Dear ESPN | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Dear ESPN

Status
Not open for further replies.
The point is in front of a national tv audience he is all but saying bottom-tier ACC teams with no hope of being near the top for a long top is better than anything else in our conference. It's a dumb comment being spread out nationally. Was his comment dumb? I say it is. Pitt and Cuse have been nothing. Mentioning them as relevant as if they would be better than USF is slap in the face to USF and what the other teams are trying to do in our conference. They are competing against the "mediocre Pitt's." When you have a national commentators making dumb comments it needs to be called out. We need our conference to get better. Ignorant comments like what he said doesn't help our conference. These are the type of comments why mid-major teams get so little respect from the NCAA. Maybe USF should have been a higher seed. I doubt that commentator has nay clue about any of that stuff.

I think Syracuse finished 4th in the ACC this year, with an 11-5 conference record. That is hardly terrible. Pitt won their first round NCAAT game against UTC, who beat both Tennessee and Stanford during the regular season, so they're not exactly chopped liver, either. There isn't tremendous depth of talent in WBB. Why is that? There are probably almost as many girls playing sports in high school as guys, but most likely the best coaches are not coaching girls sports in junior high, high school and even college, so the issue is probably one of quality coaching depth as much as anything.
 
I think Syracuse finished 4th in the ACC this year, with an 11-5 conference record. That is hardly terrible. Pitt won their first round NCAAT game against UTC, who beat both Tennessee and Stanford during the regular season, so they're not exactly chopped liver, either. There isn't tremendous depth of talent in WBB. Why is that? There are probably almost as many girls playing sports in high school as guys, but most likely the best coaches are not coaching girls sports in junior high, high school and even college, so the issue is probably one of quality coaching depth as much as anything.


And what is USF?
 
It wasn't "they"-- it was the play-by-play guy. IMO he was saying - misinformed that he was- that the rest of the AAC conference can't come close to competing (true) and teams like Cuse and Pitt can (idiotic).

I don't think he was saying Syracuse and Pitt can compete with UConn, just that they, as examples, are better than some of the teams that make up the current group. It started off with the guy saying UConn doesn't belong in the AAC. He thinks they belong in a better conference which was the overall point. Does anyone not agree with that sentiment?
 
.-.
So you think Cuse seeded too low or USF too high? Or both?

I think Syracuse at 4th in the ACC should have been a 5th or 6th seed. Losing to "Weak Florist" in the ACCT probably dropped them a couple of notches. I probably would have given USF a 7 seed.
 
I don't think he was saying Syracuse and Pitt can compete with UConn, just that they, as examples, are better than some of the teams that make up the current group. It started off with the guy saying UConn doesn't belong in the AAC. He thinks they belong in a better conference which was the overall point. Does anyone not agree with that sentiment?

I think he only used Syracuse and Pitt because Laphonso Ellis played for ND and he jokingly didn't want to give them any props.
 
.-.
I am not sure why I actually read to the end of this thread, but I did.

1. Princeton is one of only 14 teams to enter the NCAA tournament during its 30+ year history with an undefeated record. That is very noteworthy! (NB Uconn has 6 of those 14.) And unlike other lower conference teams and a number of P5 teams, they tried to play up in their OOC - something that can be very difficult to do as most P5 teams do not want to do home-home series with lesser conferences. They should be celebrated, they should have been a higher seed, and celebrating their year does not in any way disparage Uconn or any other team.

2. In the P5 conferences there was one undefeated team in conference play (Maryland 18-0) and three 15-1 teams (TN, SC, ND) and three two loss teams in Baylor 16-2, FL St 14-2, and OrSt 16-2. After those 7 teams there was a lot of mediocrity. You might argue that a few other teams 'challenged' those leaders in conference play, but I think more a result of inconsistency in those 7 teams than actual competitiveness. That picture is not that different from what Uconn/USF experienced in the AAC and Uconn in any of those P5 conferences would likely have breezed and added two losses to the record of most of those 7. Whatever conference Uconn has played in OBE, Initial AAC, or Current AAC they have dominated and their consistency most years has hurt the reputation of most of their conference mates - ECU or Tulane would have looked a lot better had Uconn laid an egg in one of their games, like ND did at Miami, or Baylor did at OK or ISU for example.

