Lin Dunn: UConn Bad for the Game

[HuskyNan]

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.

One of my beefs is people who think that things have to be done the same way they were a generation ago or they're wrong. Times change, people change.

The giving everyone a trophy thing isn't good for inspiring kids to try their hardest but it is good for getting some kids to try at all. You know, those shy, awkward kids that are terrified of joining a team, a club or whatever because they think they're not good enough. Well, maybe encouraging those kids might help them find abilities and strengths they didn't know they had.

As the parent of two teens, one now a freshman in college, I'm seeing more of a compromise between praising everyone equally and shutting kids out from activities. I live in a sports crazy town and everyone - EVERYONE - is encouraged to try out for something. The best performers get additional recognition; the bench players get included into the jocks' "inner circle" and everyone wins. I saw a stat that something like 65% of the high school students here are on some kind of team and many, many more are in organizations like marching band or competitive clubs (like the robotics club, math team, debate team, etc). Our town has high SAT scores, high student involvement in community service, and a ridiculously high rate of college bound seniors (95%, I think). Being included and involved is a good thing, and if you have to hand out a few trophies to all the kids at the elementary and middle school level, I'm fine with that.

 

[Phil]

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.

Yeah, I think the criticism is a bit over-blown. While the wording was inartful, I thought her message wasn't "UConn bad" but "rest of NCAA bad" for not being able to compete better.

 

[Icebear]

The giving everyone a trophy thing isn't good for inspiring kids to try their hardest but it is good for getting some kids to try at all. You know, those shy, awkward kids that are terrified of joining a team, a club or whatever because they think they're not good enough. Well, maybe encouraging those kids might help them find abilities and strengths they didn't know they had.

Amen, Nan. There is nothing to indicate the two extremes are the only options. One needs to have a broader view and think outside the box. There are multiple things to be reinforced in every event. Participation is just one and athletic dominance is just another.

 

[UcMiami]

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.

I think you hit on the biggest issue - sustaining excellence - Can Baylor remain in the top ten for the rest of the decade, can Delaware sustain the impetus provided by EDD, etc. There are a few teams that have done well consistently for a prolonged period and not just for a four year window with a superstar dropping in their lap. ND, Stanford, TN, Louisville come to mind as those types of teams, as does Marist at the mid-major level. It is tough because it requires recruiting and coaching and a little luck. But it also requires commitment and setting expectations and accepting nothing less and that is not as difficult.
And I think we can laugh about Villanova and dismiss DePaul as not in the top echelon, but I think both of those schools have shown commitment and expectations and coaching that is commendable - they will probably never attract the top recruits, but they get more out of the skill they do have than most coaches get with better skilled players. There probably isn't enough women's talent in HS to support 20 great teams, but there is enough right now to support 10.
Kim got a lot of publicity and coaching accolades because she got BG and no one else did, but the coach that has impressed me the most in that conference is Coale - she won the lottery with the Paris twins, but since then she has been consistently competitive with 'smoke and mirrors' - some really good players but I don't think top 5 HS talent, some really tough injuries, and good coaching.

 

[John Glass]

One of my beefs is people who think that things have to be done the same way they were a generation ago or they're wrong. Times change, people change.

The giving everyone a trophy thing isn't good for inspiring kids to try their hardest but it is good for getting some kids to try at all. You know, those shy, awkward kids that are terrified of joining a team, a club or whatever because they think they're not good enough. Well, maybe encouraging those kids might help them find abilities and strengths they didn't know they had.

As the parent of two teens, one now a freshman in college, I'm seeing more of a compromise between praising everyone equally and shutting kids out from activities. I live in a sports crazy town and everyone - EVERYONE - is encouraged to try out for something. The best performers get additional recognition; the bench players get included into the jocks' "inner circle" and everyone wins. I saw a stat that something like 65% of the high school students here are on some kind of team and many, many more are in organizations like marching band or competitive clubs (like the robotics club). Our town has high SAT scores, high student involvement in community service, and a ridiculously high rate of college bound seniors (95%, I think). Being included and involved is a good thing, and if you have to hand out a few trophies to all the kids at the elementary and middle school level, I'm fine with that.

My beef is being dishonest with the kids, and taking a Pollyanna approach . I have coached hundreds of kids at all levels, from the Bad News Bears, to D1 student athletes. I praise productive performances enthusiastically, and encourage kids that struggle. I never needed a trophy to motivate anyone.

