Plebe
La verdad no peca pero incomoda
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2016
- Messages
- 20,031
- Reaction Score
- 73,696
Yes, I'm sure that playing the likes of Washington and Colorado and Pitt and Wisconsin and Vanderbilt and Kansas would make all the difference, suddenly turning a B game into an A+ game.As an outsider, I'd also argue that (b) is plausible-- not for teams (like the Stewie years) that are head and shoulders above everyone else, but for teams, like this one and the past few at UCONN, whose advantages over the best other teams in WBB are less or sometimes not that at all. Yes, Geno does everything he can to schedule a very demanding out-of-conference schedule and that has generally given UCONN what is listed as a very high strength of schedule overall. But playing marquee games, usually spread out over time, against tough opponents out of conference is not the same, in my view, as navigating a conference schedule in which the margin of error for victory, week after week and sometimes game after game, is much less than it has been, and is, for UCONN in both the American Conference and Big East. The physical and mental demands of competition within a relatively tough conference are much greater and, perhaps just as important, the scouting by opponents is much more thorough (and becomes increasingly so). So--if team B learns how to defend what team A has been doing so well up to that point (or discovers a weakness), everyone jumps on board, forcing team A to adjust if it is to continue to be successful. And that of course makes team A all the stronger as the (conference) season progresses. That's why it is often the case that teams with a fine out-of-conference record fall flat once they get a couple of games into the conference part of the season. I think it's difficult to improve as much as one would like without that sort of week-to-week competition. Not impossible, obviously, but considerably more difficult. And that is the challenge that UCONN has faced for several years now.
This is all armchair spitballing, at best; sophistry would be more accurate.
There is zero empirical evidence that being in a "tough" or "easy" conference per se makes a lick of difference in team development or postseason results. Back in 2012, when the Big 12 was recognized as an extremely tough conference, Baylor, deemed the heavy national title favorite, still suffered the shocking loss to Louisville in the Sweet 16. Contrast that to 2019, when the Big 12 outside of Baylor was a decidedly weak conference, and yet Baylor, though not the clear singular favorite, won it all.
Fans and coaches of certain teams in certain conferences have a Pavlovian compulsion to spout clichés and platitudes about how wonderful/competitive/brutal their conference is and how their specific conference affiliation prepares them uniquely for epic postseason conquests. It's really just a bunch of PR baloney.
Last edited:

