- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,595
- Reaction Score
- 6,342
My mother never went to any of my games either when I was playing or coaching but she turned in for UConn women's basketball from 1991
Great (unrealistic?) Expectations
- Thread starter oldude
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Messages
- 1,164
- Reaction Score
- 2,273
Well said. I'm thinking more like 2 or 3 losses before March but either way, so what. As long as things come together by then, and don't bet against it.
Gus Mahler
Popular Composer
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Messages
- 5,037
- Reaction Score
- 18,959
To pick a friendly nit, it was 20-12.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2015
- Messages
- 11,333
- Reaction Score
- 25,045
Thanks---I appreciate the reply.
I would tend to agree with Pluto---perfection is not attainable--. However there are those that see those words meaning:
Good is the Enemy of Perfection because to accept good does not allow one achieving their maximum potential. (Geno not withstanding).
(it does not sound familiar)--we don't live in a Democracy--our country was founded as a Republic with democratic ideal. A representative republic--where 1 representative speaks for thousands, unlike a democracy where one man one vote means just that.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2015
- Messages
- 11,333
- Reaction Score
- 25,045
Thanks Old Dude--I'd have liked to have met your Mom! Connecticut of my youth was a true melting pot--many cities and some towns had "sections" for Irish, Polish, Italian, Black Americans, German, etc. I ate true Italian meals --that ruined me for restaurants--the sauce (sometimes called gravy) was incomparable--. Ken Burns book 'the War" spoke of a Waterbury, Ct Italian boy and his family
if you had read it , I'm sure you'd relate to the mother.
I tend to also enjoy the "rebuilding' years.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2016
- Messages
- 5,306
- Reaction Score
- 28,416
I don't agree but I admit that there is no winning this argument for either of us, because it is somewhat about semantics. But, for what it's worth, I believe we live in a hybrid republic/democracy. Our federal gov't is a republic, but that doesn't mean it's not a democracy as well. Representatives are elected by the voters, so that they carry our views (of course, the counter argument is that they don't represent our views but have been empowered by us to represent their own wisdom). And a great many local gov'ts are pure democracies still--what were from the beginning of our nation conceived of as town meeting democracies. We still today gather for (e.g.) at school board meetings where, although we have elected a school board designed to make most of the decisions on our behalf, all those town citizens who choose to attend can vote on key issues such as the budget.
Fact is, we have far more democratic agency than most of us are willing or have the energy to demand for ourselves.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2015
- Messages
- 11,333
- Reaction Score
- 25,045
\
This is why i seek your posting--even with "serious" disagreement you are thoughtful.
Gus Mahler
Popular Composer
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Messages
- 5,037
- Reaction Score
- 18,959
Nice post, bags. I'm beginning to suspect you know what you're talking about.
Jimbo
Running to Stand Still
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2016
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction Score
- 3,108
I had the same exact thought while watching that race this summer. An unbelievable performance.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2016
- Messages
- 5,306
- Reaction Score
- 28,416
OTOH, Gus, I now have to begin doubting that you do.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 3,512
- Reaction Score
- 18,616
meyers7
You Talkin’ To Me?
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 23,904
- Reaction Score
- 63,062
No sweeter words have ever been posted on this board.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 6,651
- Reaction Score
- 14,696
I'm not ready to declare this as an "off year" yet.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2015
- Messages
- 11,333
- Reaction Score
- 25,045
SOME Call them off years. I've called this one a FUN year regardless of the final outcome. We have more than a half dozen kids learning how to play at an exceptional level--with all the ups and downs. Regardless of the outcome (yes again)--this is great preparation for next year to be "senior" leadership. Chemistry--I believe is the key ingredient not fully developed along with a TRUE leader.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 3,512
- Reaction Score
- 18,616
I find myself amazed by the number of predictions here that this team will have multiple losses this year! While I admittedly am less knowledgeable about basketball than many of you, I just can't see the rationale for all this doom and gloom. I will be truly amazed if we lose more than two games and would not be surprised at all if we were to be undefeated once again when the NCAA tournament rolls around again! I must admit to being somewhat nervous about the Notre Dame game. I mean, we have the greatest coach in the game, backed by an associate head coach that I would not trade for any head coach in women's basketball, magnificent assistant coaches who are knowledgeable and experienced, and a roster full of very good players! Realistically, who is more talented across the board than us? We have Lou, a 6'3" former No 1 recruit who imho has just began to scratch the surface of her potential! She wayynts to be a great player and has, I'm sure, asked Geno and the staff to help her accomplish that! Many observers of this team have said that Napheesa Collier is, or may be, a better player than Katie Lou! She too wants to be great and has shown repeatedly that she is willing and able to "leave it all on the court"! She is already one of my all time favorites! Next up we have Kia Nurse, an Olympian and our most experienced player, who sets the tone for effort and toughness! Then we have Gabby Williams, said by many to be the most athletically gifted player to ever play at UConn! Crystal Dangerfield is a former No 2 recruit who is already being compared favorably to the two greatest point guards in Uconn history! Three games into her career here, she has already shown herself to be a big time, big game player who can elevate her game when her team needs her! She is the littlest player on the team but has one of the biggest hearts and looks like she could bench press me and my wife together! Saniya Chong was a big time scorer in high school! I believe she averaged 33 points a game! I believe she will finally shine her brightest this year. She also brings senior leadership this year! Natalie Butler is a former star at Georgetown who has had to sit out for a season and then suffer through a frustrating injury. She is healthy now and raring to go! Finally we have Molly Bent and Kyla Irwin, two youngsters recruited by arguably the best judge of talent in all of women's basketball! Lastly we have a beloved walk on who helps bring this team together and sets an example for perseverance and selflessness! Tierney Lawlor. Oh, I forgot to mention our two transfers who are both proven great players and who although not allowed to play in games this year, nevertheless contribute in practice every day to help their teammates get ready to play! Nope, I just don't see how anyone could possibly think we are going to lose 4 plus games this year! Is it possible? I suppose so. Is it likely? I don't think so!
