Parker off Olympic team?

[hoophuskee]

Those quotes Nan posted were from a section of an article that discussed her high minutes load (35 per game) in 2014 and her ability to sustain that. They weren't about her ability to play overall. Also note that she said "But I’m confident with where I’m at right now, and better ever day." I would be very surprised if she isn't starting on opening day for Dallas and I'll bet she plays well, too.

Rationally, I can come up with a justification for every choice USAB makes. UcMiami's posts do a really good job of laying out that rational case. Just as a fan and a fan of ND, specifically, my gut reaction is that some players, notably UConn players, get a benefit of the doubt that others don't.

USAB says they are looking for the next generation of guards to emerge. Sloot has a career best season and leads the WNBA in assists. McBride has a big overseas campaign and is a key to Orenburg nearly pulling a huge upset over Ekaterinburg in the Euroleague final. Diggins makes all-WNBA 1st team. Yet none of them are seen as having done enough. The same old crew of guards - Whalen, Taurasi, Augustus, Bird -- are picked.

Meanwhile, Stewart gets picked for Worlds while still in college and for the Olympics before playing a single game. What is the justification on that? - USAB needed to take a young player. Some players seem to have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they belong while others are handed a spot before they have done anything as pros.

Now, I don't have a problem with Stewart going, but it doesn't seem consistent. Parker is better than Stewart now, so if you value experience and making players earn a spot, Parker should go. If you are willing to displace some veterans so that younger players can get international experience, why no Sims, Diggins, McBride, or Loyd?

You’re still mentioning Diggins? IMO that is so wrong to do so. You need to let Diggins go. I agree with another ND fan named Dillon who said the following on this thread:

From Dillon: “As an ND fan, I get -- and understand --that Diggins was a huge question mark this year, given that she was coming off an injury. Hopefully, she'll come back from the ACL and pick up where she was starting to go . . .”

My question to you is that Dillon seems to have no problem letting Diggins go. Why can’t you? And you seemed to jump pretty quick on the Tina Thompson comment to assume the worst in Geno. Okay I can see but other things - your other digs. It's the accumaulatiof of not only Tina abd Diggins but

As far as your gut with UCONN getting some preferential treatment - IMO your gut is giving you false signals if you think it is unwarranted. For example, you speak of new generation gaurds and lump UCONN into that. Which new generation guard from UCONN recently got put on the team? You also mentioned in another post Whelan and Augustus yet you are lumping them all in with UCONN? How is it that “UCONN players get the benefit of the doubt” when older players like Augustus, Whelan and Angel also get the benefit? In other words why are YOU singling out UCONN when you mention USAb wanted younger guards. IMO UCONN shouldn’t be part of your narrative. IMO it is wrong to bring it up instead I can see just mentioning that it's ”the older player’s are getting the nod.” You’re presenting a bias narrative by singling out UCONN in a negative light. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that a team that has dominated wcbb since 2002 would get “the nod” with many of their player’s? Your mere mention of Diggins is bordering on extreme bias imo. She’s had a bad injury. You can’t overlook that no matter how hard you try.

And I think you are way wrong to bring up Stewart in any manner to this questioning why she may get on. You must know what I’m about to post to you. I’ll borrow from uconnkat who was replying to another regarding Stewart making the team on this thread earlier in which another poster questioned Stewart. ANd I've underlined the last statement which I agree big time with. Why you choose to even mention Stewie an Parker together is just so wrong:

from uconnkat: Your position doesn't make sense given what USA BB has done in the past, i.e., putting one very young, recent college graduate on a team of more experienced players. USA BB did that in 2004 with Taurasi who had just graduated from college. USA BB did that in 2008 with Parker who had just graduated from college. USA BB did that with Maya Moore though she was one year out of college. What USA BB is doing with Stewart is exactly what it did with Taurasi, Parker and Moore.

I responded to your point that there was something unusual in USA BB taking only one very young player when that is something USA BB has done in the past 3 Olympics. Knowing that's how USA BB operates, it's very likely that it wasn't Stewart over Parker but other players taken over Parker.


It’s the accumulation of what you’ve posted: You run with Tina’s comment and think the worst of Geno. You mention Diggins as if it is relevant which I agree with Dillon Diggins with her injury doesn’t belong. You lump in non-UCONN player’s yet categorize that IT IS UCONN getting the benefit of the doubt. With that said, why shouldn’t they? How much more do they have to win and bring along POY’s from college? And what is really baffling is that you don’t know that USAB puts on one player who is bit early, might not be totally ready or proven and put them on the team. You have to know that, right? And then you say you understand why Stewie is on the team but in the same breath you question it? Why would you question Stewie on the team when you know what USAB has done? And therefore why wouldn’t it be a player from UCONN? Four titles in four years with 4 Final Four MVP’s isn’t enough vs what any other college player has done? ? IMO your overall view regarding how you are looking at this is so completely wrong.


Dillon//Kat -- If I've misrepsresnted yoru psots in any manner I apologize and let me know. You can blast me for it too. But I don't think I have.

 

[UConnCat]

Statistically, it's very hard to make the case for that. They are clearly valuing her experience and leadership very highly, maybe also giving her points for loyalty. I understand wanting a pass-first player, but Vandersloot also fits that description and has out-performed Bird in the last couple WNBA seasons (though she has had much more talent around her).

My thought is that they don't see Sloot as part of their long term plans (she'll be 31 in 2020) so might as well give Bird one last hurrah and then start fresh with a new guard group in 2018.

I also think they are keeping the Bird's spot warm for Jefferson, but that Jefferson isn't ready yet.

WNBA stats could not be more irrelevant when it comes to running Team USA. USA BB is going with whom they trust to handle the pressure that comes with playing in the Olympics and there's no reason why that responsibility would ever be given to Vandersloot over Bird under any circumstances and it doesn't matter what her WNBA stats are.

Geno and Staley both addressed the point guard issues in February and they could not have been more direct that the young guards have not shown that they're ready for the job.

"Right now there is no clear cut person that you would say that’s the next one,’’ Auriemma said. "It was easy when (Bird) was coming out because whoever they had – Teresa Edwards, Dawn Staley, that group – and Sue was coming out. They brought her over there, her and (Diana Taurasi), and said, 'OK, these are the next two.’ It’s not that easy right now to go, 'OK, here it is.’ Because if it was they’d be on the team this year. But in the next two years somebody’s going to have to emerge between now and the World Championship in 2018.’’

Dawn, who was the point guard in 3 Olympics, also addressed the failure of the younger guards to step up and prove they belong on the team:

"There are players that have some of the attributes,’’ Staley said. "I haven’t seen a complete one yet. And I think that’s a big question mark because every point guard that has been the leader for our USA Basketball team had someone that was their understudy.

"It’s a duty of service,’’ Staley said. "You’re serving other people. It’s selflessness. It’s all the intangibles it takes for a team to be successful. And that’s hard because some of the younger point guards they’re more scoring point guards. And because they think being aggressive and getting their shot off and to get in the flow, they miss a step when it comes to being the fourth or fifth option on a USA Basketball National Team level. So it takes adjusting. It takes an adjustment for some of the younger players.’’

 

[UConnCat]

Meanwhile, Stewart gets picked for Worlds while still in college and for the Olympics before playing a single game. What is the justification on that? - USAB needed to take a young player. Some players seem to have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they belong while others are handed a spot before they have done anything as pros.

You're probably too young to remember that Diana Taurasi made the Olympic team in 2004 right out of college. Candace Parker made the World Championship team in 2006 while still in college. Parker made the Olympic team in 2008 right out of college. Maya Moore made the 2010 World Championship team while still in college. Each of those transcendent college players made Team USA over experienced pros without having played professionally themselves. Thus, there is precedent for what USA BB is doing with Stewart who accomplished more than those other players in college.

 

[Plebe]

Possible interpretation of Tina's statement:

-Any 1 of the 5 on the committee. This may be a stretch, but Tina's statement is terse and obviously ambiguous. There are 5 on the committee, and we have heard that Candace got 3 "nay" votes. Maybe any 1 of those 3 could have voted differently, giving Candace a majority "yea." Would that have put her in the top 12? Who knows!

Where is this information coming from?

Bottom line: it's all a bunch of speculation. Right now this is a perception game, and the perception among many is that Geno is causing a UConn bias in roster decisions. Tina Thompson's tweet, whatever she actually meant, is at once reflecting and perpetuating that same perception. In the absence of actual facts and evidence, it's perception that's carrying the day.

 

[mdakota]

Here are the names of the people who voted for the team.

Carol Callan (USA Basketball)
Reneé Brown (WNBA)
Dan Hughes (WNBA)
Chris Sienko (WNBA)
Katie Smith (Athlete Representative)

While I have no doubt that Geno gave them his opinion, I'm confident that they have their own ideas. from what I have read elsewhere and can't confirm, three of the above did not vote for Parker.

I can't believe Chris Sienko is even on this panel... He can't even manage the Sun correctly... how does he deserve the right to assist in managing the National Team???

 

[UcMiami]

UconnCat - thanks for the quotes. That is exactly what I was trying to say a few pages ago. There are some intriguing possibilities out there, but none of them have taken the next step of grabbing the ring. And you see it in the various team practice/trials - the cycling of players through over the last six years - the only one who really did step up was Whalen and she is older but is likely to be the 'transitional' leader because she is younger than Sue.

And I think it was very telling that Diggins and Sims were not in CT in February - they were not overseas so it would have been relatively easy for them to have arranged their schedules (the date/location was fixed months in advance) and while they would not have been on the floor, they would have been watching and learning and hanging out with the other players. DT and Whalen (?) I think were injured at a previous camp but were very much in evidence. I'm not sure if USA invited them or if the didn't, having already decided they would not be part of the olympic team because they were not yet physically fit.

 

[hoophuskee]

WNBA stats could not be more irrelevant when it comes to running Team USA. USA BB is going with whom they trust to handle the pressure that comes with playing in the Olympics and there's no reason why that responsibility would ever be given to Vandersloot over Bird under any circumstances and it doesn't matter what her WNBA stats are.

Geno and Staley both addressed the point guard issues in February and they could not have been more direct that the young guards have not shown that they're ready for the job.

"Right now there is no clear cut person that you would say that’s the next one,’’ Auriemma said. "It was easy when (Bird) was coming out because whoever they had – Teresa Edwards, Dawn Staley, that group – and Sue was coming out. They brought her over there, her and (Diana Taurasi), and said, 'OK, these are the next two.’ It’s not that easy right now to go, 'OK, here it is.’ Because if it was they’d be on the team this year. But in the next two years somebody’s going to have to emerge between now and the World Championship in 2018.’’

Dawn, who was the point guard in 3 Olympics, also addressed the failure of the younger guards to step up and prove they belong on the team:

"There are players that have some of the attributes,’’ Staley said. "I haven’t seen a complete one yet. And I think that’s a big question mark because every point guard that has been the leader for our USA Basketball team had someone that was their understudy.

"It’s a duty of service,’’ Staley said. "You’re serving other people. It’s selflessness. It’s all the intangibles it takes for a team to be successful. And that’s hard because some of the younger point guards they’re more scoring point guards. And because they think being aggressive and getting their shot off and to get in the flow, they miss a step when it comes to being the fourth or fifth option on a USA Basketball National Team level. So it takes adjusting. It takes an adjustment for some of the younger players.’’

I almost included something similar you mention in bold.

Anyhow what I saw in 2014 with Bird it just makes no sense to take the young player's over her when I felt there was a huge separation between her and Simms. And Simms is one tough kid. So with that said, it stands to reason Catchings is a darn good player too and that no way I'd leave her off either.

 

[UConnCat]

UconnCat - thanks for the quotes. That is exactly what I was trying to say a few pages ago. There are some intriguing possibilities out there, but none of them have taken the next step of grabbing the ring. And you see it in the various team practice/trials - the cycling of players through over the last six years - the only one who really did step up was Whalen and she is older but is likely to be the 'transitional' leader because she is younger than Sue.

And I think it was very telling that Diggins and Sims were not in CT in February - they were not overseas so it would have been relatively easy for them to have arranged their schedules (the date/location was fixed months in advance) and while they would not have been on the floor, they would have been watching and learning and hanging out with the other players. DT and Whalen (?) I think were injured at a previous camp but were very much in evidence. I'm not sure if USA invited them or if the didn't, having already decided they would not be part of the olympic team because they were not yet physically fit.

I also thought it telling that neither Diggins nor Sims were in CT in February. Both players were in the states rehabbing yet chose not to attend camp to soak in as much as they could from the veteran players. It's not like Diggins was only rehabbing and not traveling -- she was in NY for Fashion week the week before and in Florida for the ND v FSU game while camp was going on. Maybe, as you say, they decided the trip wasn't worth their time since they wouldn't be healthy enough to make the team. I'm sure USA BB would have welcomed their presence at camp.

 

[Orangutan]

You're probably too young to remember that Diana Taurasi made the Olympic team in 2004 right out of college. Candace Parker made the World Championship team in 2006 while still in college. Parker made the Olympic team in 2008 right out of college. Maya Moore made the 2010 World Championship team while still in college. Each of those transcendent college players made Team USA over experienced pros without having played professionally themselves. Thus, there is precedent for what USA BB is doing with Stewart who accomplished more than those other players in college.

Oh, I know that that is the precedent. I just don't know why that's the precedent. Why take any players who haven't proven themselves as pros? Why not take two if one is fine?

Assuming that every team will have one and only one, it is obvious that that spot is rightfully Stewart AKA the most accomplished college basketball player of all time.

 

[Orangutan]

WNBA stats could not be more irrelevant when it comes to running Team USA. USA BB is going with whom they trust to handle the pressure that comes with playing in the Olympics and there's no reason why that responsibility would ever be given to Vandersloot over Bird under any circumstances and it doesn't matter what her WNBA stats are.

I was responding to a post saying Bird is better than the other options at point guard. I do not believe that Bird is a better basketball player than Vandersloot or Diggins at this point in time. All of those players play in the WNBA and thus I believe that WNBA stats are a valid basis for comparison.

I concede that there may be valid reasons for taking Bird besides simply who is better at basketball today in the abstract. The problem with the "handle the pressure" argument is that it is self-justifying. You are never going to fully trust a player to handle the pressure that comes with playing the Olympics until see them do it. But they can't do it until you actually pick them for the Olympics or a similar major tournament.

I'm a Sky and ND homer, hence arguing for Diggins and Sloot. I never seriously expected either would make it. But I do think each has a legitimate claim that they belong on the team if it were simply based on merit in the present day. Experience and loyalty obviously matters to USAB, though.

 

[UConnCat]

I was responding to a post saying Bird is better than the other options at point guard. I do not believe that Bird is a better basketball player than Vandersloot or Diggins at this point in time. All of those players play in the WNBA and thus I believe that WNBA stats are a valid basis for comparison.

I concede that there may be valid reasons for taking Bird besides simply who is better at basketball today in the abstract. The problem with the "handle the pressure" argument is that it is self-justifying. You are never going to fully trust a player to handle the pressure that comes with playing the Olympics until see them do it. But they can't do it until you actually pick them for the Olympics or a similar major tournament.

I'm a Sky and ND homer, hence arguing for Diggins and Sloot. I never seriously expected either would make it. But I do think each has a legitimate claim that they belong on the team if it were simply based on merit in the present day. Experience and loyalty obviously matters to USAB, though.

But playing in the WNBA has nothing to do with playing on Team USA. Playing point guard for Chicago and Tulsa is not like playing point guard for Team USA. That's the point Staley was making. Clearly those guards haven't shown that they know how to effectively run Team USA. In the case of Diggins, she doesn't know how to be the 4th or 5th best option on offense. Maybe she doesn't get the other players the ball where and when they want it. Maybe she doesn't organize the team and run the offense as effectively as Bird does. It's not in USA BB's best interest not to be grooming the next point guard(s) yet that's not currently happening. It can't simply be a matter of "Geno doesn't like them" or "they're not from UConn." That's high school stuff. It's Carol Callan's job to care about Team USA long after Geno isn't coaching anymore.

Instead of blaming USA BB for not putting them on the team, perhaps they haven't shown they're ready to be on the team. That's what both Geno and Dawn were saying. I've seen nothing from Vandersloot or Diggins that says to me they're ready to lead Team USA in the Olympics.

 

[Orangutan]

You’re still mentioning Diggins? IMO that is so wrong to do so. You need to let Diggins go. I agree with another ND fan named Dillon who said the following on this thread:

My question to you is that Dillon seems to have no problem letting Diggins go. Why can’t you?

I mentioned Diggins because you asked me about her! That's all.

Why has Dillon let Diggins go when I haven't? We are different people with different opinions.

As for the rest of the post, I really don't fully believe those points either. They're just my biased, emotional reactions. Perhaps this isn't the board for them, but I thought I would add a perspective contrary to the conventional wisdom. I'm certainly not the only one who feels (rationally or irrationally) that USAB plays favorites - a feeling that has been further fueled by this Parker decision.

