Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="hoophuskee, post: 2509358, member: 3535"] First off I just want to be clear you are replying not to a post I made to you. . . The point I was making to the other poster - imo the randomness is giving kudos to Rebecca for being "the most important recruit." So as some think- she is "the most important recruit" therefore she must be included in this top 4. Yet Bascom got the Huskies 1st to the final four. So why is Rebecca "the most important recruit?" As I've questioned -- and I'd like to know what you think-- "do you think Lobo have come to UCONN if UCONN did not go to the Final Four previously?" Some will say "I don't know." Well if we are talking about "a mythical Mt Rushmore" for those I ask -- "you can't make a guess or have not gut feel about this?" I "don't know" either. But my guess would be POSSIBLY yes. We're not in a court of law when we discuss all this "stuff." Anyhow I digress- And tell me why "Rushmore" should mean "ONE of the most important recruits" rather than "one of the top 4 PLAYERS." Where is this "Rushmore" allegory "defined" that some posters make it sound "of course YOU MUST INCLUDE" "the most important recruit?" And yet "the most important recruit is subjective" and imo nothing more than a "personal whim/ random choice of one tat suggests this must be Rebecca as the most important because I said so because my criteria/this most important recruit for Rushmore is the right criteria to use." [B]Where am I going wrong?[/B] Further, I hope you understand -- I am not irritated. The other poster seems (or seemed) to think I'm upset/ irritated. Also, I thought I have been contributing to "dialogue" yet the impression I got from that same poster was that I wasn't. When I get into these or other disagreements-- unless there insults or heavy sarcasm/talk down to/put down in nature-- as long as a disagreement doesn't stoop to that-I think disagreements are fun and a contribution. AM I wrong here as well that my posts reflect that I'm irritated/frustrated? Heck, recently even the poster bballnut thought I was angry / frustrated because she chose the ND guard over Kia Nurse - and at that moment I argued for Nurse. And part of what she said why she thought I was frustrated was because "I used CAPS." But I wasn't. I think back-and-forth as we are doing is fun. No? And I don;'t agree with your analogy of Ben Franklin over George Washington. This is the very thing why I think this Rushmore allegory is silly. YOUR OPINION IS NOT SILLY. You have awesome opinions. Even on this - please you make great points. Please don't ever think that I'm thinking your opinion or the poster justine or anyone else who I'm arguing with on this is "silly." It's a disagreement. That's all. Anyhow, do we really want to go back and forth why we disagree on your analogy of Ben vs George? Who says that YOU MUST be factor in "the most important recruit" yet use National championships is the "Rushmore" criteria? (Who is to say Rebecca is 1st? She might be 2nd. Or 3rd. right? How isn't this a personal whim to declare her 1st and then use Championships for Rebecca and not for for others that have more titles than Rebecca?) If "national Championships" is the criteria then what about our discussions with MoJeff vs Bird? And just in case if one were then to try to use NPOY for Bird-- can we realistically say that she was better than DT" that year? Where is the line drawn on all of this make believe Rushmore allegory? [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach