From an Outsider: UConn 2016-2017 Analysis

[CamrnCrz1974]

Here are my thoughts and analysis of UConn's 2016-2017 season and the post-Stewart/Jefferson/Tuck era. These are just my thoughts and observations. It is quite possible that I am remembering things incorrectly or that I am not as intimately familiar with the team and the program as some/many of you (e.g., I am sure most of you watch more UConn games in person/on television/online than I do on an annual basis).

So apologies in advance...and here is my more "cautious and measured" approach to UConn and the 2016-2017 season.

I look to UConn's 2016-2017 team with the expected transition to Samuelson and Collier as akin to 2004-2005/2005-2006, when Strother (a wing, like KLS) and Turner (an undersized post with a developing perimter game).

The 2004-2005/2005-2006 teams struggled, in some respects. The 2004-2005 team had some difficulty finding a point guard. Highly touted/ranked guard Ketia Swaner started the season at the point, but would only end up starting five games all season, as UConn employed a "point guard by committee approach," with Ann Strother having to balance scoring and with some playmaking as a wing.

And that 04-05 team lacked players who really could consistently create their own shots, with the exception of Charde Houston, who, as a freshman, had her blindingly quick spin move to free her up for a short jumper or to drive to the basket and her pull up jumper from ten feet that she would take on the run with her leaping ability. UConn finished 25-8.

For 2005-2006, UConn had highly touted/regarded/ranked PG Renee Montgomery as a freshman to add speed and stability to the PG position in the starting lineup. Strother provided assists from the wing, with Mel Thomas as the starting shooting guard.

But there really was no "go to" player (i.e., someone who could create her own shot and consistently take over the game), as Strother, Turner, and Thomas all averaged between 11 and 13 points (with a solid 9 ppg each from Houston and Montgomery) and took turns being the first option/leading scorer. There was no "alpha dog," if you will pardon the expression.

Now Crystal Dangerfield is coming in that the PG position and is ranked much higher than either Swanier or Montgomery was in their respective classes (IIRC, Montgomery was a solid top 20, with some having her higher, while Swanier had a mix between top 20/30; Dangerfield comes in as a consensus top five player). And UConn still has Kia Nurse and Gabby Williams; Nurse was a solid scorer with over 100 assists and a good A/TO ratio, while Williams is an athletic marvel who contributed 9 points and 5.6 rebounds as an undersized forward and part-time starter.

That being said, UConn has to adjust to having players who were 4th, 5th, and 6th options who were able to contribute (score, rebound, garner assists, etc.) and be effective playing next to three all-time greats and legends (at both UConn and in WCBB) to becoming the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd options. Arguably, this may be a tougher adjustment than 2004-2005, as the only major loss (and it was a MAJOR loss) was Taurasi (with no disrespect intended to Maria Conlon or Morgan Valley, but they were not of the same caliber as Jefferson and Tuck). Not to mention, 2004-2005 was also an odd year because so many programs had lost great players to graduation besides UConn (e.g., Duke, Stanford, Minnesota, Kansas State, Purdue, Texas, Penn State, etc.).

I think UConn will have a "difficult" time in 2016-2017, but "difficult" is a relative term. In other words, I would not be surprised if UConn lost 4-5 games (or maybe six games) and "only" made the Elite Eight, instead of the Final Four. Remember, even the 2013 national championship team lost 4 games.

But that is the standard that Geno Auriemma and the UConn women's basketball program have set. When "difficult" means an "Elite Eight" finish instead of a national championship or making the Final Four, it demonstrates an incredible standard of excellence that is simply awesome to behold.

Again, I did not intend to be disrespectful or offend anyone with this post. Please feel free to disagree or tell me I am way off base...or point out that I forgot a key player and her contributions that should/would change my analysis.

 

[bags27]

If you say that you don't intend to be disrespectful one more time, I'm going to fly down to Durham and slug you. Seriously, this is an excellent analysis that I think most Husky fans ought to feel is pretty much ballpark; and it adds the historical context, which is also helpful.

I guess the hope is that Lou can develop, sooner rather than later, into a first option scorer, though this past year she profited from being open due to a lot of defensive overplaying to the strong side. She will need to have a more complete offensive game, and she did show some signs of that this year.

I think eventually Crystal will surprise similarly. Always dangerous to extrapolate from high school tapes, but she seems more advanced at the pure offensive-scoring part of the game than Mo was at this point. I continue to think that one way to work her into the game at the beginning of the season is to make Kia point and bring in Crystal at the shooting guard spot, relieving her of some ball-handling pressure. If that does happen, she could make significant offensive contributions as well.

