have forgotten. Nominations are in order.

Anyway, aggravating as I (and apparently I am not alone) find the current crop of nns, they are as nothng compared to the above-mentioned giants of the ganre, and are, indeed, so few and so mild that they may well be considered an endangered species. (This may be because there is just so very little to bitch about recently; dunno.) I put about four of them on ignore (a marvelous invention) not so much because they were irritating as because they were just so predictably boring. I find the board much more interesting without them.

Thanks for the trip down memory lane. As noted, these folks were persistent and guaranteed to bump my BP up a dozen points. Obviously, gone but not forgotten.

 

[Zorro]

Actually, 50ish, my "memory lane" is more of a goat path. I am sure that other, younger old-timers will be able to add many more interesting details and corrections.

 

[Tidepool]

What makes me crazy is that if an opponent hits a shot and UConn doesn't come down and score and they next come down and hit a 3 point shot, some announcers talk about that team as being on a 5-0 RUN, as if they are kicking the Huskies around when they haven't really done much of anything. A RUN needs to be something appreciably more than two baskets put together without their opponent answering. That's certainly a pet peeve of mine.

Or how about the phrase "5-point swing" after Team A screws up (or a ref screws up in Team B's favor) and Team B then proceeds to score a 3-pointer? That would be a 5-point swing if, but only if, Team B wasn't going to get the basketball back if Team A had scored. Otherwise, it's just 2 or 3 lost points for Team A, like any other failed trip down the court. But then, sportscasters utter so many dumb, redundant, overblown, incomprehensible, pompous, trite, and/or ignorant statements, it's hard to choose one's most un-favorite.

 

[Wiltonian]

Which begs the question, can a Canadian become an All American? just wonderin'

If a Russian can be an All American, why not a Canadian?

 

[j66kicker]

If a Russian can be an All American, why not a Canadian?

It has been demonstrated that an All-American can become a Russian, too (a la Becky Hammon)

 

[DobbsRover2]

But the best ones are those math theorems that posters make up to fit their fervent beliefs, like this year's "an 8-5 record is better than a 9-0 one." Obviously loony stuff and often dreamed up by other teams' fans to hold on to the crumbling vestiges of their dream worlds, but math can be used to support many odd beliefs.

 

[EricLA]

View attachment 8201

How did you do that? copy a file from the net or something? Good job!!

 

[PalPa]

How did you do that? copy a file from the net or something? Good job!!

http://depositphotos.com/search/dislike.html

They have a lot of dislike icons.

 

[EricLA]

http://depositphotos.com/search/dislike.html

They have a lot of dislike icons.

Good stuff thanks!!

 

[EricLA]

Conlon could handle the ball. Ekmark can't wait to get rid of it.

Yay I did it!!!

 

[Zorro]

Yay I did it!!!

Actually, no orange allowed. It is an ugly color. What were you thinking?

 

[EricLA]

Actually, no orange allowed. It is an ugly color. What were you thinking?

It's supposed to be red! I guess i can go for the blue one next time!

 

[PalPa]

Yay I did it!!!

Somehow I don't think this will keep a silver tongued devil like yourself out of trouble.

 

[Zorro]

It's supposed to be red! I guess i can go for the blue one next time!

Well, hell, maybe it IS red. I don't see as well as I used to. However, keep in mind that you can never go wrong with blue.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

And you guys wonder why we don't get no stinkin' respect!

 

[EricLA]

Well, hell, maybe it IS red. I don't see as well as I used to. However, keep in mind that you can never go wrong with blue.

Maybe it's just your monitor? Or maybe it's mine!!

 

[Bestiarius]

If a Russian can be an All American, why not a Canadian?

Well, you know, Canada is in America.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Okay, freak out time. I went to the list of "Famous Canadians" on two sites including Wikipedia, and although one of them included the group Steppenwolf, neither mentioned Joni Mitchell or Neil Young. Is rock music completely dead in Canada and is all they care about their Road (South Park reference)?

On the other hand, Wikipedia has a section for the Canadians called "Wrongfully Convicted and Lynched" but neither Joni or Neil are in there. And yes there is a linked page for famous musicians where they might get a mention, but shouldn't they flat out be in on the top page of Famous Canadians?

Phil, oh wiki-meister, can you help out here?

