ND formidable roster.

[hoophuskee]

I also don't like the fact that everyone thought SC was only the freshmen or two seniors when in reality we had the best bench in WCBB. Regardless if those freshmen didn’t play to potential someone stepped in like nothing ever happened. How can you make a point that because an individual has a bad game the whole team would fail because of it? It doesn’t make any sense...

1--- Read Donald's post. The post was about freshmen. Not about other players stepping up. But the more your frosh anywhere from 1 to whatever get nervous, it means your team is not as good as it otherwise would be, right?

2--- The post was about if freshmen can get nervous.

3--- Just knowing that even one can get nervous could be a problem. Because we know not all freshmen are equal. For example if your best frosh was nervous or just played lousy (unless you suggest YOUR freshmen are incapable of playing bad. It seems the other poster seems to believe ANY are incapable of being nervous nor does he seem to understand the difference between a November game and a one-and-done season over.) and just ONE OTHER frosh was just the other way a combination of nervous or lousy game then you have two freshmen that aren't playing well. That reduces your chances, right? You still might win ocf but it does "reduce." Unless you are suggesting it's impossible that two South Carolina freshmen can play bad in a one-and-done NCAA Tourney?

4-- I just want to address the bold above because it relates to number 3. In basketball-- more than any other major team sport one player can affect the game / the flow of the game in an exponential/dynamic fashion. Sure you have a deep bench but there is a reason why they are on the bench, right? They aren't as good as the starters. You realize if you cannot force a very fast pace-of-play and the other team has a super player you are struggling to stop, your bench possibly won't wear down a 20-22 year old kid, right?

5-- Young players get nervous a lot. In men's title game in 2014 John Calipari specifically said his FRESHMEN were nervous. How many other years has he had huge frosh classes and not won even though they were favored? Same with Duke men. Look at last year led by three frosh. I'm sure they had THOSE BIG NOVEMBER / DECEMBER GAMES in which they won and the frosh were good. Yet they got picked off in an early round even though they were heavily favored. So all these teams are affected by youth but the great Frosh from South Carolina women's team HAS NO CHANCE OF BEING AFFECTED BY IT? If you believe that -- I call that "delusional."

6--- ***So in the HISTORY OF THE GAME there are many examples of youth getting nervous/just playing lousy yet we're supposed to throw that all out and state THERE IS LITTLE-TO-NO-CHANCE OF THAT HAPPENING and this guy uses as a MAIN POINT a November basketball game???? It's mind-boggling anyone can think this has any logic whatsoever.

 

[SCspur]

1--- Read Donald's post. The post was about freshmen. Not about other players stepping up. But the more your frosh anywhere from 1 to whatever get nervous, it means your team is not as good as it otherwise would be, right?

2--- The post was about if freshmen can get nervous.

3--- Just knowing that even one can get nervous could be a problem. Because we know not all freshmen are equal. For example if your best frosh was nervous or just played lousy (unless you suggest YOUR freshmen are incapable of playing bad. It seems the other poster seems to believe ANY are incapable of being nervous nor does he seem to understand the difference between a November game and a one-and-done season over.) and just ONE OTHER frosh was just the other way a combination of nervous or lousy game then you have two freshmen that aren't playing well. That reduces your chances, right? You still might win ocf but it does "reduce." Unless you are suggesting it's impossible that two South Carolina freshmen can play bad in a one-and-done NCAA Tourney?

4-- I just want to address the bold above because it relates to number 3. In basketball-- more than any other major team sport one player can affect the game / the flow of the game in an exponential/dynamic fashion. Sure you have a deep bench but there is a reason why they are on the bench, right? They aren't as good as the starters. You realize if you cannot force a very fast pace-of-play and the other team has a super player you are struggling to stop, your bench possibly won't wear down a 20-22 year old kid, right?

5-- Young players get nervous a lot. In men's title game in 2014 John Calipari specifically said his FRESHMEN were nervous. How many other years has he had huge frosh classes and not won even though they were favored? Same with Duke men. Look at last year led by three frosh. I'm sure they had THOSE BIG NOVEMBER / DECEMBER GAMES in which they won and the frosh were good. Yet they got picked off in an early round even though they were heavily favored. So all these teams are affected by youth but the great Frosh from South Carolina women's team HAS NO CHANCE OF BEING AFFECTED BY IT? If you believe that -- I call that "delusional."

