Lobo's Daughter

[husky8273]

Steve Rushin played for, I believe, Marquette

Steve Rushin // University Honors // Marquette University - graduated but no record of playing

 

[HuskyNan]

I stand corrected

 

[MSGRET]

My Big Fat Sports Wedding

We met, by chance, in a smoke-filled bar better suited for curing hams. She asked if I was the scribe who once mocked, in SPORTS ILLUSTRATED, women's

vault.si.com

Here is Rebecca's HOF speech, where she jokes about her husband.

 

[FormerCTrez]

Here is Rebecca's HOF speech, where she jokes about her husband.

Thank you so much for sharing this. Awesome memories/stories about one of UCONN’s favorite daughters.

 

[husky8273]

Here is Rebecca's HOF speech, where she jokes about her husband.

 

[MSGRET]

Thanks, don't know what happened to it but I did see it when I copied the you tube video. Is there a limit to the number of video copies can be posted per a post?

 

[cancontent]

The size of the high school court isn't the same as the college court anyway.

Basketball court size regulation:
High School – 84 Ft long x 50 Ft width.
College and NBA professional – 94 Ft long x 50 Ft width.

Sorry, but I don't understand how this point justifies a 35 second shot clock. Why would the size of the court matter?

The FIBA shot clock is used in Canada for majority of provincial rep league games starting from U14/U15, regardless of the court size.

 

[sun]

Sorry, but I don't understand how this point justifies a 35 second shot clock. Why would the size of the court matter?

The FIBA shot clock is used in Canada for majority of provincial rep league games starting from U14/U15, regardless of the court size.

Obviously the US national regulatory "experts" have a different opinion than you due to a variety of different factors which are variables.
The high school court is a different size, the high school players are of different ages and skill levels, public schools are not the same as private leagues. and the states are just now starting to institute shot clocks on a trial /optional basis.
If you read the article, California has been using a shot clock for 45 years even though it wasn't approved nationally.
States can do what they want but I don't see how the 5 seconds makes a difference when there wasn't any shot clock previously being used.
There are so many differences between the high school & college game, which leaves plenty of room for differences of opinions among the 50 states.
The article that I posted also mentions the different state high school divisions or conferences some of which may be allowed to use a shot clock while others may not.
It's all in the judgment of the state associations that are entrusted with teaching kids how to play competitive basketball, which some high school kids are playing for the very first time.
The kids in some schools don't know how to play very well, especially in small towns & small schools without many athletes to field teams.

If a team wants to run fast, then they can still run fast even though the shot clock allows more time.
So in effect, the more lenient shot clock benefits kids who are young & learning and may not ever advance to play in college.
It's just like Little League baseball has different rules than college or the pro leagues.
Do you think that high school baseball players should only use wooden bats, or that college baseball players should only use wooden bats?
There's a transition that players need to make when they move up from one level to another, that's all.
You may not like it but that's the situation in the US right now.
It can change in the future if states want to go their own way or the national decision makers have the courage to mandate a shorter shot clock.

 

[MSGRET]

Obviously the US national regulatory "experts" have a different opinion than you due to a variety of different factors which are variables.
The high school court is a different size, the high school players are of different ages and skill levels, public schools are not the same as private leagues. and the states are just now starting to institute shot clocks on a trial & optional basis.
If you read the article, California has been using a shot clock for 45 years even though it wasn't approved nationally.
States can do what they want but I don't see how the 5 seconds makes a difference when there wasn't any shot clock previously being used.
There are so many differences between the high school & college game, that leaves plenty of room for differences of opinions among the 50 states.
The article that I posted also mentions the different state high school divisions, levels or conferences some of which may be allowed to use a shot clock while others may not.
It's all in the judgment of the state associations that are entrusted with teaching kids how to play competitive basketball, which some high kids are playing for the very first time.
The kids in some schools don't know how to play very well, especially in some small towns.
If a team wants to run fast, then they can still run fast even though the shot clock affords more time.
So in effect, the more lenient shot clock benefits kids who are young & learning and may not ever advanced to play in college.
It's just like Little League baseball has different rules than college or the pro leagues.
Do you think that high school players should only use wooden bats, or that college players should only use wooden bats?
There's a transition that players need to make when they move up from level to another, that's all.

