Dan Shaughnessy dissed UConn in The Globe. . .

[Kibitzer]

. . . today. He described the UCLA 88-game win streak as "a thing of beauty," but UConn's dominance as "boring."

So I posted a smackdown rebuttal that concluded with my suggestion to Dan that he avoid going to the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, cuz he would surely find the Rembrandts to be "boring as hell."

Made my day!

 

[winlots]

KIB: perfect rebuttal. (Had to sign in for that one; and I do know the feeling of "make my day.") Nice goin

 

[Alydar]

Can't find the article. Dan should look closer at the PAC in those days. It was a lot like the AAC, UCLA and a bunch of teams that didn't even make the dance. The PAC was a top notch football conference but was pretty weak in basketball once you got past the Bruins.

Lots of lopsided wins. But still they were beautiful to watch.

 

[huskeynut]

Do I detect some "writers" trashing UCONN because of the Big12 discussions? I think so.

 

[hoophuskee]

. . . today. He described the UCLA 88-game win streak as "a thing of beauty," but UConn's dominance as "boring."

So I posted a smackdown rebuttal that concluded with my suggestion to Dan that he avoid going to the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, cuz he would surely find the Rembrandts to be "boring as hell."

Made my day!

I read a few weeks ago Len Barmore say UCONN was bad for women's basketball.

Anyhow, I wonder how many top team women's games Dan loves to watch outside of not liking UCONN. Is he a WNBA fan too?

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Can't find the article. Dan should look closer at the PAC in those days. It was a lot like the AAC, UCLA and a bunch of teams that didn't even make the dance. The PAC was a top notch football conference but was pretty weak in basketball once you got past the Bruins.

Lots of lopsided wins. But still they were beautiful to watch.

UCLA played a ridiculously high percentage of unranked opponents during their streaks. Not sure how they got such cupcake schedules.

 

[uconnfan68]

I read a few weeks ago Len Barmore say UCONN was bad for women's basketball.

Anyhow, I wonder how many top team women's games Dan loves to watch outside of not liking UCONN. Is he a WNBA fan too?

He may not even like women, let alone women's basketball. And Barmore is just upset that his records were broken.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

I read a few weeks ago Len Barmore say UCONN was bad for women's basketball.

He did but he also said it's not UConn's fault. Also praised the Huskies mightily.


http://rep-am.com/articles/2016/02/12/sports/uconn/936477.txt

 

[dbmill]

Leon Barmore, not Len.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

He did but he also said it's not UConn's fault. Also praised the Huskies mightily.


http://rep-am.com/articles/2016/02/12/sports/uconn/936477.txt

Should edit this:

Barmore said their dominance is bad for the game, not that UConn itself is.

 

[vtcwbuff]

I agree with Barmore but you can't blame UConn for being what they are. Other programs and coaches need to up their game.

I'll agree with Shaugnessey to the extent that a 50 point win over some hapless bottom feeder is boring when compared to a nail biter that's decided in the last few minutes.

 

[EricLA]

This old debate - that UCONN's dominance is bad for the game? Ridiculous IMHO. Women's college hoops is a fringe sport. Anything that can be done that makes it more mainstream, or more interesting, or more newsworthy is good for the game, not bad for it. WCBB get's ZERO publicity on ESPN or any sports network unless someone dunks, there's a brawl, or UCONN does something crazy with their winning streak.

Add to that Stewie, Moriah and Morgan going after something that has never been done in the history of WCBB - a team winning 4 straight NC's, and it's NEWSWORTHY. As opposed to normal years when anyone can win and WCBB isn't even a fringe sport - it's like curling at the Olympics. Most people are aware of it, but almost no one cares.

I simply cannot understand why anyone on the planet continues with the delusion that UCONN's dominance is "bad for the game". The contrary has been proven over and over. What our dominance is "bad" for is anyone else winning much of anything.

 

[carpe diem]

The scary part and most interesting is Geno's comment at the very end: "Whether those teams get better or not, it doesn't matter. Next year we are coming back to their level. That will make everything a little more competitive." Sounds like Geno is not very optimistic about the streak continuing very long next year. Bummer. I have been really enjoying it.

