Fuller: Michala talks.....

[pap49cba]

LINK

 

[MilfordHusky]

MJ hasn't been interviewed much at UConn, but she did well with this one. Everyone wishes her the best.

 

[EricLA]

those are some great quotes from a very well spoken young lady. do not blame her one bit for wanting to play closer to home, wanting to play with her sister, and wanting more playing time. she'll get a chance for all of that at Wisconsin. Best wishes Michala!!

 

[dtbtbtb]

All the best to MJ! I know I will follow her career in Wisconsin as I guess a lot of us will.

 

[Kevin G]

I wish her the best at Wisconsin. I hope she does very very well. UCONN Nation will def miss you and your wonderful spirit!

 

[wallman]

Very classy on all parts involved, wish her well at Wisconsin.

 

[msf22b]

Funny, how we classify kids as being real positive (classy, well spoken) when they gush of their wonderful uplifting experiences at UCONN when they leave.

Kids don't usually leave (one recent exception noted) when they're getting plenty of playing time, attention, feel they're making a big contribution etc.

I always worried about Michala, great kid, big star in HS until she was injured, looked like a player in the few minutes she had this season especially near the end.

Someday, a kid will leave and bitch mightily about the lack of opportunity, about being pigeonholed from the gettgo, about all the attention being reserved for the top six or seven and then we will say:

What a horrible, negative child.

The reality being? Who knows?

I suppose, I'm just tired of the usual pablum, the PC approach to such matters

 

[FairView]

Funny, how we classify kids as being real positive (classy, well spoken) when they gush of their wonderful uplifting experiences at UCONN when they leave.

Kids don't usually leave (one recent exception noted) when they're getting plenty of playing time, attention, feel they're making a big contribution etc.

I always worried about Michala, great kid, big star in HS until she was injured, looked like a player in the few minutes she had this season especially near the end.

Someday, a kid will leave and bitch mightily about the lack of opportunity, about being pigeonholed from the gettgo, about all the attention being reserved for the top six or seven and then we will say:

What a horrible, negative child.

The reality being? Who knows?

I suppose, I'm just tired of the usual pablum, the PC approach to such matters

I agree that the circumstances that left her at the end of the bench really sucked -- for her and for what she may have contributed to UConn. Regarding her statements when leaving ... making positive statements is the way every person should leave any organization -- that's simply the way to do it, regardless of the situation. If you leave a job or a civic organization or a club for any reason, you say nice things and step aside. Or you say nothing at all. It's just bush to beat up an organization as you are walking out the door simply because it didn't work out for you. I don't think it's a matter of being PC, it's a matter of being decent. Of course, that's not the case if there is wrongdoing on the part of the organization or its members -- then you can simply state the truth.

 

[RadyLady]

I believe it took a lot of courage to make this change.
I believe that we are looking at a mature well thought out decision.
Michala loved her teammates - they are close as we see that most UConn BB girls are close - I saw her in Carolines video having a hell of a time.
She, a gifted athlete with a series of bad injuries has a place a UConn, but also saw an opportunity to be closer to her family and play BB with her sisters.
She made a difficult decision based upon what was best for her. It cannot be easy to do this, and having watched the firestorm of Samarie's decision, her approach was professional and well though out.

TO msf - a person who burns bridges does themselves a disservice. Not only does it paint the burner in a poor light of sour grapes, it could poentially harm relationships within that basketball circle going forward. It would be a poor choice.
It is obvious to all followers of the game that her minutes were limited, however remember this: At UConn, minutes are earned, not entitled.

 

[alexrgct]

Yeah, you don't burn bridges on your way out the door anywhere, especially when the organization you're leaving is run by one of the most respected and connected coaches in women's basketball.

It's an interconnected, incestuous world we live in. My company got acquired two months ago. Lots of people who left the acquiring company for mine over the years, and vice versa. If you left either organization, you better have gone about it the right way. Never know when someone's perception of you might make a difference.

 

[msf22b]

I wasn't speaking of what the kids said, rather the attitude of poster's.

 

[RadyLady]

I wasn't speaking of what the kids said, rather the attitude of poster's.

apologies then. I mistook your response....

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

Funny, how we classify kids as being real positive (classy, well spoken) when they gush of their wonderful uplifting experiences at UCONN when they leave.

Kids don't usually leave (one recent exception noted) when they're getting plenty of playing time, attention, feel they're making a big contribution etc.

I always worried about Michala, great kid, big star in HS until she was injured, looked like a player in the few minutes she had this season especially near the end.

Someday, a kid will leave and bitch mightily about the lack of opportunity, about being pigeonholed from the gettgo, about all the attention being reserved for the top six or seven and then we will say:

What a horrible, negative child.

The reality being? Who knows?

I suppose, I'm just tired of the usual pablum, the PC approach to such matters

Sorry, I don't understand. What "pablum"? She left to be with her sister, to have more playing time, to get a new experience. How is that PC? This does not mean she found no value at UCONN.

 

[msf22b]

Let me try again...

When a player such as Michala (not a superstar like EDD, not a scandal like Samarie) leaves, This board similarly the UTenn and possibly other boards, will express a measure of sympathy and understanding in direct proportion to the exit interviews given by that player, often scripted, that they had a great time, learned a lot, loved their teammates et al.

Boards tend to respond thusly in lockstep: what a great kid, wish her luck, have a great time, regards to your sister.

I just find this little Minuet a little disingenuous.

The essential truths are certainly more complex and it would be truly enlightening to be able to get a glimmer of them rather than the "pablum" of the public statements of the student and the sympathetic, lockstep response of the board.
(pablum on both sides of the aisle.)

As written before in other posts, I wonder what its like for a star high-school athlete to come to an elite program and then be relegated to the rear of the bench (even one injured). I find myself, increasingly unwilling to accept on faith the UCONN adage that playing time = success and effort in practice. Its not that I don't believe it, its just that its not transparent, we have to accept the staff's judgement without any evidence. I am increasingly skeptical.

I am not saying that any of the following is true but it is not impossible that some get "coached up better than others" in this program, that some players are "pigeonholed" and have an almost impossible time breaking the mold, that Geno is most comfortable with a small roster.

Next year will be a great test for all of these conjectures. Three outstanding young woman will be entering the program to join 6.5 players with significant time (Kiah, the 6th and Brianna the .5) + Heather and Lauren; theoretically, 9.5 worthy players competing for playing time and attention. In recent memory, I don't recall a similar situ.

If any of my wild (negative) speculations have but a grain of truth, then we will know about it soon enough; the talent level is just too outstanding for passivity with regard these competitive young woman.

Its a quiet time of the year, a good time to think a little more deeply regarding the essential truths (and perhaps weaknesses) of the program and muse over any crumbs of evidence.

Michala's public statements and the response to them are not enlightening.

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

"not a scandal like Samarie"

no need for me to read on after this baloney. Carry on, you can have the last word(s).

 

[Icebear]

There was no scandal with Samarie and many supported her in her choice, too, if not in the timing. Also, Samarie left because Geno made the decision and forced it for her.

On top of that most of what you, mfr, offer and suggest is sheer speculation and nothing of substance.

 

[sarals24]

I guess I just don't understand what you want here. Do you want Johnson to come out and say that it sucked sitting on the end of the bench and getting no playing time? Of course it did. She is obviously a competitive young woman, or she wouldn't be playing basketball at this high a level. However, what would be the point of saying that in a press release or interview? She clearly bears no ill will towards the program or the players, and wants to keep the split as amicable as possible. Both sides want this.

In every program there are transfers and players who don't fit or don't find what they need. It's just one of the things that happen, at every level.

I find myself, increasingly unwilling to accept on faith the UCONN adage that playing time = success and effort in practice. Its not that I don't believe it, its just that its not transparent, we have to accept the staff's judgement without any evidence. I am increasingly skeptical.

How is this difficult to accept? And there is plenty of evidence that this is true. Kiah clearly made a big leap during the season after the coaches and team spoke with her about her effort. And "faith" is pretty much all we get to go on, since we are not privy to the inner workings of practice, weights, training, preseason, etc. What we are privy to is the success rate of the program, which is high by every measurable standard. UConn is obviously not a program where playing time is a right. Any prospect looking at it will realize that, and Geno famously doesn't promise anyone anything. Look at a player like Maria Conlon, for example. She wasn't a key part of the team her first two years, but Geno (in his book) speaks about how she worked really hard before her junior year, lost some weight, and became a key player her final two years.

Clearly all the players he recruits have the talent, or her wouldn't have recruited them. As fans we have to accept a bit on blind faith that the staff know the best team to put on the floor. I'd say five Final Fours in a row means they know a little more than we do.

In Johnson's case, you could tell when she was out there that offensively she had nice touch around the basket and good footwork. However, she was nowhere near strong enough to play big minutes in the post, and defensively she got pushed way too far under the basket. And these were in cleanup minutes. So it's tough to say that she deserved more time out there. Obviously the staff saw that every day in practice, and didn't put her in a position to fail out there. I don't think she was "pigeonholed", I just think she didn't develop the way that Stef did or that Kiah seems to be.

And on a message board that is for the most part very positive about the program, I don't think it's disingenous for fans to wish a 20-year-old luck in the future or happiness that she might find a place where she can be more successful. What exactly do you want to hear?

 

[alexrgct]

I guess I just don't understand what you want here. Do you want Johnson to come out and say that it sucked sitting on the end of the bench and getting no playing time? Of course it did. She is obviously a competitive young woman, or she wouldn't be playing basketball at this high a level. However, what would be the point of saying that in a press release or interview? She clearly bears no ill will towards the program or the players, and wants to keep the split as amicable as possible. Both sides want this.

In every program there are transfers and players who don't fit or don't find what they need. It's just one of the things that happen, at every level.

I find myself, increasingly unwilling to accept on faith the UCONN adage that playing time = success and effort in practice. Its not that I don't believe it, its just that its not transparent, we have to accept the staff's judgement without any evidence. I am increasingly skeptical.

How is this difficult to accept? And there is plenty of evidence that this is true. Kiah clearly made a big leap during the season after the coaches and team spoke with her about her effort. And "faith" is pretty much all we get to go on, since we are not privy to the inner workings of practice, weights, training, preseason, etc. What we are privy to is the success rate of the program, which is high by every measurable standard. UConn is obviously not a program where playing time is a right. Any prospect looking at it will realize that, and Geno famously doesn't promise anyone anything. Look at a player like Maria Conlon, for example. She wasn't a key part of the team her first two years, but Geno (in his book) speaks about how she worked really hard before her junior year, lost some weight, and became a key player her final two years.

Clearly all the players he recruits have the talent, or her wouldn't have recruited them. As fans we have to accept a bit on blind faith that the staff know the best team to put on the floor. I'd say five Final Fours in a row means they know a little more than we do.

In Johnson's case, you could tell when she was out there that offensively she had nice touch around the basket and good footwork. However, she was nowhere near strong enough to play big minutes in the post, and defensively she got pushed way too far under the basket. And these were in cleanup minutes. So it's tough to say that she deserved more time out there. Obviously the staff saw that every day in practice, and didn't put her in a position to fail out there. I don't think she was "pigeonholed", I just think she didn't develop the way that Stef did or that Kiah seems to be.

And on a message board that is for the most part very positive about the program, I don't think it's disingenous for fans to wish a 20-year-old luck in the future or happiness that she might find a place where she can be more successful. What exactly do you want to hear?

Spot on. I'd add the following since you don't get to watch the Geno Show:

In the Marquette game, Michala made a number of nice plays around the basket, enough that she made the game highlights package in the Geno Show. Geno commented that Michala had some great post moves, but the problem she was going through was getting into position to make those plays on a regular basis.

These are young adults we're talking about. Yes, they receive a substantial benefit for paying for UConn, but that does not mean they need every aspect of their game/playing time decisions dissected. Would you like your like your job performance dissected publicly by way of explanation as to why you were overlooked for a promotion? I wouldn't.

IMO, people are going to wish her the best of luck without fail because it was clear that she's not likely to contribute significantly. If she left UConn in a bad spot, people would be less likely to be uniformly magnanimous. And even then there are a substantial number of people who would be- look at both Samarie and EDD.

Also not sure what the OP was looking for. Attrition is inevitable. When it happens, statements tend to be coordinated to the least detriment of all concerned. It's the right thing to do, and it's the only thing to do.

