Get ready for Geno's best coaching job....(ever?)

[diggerfoot]

We project what we would consider to be difficult coaching on what Auriemma would consider. If I can accurately imagine what goes on in Auriemma's mind, a difficult schedule would not make his job difficult in the least. Ironically, my impression is that Auriemma cares much more about player development and pursuing excellence than wins and losses.

Reminds me of when my oldest daughter declared, somewhat in shock, that I had become a good cook. My secret was I did not care what the food tasted like, I started using spices that were good for brain health. My doing that the food tasted good. But I digress.

By pursuing player development and excellence the wins follow. A difficult schedule facilitates player development and the pursuit of excellence. If anything I agree with what some have pointed out, the schedule is not difficult enough for Auriemma's goals in coaching. It may contribute to doing a masterful job, but in the opposite way that the OP intimated.

What stands out to me as presenting difficult challenges for Auriemma already has been pointed out. One was the "lean year," where we could not go beyond the Regionals. C. Houston was specifically cited, but more challenging I imagine was losing an entire class of three, including a 6'5" center and a player who could have played point. It's one thing to plan for known lean years of recruiting; it's a whole other level to have that suddenly sprung on you.

The other difficult challenge was a year like 2001, in which there was so much talent that chemistry and likely playing time became an issue. We performed nowhere near the talent potential that year, indeed, we performed better once the roster thinned a little. I don't wish that ever on players, as I am sure Auriemma doesn't, but I agree with posters who point out a stacked roster as presenting a particularly difficult challenge for a coach like Auriemma. Hence, this year could be one of his greatest challenges, as the roster will be stacked with talent, though the inexperience of some may actually help with the chemistry.

A little off topic, but "on thread," there is a poster that hails from the same region as the long gone HoopDreams. That handle itself was a new revival of someone who hailed from that area. Our history with Ossining players has not been sterling, which has led to some discontent in that area. Making a claim based on physical talent, highly unlikely to come true because of the mental and learning aspects of the game, is a good way to set the table for assigning blame later. Just sayin'.

 

[Triad]

Megan will be a junior in 2019-20, not a senior, but otherwise I agree with the point that you are making. Even if Jingo is right (which I doubt) that Aubrey has more physical ability than Megan, there is still the issue of the learning curve for the UConn offense and defense. It took Megan a full year to learn that, and it is quite conceivable that it could take Aubrey a similar amount of time.

Aubrey, I have great expectations, may have leaping skills better than ANYONE on this team but MEGAN is a talent, not just a stand still shooter, who rebounds and defend ---that little word has amazing impact on GENO--DEFENSE--Megan won't sit (regularly) for Griffin. I do however believe Aubrey will play lots of minutes after December. That time may come for 3 or 4 players. This belief goes for Ania/Anna too. Geno will have the pleasure of running 6 or 8 kids in and out once they get their Game shoes on in late December.

 

[Triad]

We project what we would consider to be difficult coaching on what Auriemma would consider. If I can accurately imagine what goes on in Auriemma's mind, a difficult schedule would not make his job difficult in the least. Ironically, my impression is that Auriemma cares much more about player development and pursuing excellence than wins and losses.

Reminds me of when my oldest daughter declared, somewhat in shock, that I had become a good cook. My secret was I did not care what the food tasted like, I started using spices that were good for brain health. My doing that the food tasted good. But I digress.

By pursuing player development and excellence the wins follow. A difficult schedule facilitates player development and the pursuit of excellence. If anything I agree with what some have pointed out, the schedule is not difficult enough for Auriemma's goals in coaching. It may contribute to doing a masterful job, but in the opposite way that the OP intimated.

What stands out to me as presenting difficult challenges for Auriemma already has been pointed out. One was the "lean year," where we could not go beyond the Regionals. C. Houston was specifically cited, but more challenging I imagine was losing an entire class of three, including a 6'5" center and a player who could have played point. It's one thing to plan for known lean years of recruiting; it's a whole other level to have that suddenly sprung on you.

The other difficult challenge was a year like 2001, in which there was so much talent that chemistry and likely playing time became an issue. We performed nowhere near the talent potential that year, indeed, we performed better once the roster thinned a little. I don't wish that ever on players, as I am sure Auriemma doesn't, but I agree with posters who point out a stacked roster as presenting a particularly difficult challenge for a coach like Auriemma. Hence, this year could be one of his greatest challenges, as the roster will be stacked with talent, though the inexperience of some may actually help with the chemistry.

