No. In the context you are speaking I think (of having a deeper bench and play more players rather than rely on your superstars as much?). If that is it - then - No.
Because UCONN gets number 1 recruits more than anyone else and it's not close and other very top ranked recruits. They have held a huge advantage of number 1 recruits. Looking back at nearly all the championships, they have had a number 1 ranked recruit.
Number 1 ranked recruits want to play. There is a reason why number 1 recruits come to UCONN and one is that they get to play a lot of minutes.
If the intent is to not play number 1 ranked recruits many minutes then you would never have ever achieved 11 National Championships.
There is always a flawed thought that the bench is more important – but it isn't. Superstars playing 40 minutes in a big game is what gets you championships. See DT (3), Maya (2), Stewart (4). If Geno didn't play these players big minutes at certain points in there career then "Paige Buckers and Azzi Fudd" ain't coming.
It's not the 11 time National Championship coach that is wrong. -- It's the thought that not playing your superstars big minutes in contrast to what the 11 time National Championship coach that has shown us - that is wrong.
I respect your opinion.
It's just there must be reasons why UIConn hasn't won a NC in a number of years, and why other schools have become more successful, and apparently by using a deeper bench.
For instance, many folks may not rate Amari and/or Piath as being elite enoiugh to get the job done. Not good enough to be playing other than the bench for another 1-2 years. Meanwhile, Ice Brady is being touted as someone who could possibly keep not only those 2 but put AE on the bench as well.
And that may be true, that Dorka and Ice can be starters. But that means that 4-5 players were recruited in order to find 2 that are worthy of being real stars.
That's 1/3 of the team to perhaps fill 2 positions.
Folks can't have it both ways, to believe that everyone that UConn recruits is a superstar caliber player while at the same time admitting that there are 100's of more elite players in development than there were in the past.
Either there is more player parity these days or there isn't.
Because I believe that there is more parity and a larger number of potentially elite players, then teams like UConn now need to change their recruiting tactics a little bit and recruit more players to get what they need to win a NC.
Some positions can be filled by committee because 2 fresh players are better than 1 tired " superstar" that may not have enough experience or skill to win a NC as a freshman.
We needed to acquire Dorka through the transfer portal and she may not be able to do it all alone either.
Consistency makes all of the difference between being a good player and a great player.
That's also why sometimes there is safety in numbers, the more recruits/players the more chance that positions can be held down to give UConn a fighting chance of obtaining another NC.
AE is good, but alone is she enough?
Dorka is good but alone is she enough?
That's 2 players possibly for only 1 position, and we have more on the way and some sitting on the bench, and all are essentially untested at the college level.
So how can UConn win a NC with only 10 - 12 players?
It's takes maximum effort unless there we have true superstars which are becoming harder to find enough of them who stand head & shoulders above the rest.
Otherwise it becomes a strategic numbers game and a chess match.
Is 12 enough, is 15 too many?
IMO there's no such as too much talent, there is only not enough talent to win a NC.
Then everything becomes an excuse.
