Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="diggerfoot, post: 3398752, member: 1673"] I agree with your point, if we remove the misleading element. Wolters and Rizzotti, for example, were not highly sought after recruits. Rizzotti may have been due to low visibility from playing abroad, but Wolters simply was not a player that many coaches coveted. Yet Auriemma saw what he needed in them, recruited them and developed them into Players of the Years. If you are going by recruiting the best talent as recognized by all, then I think that is a little misleading. Sure, for 25 years UConn has recruited at the highest level, yet they always had a peer. Tennessee was recruiting at our level for perhaps 20 of those years. Duke, Notre Dame, Baylor, Stanford in and out all were recruiting at our level at a time when we yet often outperformed them. Referring back to 1995, that was the year VanDerveer touted "we have six Nykesha Sales on our team" ... and we stomped them by 27 points in the semifinal game. That has to do with not simply recruiting the best talent, but recruiting the best talent you feel can be developed into the best squad. As far as the generational talent angle is concerned, that is a term that necessarily invokes a time frame. Let's be generous and assume it means ten years instead of twenty. So no player like Lobo existed within ten years of her? What about Leslie? I'm more comfortable with saying POY talent rather than generational talent. Yes, we always had POY talent, but sometimes POYs have to be developed (like Wolters and Rizzotti), not merely recruited. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,443

Messages: 4,396,427

Members: 10,209

Latest member: gemini*trvl