maybe my favorite reason why I love this team

[bags27]

I know this is not the time to start this tread. But I have to say, the end of the article in today's NY Times is breathtaking: Geno consoling a broken-hearted Lou: "to work even harder to return and put her own mark on the Final Four: 'but right now, it's not your time: It's somebody else's time.'"

This is the type of moral stories that Geno weaves. This is a moral team, a moral program, a moral purpose. It is grounded on team values, family values, the best of basketball and competitive values. It is awesome, and, win or lose tonight, nothing can add or detract from the enormous character of this team, its coaches and the program.

So there.

 

[Kaizen]

We will see Lou next year in big time. She will be a big star....

 

[pinotbear]

not to be a bummer, but, I get uncomfortable assigning "moral" values to sports programs, much less college or high school kids who, frankly, aren't in it to reaffirm your version of morality. What I am quite comfortable with is your use of "values" in the sense of good team values, competitive values, and, in general, being people of good character.

Phrases such as "family values" are loaded words, historically, as are terms such as "moral purpose". That's putting an awful lot on a school sports team, unfairly so, I think. Just appreciate how well they do what they do, and how much they seem to treasure doing it together.

 

[BigBird]

Bags, this was one of your best posts, and spot on.

 

[bags27]

not to be a bummer, but, I get uncomfortable assigning "moral" values to sports programs, much less college or high school kids who, frankly, aren't in it to reaffirm your version of morality. What I am quite comfortable with is your use of "values" in the sense of good team values, competitive values, and, in general, being people of good character.Phrases such as "family values" are loaded words, historically, as are terms such as "moral purpose". That's putting an awful lot on a school sports team, unfairly so, I think. Just appreciate how well they do what they do, and how much they seem to treasure doing it together.

Hi Pinotbear, I understand your concerns and I thought twice about some of my word choices. But that's how I thought about it and, at this highly emotional moment, I decided to trust my emotions. I think words can be taken out of context and unpacked, but I hope they're interpreted within the intended context.

 

[GoUconn7961]

Katie Lou's star will burn bright in the next three years. Geno is a wise man indeed.

 

[UcMiami]

pinot - just want to say I had the same uneasy feelings reading the OP.
And Bags27 - I understand what you were aiming for, but both 'moral' and 'family' when associated with 'values' have been so bastardized by political misuse to cause me to cringe when they are used in pretty much any context. Indeed the word 'values' has also become fraught with associations that make it too suspect.

Not sure if you were aware but specific to women's basketball recruiting 'family values' became code used by people like Rene Portland to denigrate other programs that had unmarried female coaches. It still makes me uneasy when players and coaches refer to the strong family atmosphere they associate with their team because of that.

 

[bags27]

pinot - just want to say I had the same uneasy feelings reading the OP.
And Bags27 - I understand what you were aiming for, but both 'moral' and 'family' when associated with 'values' have been so bastardized by political misuse to cause me to cringe when they are used in pretty much any context. Indeed the word 'values' has also become fraught with associations that make it too suspect. Not sure if you were aware but specific to women's basketball recruiting 'family values' became code used by people like Rene Portland to denigrate other programs that had unmarried female coaches. It still makes me uneasy when players and coaches refer to the strong family atmosphere they associate with their team because of that.

Thanks UcMiami. These are, indeed, deeply freighted terms. I struggle with that question without resolution, often staying away from these and similar terms precisely because they can be misconstrued and sometimes the opposite--ignoring my own concerns, because I don't want the English language, limited as it already is, further impoverished by presumptions about what some people might misconstrue or take out of context. I then hope that, if people do have concerns, they will have the candor and trust that you and pinotbear display by raising them directly. On this term particularly, it's a difficult line for us all, as witnessed by the opposing opinions rendered on what constituted a "natural" family in Obergefell v Hodges offered by Justices Kennedy and Roberts. So to be specific here, I guess I had in mind for family Justice Kennedy's interpretation, which I construed as arguing for the naturally-occurring affinity of people (regardless of gender) to form mutually dependent relations. Family values in the context I used it above then would describe a commitment to maintaining ties of trust, loyalty, and affection within those mutually dependent bonds. Of course, Justice Kennedy was appropriately defending only the legal consummation of those ties. So I did use it metaphorically, and that's what created peoples' unease. I know I was emotional and not thoughtful there, but when I read that last line in the Times, I was so struck by its moral quality.