I suspect you've picked up our collective anguish over our "bigs." If, if, if, Natalie comes in even just mostly fulfilling our dreams, that would be huge. And we have a lot of faith in the (untested) Kyla. These are massive unknowns.

Enough idle speculation. I really want to express again that your observations were very illuminating from a historical perspective and, yes, not disrespectful!

 

[UcMiami]

Cam - really thoughtful and well presented. I'll add a few thoughts -
1. 2004-5 also had a very experienced and quite productive starting center returning for her 5th year (a player that had an 8 year run as a WNBA player.) Something that 2016 does not have. And with Battle (5th year (and a solid WNBA career)), Valley (Sr), and Strother, Turner, Crockett, and Wolff as juniors it was a team dominated by experienced upper-classmen. Next years team has a lot less experienced leadership.

2. I think you undersell Conlon a bit - she is certainly not on the level of Morgan or Moriah, but she was a very heady and good college PG, a two year starter, and a very good leader - she didn't have the physical attributes for a WNBA career but was good enough to have training camp contracts for a few years.

On the plus side:
3. Nurse I think has some solid Alpha dog potential.

4. I think Samuelson, Collier, Nurse, and Williams have a bit more potential than their counterparts from 2004-5. We'll see how that plays out, and they are younger.

Also un-noted - I don't think the OOC next years has ever been matched in terms of strength (on paper at least.) It is really a murders row of highly rated opponents, most of whom will be played in the first six weeks of the season. The conference schedule should be easier than 2004-5 but the early season looks very daunting to a team making such a huge transition. They could easily fall well down the rankings with early season losses.

[I have often railed against the belief that the 2003 and 2004 championships were DT and the DTettes - those teams had a lot of really good basketball players - as you say, not alpha dog personalities but a lot of skill that gets lost in the fact they 'failed' to win a NC without DT - something that a lot of very good teams around the country have 'failed' to do! - So I agree with your basic premise.]

 

[Ctpaul0825]

Love your insightful post, had the exact same thoughts which you put into words so eloquently. Would not be surprised with 4/5 losses would also not be surprised to go undefeated again. Lou has shown more than a few signs that she has that Alpha potential to be one of the next great ones. Geno and coaches also seem to have perfected the "system", as in my opinion this team played perfect or as close to perfect basketball you can play on numerous occasions.

 

[cohenzone]

The post is pretty accurate. The difference between the mid-2000s and now I think is there are more teams capable of giving UConn a go, but maybe none in conference. So there shouldn't be as many losses as there might have been in the old Big East. I think that KLS can be a go to player, but I think her skill set is closer to Strother than the kind of player that made match ups tough when UConn is dominant. Her supporting cast except for Nurse and Williams, both to be in a more prominent role, is as young as she is. Butler is likely to be important. But, as the saying goes, we have our coaching staff and they don't. Should be interesting.

 

[Baroloboy]

All this discussion or 4 or 6 or 8 losses would end if Natalie decided to take the chewing gum off the soles of her shoes

 

[bags27]

All this discussion or 4 or 6 or 8 losses would end if Natalie decided to take the chewing gum off the soles of her shoes

Before you feel the wrath of some bloggers again, Baroloboy, on dissing Natalie, can I ask you about your handle? Is it just because you just like Barolo wine, or because you associate with the "Barolo Boys"--the radical winemakers of the 1980s and 90s who tried to change Barolo's style? This is something that interests me a lot.

 

[Baroloboy]

Before you feel the wrath of some bloggers again, Baroloboy, on dissing Natalie, can I ask you about your handle? Is it just because you just like Barolo wine, or because you associate with the "Barolo Boys"--the radical winemakers of the 1980s and 90s who tried to change Barolo's style? This is something that interests me a lot.

Bags; Yes the Natalie comment was just a little joke and perhaps a bad one so let me say explicitly--no disrespect to NB intended.
The handle is one I used on a long time ago on a wine board which I no longer am active on. I am however a big Barolo fan and while I like the modern style as it is much more approachable and food friendly on balance I prefer the traditional style with the barnyard and tar aroma

 

[bags27]

Bags; Yes the Natalie comment was just a little joke and perhaps a bad one so let me say explicitly--no disrespect to NB intended.
The handle is one I used on a long time ago on a wine board which I no longer am active on. I am however a big Barolo fan and while I like the modern style as it is much more approachable and food friendly on balance I prefer the traditional style with the barnyard and tar aroma

Yup! I'm there with you. Modern is good for restaurants or if you don't have a lifetime to wait, but nothing beats the old style with age. This is a very fun movie, if you have a chance:
BAROLO BOYS - HOME

 

[HuskyNan]

If you say that you don't intend to be disrespectful one more time, I'm going to fly down to Durham and slug you.