 

[Orangutan]

But playing in the WNBA has nothing to do with playing on Team USA. Playing point guard for Chicago and Tulsa is not like playing point guard for Team USA. That's the point Staley was making. Clearly those guards haven't shown that they know how to effectively run Team USA. In the case of Diggins, she doesn't know how to be the 4th or 5th best option on offense. Maybe she doesn't get the other players the ball where and when they want it. Maybe she doesn't organize the team and run the offense as effectively as Bird does. It's not in USA BB's best interest not to be grooming the next point guard(s) yet that's not currently happening. It can't simply be a matter of "Geno doesn't like them" or "they're not from UConn." That's high school stuff. It's Carol Callan's job to care about Team USA long after Geno isn't coaching anymore.

Instead of blaming USA BB for not putting them on the team, perhaps they haven't shown they're ready to be on the team. That's what both Geno and Dawn were saying. I've seen nothing from Vandersloot or Diggins that says to me they're ready to lead Team USA in the Olympics.

Re the bolded - fair point but I am not in the camps watching these players so the WNBA is my best basis for comparison, however imperfect it is.

The argument for Sloot (which I am almost boring myself with now) is that she does know what it's like to play 4th option (behind Fowles, Delle Donne, and Prince). If Sloot were 23, I would be vehement about this. I get it given that she is 27. She hasn't played well enough leading up to previous major tournaments to warrant selection and gain experience and USAB wants experienced point guards. But she's not young enough for it to make sense to take her purely to get her some experience.

Anyhow, my specific limited point is that I think those two are better than Bird is now. Which still leaves open the possibility that Bird is the best choice for team USA. I'm not arguing she is not.

 

[hoophuskee]

I mentioned Diggins because you asked me about her! That's all.

Why has Dillon let Diggins go when I haven't? We are different people with different opinions.

As for the rest of the post, I really don't fully believe those points either. They're just my biased, emotional reactions. Perhaps this isn't the board for them, but I thought I would add a perspective contrary to the conventional wisdom. I'm certainly not the only one who feels (rationally or irrationally) that USAB plays favorites - a feeling that has been further fueled by this Parker decision.

I only mentioned Diggins because you started when you said the following:

Taurasi, Moore, and Charles are no-doubt picks. But Stewart has no pro experience and Bird has been a statistically below average player for a couple years now. At those same positions, you have the most visible Tenn. player (Parker) and the most visible ND player (Diggins) missing out. Sure, Diggins is coming off knee surgery, but they didn't take her for Worlds right after she was named 1st team All-WNBA.

We can agree to disagree. I brought up Dillon's points in a simalar manner you brought up ucmiami. In this case I'm with Dillon. So for me it just out that imo you're extremely radical with your observations in this case. You don't agree with my points on Stewart - is just mind-boggling. And you can't accept that UCONN should get more player's in -- it's unreal. Whatever. Got to crash. Have a good night.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Sue has been statistically below average? She was second in the league in assists--without Lauren Jackson on the team. The only averages she might have been under are her career averages. Here's a simple statement for Orang et al.--no one runs a team better than Sue Bird. Period.

There are a number of really good guards out there, but all of them are lacking something. Based on what I've seen over the last 3 years, the next great U.S. point guard is Moriah Jefferson. The only things she lacks are experience and height. She'll get pro experience starting in a few weeks, and her athleticism, intensity, and smarts make up for her lack of height. The player who could boss Breanna Stewart around can lead Team USA in the next 2-4 years.

 

[nd2tty]

Stunning, really. Positions aside, I would have thought there would be 3 locks: Taurasi, Moore, and Parker. And one isn't even going.

 

[malevocalist#]

"To that end, some will see this as evidence that USA Basketball has turned into Club UConn in the past eight years with Huskies coach Geno Auriemma guiding the senior national team. And that Tennessee grad Parker was outside of that clique, and thus deemed more expendable."

Wow! Sure sound like (Anti-Geno) comments to me by this writer. She had to go there huh.

Nevertheless, I can't help but to be baffled why Parker was dropped.

 

[malevocalist#]

You're probably too young to remember that Diana Taurasi made the Olympic team in 2004 right out of college. Candace Parker made the World Championship team in 2006 while still in college. Parker made the Olympic team in 2008 right out of college. Maya Moore made the 2010 World Championship team while still in college. Each of those transcendent college players made Team USA over experienced pros without having played professionally themselves. Thus, there is precedent for what USA BB is doing with Stewart who accomplished more than those other players in college.