 

[sarals24]

I watch the Geno Show! I buy the CPTV online package

 

[doggydaddy]

Next year will be a great test for all of these conjectures. Three outstanding young woman will be entering the program to join 6.5 players with significant time (Kiah, the 6th and Brianna the .5) + Heather and Lauren; theoretically, 9.5 worthy players competing for playing time and attention. In recent memory, I don't recall a similar situation.

If any of my wild (negative) speculations have but a grain of truth, then we will know about it soon enough; the talent level is just too outstanding for passivity with regard these competitive young woman.

Its a quiet time of the year, a good time to think a little more deeply regarding the essential truths (and perhaps weaknesses) of the program and muse over any crumbs of evidence.

Michala's public statements and the response to them are not enlightening.

Sarah and Alex did a fine job discussing the first part of your post. I'll just focus on the quote above.

It's unusal, to say the least, that a UConn team goes 9-10 deep in the regular rotation. But when it has happened, Geno was very capable of spreading out the minutes, keeping those players happy. You just have to look at the first two years of DT's career. I'll just list her Freshman season, but they had 9 players with minutes that averaged from 16.9 to 27.7. Stars like Ralph (23.7), Jones (19.9) , Cash (23.8), Taursai (24) did not have over 25 minutes a game. I don't see any issues with PT. Unless you are just looking for issues.

The bolded statement above is just .....well.....WOW. I don't even know how to respond to that one. I don't see a player on that roster that will cause a problem due to playing time. It's quite the wild statement you made there.

"Its a quiet time of the year, a good time to think a little more deeply regarding the essential truths (and perhaps weaknesses) of the program and muse over any crumbs of evidence."

This is exactly the reason I hate the off season. I don't look at the program deeply. I just don't look at the program like that. I'm not looking for issues, and certainly not over "crumbs".

 

[msf22b]

Would you like your like your job performance dissected publicly by way of explanation as to why you were overlooked for a promotion? I wouldn't.

In the business I was in, virtually every decision I made was questioned publicly, often in the New York Times. Even my retirement job as New York City teacher has regrettably become a matter of public record.

There was no scandal with Samarie

Perhaps the one word not carefully chosen. Which do you prefer: controversial, surprising, messy, unseemly, contentious, or divisive

what you, mfr, offer and suggest is sheer speculation and nothing of substance.

I am raising questions, possibilities, hypotheticals. I agree that in themselves there is no wisdom. But there might be in the answers.

How is this difficult to accept? And there is plenty of evidence that this is true. Kiah clearly made a big leap during the season after the coaches and team spoke with her about her effort. And "faith" is pretty much all we get to go on, since we are not privy to the inner workings of practice, weights, training, preseason, etc. What we are privy to is the success rate of the program, which is high by every measurable standard.

No doubt the success rate is high and the standard of play is remarkable. But my experiences with the Orchestra of St. Luke’s in which it was required that extraordinary effort and achievement be obtained each and every time we took the stage as most of our engagements were sponsored and we couldn’t allow a Notre Dame to sneak up on us. There had to be absolutely no question that we were the best that money could buy.

As a result, I developed an attitude of skeptism and vigilance which remains with me to this day. Things can always be better. Small faults can be exercised

I think that what causes alarm is my raising potential issues as generalities rather than specifics as the board itself has discussed at length and speculated on such issues as Heather’s role or lack thereof and more recently that of Brianna.

I stand by my posts and am gratified at the responses

 

[DaddyChoc]

"not a scandal like Samarie"

no need for me to read on after this baloney. Carry on, you can have the last word(s).

I agree

 

[DaddyChoc]

lets trash MJ....

 

[doggydaddy]

Would you like your like your job performance dissected publicly by way of explanation as to why you were overlooked for a promotion? I wouldn't.

In the business I was in, virtually every decision I made was questioned publicly, often in the New York Times. Even my retirement job as New York City teacher has regrettably become a matter of public record.

Really? Well, that explains why you are so comfortable with doing the same to Geno and his players.

There was no scandal with Samarie

Perhaps the one word not carefully chosen. Which do you prefer: controversial, surprising, messy, unseemly, contentious, or divisive

I can live with "surprising". Maybe even "messy". The others are just as bad as "scandal".

what you, mfr, offer and suggest is sheer speculation and nothing of substance.

I am raising questions, possibilities, hypotheticals. I agree that in themselves there is no wisdom. But there might be in the answers.

Answers to hypotheticals based on nothing? No answers there.
How is this difficult to accept? And there is plenty of evidence that this is true. Kiah clearly made a big leap during the season after the coaches and team spoke with her about her effort. And "faith" is pretty much all we get to go on, since we are not privy to the inner workings of practice, weights, training, preseason, etc. What we are privy to is the success rate of the program, which is high by every measurable standard.

No doubt the success rate is high and the standard of play is remarkable. But my experiences with the Orchestra of St. Luke’s in which it was required that extraordinary effort and achievement be obtained each and every time we took the stage as most of our engagements were sponsored and we couldn’t allow a Notre Dame to sneak up on us. There had to be absolutely no question that we were the best that money could buy.

As a result, I developed an attitude of skeptism and vigilance which remains with me to this day. Things can always be better. Small faults can be exercised

See, here is the thing. For your Orchestra of St. Luke's, you were a MEMBER, not a fan. And your attitude actually had an impact to that group, although I can't imagine you were very popular with your skeptism. Fans have ZERO impact in how this team is run.
I think that what causes alarm is my raising potential issues as generalities rather than specifics as the board itself has discussed at length and speculated on such issues as Heather’s role or lack thereof and more recently that of Brianna.

Again, these discussions have ZERO impact on the team. So raising potential issues is such a waste of time, IMO. It appears to me that it's just you being contentious. Seems you like that role.

I stand by my posts and am gratified at the responses

I'm sure you do and are.

 

[alexrgct]

"No doubt the success rate is high and the standard of play is remarkable. But my experiences with the Orchestra of St. Luke’s in which it was required that extraordinary effort and achievement be obtained each and every time we took the stage as most of our engagements were sponsored and we couldn’t allow a Notre Dame to sneak up on us. There had to be absolutely no question that we were the best that money could buy.

As a result, I developed an attitude of skeptism and vigilance which remains with me to this day. Things can always be better. Small faults can be exercised

I think that what causes alarm is my raising potential issues as generalities rather than specifics as the board itself has discussed at length and speculated on such issues as Heather’s role or lack thereof and more recently that of Brianna"

I'm not sure how your analogy mreally applies

An orchestra does not compete head-to-head with other orchestras in a "battle of the band" style format. Certainly, you may want to have a reputation as being the best that you wish to maintain, but if you did compete head to head, sometimes you'd have an off night. Sometimes, you'd out-compete the other orchestra three times in a row but be a little off the fourth time. Sometimes the peope judging you would be off or have poor taste. In one given year, the other orchestra might just be better due to late bloomers, greater continuity, etc. So what do you do? You recruit the best talent you can for the spots available and hope the existing musicians you have improve.

But whatever you did, you wouldn't shove a musician into a live performance when you didn't believe they could execute everything you thought they should. You recruit based on potential. Potential is not always realized.

Geno, as "conductor", is famously, almost infamously, driven to observing imperfection and driving it out of his organization. Our role as the audience doesn't require we do so because there is no conductor like Geno in WBB on that score, and few in any sport.

If the band's been a little off the past two seasons, it's not because not enough kids get to play so much as the kids who were expected to have been sidelined and/or not at full physical potential (Caroline), or were not able to commit to the program the way they believed they could (EDD, Samarie, McCormack). Despite this, UConn has made five consecutive Final Fours, a streak that looks to continue for at least another few years. Meanwhile, other teams project to have more precipitous drops. Would you bet the farm on ANY of the other three teams who made the Final Four this year being in the Final Four in 2013-14? Other than Baylor, even next year? Meanwhile, UConn has gone 19 consecutive seasons finishing inside the top 10, making at least the Sweet 16, winning 25 games or more, bringing home a league championship trophy of some sort, and not losing more than one game at a time. No one other than Tennessee even comes close. All this despite the competitive landscape changing drastically over the past 19 years.

I'd say we're in pretty good hands, as good a set of hands as there's going to be...and that should be music to everyone's ears.