Here in Nevada there is a rule that if a team is up by so many points, I think it is 50, then the game clock does not stop, not for free throws or any other time that the clock would be stopped, except for time outs or injuries.

 

[cancontent]

Obviously the US national regulatory "experts" have a different opinion than you due to a variety of different factors which are variables.
The high school court is a different size, the high school players are of different ages and skill levels, public schools are not the same as private leagues. and the states are just now starting to institute shot clocks on a trial /optional basis.
If you read the article, California has been using a shot clock for 45 years even though it wasn't approved nationally.
States can do what they want but I don't see how the 5 seconds makes a difference when there wasn't any shot clock previously being used.
There are so many differences between the high school & college game, which leaves plenty of room for differences of opinions among the 50 states.
The article that I posted also mentions the different state high school divisions or conferences some of which may be allowed to use a shot clock while others may not.
It's all in the judgment of the state associations that are entrusted with teaching kids how to play competitive basketball, which some high school kids are playing for the very first time.
The kids in some schools don't know how to play very well, especially in small towns & small schools without many athletes to field teams.

If a team wants to run fast, then they can still run fast even though the shot clock allows more time.
So in effect, the more lenient shot clock benefits kids who are young & learning and may not ever advance to play in college.
It's just like Little League baseball has different rules than college or the pro leagues.
Do you think that high school baseball players should only use wooden bats, or that college baseball players should only use wooden bats?
There's a transition that players need to make when they move up from one level to another, that's all.
You may not like it but that's the situation in the US right now.
It can change in the future if states want to go their own way or the national decision makers have the courage to mandate a shorter shot clock.

Could you repost the article? I don't see a link.

And yes, states have their rules, however my point is that it's been done and it's possible. The argument about small towns, holds some water, however Canada has similar challenges regarding small towns. That's hasn't prevented the shot clock from being implemented.

 

[Galaxyshooter]

Would be cool but not sure if there has been any interest though. As she's a junior, this is a critical season if that were to be a possibility.

At the same time, is it fair to project expectations like this? She may just enjoy playing basketball and have other interests long term. Just my thoughts.

Absolutely and then if she comes to Uconn and doesn't live up to expectations then she should be who she wants to be and not what people (Uconn fans) want her to be hopefully she doesn't want to follow in her mother's footsteps and decides to become great at whatever she chooses to become. I'm sure she's already feeling the pressure of being who she is let's not add another burden on her to follow in her mom's sneakers and produce a championship at her mother's alma mater

 

[sun]

Could you repost the article? I don't see a link.

And yes, states have their rules, however my point is that it's been done and it's possible. The argument about small towns, holds some water, however Canada has similar challenges regarding small towns. That's hasn't prevented the shot clock from being implemented.

There's 2 articles in post #21 on Page 1 of this thread that's linked below.
The 2nd article details the implementation of high school shot clocks in various states.

Lobo's Daughter

Maeve Rushin (Lobo's daughter) had 12 pts and 11 rbs in Northwest Catholic's 39 to 34 win over Glastonbury. VIDEO

the-boneyard.com

 

[cancontent]

There's 2 articles in post #21 on Page 1 of this thread that's linked below.
The 2nd article details the implementation of high school shot clocks in various states.

Lobo's Daughter

Maeve Rushin (Lobo's daughter) had 12 pts and 11 rbs in Northwest Catholic's 39 to 34 win over Glastonbury. VIDEO

the-boneyard.com

Thanks. I took your reply that you included another link. My apologies for the confusion.

 

[Founday21]

Hear she’s pretty good. Northwest, E.O. Smith and Windsor has a 6”2 Sophomore who’s also playing well this year.