Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="hoophuskee, post: 4001789, member: 3535"] I don't understand why you are having this beef regarding Geno. Hasn't he made it clear that it's not his authority to address? It's right there the quote from the article that he won't speak for others. Can you even imagine if he spoke for Dawn - the uproar that would cause? Yet the writer put it in quotes that Geno said he can't speak for others so why would the writer title the article that "Geno declines to address . . ." when he clearly said he can't be speaking for others? She's trying to put him in bad light, correct? After all, the article is entitled specifically about Nneka's omission so why would the writer bring up that UCONN has five players on the team if the omission is only about 1 player? For example you can easily bring up Collier vs Nneka, right? so what was her purpose to bring up 5 players instead of 1 or maybe 2? What was she fishing for? After all, didn't Geno actually give a probable explanation for his decision when he said it's not the best players but those who can work best with the other 6? Why wasn't that the point of the article or this issue addressed instead of mentioning why UCONN got 5 players on the team? [I]Don't you think she was trying to imply that there is a certain favoritism going on for UCONN players? It's not like this writer is the only one that thinks this, right?[/I] So don't you think Geno realizes this? [B]So then why wouldn't he be defensive a little bit if he thinks it outrageous for any implication that there is favoritism going on along with how he feels that he has been misrepresented in the past? [/B]After all, this writer knew he couldn't speak for others so why entitle the article in the manner she did? [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,453

Messages: 4,396,850

Members: 10,209

Latest member: noelle