He lives a tad west of Durham.

 

[EricLA]

Cam has a great basketball mind and I always enjoy reading his insights, especially from an outsider's perspective. I do think the analogies post TASS and Dee are accurate and fair, but...

I loved Annie and don't think some people gave her "her fair due" - I think she's a better player than some gave her credit for. However, she was not a super star and could not put the team on her back or lead them like some of the other UCONN "top players". She was a #1 high school kid who did really well in college but did not have a very productive pro career. I would put her skill and talent level below players like Hartley, Montgomery, Dolson, Hayes, and even Greene. Annie had great college stats but was selected 15th in the draft and never really caught on in the WNBA.

To compare her to Lou - Annie is a few notches below. Annie wasn't as good of a 3 point shooter, not as strong, and almost never ventured into the post. Lou is better in every way IMHO. Collier may be a different story - but I can't tell from her freshman campaign how she will compare in the long run to Turner, but I suspect Collier will also be better in most ways. She's taller, longer, has an easier time defending tall players, but is not nearly as strong. I actually think it's more fair to compare Turner to Williams. Both undersized post players working on expanding their games.

The team consisted of
SR - Ashley Valley, Ashley Battle, Jess Moore
JR - Crockett, Strother, Turner
SO - Wolff, Hunter (did either even play that year?)
FR - Houston, Swanier, Thomas

PG by committee indeed - All we really had was Valley and Swanier. I don't recall who the usual starters were but let's assume Battle, Moore, Turner, Strother and either Valley or Swanier. Compare that to Dangerfield, Nurse, Williams, Samuelson and Collier/Butler. IMHO the 2016-2017 team is far superior. The other season we had PG by committee was when we had Hays/Doty handling the rock. That worked out ok, but not geat.

2016-2017
SR: Chong
JR: Nurse, Williams, Butler, Ekmark
SO: Lou, Collier
FR: Danger, Bent, Irwin

There are a TON of questions about this team next year. The overwhelming question is how much will everyone improve next year? I think we can all "assume" that players like Nurse, Williams, Lou and Collier will all see jumps in performance, but other players - Chong, Ekmark, and Butler -are question marks.

Will we see the confident Saniya who threw in 20+ vs. Stanford a few years back, or the one who seemed to disappear more times than not just this past season?

Will we see a more consistent Butler with solid defense, good hands, competent passing, and a legit low post scoring threat, or the butterfingers gal who tries super hard, but seemed to mostly be a moment too late on almost everything she did?

Will Emkark be able to put her somewhat forgettable (playing time-wise) and injury plagued freshman year behind her and make a leap in quality play and earn more minutes?

What about the freshmen - will Danger end up a starter by the end of the year? She's more college ready than Moriah IMHO, at least as an offensive threat, but will she struggle with doing everything too fast like Moriah did?

How much will Kyla and Molly be able to contribute? Molly, it sounds like, may be much better than we thought, but will that be enough to earn minutes off the bench, or will she be a role player? She would be taking those minutes from Saniya most likely. How about Kyla - she seems to be a solid player with good post and good perimeter skills. BUT the college game is much faster and requires much more fitness than high school. Will Kyla be able to have her body in good enough shape to contribute in her first year and will the speed of the game be too fast for her?

I suspect some answers will be better than we hoped, and others not quite as good. I'm excited to see how next season plays out and am already prepared for the "sky is falling" posts that I know we'll see as we notch a loss or two next year...

 

[Sonny44]

Bags; Yes the Natalie comment was just a little joke and perhaps a bad one so let me say explicitly--no disrespect to NB intended.
The handle is one I used on a long time ago on a wine board which I no longer am active on. I am however a big Barolo fan and while I like the modern style as it is much more approachable and food friendly on balance I prefer the traditional style with the barnyard and tar aroma

Alright! Barolo is one of the wines I make.

 

[Sonny44]

Here are my thoughts and analysis of UConn's 2016-2017 season and the post-Stewart/Jefferson/Tuck era. These are just my thoughts and observations. It is quite possible that I am remembering things incorrectly or that I am not as intimately familiar with the team and the program as some/many of you (e.g., I am sure most of you watch more UConn games in person/on television/online than I do on an annual basis).