 

[PhillyCoach]

This was my first complete year on the BY and I learned quite a bit. I met/read many great posts from some very insightful and thoughtful people. Thanks to all.
Every once in awhile a post veers into politics and away from WBB. As an independent, critical thinker I read, then digest, contemplate, and sometimes respond. I felt I needed to respond to this thread.
First, I respect UC, Pinotbear, & Bags27. You all have been decent, honorable, and principled posters. You have been open and honest. Guess what? That is what I call MORAL! When I was president of an athletic association, administrator of a school, coach of numerous teams, part of a community outreach, chair of committees---we had a moral purpose, a moral story and a moral program. We strived to be decent, honest, open, honorable, caring, and principled.
I am sure we have all seen programs or organizations that were not moral. They were deceitful, dishonest, insincere, and underhanded. I think we should focus on MORE moral issues. If we can't agree on what is honest, decent, honorable, or principled then we are in big trouble.
The same goes for Values. Honesty, openness, personal responsibility, caring for others, and having clear-stated principles seem to be easy to agree on. No one is talking Religion. I am not religious. However, I will admit to spiritual. Yes, IMHO there are Universal Values and Moral standards.
UC hit it right on the head. The terms Morals & Values have been bastardized by political misuse. So, I say deal with the misuse, not the time honored use of morals and values.
Pinotbear said "I got uncomfortable" with those terms. IMHO that is Pinots issue. Are you telling us that you never taught your children or employees or relatives what your values are or what you expect from them? Politics made you uncomfortable. What is influencing your view about these words? That is the question.
Family values - I am one of 10 children and we had & have family values. I have two sons and we have the same family values. Honesty, personal responsibility, loyalty, caring for others, and being a productive citizen and neighbor. Politics bent all this out of shape for political purposes that--IMHO-- DID NOT help our country move forward. Quick example is the serious increase of cheating in school, lying, and not being accountable for one's own decisions and actions. That is just the tip of the iceberg.
I will continue to use the terms and to live by moral standards and family values. Politics and political correctness do not determine what words I use and how I live my life.
To close - tolerance is thrown around for political purposes until its not politically useful. When someone posts a thought and there is a contrarian response; a certain saying comes to mind for me. "We don't see things the way they are--we see things as WE ARE!"
It was a great season and I look forward to interacting with all of you over the next few months and more.

 

[bags27]

Coach--you raise really tough and honest issues that we all struggle with. Thank you. Some of us may disagree on the meanings of words or their implications or extended applications, but perhaps most of us will agree that if we discuss these things with each other civilly and with mutual respect we begin to appreciate deeper intentions. We may then surprise ourselves that we may have more in common than we thought.

As to the question of "moral", what Geno told Lou carried great moral valence (for me at least). It was a way of honoring her desire to compete and contribute, but also of saying to her that she was not responsible for carrying this team this year. That's powerful and not easy stuff to hear when you're the reigning high school POY. To express oneself so candidly this way, without artifice or manipulation, creates, as Geno so often does, (again, sorry for the word, but I hope everyone understands my context) a moral environment for the team.

I think, Coach, you and I feel pretty similarly about these things. Others, however--and I speak as an educator, too--have felt oppressed or marginalized by these very words or at least are somewhat more sensitized to how they've been used as weapons. I acknowledge that here, and hope candid discussion clarifies meaning.

 

[UcMiami]

Bags and Philly - thanks both. As I said, initially, I knew what the meaning of those terms in the OP was and I very much agreed with the post in terms of the honesty and compassion that Geno showed to Lou and the reflection that made on the nature of the program he leads.
You have both written clearly about how you view those terms and how important those ideas are to civilized society and I am in total agreement about what you write and how important those concepts are.

Coach - I am the son of an English professor (at Uconn) and grew up with a real appreciation for vocabulary and precise and accurate use of language and the beauty of words and the concepts they represent. I hate that language and usage in great literature comes under criticism because it is seen through the lens of modern sensibilities and changed societal norms, but also understand how people affected by those issues can be offended. And I find the search for origins of words that have long been forgotten in modern usage in order to label those words 'pejorative' to be so convoluted as to be silly - people for decades used 'handicapped' without ever knowing it was 'pejorative' based on it being a reference to a person who stood cap-in-hand begging - but it has been so indentified now, so we have to make use of other new convoluted words to represent the same meaning.