Wow. Great post. Yet some would argue "but why still leave Parker off" who could of participated along with Stewie?

Nevertheless, great post and many nice points made in your statement.

 

[HuskyNan]

It's a shame some think this is a Stewie vs Candace issue.

 

[nd2tty]

It's a shame some think this is a Stewie vs Candace issue.

Agreed.

But if the 12th spot did come down to Parker and Stewart - which I highly doubt it did - it has to be Parker. (And I think Stewie is, and will be, monumental for WBB).

 

[msf22b]

I still fail to understand if there is no apparent understudy for Sue, why there is no desire to (at least) invite Moriah to practices.

Or is there a perceived larger chasm between her talent and abilities compared with Stewie than one suspects.

 

[Vowelguy]

I was responding to a post saying Bird is better than the other options at point guard. I do not believe that Bird is a better basketball player than Vandersloot or Diggins at this point in time. All of those players play in the WNBA and thus I believe that WNBA stats are a valid basis for comparison.

I concede that there may be valid reasons for taking Bird besides simply who is better at basketball today in the abstract. The problem with the "handle the pressure" argument is that it is self-justifying. You are never going to fully trust a player to handle the pressure that comes with playing the Olympics until see them do it. But they can't do it until you actually pick them for the Olympics or a similar major tournament.

I'm a Sky and ND homer, hence arguing for Diggins and Sloot. I never seriously expected either would make it. But I do think each has a legitimate claim that they belong on the team if it were simply based on merit in the present day. Experience and loyalty obviously matters to USAB, though.

I will note that many complained bitterly when Katie Smith made the team in 2008 saying she wasn't any good anymore. I'm pretty sure she ended up starting.

 

[nd2tty]

How do you know what players were rated where? Are you on the selection committee?

Lololol, I love when posts are taken in the manner they are intended. Cheers.

 

[Jim R]

It's a shame some think this is a Stewie vs Candace issue.

Spot on. My earlier comment concerning Thompson's coaching "wins", was meant to reflect on the "chemistry" issue. As Geno's mentioned, when providing a pre-season preview of his UCONN team's likelihood of success, its about how well the soup's ingredients blend together when cooked. Great players don't always make great teammates, and some "blend" better than others. The Committee had a job to do, and did what they thought best. With their experience, judgment, and analysis of these athletes competing against one another on numerous occasions, my guess is, they've got more information to go on than the cheap seats.

 

[hoophuskee]

I was responding to a post saying Bird is better than the other options at point guard. I do not believe that Bird is a better basketball player than Vandersloot or Diggins at this point in time. All of those players play in the WNBA and thus I believe that WNBA stats are a valid basis for comparison.

I concede that there may be valid reasons for taking Bird besides simply who is better at basketball today in the abstract. The problem with the "handle the pressure" argument is that it is self-justifying. You are never going to fully trust a player to handle the pressure that comes with playing the Olympics until see them do it. But they can't do it until you actually pick them for the Olympics or a similar major tournament.

I'm a Sky and ND homer, hence arguing for Diggins and Sloot. I never seriously expected either would make it. But I do think each has a legitimate claim that they belong on the team if it were simply based on merit in the present day. Experience and loyalty obviously matters to USAB, though.

Ohhhh - you're the one that I argued with regarding you feel that even over time that EDD will be just as good at guarding 3's as Stewart? No wonder why you've been pushing sloot.

SO on it team -- in 2014 because we get ONE PLAYER that you question from UCONN shouldn't have made it - Bird -- whom you readily admit you understand why she's on. You understand why the went with Stewart. You acknowledge they went with experience. And do you acknowledge UCONN has been the most dominant wcbb team since 2002? So with all this - you think there is a UCONN bias? All because of Sue Bird?

For rivals how many would you consider UCONN has had? Just the two? ND and Tenn? So why Catchings on if he is against putting on rivals? Maybe you are right about Parker. Would like to hear why she didn't make it. I'm on board trying to understand why no Parker. She should have been on. imo unless there is some very unusual circumstance.

There is just ONE player in your dispute with on the prior UCONN teams that is now on the Olympcis and you single out UCONN getting the nod when the one player is so experienced just like Cacthings. Just like Whelan. Just Like Angel. Just like Augustus. And one of your points that bothers you is something a kid would say to USA BB "You promised you would bring in a younger guard. You promised. You promised. You promised." Ughhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!