" Times change, people change " for the better ? being on time, and discipline are frequently optional these days

 

[UcMiami]

One of my beefs is people who think that things have to be done the same way they were a generation ago or they're wrong. Times change, people change.

The giving everyone a trophy thing isn't good for inspiring kids to try their hardest but it is good for getting some kids to try at all. You know, those shy, awkward kids that are terrified of joining a team, a club or whatever because they think they're not good enough. Well, maybe encouraging those kids might help them find abilities and strengths they didn't know they had.

As the parent of two teens, one now a freshman in college, I'm seeing more of a compromise between praising everyone equally and shutting kids out from activities. I live in a sports crazy town and everyone - EVERYONE - is encouraged to try out for something. The best performers get additional recognition; the bench players get included into the jocks' "inner circle" and everyone wins. I saw a stat that something like 65% of the high school students here are on some kind of team and many, many more are in organizations like marching band or competitive clubs (like the robotics club). Our town has high SAT scores, high student involvement in community service, and a ridiculously high rate of college bound seniors (95%, I think). Being included and involved is a good thing, and if you have to hand out a few trophies to all the kids at the elementary and middle school level, I'm fine with that.

Nan - I agree to a certain degree but I think it goes too far in many cases, to the point of minimizing excellence and preventing failure. And rewarding poor effort and indifference. If a person doesn't experience failure how do they learn to value their success? I think failure is a necessary experience in growing up. If you do not challenge yourself or your children and do not allow the chance of failure, what is the reward of success. If we do not allow kids to excel because we want to include everyone in everything, we are short changing our society from producing excellence.
At Uconn - we don't expect Polido or Lawlor to start any games or to play in competitive games, but I bet their skill level will improve more over the next few years than if they were getting 20 minutes a game on a really bad team.
I don't think we want to crush any child's psyche but we have to find a way to do that without stunting other children's potential. If we surround the really skilled players with mediocrity then there is little reason for them to play because they will not be challenged to improve nor be surrounded by enough skill to succeed.

 

[HuskyNan]

Nan - I agree to a certain degree but I think it goes too far in many cases, to the point of minimizing excellence and preventing failure. And rewarding poor effort and indifference. If a person doesn't experience failure how do they learn to value their success? I think failure is a necessary experience in growing up. If you do not challenge yourself or your children and do not allow the chance of failure, what is the reward of success. If we do not allow kids to excel because we want to include everyone in everything, we are short changing our society from producing excellence.
At Uconn - we don't expect Polido or Lawlor to start any games or to play in competitive games, but I bet their skill level will improve more over the next few years than if they were getting 20 minutes a game on a really bad team.
I don't think we want to crush any child's psyche but we have to find a way to do that without stunting other children's potential. If we surround the really skilled players with mediocrity then there is little reason for them to play because they will not be challenged to improve nor be surrounded by enough skill to succeed.

I'm not talking about college aged or even high school aged students. I specifically mentioned elementary and middle school kids need encouragement and an incentive to try. For some, a trophy is an excellent incentive. When he was 6-7, my oldest son played soccer just to get the trophy and he turned out to be a pretty good defender so he played until he was 12 or so. He didn't stay with soccer but he now knows all the high school team players because he went through AAU (non-travel team) with them. He's part of their circle of friends and can hang out with the jocks as well as the nerds, all because he got a trophy as a 6 year old.

The kids that are spoiled or act like they deserve something regardless of effort didn't just learn that from soccer or basketball or football. If coaches are telling kids they're the best thing since sliced bread, this lesson needs to be reinforced at home and in the schoolroom for it to take root deeply. When you hear about playing time or starting for the team in women's basketball, it's almost always a parent making these demands rather than the kid. There's plenty of blame to go around for poor behavior so simply pegging it to an inclusionary attitude towards sports is lazy thinking.

 

[UcMiami]

I'm not talking about college aged or even high school aged students. I specifically mentioned elementary and middle school kids need encouragement and an incentive to try. For some, a trophy is an excellent incentive. When he was 6-7, my oldest son played soccer just to get the trophy and he turned out to be a pretty good defender so he played until he was 12 or so. He didn't stay with soccer but he now knows all the high school team players because he went through AAU (non-travel team) with them. He's part of their circle of friends and can hang out with the jocks as well as the nerds, all because he got a trophy as a 6 year old.