6--- ***So in the HISTORY OF THE GAME there are many examples of youth getting nervous/just playing lousy yet we're supposed to throw that all out and state THERE IS LITTLE-TO-NO-CHANCE OF THAT HAPPENING and this guy uses as a MAIN POINT a November basketball game???? It's mind-boggling anyone can think this has any logic whatsoever.

1. I read his post and realized he was talking about freshmen hence why I made my post about the bench.

2. See #1.

3. Regardless of your point I still stand by mines when I said the bench or any player would step in and takeover. Not sure what point you’re trying to make but Dawn said many times anyone on the bench could start and on most nights they outplayed the other teams starting 5.

 

[hoophuskee]

1. I read his post and realized he was talking about freshmen hence why I made my post about the bench.

2. See #1.

3. Regardless of your point I still stand by mines when I said the bench or any player would step in and takeover. Not sure what point you’re trying to make but Dawn said many times anyone on the bench could start and on most nights they outplayed the other teams starting 5.

1-- Which is why I replied to you. I didn’t understand why you replied to him stating "I also don't like the fact that everyone thought SC was only the freshmen or two seniors when in reality we had the best bench in WCBB." You realize that the poster was saying near-no-chance your freshmen would play like freshmen, right? You agree with that assessment? If so, what’s the point of your reply that you have others if you think near-no-chance your frosh will fail? You wouldn’t need the bench, if your frosh starters were so perfect, right? Ohh that’s right he referred ot a game in November which proves your freshmen have a near-no-chance-to-fail, right?

Additionally, you also had one of the best starting teams in America. You had TWO All-Americans and a SR that went in RD 1 in the draft. They are better than your bench, right? As a result, you realize that your bench is not as good as your starters, right (More on that with your point about Dawn and your bench)? Therefore, you realize that you are not as strong if some of your freshmen starters play lousy, right? And during a tight one-and-done game, you realize that it's not "bench vs bench," right?

So what it comes down to is -- if your frosh starters are lousy and you have to use your bench, your bench will be competing against the opposing team's starters. So how does that make you better in a one-and-done game (unless you are able to force pace of play.)? You still might win but you are more susceptible to lose, right?

For example, if Boston or Harris or your other senior played lousy in certain combinations you are more susceptible to lose vs a very good team, right? So if it is Boston and another starting frosh -- you are more susceptible to lose than what would otherwise be, right? ***THIS GUY I"VE BEN ARGUING WITH AS AN EXAMPLE IS SAYING THAT BOSTON IS INCAPABLE OF PLAYING POORLY DUE TO FROSH JITTERS/ or just lousy. You agree with that? And your team is JUST AS STRONG vs the very good teams without her????

3a--- The point I made is "see above." What have I said in the above four paragraphs that you feel is wrong?

3b—In regards to your comment from Dawn about the bench and “on most nights” - On most nights is not all nights, right? The other poster was saying your freshman have near little chance of not playing well. What about the other nights Dawn is referring to? You just aren’t going to count them? Ignore the implied reference of “the other nights?”

Do you believe "on most nights" equals "all nights?" If we agree it's on most but not all nights and you ended up losing then it would more-than-likely mean your freshmen didn't produce, right? And your chances of winning the NCAA Tourney wasn’t 90%, or near that, right? So isn’t it more likely that some combination of your frosh probably would be the most-likely culprits for not producing rather than you seniors, right?

 

[SCspur]

1-- Which is why I replied to you. I didn’t understand why you replied to him stating "I also don't like the fact that everyone thought SC was only the freshmen or two seniors when in reality we had the best bench in WCBB." You realize that the poster was saying near-no-chance your freshmen would play like freshmen, right? You agree with that assessment? If so, what’s the point of your reply that you have others if you think near-no-chance your frosh will fail? You wouldn’t need the bench, if your frosh starters were so perfect, right? Ohh that’s right he referred ot a game in November which proves your freshmen have a near-no-chance-to-fail, right?

Additionally, you also had one of the best starting teams in America. You had TWO All-Americans and a SR that went in RD 1 in the draft. They are better than your bench, right? As a result, you realize that your bench is not as good as your starters, right (More on that with your point about Dawn and your bench)? Therefore, you realize that you are not as strong if some of your freshmen starters play lousy, right? And during a tight one-and-done game, you realize that it's not "bench vs bench," right?

So what it comes down to is -- if your frosh starters are lousy and you have to use your bench, your bench will be competing against the opposing team's starters. So how does that make you better in a one-and-done game (unless you are able to force pace of play.)? You still might win but you are more susceptible to lose, right?

For example, if Boston or Harris or your other senior played lousy in certain combinations you are more susceptible to lose vs a very good team, right? So if it is Boston and another starting frosh -- you are more susceptible to lose than what would otherwise be, right? ***THIS GUY I"VE BEN ARGUING WITH AS AN EXAMPLE IS SAYING THAT BOSTON IS INCAPABLE OF PLAYING POORLY DUE TO FROSH JITTERS/ or just lousy. You agree with that? And your team is JUST AS STRONG vs the very good teams without her????

3a--- The point I made is "see above." What have I said in the above four paragraphs that you feel is wrong?

3b—In regards to your comment from Dawn about the bench and “on most nights” - On most nights is not all nights, right? The other poster was saying your freshman have near little chance of not playing well. What about the other nights Dawn is referring to? You just aren’t going to count them? Ignore the implied reference of “the other nights?”

Do you believe "on most nights" equals "all nights?" If we agree it's on most but not all nights and you ended up losing then it would more-than-likely mean your freshmen didn't produce, right? And your chances of winning the NCAA Tourney wasn’t 90%, or near that, right? So isn’t it more likely that some combination of your frosh probably would be the most-likely culprits for not producing rather than you seniors, right?

no not at all lol. I’m not sure why you’re going so hard about this.... @jumpstart made our points and stood by them. You posting meaningless paragraphs is.... well meaningless lol.

 

[hoophuskee]

no not at all lol. I’m not sure why you’re going so hard about this.... @jumpstart made our points and stood by them. You posting meaningless paragraphs is.... well meaningless lol.

Wow-

"he stood by them"

Yeah that means "everything."

I just find it mind-boggling that some of you get so stubborn and dig in on such illogical points. Nowhere did you specifically tell me I'm wrong. Well that's just great - he ":stood by them."

 

[SCspur]

Wow-

"he stood by them"

Yeah that means "everything."

I just find it mind-boggling that some of you get so stubborn and dig in on such illogical points. Nowhere did you specifically tell me I'm wrong. Well that's just great - he ":stood by them."

At this point I’m not even sure what your argument is anymore....

 

[Alydar]

The November 19th game was when they were truly freshmen that would have exposed their tendencies to fold under pressure. It is the perfect analogy for my argument. They were playing their second game together on a national stage. If they were going to falter...don't you think that would have been the time. To dismiss an early season, under pressure, national televised game as "it didn't mean anything" is disingenuous at best...They played like seasoned players even that early on. You people can be as jealous of that team last year as you want...but my argument stands...and it stands tall !!!!....again...I am not a South Carolina fan, I am not a Baylor fan, or an Oregon fan, and am not a UCONN fan. I am a fan of women's basketball...graduate of Elon in North Carolina......I have said that about a thousand times also....so get that through your head....

I watched that game and the win was more due to MD ineptitude than any brilliance from SC. MD was ranked 4th because ESPN touted them as a FF team and the AP writers who cover the B1G wanted something to write about.
It's one thing to prepare freshmen for a big game when you have weeks to teach them and a bunch of weak teams to practice against in between. It's another to win when you have 24 hours to prepare, and in the NCAA's that happens twice, in the E8 game and the final. That's one reason UConn has lost so many semi final games and no finals. Give an elite coach a week and they can get their team good enough to compete against UConn, but when they have 24 hours they fall short. Any team starting 3 freshmen would have a hard time getting through those two games.

 

[JonathanXIV]

I watched that game and the win was more due to MD ineptitude than any brilliance from SC. MD was ranked 4th because ESPN touted them as a FF team and the AP writers who cover the B1G wanted something to write about.
It's one thing to prepare freshmen for a big game when you have weeks to teach them and a bunch of weak teams to practice against in between. It's another to win when you have 24 hours to prepare, and in the NCAA's that happens twice, in the E8 game and the final. That's one reason UConn has lost so many semi final games and no finals. Give an elite coach a week and they can get their team good enough to compete against UConn, but when they have 24 hours they fall short. Any team starting 3 freshmen would have a hard time getting through those two games.

Have to agree that trumpeting Maryland as the #4 team is gilding the lily a bit. Always overrated. Always under perform.

 

[visitingcock]

I watched that game and the win was more due to MD ineptitude than any brilliance from SC. MD was ranked 4th because ESPN touted them as a FF team and the AP writers who cover the B1G wanted something to write about.
It's one thing to prepare freshmen for a big game when you have weeks to teach them and a bunch of weak teams to practice against in between. It's another to win when you have 24 hours to prepare, and in the NCAA's that happens twice, in the E8 game and the final. That's one reason UConn has lost so many semi final games and no finals. Give an elite coach a week and they can get their team good enough to compete against UConn, but when they have 24 hours they fall short. Any team starting 3 freshmen would have a hard time getting through those two games.

I do not disagree with you main point, but I do think your way of getting there is weak.

Maryland, you imply, was not worthy of being 4th. However, they did prove to be worthy of that rank by end of year (or very, very close) - weren't they. In the early season, the team with 3 freshmen beat the more experienced team (on the road) that was ranked 4th due to what they were expected to and did do.

Maryland thought they could handle Boston straight up and got pounded. By the time, they adjusted to focus on shutting her down, it was too late. UConn had the much better plan and focused on her early. They did a good defensive job early, but their offense couldn't take advantage of the good defensive effort.

So, was SCar's potential tournament run with 3 freshmen questionable? Of course. As were the potential runs of Baylor, UConn and Maryland whom the freshmen had beaten.

Alas, the tournament never happened,

 

[Alydar]

I do not disagree with you main point, but I do think your way of getting there is weak.

Maryland, you imply, was not worthy of being 4th. However, they did prove to be worthy of that rank by end of year (or very, very close) - weren't they. In the early season, the team with 3 freshmen beat the more experienced team (on the road) that was ranked 4th due to what they were expected to and did do.

Maryland thought they could handle Boston straight up and got pounded. By the time, they adjusted to focus on shutting her down, it was too late. UConn had the much better plan and focused on her early. They did a good defensive job early, but their offense couldn't take advantage of the good defensive effort.

So, was SCar's potential tournament run with 3 freshmen questionable? Of course. As were the potential runs of Baylor, UConn and Maryland whom the freshmen had beaten.

Alas, the tournament never happened,

I think more posters would be inclined to praise S Car if their coach hadn't crowned herself national champion.

 

[SCGamecock]

The horse was literally buried and it’s still being beaten somehow.

 

[triaddukefan]

Not sure what this thread is about anymore.... but ND does have a strong roster on paper

The horse was literally buried and it’s still being beaten somehow.

you expected any different?

 

[DefenseBB]

I have to say I am not overly impressed with the ND roster. From the Junior and Senior class, who can you point to and say "All-American"? No one. Sam Brunelle was not good this year. Mick Vaughn is a steady player but to say she's a force on the inside, not true. Anaya People's showed some skills but on a 13-18 team, someone has to score so it happened to be People's. I also don't buy into Mabry III being such a stud either. She's a nice spare part (necessary but still a spare part) and not a force on a VT squad. If you want to point to the some of the untested talent coming in, sure they have some accolades but College is a different ball game than the ranking services. Just look at the top 10 or even 15 from the 2018 HG rankings-no one looks like a lock for All-American. Arguably the best player in that class is #55 Elisa Cunnane. My point is just because you are a top 10 doesn't transcend into WCBB All-American and now add in a new coach and who knows what these young women could be/will be. To rely on underclassmen is not a recipe for championships. I will take our roster and it's proven coach way, way more than the ND team. I would not even count that ND team in the top 10 in the country the next 2 years. Stanford, Arizona, UCLA, Baylor, NC State, Louisville, SC Gamecocks, UConn, Oregon State, Kentucky all come to mind as better (and in no particular order) for these next two years.

Sorry Miss St fans, your new coach has much to prove to me before I can think of the Bulldogs as top 10 as well.

 

[visitingcock]

I think more posters would be inclined to praise S Car if their coach hadn't crowned herself national champion.

But her team was the National Champions. *

 

[hoophuskee]

At this point I’m not even sure what your argument is anymore....

I'm sure that you are burying your head in the sand.

 

[visitingcock]

So, what's up with Notre Dame (huskies and "Cocks take a break)

 

[jumpstart]

I watched that game and the win was more due to MD ineptitude than any brilliance from SC. MD was ranked 4th because ESPN touted them as a FF team and the AP writers who cover the B1G wanted something to write about.
It's one thing to prepare freshmen for a big game when you have weeks to teach them and a bunch of weak teams to practice against in between. It's another to win when you have 24 hours to prepare, and in the NCAA's that happens twice, in the E8 game and the final. That's one reason UConn has lost so many semi final games and no finals. Give an elite coach a week and they can get their team good enough to compete against UConn, but when they have 24 hours they fall short. Any team starting 3 freshmen would have a hard time getting through those two games.