All of that said, when words and phrases do become code for ugly concepts that belie their original meaning, I think people need to be sensitive to that code and to be vigilant in making clear that their usage is not code but literal. That becomes more important in two instances: in public usage where the user and the recipient are unacquainted so the context is open to misinterpretation; and in situations where the 'code' has been used before and documented in such usage.

Public forums like the boneyard are an example of the first instance. And unfortunately WCBB is an example of the second - which is why I added the context at the end of my earlier post to explain to perhaps newer converts to WCBB what older coverts already might be painfully aware of.

 

[PhillyCoach]

Bags and Philly - thanks both. As I said, initially, I knew what the meaning of those terms in the OP was and I very much agreed with the post in terms of the honesty and compassion that Geno showed to Lou and the reflection that made on the nature of the program he leads.
You have both written clearly about how you view those terms and how important those ideas are to civilized society and I am in total agreement about what you write and how important those concepts are.

Coach - I am the son of an English professor (at Uconn) and grew up with a real appreciation for vocabulary and precise and accurate use of language and the beauty of words and the concepts they represent. I hate that language and usage in great literature comes under criticism because it is seen through the lens of modern sensibilities and changed societal norms, but also understand how people affected by those issues can be offended. And I find the search for origins of words that have long been forgotten in modern usage in order to label those words 'pejorative' to be so convoluted as to be silly - people for decades used 'handicapped' without ever knowing it was 'pejorative' based on it being a reference to a person who stood cap-in-hand begging - but it has been so indentified now, so we have to make use of other new convoluted words to represent the same meaning.

All of that said, when words and phrases do become code for ugly concepts that belie their original meaning, I think people need to be sensitive to that code and to be vigilant in making clear that their usage is not code but literal. That becomes more important in two instances: in public usage where the user and the recipient are unacquainted so the context is open to misinterpretation; and in situations where the 'code' has been used before and documented in such usage.

Public forums like the boneyard are an example of the first instance. And unfortunately WCBB is an example of the second - which is why I added the context at the end of my earlier post to explain to perhaps newer converts to WCBB what older coverts already might be painfully aware of.

UC - you write so well!

All in all, we understand each other and where we are coming from. My final thought on this relates to your 3rd paragraph. Only the political left and the political right use the "code words" as weapons. I have been asked to run for public office and would not touch it with a ten foot pole. Politics divide.
Most folk know the common meanings of morals and values. IMHO there are few problems with those discussions in my experience. Dog whistles are hanging around the necks of people who are closer to politics than most common folks.
Let's get on with 2016-2017 starting five!

 

[bags27]

Public forums like the boneyard are an example of the first instance. And unfortunately WCBB is an example of the second - which is why I added the context at the end of my earlier post to explain to perhaps newer converts to WCBB what older coverts already might be painfully aware of.

Thanks so much for this UcMiami. I really didn't have any idea of the pre-history, and I guess I'm learning some of it now. I appreciate your patience! Thanks.

 

[Plebe]

I know this is not the time to start this tread. But I have to say, the end of the article in today's NY Times is breathtaking: Geno consoling a broken-hearted Lou: "to work even harder to return and put her own mark on the Final Four: 'but right now, it's not your time: It's somebody else's time.'"

This is the type of moral stories that Geno weaves. This is a moral team, a moral program, a moral purpose. It is grounded on team values, family values, the best of basketball and competitive values. It is awesome, and, win or lose tonight, nothing can add or detract from the enormous character of this team, its coaches and the program.

So there.

I read a couple of stories today in the online NYT but I didn't see the bit about Geno consoling Lou. Does anyone have the link?

 

[bags27]

I read a couple of stories today in the online NYT but I didn't see the bit about Geno consoling Lou. Does anyone have the link?

It was yesterday's general coverage in Times; the last paragraph of that story.

 

[Goodgood]

I read a couple of stories today in the online NYT but I didn't see the bit about Geno consoling Lou. Does anyone have the link?

Try this link. Last paragraph.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/05/s...use-not-to-win-the-title.html?ref=todayspaper