Lin Dunn: UConn Bad for the Game | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Lin Dunn: UConn Bad for the Game

Status
Not open for further replies.
She would have made more sense if she'd said Geno is bad for wcbb.
 
In fairness to her, she may be tired of losing WNBA championships to teams with UConn Alum. We should all send her some cheese to go with her whine.
 
huskyblooz said:
what about Duke's dynasty?
Expand ...
You mean the one from the 2004 article titled:

Duke’s women building a dynasty

Well, Gail did have a point. Duke had won 5 straight ACC crowns at that point, which was way more than anything that Husky team up north was going to do in the ACC. Sometimes you just have to define your dynasty. I've won two championships in my fantasy football league over the last four years, so I rightly consider myself a powerful dynasty equivalent in scope to maybe the Tang or Shang dynasties in China.
 
.-.
bschwartz said:
In fairness to her, she may be tired of losing WNBA championships to teams with UConn Alum. We should all send her some cheese to go with her whine.
Expand ...
And they had a chance to add a UConn alum in the draft last year and passed her over... :mad:
 
2ndCity said:
Did Lin Dunn think that Baylor's recent run was "Not good" for
WCBB? Or, Tennesee's?
Expand ...
Baylor should have won 3 National Championships with the team they had around Griner---they won only one---- they had the most talented team- hands down. I am more convinced the more I watch- that our raw talent isn't 15-40 pts better than everyone we play- we just play harder and smarter all the time.
 
Blueballer said:
I don't remember hearing this crap when TENN was winning all the time. By the way was the same thing said about Wooden's teams?
Expand ...
That is the best and most obviously appropriate observation yet------ the fact that Geno is a Male- Is Italian - and is "the way he is" is most of the reason the "status quo" doesn't think Uconn is good for Women's basketball. Great Post Blue Baller---- when it was Tenn/Virginia-Old Domion & LSU--- there probably wasnt many detractors. Pathetic!!!!
 
MilliniumPrince said:
She's right. Remember how bad heavyweight boxing was when Tyson dominated? Boxing is in such a better place now.

Sports are built on three things:
1) Dynasties
2) Great Rivalries
3) Transcend player(s)

A sport better have 2 out of 3 if it wants to grow. Uconn is carrying WCB right now. She should simply say thank you and be on her way.
Expand ...
so who's the heavyweight champion at the moment? i really don't know.
 
Last edited:
Dove said:
UConn hasn't won back to back titles in a while. There are teams out there that can compete.
Expand ...
I know!!! Its been like two years in the wilderness since our last streak ended and our next one began! We were on life support!:cool:

But to your real statement - maybe this year is going to be undefeated, but I think she is wrong in stating there is no one competing with Uconn - what is true is there are not enough teams competing. Over the past three years Baylor, ND, Stanford, and aTm could be said to have competed well. So that is 5 at the top and you could add in Duke and Louisville and maybe a few more. That is still a bit meager but it is not insignificant and is an improvement over the early 2000s say.
 
.-.
Dunn only clarified her comments because she got called out. No reason the original statement could not have been framed better unless this reaction was her intent all along.
 
One of the Klitchkos but I only care because I think he is marrying the cheerleader from Heroes. ...:D

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2
 
John Glass said:
What is bad for the game is spoiled kids that think they are gods gift to basketball. They are told they are "special", even though they lack fundamentals. They pick a college based on an opportunity to start as a freshman, and college may be the first time they have heard the word no.

Girls (and boys) get participation trophies, and guaranteed playing time when they are young. Then in AAU they play so many games, winning becomes irrelevant . The word sacrifice is foreign to most of them.
Expand ...
I can't believe 6 people actually Liked this post. Talk about generalization! It's like saying all people of a certain age, ahem, are cranky curmudgeons. Certainly some are, but painting all with such a broad brush is just wrong. And this comes from someone who's constantly in our high school, as a robotics team mentor and now as a band parent.
 
A dynasty is always good for the sport from a ratings/money point of view. The casual fan is always more interested when there's one team or player that dominates. They either root for them or against them but there's certainly more interest.

From the more serious fan point of view it's only generally more interesting if you're a fan of the dominating team/player.

So my basic premise is that whether it's good for the sport or not is in the eye of the beholder.
 
.-.
Fishy said:
UConn's dominance is pretty good for us.

Especially after the way UConn was treated by the media in conference realignment, my concern for the welfare of athletic programs no longer extends more than an inch off the UConn campus.

UConn's bad for the game? Everyone else should either get better or go pound sand.
Expand ...


I certainly subscribe to this argument
But:

I could imagine a hypothetical situation in which UConn (Yukon) was able to complete next season's recruiting class w a tall Southern girl and then come back the following season with a couple more who have been discussed regularly.