A little off topic, but "on thread," there is a poster that hails from the same region as the long gone HoopDreams. That handle itself was a new revival of someone who hailed from that area. Our history with Ossining players has not been sterling, which has led to some discontent in that area. Making a claim based on physical talent, highly unlikely to come true because of the mental and learning aspects of the game, is a good way to set the table for assigning blame later. Just sayin'.

While your first paragraph is fun to read and mostly true as in para 2. The belief that Geno cares less about wins and losses than player development has a flaw. Geno more than anything hates to lose. Please review about 1500 games his teams have played and take particular attention to the losses---especially in the handshake lines and a bit prior. He cares about Freshman and Sophs (his words) development that's true--would he choose this over a win?? I have very serious doubts.

 

[diggerfoot]

While your first paragraph is fun to read and mostly true as in para 2. The belief that Geno cares less about wins and losses than player development has a flaw. Geno more than anything hates to lose. Please review about 1500 games his teams have played and take particular attention to the losses---especially in the handshake lines and a bit prior. He cares about Freshman and Sophs (his words) development that's true--would he choose this over a win?? I have very serious doubts.

Instead of "my impression" perhaps I should have written "Auriemma has stated" that he prefers a loss where they play the right way than a win when they do not. He has stated this repeatedly, to the point where I believe him.

As for the handshake line, Auriemma is one of the more gracious coaches in the handshake line that I've seen after a loss, particularly when he feels the other team has played well. I guess we each see what we want to see. In any case, since Auriemma has not coached 1500 games it would be hard to review them all.

 

[Jingo]

If you think Geno will sit a senior (one that is far better and more valuable than you say) for a freshman, you know nothing about Geno

 

[Jingo]

Slippery slope .. Geno wants to win and Walker's not a senior, eh?

 

[Triad]

Instead of "my impression" perhaps I should have written "Auriemma has stated" that he prefers a loss where they play the right way than a win when they do not. He has stated this repeatedly, to the point where I believe him.

As for the handshake line, Auriemma is one of the more gracious coaches in the handshake line that I've seen after a loss, particularly when he feels the other team has played well. I guess we each see what we want to see. In any case, since Auriemma has not coached 1500 games it would be hard to review them all.

If you follow all the words spoken by Geno you will find he often speaks words that contradict word spoken or to be spoken. Not a dig on Geno. He is human and humans, by their very nature, change their minds or their view if ONLY for the moment they are in. His comment about preferring a loss to get better play is just plain smoke being sent to players to get a rise out of them and better play from them. Don't dwell on Geno's words. If you do for ever stated comment about a subject you will usually find the opposite spoken elsewhere. Most humans tend to do that. If they don't they are very rigid and won't make good coaches, good people to be around. Flexible is the real nature of most humans. Yet politicians get hung for changing their views from 30 year previous--go figure!!

 

[Triad]

Instead of "my impression" perhaps I should have written "Auriemma has stated" that he prefers a loss where they play the right way than a win when they do not. He has stated this repeatedly, to the point where I believe him.

As for the handshake line, Auriemma is one of the more gracious coaches in the handshake line that I've seen after a loss, particularly when he feels the other team has played well. I guess we each see what we want to see. In any case, since Auriemma has not coached 1500 I games it
I only know of 3 Ossing players that landed at Uconn. So far 2 were very good players. Chung was not DT but a very good pg. AEH, has shown she can play even though not at Uconn, so what do you believe is the issues with those plays as you see it?
In terms of Development over wins---maybe. But consider this he has on board for the past 3 plus years 2 very intelligent players with a bit more than exceptional basketball education and training prior to Uconn. Why they have, with Geno's emphasis on development, not developed beyond most freshman?? Ok try Sophs. Certainly not Jr's or Seniors. Then too if you hold the Ossing recruits as not so great where was their development? I could list another 10 or so that graduated or transferred that arrived with great hype and spent their Senior years preparing for Uconn, but never made the grade at Uconn, why--were they not worthy of development certainly they arrived with much fanfare and supposed desire to be great---how is it they were not developed? Geno doesn't recruit bad players does he? Is the judgement of the staff that far off? Or is it he just likes players to sit on his bench for 4 years?