Ha ha ha....yea right.....Maryland had all their players back.....they were ranked No.4...at home...on national television.....and it was their fault they lost to the team of freshmen ? That is the dumbest thing I have heard in a while...and I have heard some dumb things....

 

[Alydar]

Ha ha ha....yea right.....Maryland had all their players back.....they were ranked No.4...at home...on national television.....and it was their fault they lost to the team of freshmen ? That is the dumbest thing I have heard in a while...and I have heard some dumb things....

The turtles shot 31% in that game, 12% from 3. They had 24 pts in the 1st half & 54 pts for the game. S Car shot 32% (with Boston going 6-10). H-Harrigan was 4-12 and the 3 frosh were a combined 5-29. S car was 1-9 from 3. You call that great basketball between highly ranked teams? I guess dumb has a different meaning in your reality.

Maryland went on to play much better against JMU, Delaware, G Washington, Quinnipiac, Clemson and Belmont before losing to NCSt and padded their record more vs Loyola-MD & GaSt.

South Carolina 63-54 Maryland (Nov 10, 2019) Box Score - ESPN

Box score for the South Carolina Gamecocks vs. Maryland Terrapins NCAAW game from November 10, 2019 on ESPN. Includes all points, rebounds and steals stats.

www.espn.com

 

[DefenseBB]

I had season tickets to the Terps this year and went to the SC game and quite a few others. SC dominated Maryland who simply did not have a good game plan.

In the world of WCBB, the top 3-5 teams are usually far ahead of the next grouping and then the 6-10 teams are far ahead of the 11+ ranked teams. Maryland is clearly a top 10 team, nearer 10 than 5.

They played a very good schedule this year and the Big Ten Conference was finally strong, so many teams Maryland beat were in that 11+ range (good for them) however to say Maryland was really a top 4 team (hence a #1 seed) was an optical illusion. Yes, the committees process would have put them as #1 as they did probably deserve it due to those top wins and they were playing better at the end.

I do not believe for 1 minute that Maryland could beat Oregon, SC, Baylor, UConn or Stanford. They would be competitive with Louisville, NC State, Miss State and Arizona in the next set of 6-10 teams. There is significant tiering and while losing to lesser teams can happen (Oregon to Louisville/Arizona; SC to Indiana; Baylor to ISU), when well known teams do face off, I do think logical coaching favorites will win. In other words, Brenda, with this team would lose to all the top 5 teams. She would be a toss up against the 6-10 range and would probably win the vast majority of the 11-25 teams as her team is/was good. But as we know, she had/has chemistry issues and those cracks show in big games.

BTW-as stated I went to many games and saw GW vs. Maryland and I am sad to say, Jen needs to rethink, re-exhort and reconfigure her coaching as she is regressing as a coach.

 

[jumpstart]

The turtles shot 31% in that game, 12% from 3. They had 24 pts in the 1st half & 54 pts for the game. S Car shot 32% (with Boston going 6-10). H-Harrigan was 4-12 and the 3 frosh were a combined 5-29. S car was 1-9 from 3. You call that great basketball between highly ranked teams? I guess dumb has a different meaning in your reality.

Maryland went on to play much better against JMU, Delaware, G Washington, Quinnipiac, Clemson and Belmont before losing to NCSt and padded their record more vs Loyola-MD & GaSt.

South Carolina 63-54 Maryland (Nov 10, 2019) Box Score - ESPN

Box score for the South Carolina Gamecocks vs. Maryland Terrapins NCAAW game from November 10, 2019 on ESPN. Includes all points, rebounds and steals stats.

www.espn.com

I did not say it was great basketball....I said to say it's Maryland's fault that they lost is idiotic. They shot 31%...why ???? To just say...."well the whole team was off and that's why they lost." and not to admit that South Carolina plays defense and beat the season ending No. 3, 4, and 5 ranked teams along with the No. 9, 16 (3 times), 18 (2 times), 24 (3 times)....was because not because of South Carolina's defense but because they all "just had an off night" is again....dumb....Maryland lost to a team at the start of the season that was better than anyone else at seasons end with the exception of Oregon....and we will never know what that match up might have been. South Carolina nor Oregon may have made it to the championship game who knows...but...odds were that it was going to happen and these freshmen...they were no longer freshmen and had proven in high stakes games they were not winning ugly...but winning big. There was plenty of room in the scores for "a freshman error" per game.