So apologies in advance...and here is my more "cautious and measured" approach to UConn and the 2016-2017 season.

I look to UConn's 2016-2017 team with the expected transition to Samuelson and Collier as akin to 2004-2005/2005-2006, when Strother (a wing, like KLS) and Turner (an undersized post with a developing perimter game).

The 2004-2005/2005-2006 teams struggled, in some respects. The 2004-2005 team had some difficulty finding a point guard. Highly touted/ranked guard Ketia Swaner started the season at the point, but would only end up starting five games all season, as UConn employed a "point guard by committee approach," with Ann Strother having to balance scoring and with some playmaking as a wing.

And that 04-05 team lacked players who really could consistently create their own shots, with the exception of Charde Houston, who, as a freshman, had her blindingly quick spin move to free her up for a short jumper or to drive to the basket and her pull up jumper from ten feet that she would take on the run with her leaping ability. UConn finished 25-8.

For 2005-2006, UConn had highly touted/regarded/ranked PG Renee Montgomery as a freshman to add speed and stability to the PG position in the starting lineup. Strother provided assists from the wing, with Mel Thomas as the starting shooting guard.

But there really was no "go to" player (i.e., someone who could create her own shot and consistently take over the game), as Strother, Turner, and Thomas all averaged between 11 and 13 points (with a solid 9 ppg each from Houston and Montgomery) and took turns being the first option/leading scorer. There was no "alpha dog," if you will pardon the expression.

Now Crystal Dangerfield is coming in that the PG position and is ranked much higher than either Swanier or Montgomery was in their respective classes (IIRC, Montgomery was a solid top 20, with some having her higher, while Swanier had a mix between top 20/30; Dangerfield comes in as a consensus top five player). And UConn still has Kia Nurse and Gabby Williams; Nurse was a solid scorer with over 100 assists and a good A/TO ratio, while Williams is an athletic marvel who contributed 9 points and 5.6 rebounds as an undersized forward and part-time starter.

That being said, UConn has to adjust to having players who were 4th, 5th, and 6th options who were able to contribute (score, rebound, garner assists, etc.) and be effective playing next to three all-time greats and legends (at both UConn and in WCBB) to becoming the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd options. Arguably, this may be a tougher adjustment than 2004-2005, as the only major loss (and it was a MAJOR loss) was Taurasi (with no disrespect intended to Maria Conlon or Morgan Valley, but they were not of the same caliber as Jefferson and Tuck). Not to mention, 2004-2005 was also an odd year because so many programs had lost great players to graduation besides UConn (e.g., Duke, Stanford, Minnesota, Kansas State, Purdue, Texas, Penn State, etc.).

I think UConn will have a "difficult" time in 2016-2017, but "difficult" is a relative term. In other words, I would not be surprised if UConn lost 4-5 games (or maybe six games) and "only" made the Elite Eight, instead of the Final Four. Remember, even the 2013 national championship team lost 4 games.

But that is the standard that Geno Auriemma and the UConn women's basketball program have set. When "difficult" means an "Elite Eight" finish instead of a national championship or making the Final Four, it demonstrates an incredible standard of excellence that is simply awesome to behold.

Again, I did not intend to be disrespectful or offend anyone with this post. Please feel free to disagree or tell me I am way off base...or point out that I forgot a key player and her contributions that should/would change my analysis.

I agree that 4 - 5, maybe 6 losses is reasonable. But Geno polishes them up at the end and they overachieve their way into the final four.

 

[Bestiarius]

The post is pretty accurate. The difference between the mid-2000s and now I think is there are more teams capable of giving UConn a go,

Agree. UConn has so much success that other teams are having a difficult time ignoring the UConn way. I've noticed many teams are attempting to emulate UConn's methods and are beginning to talk the UConn talk even if they aren't able to walk-the-walk - yet. Opposing players are beginning to realize that they will have to add additional skills to their game to be successful.

How well others will do in the future will be determined in part by the realization that UConn's ways are the new normal. Society's trend toward permissiveness and entitlement will probably have to be reversed, at least as far as BB players are concerned, if others expect to catch up.

Geno and staff have revolutionized the face of women's basketball, and they will go down in history as pioneers of the modern game.

 

[bags27]

Alright! Barolo is one of the wines I make.

you have access to Nebbiolo grapes? Not much of that in the States. I'm impressed!

 

[CocoHusky]

Cam,
I not going to threaten to slug you like some others but I think your excellent post proves that you are no “outsider”. There is very little to quibble with your or UC response but I am determined. One immeasurable nit is this notion of the roster lacking and Alpha. I don’t disagree with that notion as you intended but would suggest an alternative team dynamic which might be more powerful. The training and the mindset of the team is do your job and don’t let the other guy down. One of the lesson learned in the aftermath of the Stanford loss per Stewie was everyone needed to do their job and not stand around waiting for one person to do something. Kia, Saniya and Gabby were recipients of that lesson. Unlike @Duke lessons are actually learned @ UCONN and many are actually passed on. When roles are well defined (at UCONN always) the objective is clear (@ UCONN=NC) the need for an Alpha is diminished.

My biggest concern about the team next year is defensive cohesion. UCONN led the nation in defensive efficiency by a wide margin and I do not see a significant drop off that would result in 4-5 losses because many of the elements that comprised that defense can be replaced with this roster the notable exception being shot blocking. For example Molly and Crystal are not Moriah but they can replace some of the on ball defense that Moriah provided. Gabby is among the NCAA leaders in rebounding per minutes and Natalie finished 5 in the nation as a freshmen. Both could easily replace the rebounding of Stewie and Morgan. By the numbers: In 12 min/game Butler pulls down 4 rebounds. In 19 min/ game Gabby pulls 5.6 rebounds. Morgan pulled 5.7 and Stewie pulled 8.7. Of course there is more to defense efficiency and the more to replacing the big three but those are just two examples. UCONN was lapping the field by a significant amount these last few years. Geno works very hard to instill good habits in his players. For these players one of those habits is winning. I envision a handful close games next year. On the other side of those close games will be teams saying “Oh my God we are in a close game with UCONN. What do we do now Coach?” Coach: “Heck if I know I’ve never been here either. My guess is that UCONN will win more of those games than it loses. The higher the stakes (Final Four) the better I like UCONN's chances. I see UCONN still competing for a National Championship next year and if they are successful the MOP will be the UCONN system not any individual player.

 

[bags27]

Cam, I not going to threaten to slug you like some others

But I thought you were also from Norristown....

 

[CocoHusky]

But I thought you were also from Norristown....

So I would hold him, and let you slug him!

 

[BobbyJ]

A lot of good points by all of you. I guess my main concern will be defense. I know the staff will teach good positioning and fundamentals but even with those in place, I thought this year's team was fairly susceptible to penetration to the paint. They were able to control and limit it because of Tuck's experience and Stewart's shotblocking without fouling. Without them I see a lot of potential for foul trouble without any depth up front. I'm just guessing that Auriemma may have to go to more zone against the better teams. It'll be interesting to see how fast they can adjust because if teams start pounding that paint, Butler could foul out in a half.

 

[j66kicker]

Yup! I'm there with you. Modern is good for restaurants or if you don't have a lifetime to wait, but nothing beats the old style with age. This is a very fun movie, if you have a chance:
BAROLO BOYS - HOME

Let me second that. Nuthin' better than that hint (?) of chewing on a leather belt and unlit cigar at the same time (especially with a LIT cigar going too!).

 

[MilfordHusky]

Nice work, Cam, but I think several BYers want to slug you for various reasons.

I largely agree, but have some mildly divergent thoughts. Of course, our success will depend on staying injury free, as usual.

Lou is an alpha dog. The pretty kid with the sweet smile has an edge. Like Stewie, she wants to be the best player in the country. How she does as the primary scorer will be interesting. I don't expect her to be as open. But I expect her to be close to the top 5 in UConn career scoring after 3 more years. She was Stewie's understudy.

The biggest problem with the 2005 team was the PG position. Dangerfield, though she'll have a learning curve, will mitigate that considerably.

Kia Nurse is a very tough player. She'll emerge from the shadows of the Big 3. She may or may not make AA status, but she's a solid, aggressive player. I liked that she learned this season to vary her game and take the pull-up jumper instead of risking the charge call.

The ceiling for Gabby is very high. She makes plays that few other players can make. If she keeps improving, she can be an AA.

Napheesa may be a key. She showed flashes of greatness and moments of being lost. I think she has tremendous, AA potential. I expect her to make a BIG sophomore leap. Can she be an offensive threat?

Natalie and Saniya are also keys. I expected Natalie to be better. I think her hand/wrist injury set her back. She needs to be stronger with the ball and quicker with her decisions. I think she has the ability to improve. She certainly has WNBA size. Saniya has excellent offensive skills, especially as a shooting guard. She also has quick hands on defense--see the end of the half against Maryland. She needs to be healthy and keep her confidence up.