3. The AAC is poor at the bottom (as was the OBE) and mediocre in the 3-6, USF has distanced itself a little from those but still has a mountain to climb. This is one of the best Uconn teams ever in terms of balanced scoring, defense, and team play, and the bench is one of the strongest in my memory which has all contributed to an outrageous 40+ point MOV. They will probably exceed their team and NCAA record in that category by around 5 points (2001-2 and nearly repeated in 2009-10.) Impressive, but not a significant difference and those teams played in the Old Big East. Uconn MOV is almost entirely driven by what happens in the final 10 minutes when reserves are playing and this year the reserves are good enough to maintain or increase. Add two competitive games against an ND/Baylor with a 5 point margin and the MOV would be right back to the 35-36 point range and people wouldn't be shaking their head quite so much about the AAC.
 
You don't have to but he actually said THAT VERY THING in the very next sentence.

That's crap. After he named two teams -- then he joked about Notre Dame .

If your intent was to tell a joke from the beginning you certainly would have mentioned more that two teams before mentioning ND.

Before mentioning Cuse and Pitt they weren't joking about a crummy conference. So immediately after telling us how crappy the league is he immediately just mentions two teams from the old Big East and it was actually a joke? Yeah - I got a bridge to sell you too. .
 
Just askin', not demanding anything, but.......

why-the-hell-is-this-thread-still-going-thumb.jpg
 
I think he only used Syracuse and Pitt because Laphonso Ellis played for ND and he jokingly didn't want to give them any props.
I don't agree with that at all.
You don't have to but he actually said THAT VERY THING in the very next sentence.
It's not a matter of opinion, he actually said so.

It's exactly what he said (at about 0:45 in the first half):

Bob Wischusen: ‘…once in a while Notre Dame – occasionally…did you think maybe I avoided them on purpose?”

LaPhonso Ellis (Notre Dame ’92): “I - I - I think so”

Bob Wischusen: ‘The answer was I did because of you [or “who’s”] seated next to me.”

LaPhonso Ellis: “Thank you, I appreciate it.”

Bob Wischusen: “It just pains me sometimes to talk about Notre Dame positively but I will do it on your behalf…”

It pains us all, Bob. It pains us all...
 
Sorry, but I was so disappointed with the 2 male announcers. Couldn't they find at least one woman somewhere. I had to hit the mute button at about the 12 minute mark in the 2nd half. Two blabbermouths. I thought I was listening to the Clark Kellogg twins. I took it as an insult to the women's game.
 
.-.
Sorry, but I was so disappointed with the 2 male announcers. Couldn't they find at least one woman somewhere. I had to hit the mute button at about the 12 minute mark in the 2nd half. Two blabbermouths. I thought I was listening to the Clark Kellogg twins. I took it as an insult to the women's game.

I disagree I loved that they were very respectful and complimentary of both SFNY and UConn. Ellis is certainly a fan of Stewie.
 
It's exactly what he said (at about 0:45 in the first half):

Bob Wischusen: ‘…once in a while Notre Dame – occasionally…did you think maybe I avoided them on purpose?”

LaPhonso Ellis (Notre Dame ’92): “I - I - I think so”

Bob Wischusen: ‘The answer was I did because of you [or “who’s”] seated next to me.”

LaPhonso Ellis: “Thank you, I appreciate it.”

Bob Wischusen: “It just pains me sometimes to talk about Notre Dame positively but I will do it on your behalf…”

It pains us all, Bob. It pains us all...


Sorry but you deliberately cherry-picked everything after the criticism of the conference and you deliberately omitted the statements of Cuse and Pitt. The entire point was the criticism and then idiotic comments of Pitt and Cuse. DO you really think just mentioining two teams while he could have rattled off closer to ten is a joke?

even the poster slu who was arguing with me thought it was more that he was speaking of/referencing the entire conference as a conference.

The fact is - he stopped at two - then he decided to bust off on Ellis shortly thereafter. beforehand they were riping the conference - which is okay. But no way was he joking when he mentioned Cuse and Pitt.

Kind of odd last night and before the USC poster mentioned it was a joke nobody else did- did they? Now all of a sudden it was all a joke. Next maybe someone will post that the ripping of our conference was a joke too. Let's rip an entire conference and then make jokes about it - and that is so great for wcbb. Yeah right.
 
I hate when disagreements go on and on. I just stop reading.boring.

What I don't understand is why then you feel compelled to read or even post on such a boring thread.

While some say "I don't understand or that about posters ..."

I even said on another thread I don't understand how some of our UCONN breathren become so nervous with having to potentially play USF 4 times-- but hey it is what it is.

I don't understand why if you think a thread is so boring why you feel a need to post that on that very thread. But hey to each his own.

It got under my skin - if it didn't for you fine. If you feel a need to post that you're bored by it fine- it just puzzles me why you'd even waste the effort.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,052
Messages
4,551,162
Members
10,432
Latest member
lkcayoho1


Top Bottom