 

[Alydar]

I did not say it was great basketball....I said to say it's Maryland's fault that they lost is idiotic. They shot 31%...why ???? To just say...."well the whole team was off and that's why they lost." and not to admit that South Carolina plays defense and beat the season ending No. 3, 4, and 5 ranked teams along with the No. 9, 16 (3 times), 18 (2 times), 24 (3 times)....was because not because of South Carolina's defense but because they all "just had an off night" is again....dumb....Maryland lost to a team at the start of the season that was better than anyone else at seasons end with the exception of Oregon....and we will never know what that match up might have been. South Carolina nor Oregon may have made it to the championship game who knows...but...odds were that it was going to happen and these freshmen...they were no longer freshmen and had proven in high stakes games they were not winning ugly...but winning big. There was plenty of room in the scores for "a freshman error" per game.

You sound like the talking heads on TV, praising the winner, giving them all the credit for the victory and pointing out their outstanding players. But the reality of sport is that it's often the bad play of the loser that led to the loss more than the great play of the winner. Go look at the box score and pay attention to S Carolina. If someone showed me the SC box score and not Maryland's I would think that SC lost the game. They were just as pathetic shooting as MD, with the exception of Boston, who Brenda had no answer for.

Now MD went on to win the B1G but IMO the B1G has been a paper tiger in recent years. When was the last time a B1G team made a FF? And how many EE games have they even played in during the last 10 years? The B1G has been walking around naked for years but the media and their fans pretend it is dressed in a fine suit. Denial is an amazing thing.

 

[jumpstart]

You sound like the talking heads on TV, praising the winner, giving them all the credit for the victory and pointing out their outstanding players. But the reality of sport is that it's often the bad play of the loser that led to the loss more than the great play of the winner. Go look at the box score and pay attention to S Carolina. If someone showed me the SC box score and not Maryland's I would think that SC lost the game. They were just as pathetic shooting as MD, with the exception of Boston, who Brenda had no answer for.

Now MD went on to win the B1G but IMO the B1G has been a paper tiger in recent years. When was the last time a B1G team made a FF? And how many EE games have they even played in during the last 10 years? The B1G has been walking around naked for years but the media and their fans pretend it is dressed in a fine suit. Denial is an amazing thing.

The whole thing is...they were suppose to lose the game (South Carolina) against a team rated 4th...and finished 4th in the nation with all of their starters back and playing at home against a group of mostly freshmen playing their first game on the road...and on national television.......that is it, plain and simple.....It's facts...facts...do you not understand facts ?

 

[Alydar]

The whole thing is...they were suppose to lose the game (South Carolina) against a team rated 4th...and finished 4th in the nation with all of their starters back and playing at home against a group of mostly freshmen playing their first game on the road...and on national television.......that is it, plain and simple.....It's facts...facts...do you not understand facts ?

Where are these facts you talk about? "they were supposed to lose"? Is that one of your facts? In fact the only "facts" you mention are the rankings, which ironically are opinions, not facts.


That was a preseason ranking which is based mostly on reputation and very few FACTS. MD always gets a nice pre-season ranking, mostly because Brenda is an excellent recruiter and the team is loaded with talent. However MD never seems to produce to their talent level and along with Tenn has been overrated in the preseason more years than not.
All those wins against B1G teams ranked 15-25 got them a 4 ranking late in the season but they also lost to 2 unranked teams and lost to two of the ranked teams they beat at home.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

I have read this over and over. It's not "senior" leadership so much as upper class players with talent. This could have happened with two talented juniors....or Sophomores. The "senior" is not the key element as much as experience. The 3 starting freshmen will have the experience of "that" season of No.1...and beating numerous ranked teams along the way. Those girls are now seasoned. I would expect them to be as good if not better in 2020-21....and then even better with the 21-22 team. Don't underestimate that South Carolina team just because Harris and Herbert-Harrington have moved on. That team has young "experience" in very crucial games. The South Carolina/UCONN series will be an awesome one for several more years.

Harris and Herbert-Harrigan both had the best seasons of their career.

there is more to it than talent.