The kids that are spoiled or act like they deserve something regardless of effort didn't just learn that from soccer or basketball or football. If coaches are telling kids they're the best thing since sliced bread, this lesson needs to be reinforced at home and in the schoolroom for it to take root deeply. When you hear about playing time or starting for the team in women's basketball, it's almost always a parent making these demands rather than the kid. There's plenty of blame to go around for poor behavior so simply pegging it to an inclusionary attitude towards sports is lazy thinking.

Thanks Nan - appreciate the explanation. I am not completely convinced, but have a better perspective.

 

[David 76]

I love the program and Auriemma is the best. But 8 titles in 18 years means there is some parity at the top. The problem lies in that beyond the top 5 or 6 programs, there is not a lot of institutional strength.

 

[cardfan]

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?

I did.

 

[cardfan]

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.

Lin could have easily made the same point about a top 5 team vs. an unranked team, or any ranked team ranked vs UConn. There simply are not enough top women bball players spread around for any parity.

Women's college soccer and vball have experienced the same thing, the top teams just reload, with a rare year when a power team wins. UConn has riches of talented players beyond any team this year and probably the next 2-3 years. As a fan of the game, and someone who played and coached, I am BORED to death with the game now. I love watching good bball, and I love and support what Stanford has accomplished over the years, but my interest in the game is at an all time low.

 

[doggydaddy]

Lin could have easily made the same point about a top 5 team vs. an unranked team, or any ranked team ranked vs UConn. There simply are not enough top women bball players spread around for any parity.

Women's college soccer and vball have experienced the same thing, the top teams just reload, with a rare year when a power team wins. UConn has riches of talented players beyond any team this year and probably the next 2-3 years. As a fan of the game, and someone who played and coached, I am BORED to death with the game now. I love watching good bball, and I love and support what Stanford has accomplished over the years, but my interest in the game is at an all low.

After watching that horrible display of basketball in Texas, I don't blame you for losing interest.

 

[semper]

If you had an autistic child who never ever could win anything no matter how hard he tried, you might feel differently. At least once in their life at school kids need something...so matter how small, and to feel a moment of joyful recognition for who and what they are. This doesn't detract from the beautiful, the skilled, and the brilliant.

 

[cardfan]

After watching that horrible display of basketball in Texas, I don't blame you for losing interest.

I didn't watch the game yet as I have a lot going on right now, but I read about it. Beyond your sarcastic reply, my post wasn't about Stanford, but about the lack of parity in the game. Stanford is very, very young, has a lot of injuries, lost a pg for good, and has one AA player. I'm not sure what you expect to see this early in the season, but I don't care what you think.

Texas will be good, just not this year.

 

[doggydaddy]

I didn't watch the game yet as I have a lot going on right now, but I read about it. Beyond your sarcastic reply, my post wasn't about Stanford, but about the lack of parity in the game. Stanford is very, very young, has a lot of injuries, lost a pg for good, and has one AA player. I'm not sure what you expect to see this early in the season, but I don't care what you think.

Texas will be good, just not this year.

You cared enough to reply.

"After watching that horrible display of basketball in Texas, I don't blame you for losing interest."

No sarcasm there. Just facts about the game.

Stanford shot 32.3%, 26.1% on 3's and 15-25 on FT's.
Texas shot 26.2%, 25% on 3's and 18-24 on FT's.
49 FT's taken. 45 personal fouls.

A horrible display of basketball. I didn't know you didn't see it. If you are bored to death with the game now I would suggest you don't watch the game.

Young is relative. Stanford starts 2 seniors and a junior every game with a junior and a senior in the regular rotation off the bench. Along with at this time two freshman starters and two freshman off the bench. Lots of youth but plenty of experience.

They certainly are hurting with injuries, but I think the Kokenis excuse has reached it's statute of limitations.

One AA? I'd like to introduce you to Taurasi's junior season.

 

[cardfan]

You cared enough to reply.

"After watching that horrible display of basketball in Texas, I don't blame you for losing interest."

No sarcasm there. Just facts about the game.

Stanford shot 32.3%, 26.1% on 3's and 15-25 on FT's.
Texas shot 26.2%, 25% on 3's and 18-24 on FT's.
49 FT's taken. 45 personal fouls.