Geno has been speaking of late of players who are ready to play, sure, need coaching but whose talent is virtually game ready.

That is a bit of a step up from only a few years ago.

Could lead to a batch of undefeated seasons, National Championships as far as the eye can see.

As Doggy has correctly pointed out, the conference fiasco has had little or no effect on recruits.

Could three or four undefeated seasons cause some justifiable discontent?

Perhaps.

Let's see how this all plays out.
 
SWHuskyFan said:
A dynasty is always good for the sport from a ratings/money point of view. The casual fan is always more interested when there's one team or player that dominates. They either root for them or against them but there's certainly more interest.

From the more serious fan point of view it's only generally more interesting if you're a fan of the dominating team/player.

So my basic premise is that whether it's good for the sport or not is in the eye of the beholder.
Expand ...

SW and others who have made similar points could well be right. But isn't it possible that the real ratings boost is an intense rivalry like UConn-UTenn in the olden days or UConn-ND in more recent times? Yeah, ESPN and print will talk up a streak as it gets close to 88, but that's once every three years at best. Rivalry games in the regular season and often the playoffs seem like a more consistent path to coverage and fan enthusiasm: everyone gets to pick a side AND have a reasonable expectation that their side could win.
 
I agree with your point to a degree maddoggy. A rivalry is another reason why ratings might increase. I don't think that changes the general point on dynasties in sports. There are lots of reasons why the casual fan might watch a sport that they otherwise tend to ignore. A transcendent star might have a similar effect to a rivalry or a dynasty.
 
You are absolutely right, and I'm sorry I didn't say it better.

There are lots of reasons for fans to watch not only a transcendent star but also a transcendent team. We have only to look at the home attendance bump that UConn's opponents get every time the Huskies come to town.
 
.-.
bschwartz said:
In fairness to her, she may be tired of losing WNBA championships to teams with UConn Alum. We should all send her some cheese to go with her whine.
Expand ...
She did Draft Sue first overall remember. To be honest I can kind of get what she is saying. I think it would be better for the game if their were more than one UConn (a team who can make the plays we can ) but not having any team that can play like this would only fuel the belief that women can not play with the skill men can.
What is "bad for the game" is that we don't get to renew our rivalry with ND during the regular season
 
Before the championship I remember watching Louisville as they were being introduced with all kinds of dance moves and handshakes. Then there was UConn, nothing fancy. They shook the Louisville players' hands and went about the business of playing the game and annihilated Louisville. It's mainly in the attitude. Many teams have skilled players, but only one team has the UConn coaching staff.
 
I actually thought of Lin Dunn last Sunday night watching Georgia Tech play Tennessee. I watched as Tennessee aggressively over-played on defense and wondered when Georgia Tech's coach, Machelle Joseph, was going to instruct her players to make the most basic basketball play: the backdoor cut. I wondered what Machelle Joseph learned from her former coach and mentor Lin Dunn.

The college game needs better coaches who need to be taught the game by their mentors. Maybe Lin Dunn could have done a better job of teaching the game.
 
HuskyNan said:
I can't believe 6 people actually Liked this post. Talk about generalization! It's like saying all people of a certain age, ahem, are cranky curmudgeons. Certainly some are, but painting all with such a broad brush is just wrong. And this comes from someone who's constantly in our high school, as a robotics team mentor and now as a band parent.
Expand ...

Where did I say everyone ? Getting a trophy for participating , and guaranteed playing time is just wrong. It teaches kids they are entitled to things, and discourages hard work.

I was on a baseball team as an 11 year old, and didn't play one inning, or get an at bat all season. It was because the boy (catcher) ahead of me was better. I knew it, and worked hard to become a starter the next 3 seasons. Competition is good, it brings out the best in most people.
 
Last edited:
I'll stay out of the John Glass discussion, but I tend to agree to an extent, both with his premise and the fact that it is an over-generalization.

As to Lin Dunn, I don't think she was dissing UConn. I really think that there are benefits of a strong dynasty (for the casual sports fan and for the fans of the dynasty) and some negative aspects for fans (casual and fanatical) of other teams. Having never been in that position, you cannot understand how absolutely frustrating it is to know your team has to play UConn and has, by definition, a less than 50% chance of winning, and often less than 1% chance.

Now, the fault is not UConn's, it is everyone else's who have not stepped up, except that it is extraordinary difficult to step up, and teams that have succeeded on a short term basis (Baylor for example) can't sustain it. I think that, for a team to make themselves a consistent competitor with UConn, they would need to get a base of superior talent, and really, while first rate classes for a single year are out there, not many schools besides you guys can consistently recruit, year in and year out, at that level.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,384
Messages
4,569,664
Members
10,475
Latest member
Tunwin22


Top Bottom