 

[HoopsFan21]

The scary part and most interesting is Geno's comment at the very end: "Whether those teams get better or not, it doesn't matter. Next year we are coming back to their level. That will make everything a little more competitive." Sounds like Geno is not very optimistic about the streak continuing very long next year. Bummer. I have been really enjoying it.

Geno did say that he is done playing for streaks, hence the brutal out of conference schedule. I'm really enjoying this season because deep down I know this is the peak of the Geno era and UConn WCBB. Until UConn gets the next Stewie/Maya/Diana type of player, expect a few, perhaps more, losses each season. Dominating the way UConn has with time will get tougher. There are more teams now that are becoming competitive, and kids now seem to want to stay home or closer to it, and they have more choices than just Stanford, Tennessee, and UConn.

 

[noirwestern]

The scary part and most interesting is Geno's comment at the very end: "Whether those teams get better or not, it doesn't matter. Next year we are coming back to their level. That will make everything a little more competitive." Sounds like Geno is not very optimistic about the streak continuing very long next year. Bummer. I have been really enjoying it.

Do you think he really believes this? I mean, sure, it's possible, but just as likely the first boards being nailed together to fashion next year's great Trojan Huskie parked outside the arena....

 

[Kibitzer]

Can't find the article.

The UCLA-UConn excerpt I cited was within a long piece by Dan ("Lighten Up on Hanley Ramirez. . . .") that headlined his harsh putdown of Cam Newton. Then BC. Then the NFL. And so on.

There is no indication that he has viewed any UConn games -- just a remark about finding it "boring" to see UConn up by 30 every time scores are shown on tv.

By contrast, the NY Times sent Harvey Araton to Columbia to report the SC-UConn game.

 

[cohenzone]

Can't find the article. Dan should look closer at the PAC in those days. It was a lot like the AAC, UCLA and a bunch of teams that didn't even make the dance. The PAC was a top notch football conference but was pretty weak in basketball once you got past the Bruins.

Lots of lopsided wins. But still they were beautiful to watch.

That's partially accurate. In Wooden's day, only the conference champ or conference tournament champ could make the dance. Not to say that the conference was strong. The league that had the issues was the ACC which was one of the few leagues with a conference tournament and it was usually Duke or UNC that ran the risk of no NCAAs even if they won the regular season. If the next best team was really good, they'd be off to the NIT, which was a top notch tournament until the NCAA kept expanding the field.

 

[HuskyBandDad]

This old debate - that UCONN's dominance is bad for the game? Ridiculous IMHO. Women's college hoops is a fringe sport. Anything that can be done that makes it more mainstream, or more interesting, or more newsworthy is good for the game, not bad for it. WCBB get's ZERO publicity on ESPN or any sports network unless someone dunks, there's a brawl, or UCONN does something crazy with their winning streak.

Add to that Stewie, Moriah and Morgan going after something that has never been done in the history of WCBB - a team winning 4 straight NC's, and it's NEWSWORTHY. As opposed to normal years when anyone can win and WCBB isn't even a fringe sport - it's like curling at the Olympics. Most people are aware of it, but almost no one cares.

I simply cannot understand why anyone on the planet continues with the delusion that UCONN's dominance is "bad for the game". The contrary has been proven over and over. What our dominance is "bad" for is anyone else winning much of anything.

Agree completely. I am a big fan of the men's team and watch a lot of men's hoops. If the womens game was as competitive as the mens game with no dominate team such as Uconn then I do not believe as many fans would be interested. I am a big fan of the womens team also.

 

[hoophuskee]

He did but he also said it's not UConn's fault. Also praised the Huskies mightily.


http://rep-am.com/articles/2016/02/12/sports/uconn/936477.txt

Do you follow the NBA? DO you recall the interview with Stan Van Gundy had suggesting Howard told Orlando Magic that Howard wanted him fired? Howard was enying he said. Later he admits he did. It seems he was talking out of two sides of his mouth.

While he says "not UCONN's fault." he does say "UCONN is bad for the game." Dwight Howard never complained about Van Gundy to his face but did tell management that he lost the team. Barmore is telling everyone that "UCONN is BAD for the game" regardless whose "fault" it is. Whose fault it is - is irrrelevant. It's despicable that Barmore would make this claim. Only in women's basketball I guess can a team who plays so brilliantly in their own sport can they bee deemed bad for the game.

The thing is, its football that is "bad for the women's game." If it wasn't for football UCONN wouldn't have been banished to the AAC and thus would have been picked off a bit more.

 

[Gus Mahler]

Do you think he really believes this? I mean, sure, it's possible, but just as likely the first boards being nailed together to fashion next year's great Trojan Huskie parked outside the arena....

My thoughts in a similar vein: He reminds me of a politician who is trying to manage (lower!) expectations prior to a debate or primary vote. I don't mean this in a negative, cynical way. He's mainly just acknowledging that his team will step back a tick and not have the sweeping dominance they've enjoyed lately. But make no mistake, Geno will be playing to win a National Championship. If Tuck comes back, I like his chances as much as anyone else's. If she doesn't, it will still be a fun season and I bet he will enjoy the chase. And if I were the rest of WCBB, I wouldn't be letting the saliva run down my chin. That could get embarrassing.

 

[hoophuskee]

Do you think he really believes this? I mean, sure, it's possible, but just as likely the first boards being nailed together to fashion next year's great Trojan Huskie parked outside the arena....

Yes I do - especially if Tuck isn't coming back.

 

[HoopsFan21]

My thoughts in a similar vein: He reminds me of a politician who is trying to manage (lower!) expectations prior to a debate or primary vote. I don't mean this in a negative, cynical way. He's mainly just acknowledging that his team will step back a tick and not have the sweeping dominance they've enjoyed lately. But make no mistake, Geno will be playing to win a National Championship. If Tuck comes back, I like his chances as much as anyone else's. If she doesn't, it will still be a fun season and I bet he will enjoy the chase. And if I were the rest of WCBB, I wouldn't be letting the saliva run down my chin. That could get embarrassing.

Ha ha step back a tick? We're losing one of the greatest women's college players ever, and arguably the greatest point guard to ever play at UConn. I think people are in for a rude awakening next season when the starting line up is Kia, Chong, KLS, Gabby, Butler instead of Mo, Kia, KLS, Stewie, Tuck. That's a grand canyon sized difference in talent.

 

[Beemer]

Dan Shaughnessy is a first class fool . On the hockey board I post on his nickname is CHB: Curly Headed B*****d

 

[Dabber]

Dan is probably the most prejudicial sports writer who pontificates his extremely biased opinions against ANY team or player, college or professional, that is NOT within the city limits of Boston. As far as his "displeasure" with Connecticut it dates at least as far back as the Whalers. Talk about a "homer" - - he is a perfect classic example.

 

[hoophuskee]

I agree with Barmore but you can't blame UConn for being what they are. Other programs and coaches need to up their game.

I'll agree with Shaugnessey to the extent that a 50 point win over some hapless bottom feeder is boring when compared to a nail biter that's decided in the last few minutes.

Last year - someone posted the she and husband or it was husband and wife watched Kentucky squeak out a victory over Texas A&M in double OT. The person went on to explain that the game was so exciting. I had watched a couple of minutes in that game and wished I could have gotten those minutes back. In this classic the end of regulation score was an awesome offensive explosion score of 53-53. These two beautiful offensive juggernauts shot a combined 41-133 from the floor. And their wizardry didn't stop there. The supreme passing of 20 assists total for the game vs 50 minutes of play. One team shot an amazing 53% from the ft line. I was in awe of this wonderful beauty on display by the number 1 team vs mighty Texas AM.

The person that loved the game response was - it was great to watch a close game. For anyone that enjoys watching such inept garbage have at it. No thanks for me thank you. The best part of both team's offense was to brick a shot and get an offense rebound. -- No thanks.