Molly and Kyla are big unknowns. Will either be an impact player ever? How about next year? I tend to think that they are both underrated. Neither is the most athletic kid, but both are smart, skilled, and tough.

As Eric and others have noted, we have more than the usual question marks. But we had question marks several times. For example, who replaces AA Renee Montgomery at PG? Answer: Caroline Doty and to a lesser extent Tiff Hayes. That team went 39-0 and played insane defense. Who replaces Kaleena's shooting and Kiah's defense? Both were done less than fully and by committee. That team went 38-0 and won games by an average of nearly 40. So our average MOV drops. How far? I bet it's still over 25.

I think the 4-6 loss scenario is overstated if we are healthy. Yes, the OOC schedule is loaded, but most of the tough games are at home. In terms of the Final Four, it could get dicey if we have a tough matchup in the regionals. But will the Regionals be in Bridgeport?

 

[itsasport]

One thing that has not been mentioned is that all these OOC teams that are expected to beat UConn this coming year did not reach the final four because they were beaten by teams that had much less talent than UConn will have this coming year.

While UConn lost the most to graduation, all the OOC teams lost one or more significant players- particularly at point- guard, as did UConn- but we still have Nurse and Chong, who be will at least be good and possibly much better than that; and we are getting, by far, the best point-guard in the freshman class.

All this talk of making the final four at best, and possibly worse, is a powerful motivational tool for the coaching staff.

Next year won't be Bambi meets Godzilla; but, the 16-17 team has a beastly amount of proven ability; are young with great upscale; and will by highly self-motivated to prove, that the death of the UConn dynasty has been exaggerated.

 

[bballnut90]

I think UCONN in 2016-17 will be more similar to 2011-12 than 2004-05 in terms of talent level and results. The biggest difference between 2005 and 2017 IMO is Geno. Not to discredit him in 2005, but he was a MUCH better coach in 2012 when they were a title contender with a good but not dominating lineup, and he is a better coach now than he was in 2012.

In 2011-12, they lost Maya Moore but had a good crew of supporting players coming back in Tiffany Hayes, Bria Hartley, Stefanie Dolson, Caroline Doty and Kelly Faris. They also had #1 recruit KML coming in. No one was particularly proven as a major consistent threat since Moore did all the heavy lifting during their 36-2 season, but everyone saw some very good potential in the above players and recognized that Moore's absence would open up opportunities for those players to assume more significant roles.

In 2016-17, not only do you lose Stewart, but you also lose Tuck and Jefferson. That said, the cupboard is far from empty. Connecticut has a 2 year starter in Kia Nurse returning, last year's top recruit and one of the top freshmen in the nation this past year in KLS, Collier who looked very good in limited minutes, and Gabby Williams who has been an impact player in her first two years. Add in Chong who has looked very capable as a guard during different points in her career and Dangerfield who is the consensus #1 point guard, and you have quite a solid team. There will obviously be growing pains and players will likely have some ups and downs adjusting to their new roles, but Connecticut has been so far ahead of everyone in college basketball the last 3 years so I see them as vulnerable, meaning they could lose several games next year, but they'll still a title threat.

Another piece to note--while UCONN clearly loses a ton of talent, there aren't any other teams that appear to have everything all locked in to take over as the major title favorite. Notre Dame appears to be the best team entering 2016-17, but they don't have a proven go to player (Turner may assume that role, but she isn't a dominating player offensively like Stewart/Wilson/Davis). Baylor appears to have all the pieces, but they had a really disappointing finish this last year and while they dominated a relatively light schedule, who knows if they can hang with the likes of UCONN/ND/SC. And speaking of SC, they should be great but have no point guard. Other teams like Ohio State, UCLA, Texas and Louisville should put together strong squads, but this is going to be the same Ohio State team that lost to UCONN by 44 at home in November, Texas was blitzed by UCONN the last two years and Louisville couldn't make it out of the 2nd round. So as much as UCONN is losing talent, there really isn't anyone waiting in the wings prepared to take over the top spot. The result of this? Most likely a lot of upsets and a lot more parity than we've seen the last 8-10 years.

 

[Sonny44]

you have access to Nebbiolo grapes? Not much of that in the States. I'm impressed!

I sent you a PM.

 

[Blakeon18]

Cam: an OT question here

Push comes to shove....your last dollar on the line: does Joan coach at Duke next year?