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2015
- Messages
- 11,333
- Reaction Score
- 25,045
Really nice post. Cheer this team on. positive---Thanks.
I like what I've seen from both Chong and Butler this year. If we try to put them in the shoes of Moriah or Stew--that's a mistake and and insult to their talent. Butler's sizes, body style, forces her to not be as mobile as Stew or KIAh. I've listed her attributes often so I won't bore you with those. Chong--has had a couple of nice/good games. FSU she was the Chong of HS (almost). Believe it or not--the pressures on Chong this year are large.--a senior, expected to lead after almost 3 years on the bench, expected to take up the slack when offense is lacking. Saniya--will have big games and nothing games--why, even Geno has no idea--but her plus side is good.
More games maybe she'll develop the Saniya we all want.
Does it matter if Uconn loses 2,3,4 games/?? Will they win the AAC title/ yes! Will they make the NCAA--yes! Other than that it's an ego trip for fans. It's a learning tool for Geno!!
huskeynut
Leader of the Band
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 7,400
- Reaction Score
- 31,764
Gus - you're right. CRS is setting in! My wife made that point to me.
UcMiami
How it is
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 14,196
- Reaction Score
- 47,330
Cuango - or should I call you Tony Jr. I like your thinking. I think most posters are reluctant to quite trust this team yet. Geno set up a gauntlet of massive proportions for them to run to get through December, and then added in a New Years surprise for good measure. They are definitely not the 2016 edition which would have laughed in the face of this murders row of games, and they are not yet a finished product so ... they passed their first stern test last Thursday, but that was an hors d'oeuvre - they have DePaul, Texas, ND, OSU, MD yet to navigate with SC coming in Feb.
One fear I have is that they are running on a high wire and oblivious to the depths below them - should one of these teams remove their blinders by beating them, they might start to notice that chasm and a touch of fear might creep in. I don't think it will happen, but ...
One fear I have is that they are running on a high wire and oblivious to the depths below them - should one of these teams remove their blinders by beating them, they might start to notice that chasm and a touch of fear might creep in. I don't think it will happen, but ...
meyers7
You Talkin’ To Me?
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 23,904
- Reaction Score
- 63,062
I don't know that I would call that doom and gloom. Having a 30+and 3-4 season would be a great season. Any year. Some just have a more a realistic outlook.
I'd be pretty shocked if that were to happen. Happy, but shocked.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,493
- Reaction Score
- 4,908
Intrigued by the conversation on "democratic republic". As is implied by the relationship stated. It is a form of democracy.
From Mickipedia: Thomas Jefferson defined a republic as:
...a government by its citizens in mass, acting directly and personally, according to rules established by the majority; and that every other government is more or less republican, in proportion as it has in its composition more or less of this ingredient of the direct action of the citizens. Such a government is evidently restrained to very narrow limits of space and population. I doubt if it would be practicable beyond the extent of a New England township. The first shade from this pure element, which, like that of pure vital air, cannot sustain life of itself, would be where the powers of the government, being divided, should be exercised each by representatives chosen...for such short terms as should render secure the duty of expressing the will of their constituents. This I should consider as the nearest approach to a pure republic, which is practicable on a large scale of country or population ... we may say with truth and meaning, that governments are more or less republican as they have more or less of the element of popular election and control in their composition; and believing, as I do, that the mass of the citizens is the safest depository of their own rights, and especially, that the evils flowing from the duperies of the people, are less injurious than those from the egoism of their agents, I am a friend to that composition of government which has in it the most of this ingredient.[26]
The Founding Fathers discoursed endlessly on the meaning of "republicanism." John Adams in 1787 defined it as "a government, in which all men, rich and poor, magistrates and subjects, officers and people, masters and servants, the first citizen and the last, are equally subject to the laws."[27]
Virtue vs. Commerce[edit]
The open question, as Pocock suggested,[28] of the conflict between personal economic interest (grounded in Lockean liberalism) and classical republicanism, troubled Americans. Jefferson and Madison roundly denounced the Federalists for creating a national bank as tending to corruption and monarchism; Alexander Hamilton staunchly defended his program, arguing that national economic strength was necessary for the protection of liberty. Jefferson never relented but by 1815 Madison switched and announced in favor of a national bank, which he set up in 1816.