 

[hoophuskee]

I know it's not their fault they are in this conference but to me a lot of these stats really don't mean anything. It really is hard for me to watch these games. Yes it's great the subs get game time experience and they will playing in this conference but with that said I would rather see Geno put them in with 4 starters early in a game to see how some of them react. It's one thing to play when you have a 40 point lead but it's a lot different when it's a 10 point lead. I just think it would serve them better down the road to get quality minutes. Lets face the fact here that no matter who he puts in with some of the starters they will still win by 40 every game in this conference so if they get some quality minutes then stats may mean something.

What does "quality minutes" mean? We're a minimum of 45 points better than any team in our conference. Why should the bench interrupt "the quality minutes" the starters get on the court with another? They deserve "quality minutes" too?

IMO these games aren't all about developing the bench.

 

[hoophuskee]

UOTE="meyers7, post: 1201627, member: 343"]Why?

Because they are not competitive. I would much rather see them playing against teams that they get a little competition from than 50 point blowouts all of the time. I fine myself rooting for the other team to score every once in a while. I wonder if sooner or later when they play against a team that's giving them a tighter game if it's not going to come back to bite them. I guess I really shouldn't be worried about that though because from what I've seen from other teams play I don't think anyone in the country right now can beat them.[/QUOTE]

We like different things. A poster brought up a while ago on another thread the double overtime game Kentucky men won and beat Texas A&M. KY shot 28% whiel TAM shot 33.3%. . TAM shot 53% from the ft line and had seven assists for the entire game. I turned it off after a couple of minutes. Ky got a whopping 13 assists in 50 minutes of paly with 12 turnovers. Give me a 40 point blowout where I can watch some real ball movement and seem actual skill of players at least on one team able to shoot and pass.

 

[Zorro]

I would like to see us schedule all competitive games, but who would we schedule? It would get boring playing ND twice a week, and I am not even sure that would be all that competitive.

 

[EricLA]

I would like to see us schedule all competitive games, but who would we schedule? It would get boring playing ND twice a week, and I am not even sure that would be all that competitive.

Good point. If we stomp SC like I expect, we could play all of the top 10 and not have a single game within 20-25 points. The only solution, really, is for Geno to ease up on the recruiting!!

 

[JoePgh]

I would like to see us schedule all competitive games, but who would we schedule? It would get boring playing ND twice a week, and I am not even sure that would be all that competitive.

Well, for openers, UConn could work out a way to play Tennessee. At this point, the LV's are (or were) apparently willing to play UConn if there are no preconditions to doing so.

Given the conference situation, UConn really needs to schedule as many Top 25 (or if necessary Top 50) out-of-conference games as they possibly can. Clearly Geno is trying to do that (except in the special case of Tennessee). But it's equally clear that there is a serious shortage of such teams willing to play UConn. I'm sure they think that a 30-point blowout on national television will not do their program any good, either from the standpoint of player morale or their seeding in the NCAA tournament. They probably also worry about how they will look in the eyes of potential recruits who are watching on TV.

I'm not sure any of these concerns are reality-based. Notre Dame, Stanford, Duke, and Louisville seem to be recruiting top talent just fine, despite the fact that they have been drubbed on ESPN by UConn often enough in recent years. (Admittedly that is less true of Notre Dame and Stanford than the other two.) And their reluctance to play seems to ignore the upside benefit for them -- if they manage to pull off an upset (or even come within 10 points), it would be a bigger coup for their recruiting than almost any other single event short of winning an NC. Look at Kim Barnes-Arico: one 1-point victory over UConn at Gampel (even though her team lost by 20 in a rematch a few weeks later) got her a job coaching at Michigan. Another example: the former Georgetown coach's close games with UConn got her a job at Auburn, even though I don't believe she ever actually got a victory.

It's good to see that Florida State and LSU (both probable Top 25 teams) will start a series with UConn next year. And Tennessee-Chattanooga may be reasonably good also. A regular series with Wisconsin Green Bay might be a good move for both teams.

But unfortunately, just as UConn can't make a major conference accept it, it can't make Top 25 teams schedule games with Geno's team. That is why the Tennessee game seems like one opportunity that needs to be seized.

 

[Zorro]

Much as I hate the thought, and much as it ain't gonna happen, you are probably right.

 

[hoophuskee]

But unfortunately, just as UConn can't make a major conference accept it, it can't make Top 25 teams schedule games with Geno's team. That is why the Tennessee game seems like one opportunity that needs to be seized.

No--- it doesn't.