A horrible display of basketball. I didn't know you didn't see it. If you are bored to death with the game now I would suggest you don't watch the game.

Young is relative. Stanford starts 2 seniors and a junior every game with a junior and a senior in the regular rotation off the bench. Along with at this time two freshman starters and two freshman off the bench. Lots of youth but plenty of experience.

They certainly are hurting with injuries, but I think the Kokenis excuse has reached it's statute of limitations.

One AA? I'd like to introduce you to Taurasi's junior season.

Again, I'm not bored with Stanford. I'm bored with not enough parity in the game. I will watch the later tonight. I smart enough to know Nov bball is not pretty for the type of team we have now. I'm also smart enough to know they will be better in March, but still not talented enough to win a NC. Losing a pg is not an excuse. Also read the Q&A about recruiting at Stanford, then come back with another sarcastic response Yea, Taurasi is a guard. Same with Maya. When was the last time a team with one AA "post" won a NC?

 

[doggydaddy]

Again, I'm not bored with Stanford. I'm bored with not enough parity in the game. I will watch the later tonight. I smart enough to know Nov bball is not pretty for the type of team we have now. I'm also smart enough to know they will be better in March, but still not talented enough to win a NC. Losing a pg is not an excuse. Also read the Q&A about recruiting at Stanford, then come back with another sarcastic response Yea, Taurasi is a guard. Same with Maya. When was the last time a team with one AA "post" won a NC?

Wow...dissing Chiney? Not nice.

You sure are smart. You told me so.

 

[JellyBean]

So pretty much what Linn was saying was, we need to lower our standards at UConn so that others can catch up, if they can. Give me a break! Like somebody already stated, nobody had a problem with the Lady Vols running things and being dominate. Nobody told Pat to lower her standards Tennessee

 

[hoophuskee]

IMO Lin Dunn way off base teetering on anti-UCONN bias. Last year there were 4 teams apparently that could win. Our latest games vs Md and Penn State we're hardly annihilations.

 

[hoophuskee]

I did.

1--- I wished I could have seen more of the UCLA dynasty. Dynasties are a measurement to strive for.
2--- Were you bored last year too? If not, why not?
3--- Did you watch UCONN vs. Penn State?
4--- And you were also bored with UCONN vs Tenn being so dominant back in the day?
5--- What about with Parker at Tenn wer you also bored with Tenn dominance with her as well?

 

[UConnCat]

Lin could have easily made the same point about a top 5 team vs. an unranked team, or any ranked team ranked vs UConn. There simply are not enough top women bball players spread around for any parity.

Women's college soccer and vball have experienced the same thing, the top teams just reload, with a rare year when a power team wins. UConn has riches of talented players beyond any team this year and probably the next 2-3 years. As a fan of the game, and someone who played and coached, I am BORED to death with the game now. I love watching good bball, and I love and support what Stanford has accomplished over the years, but my interest in the game is at an all time low.

I don't understand this. UConn has 9 scholarship players right now and 2 of them are injured. That's 9 players covering 4 classes. I understand that 2 players -- KML and Stewart -- were #1 in their respective classes (though for KML perhaps not unanimously), but that leaves a whole bunch of highly ranked players playing somewhere. It's up to other coaches to develop their talent and improve their level of play.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I don't understand this. UConn has 9 scholarship players right now and 2 of them are injured. That's 9 players covering 4 classes. I understand that 2 players -- KML and Stewart -- were #1 in their respective classes (though for KML perhaps not unanimously), but that leaves a whole bunch of highly ranked players playing somewhere. It's up to other coaches to develop their talent and improve their level of play.

That's the whole point, the other schools have not stepped up. Except it isn't that easy. Besides the fact that Geno is an exceptional coach (and there are not that many of them out there) there is a major difference between playing a team with 2 or even 3 really good players (and that is rare) vs. a team where all 5 are remarkably talented AND remarkable well coached. Hence UConn's continued dominance.

Like I said in an earlier post, my experience has suggested that any team's significant dominance will attract casual fans to the sport and to that program, however, it frustrates and does not develop fans of other teams, which, IMHO would be a desirable goal.
And yes, although I liked Tennessee, I also felt the seasons where they were untouchable were not good for the fans of other teams, or developing fans of other teams.