John Adams often pondered the issue of civic virtue. Writing Mercy Otis Warren in 1776, he agreed with the Greeks and the Romans, that, "Public Virtue cannot exist without private, and public Virtue is the only Foundation of Republics." Adams insisted, "There must be a positive Passion for the public good, the public Interest, Honor, Power, and Glory, established in the Minds of the People, or there can be no Republican Government, nor any real Liberty. And this public Passion must be Superior to all private Passions. Men must be ready, they must pride themselves, and be happy to sacrifice their private Pleasures, Passions, and Interests, nay their private Friendships and dearest connections, when they Stand in Competition with the Rights of society."[29]
Adams worried that a businessman might have financial interests that conflicted with republican duty; indeed, he was especially suspicious of banks. He decided that history taught that "the Spirit of Commerce ... is incompatible with that purity of Heart, and Greatness of soul which is necessary for a happy Republic." But so much of that spirit of commerce had infected America. In New England, Adams noted, "even the Farmers and Tradesmen are addicted to Commerce." As a result, there was "a great Danger that a Republican Government would be very factious and turbulent there."[30]
From Mickipedia: Thomas Jefferson defined a republic as:
...a government by its citizens in mass, acting directly and personally, according to rules established by the majority; and that every other government is more or less republican, in proportion as it has in its composition more or less of this ingredient of the direct action of the citizens. Such a government is evidently restrained to very narrow limits of space and population. I doubt if it would be practicable beyond the extent of a New England township. The first shade from this pure element, which, like that of pure vital air, cannot sustain life of itself, would be where the powers of the government, being divided, should be exercised each by representatives chosen...for such short terms as should render secure the duty of expressing the will of their constituents. This I should consider as the nearest approach to a pure republic, which is practicable on a large scale of country or population ... we may say with truth and meaning, that governments are more or less republican as they have more or less of the element of popular election and control in their composition; and believing, as I do, that the mass of the citizens is the safest depository of their own rights, and especially, that the evils flowing from the duperies of the people, are less injurious than those from the egoism of their agents, I am a friend to that composition of government which has in it the most of this ingredient.[26]
The Founding Fathers discoursed endlessly on the meaning of "republicanism." John Adams in 1787 defined it as "a government, in which all men, rich and poor, magistrates and subjects, officers and people, masters and servants, the first citizen and the last, are equally subject to the laws."[27]
Virtue vs. Commerce[edit]
The open question, as Pocock suggested,[28] of the conflict between personal economic interest (grounded in Lockean liberalism) and classical republicanism, troubled Americans. Jefferson and Madison roundly denounced the Federalists for creating a national bank as tending to corruption and monarchism; Alexander Hamilton staunchly defended his program, arguing that national economic strength was necessary for the protection of liberty. Jefferson never relented but by 1815 Madison switched and announced in favor of a national bank, which he set up in 1816.
John Adams often pondered the issue of civic virtue. Writing Mercy Otis Warren in 1776, he agreed with the Greeks and the Romans, that, "Public Virtue cannot exist without private, and public Virtue is the only Foundation of Republics." Adams insisted, "There must be a positive Passion for the public good, the public Interest, Honor, Power, and Glory, established in the Minds of the People, or there can be no Republican Government, nor any real Liberty. And this public Passion must be Superior to all private Passions. Men must be ready, they must pride themselves, and be happy to sacrifice their private Pleasures, Passions, and Interests, nay their private Friendships and dearest connections, when they Stand in Competition with the Rights of society."[29]
Adams worried that a businessman might have financial interests that conflicted with republican duty; indeed, he was especially suspicious of banks. He decided that history taught that "the Spirit of Commerce ... is incompatible with that purity of Heart, and Greatness of soul which is necessary for a happy Republic." But so much of that spirit of commerce had infected America. In New England, Adams noted, "even the Farmers and Tradesmen are addicted to Commerce." As a result, there was "a great Danger that a Republican Government would be very factious and turbulent there."[30]
LesMis89
Dedicated Lurker
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Messages
- 581
- Reaction Score
- 1,917
So did I. In fact I turned to my husband and said that I hadn't seen anything like this since Secretariat at the Belmont.
Ozzie Nelson
RIP, Ozzie
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,247
- Reaction Score
- 4,604
- Status