 

[Scotter]

And yes, although I liked Tennessee, I also felt the seasons where they were untouchable were not good for the fans of other teams, or developing fans of other teams.

Teams building a fanbase has very little to do with whether a team can win a national championship. Look around WCBB and most of the programs with the largest fanbases aren't even Final Four contenders. It is marketing. And it is recruiting players that people want to watch. And it is playing a style that people want to watch. It has to happen at the grass roots level.

 

[EricSD]

Again, I'm not bored with Stanford. I'm bored with not enough parity in the game.

Makes no sense. UCONN won the NC last year, a season where Baylor was supposed to two-peat. But due to parity, Baylor was knocked out by L'ville. Teams like Cal and L'ville made it the final 4. ND has been a fixture in the FF for several years now.

In the past 5 years, no less than 8 teams have made it to the final 4 (UCONN, L'ville, Stanford, Oklahoma, aTm, ND, Baylor and Cal). UCONN has won 3, aTm once, and Baylor once. In the 5 years preceding, 10 teams made the final 4 (UNC, LSU, Tennessee, Michigan State, Stanford, Rutgers, UCONN, Minnesota, Maryland and Duke, with UCONN winning 1, Tennessee 2, and Baylor/Maryland 1 each.

So in the past 10 years, UCONN has won 4 NC's, Tennessee and Baylor 2, Maryland and aTm 1 each. I hardly would call the above lack of parity. Lots of teams making the final 4.

However, UCONN clearly has dominated the sport for the past 14 years winning 7 of the total NC's. During that span we saw UCONN surpass UCLA's 88 game win streak. That was great for the game. WCBB never had so much publicity. I would take the opposite approach - dynasties are great for the game and UCONN is anything but boring. AND they play the most pleasing style of basketball to watch in the entire nation.

 

[UConnCat]

Lin Dunn keeps it going:

Lin Dunn ‏@coachlindunn 23 Nov
@RebeccaLobo @debbieantonelli @CAROLYNPECK another rout by Connecticut! Is this good for our game?

Debbie Antonelli responds:

Debbie Antonelli ‏@debbieantonelli 23 Nov
@coachlindunn @RebeccaLobo @CAROLYNPECK uconn plays w/ discipline, game plan, talent, coaching adjustments. Yes, that's good for gm! Clinic!

And Dunn:

Lin Dunn ‏@coachlindunn 23 Nov
@debbieantonelli @RebeccaLobo as a fan of our game ,,, I want to watch a closely contested game! Not a 30--50 pt blowout! Don't you!.

Why is dunn singling out UConn? It's not the only team that wins by blowouts. Tenn won by 34, UNC won by 40.

 

[Adesmar123]

And just who is the "our" in our game? Are those code words?

 

[msf22b]

The NCAA could institute a system in which top-ten teams are required to play each other exclusively in OO conference.
so add ND, UTenn and the others.
or
Geno could just organize it by himself.

I know we played 3 top 10's a week ago.
But this week is pretty lame (from a competition point of you, not beautiful BB).

Might not change much Liz.
Was anything of this kind discusses at the conference this summer?

 

[pinotbear]

maybe I missed it, but did Lin Dunn offer any sort of solution to this perceived problem? Or did she just complain, without any follow-through?

 

[hoophuskee]

Problem with people like Lin Dunn is they have a combiantion of anti-UCONN bias, and as long as it doesn't affect them they are willing to accept mediocrity as long as teh score is close. So a close game means "it is all right?"

Ridiculous.

Anyhow, for years and years the top teams in WCBB rout lower conferences. Amazing that this University of Tennessee Martin gradaute is specifically mentioning UCONN and nothing said before in other years. I'm shocked. NOT!

 

[hoophuskee]

The NCAA could institute a system in which top-ten teams are required to play each other exclusively in OO conference.
so add ND, UTenn and the others.
or
Geno could just organize it by himself.

I know we played 3 top 10's a week ago.
But this week is pretty lame (from a competition point of you, not beautiful BB).

Might not change much Liz.
Was anything of this kind discusses at the conference this summer?

I thought UCONN played beautiful basketball.

In addition, so kids from smaller conferences don't get opportunites to play against the giants? We don't care about them because it doesn't give us the fix we want for an entire season?