Pres. Herbst Boston Globe Letter to Editor

[gimber]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/...nt-athletes/dcOdyboqPf80xpXfjfpFcL/story.html

 

[iam76]

drops the mic

 

[Inyatkin]

Shabazz on the dean's list. Sounds pretty lazy to me.

 

[Dooley]

Honestly, I have a crush on her. LOVE this!

 

[Palatine]

Good move by Herbst.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I like this. Not only is it true, but it makes am effort to combat the ignorance of the public about our school and athletic department.

 

[gwhuskyfan]

Love this new attitude of UConn not being afraid to speak up. Shabazz after we won, now Susan. Really great

 

[Gurleyman]

Only thing I'd change is by saying 2007-11 (even though it is factually accurate), she is including our last title team in the "problem era", and that team had a 980 APR.

Just something I'm sensitive to, since I feel that the 2011 team has been slandered way too frequently. Due to the fact we won the title and were banned two years later, the natural assumption is that we won with kids who weren't going to class.

Perhaps pumping Pat Lenehan is a reach, too.

 

[Sportsman5]

this should be sent to every major newspaper and sports blogger in the country.

 

[tzznandrew]

Only thing I'd change is by saying 2007-11 (even though it is factually accurate), she is including our last title team in the "problem era", and that team had a 980 APR.

Just something I'm sensitive to, since I feel that the 2011 team has been slandered way too frequently. Due to the fact we won the title and were banned two years later, the natural assumption is that we won with kids who weren't going to class.

Perhaps pumping Pat Lenehan is a reach, too.

Right. 2011 was part of the rolling average, but as a year on its own, it was a successful year. I too wish she concentrated on the few years that actually were a problem, just to further prove a point that it was an aberation rather than the norm.

 

[August_West]

 

[UMass]

Good for President Herbst. The Boston Globe is a rag that is an absolute disgrace to journalism. Good for her for not letting them get away with their crap!. Don't hold your breath for any apology or retraction though. They are far too low class for that.

 

[Gurleyman]

Right. 2011 was part of the rolling average, but as a year on its own, it was a successful year. I too wish she concentrated on the few years that actually were a problem, just to further prove a point that it was an aberation rather than the norm.

I've always pointed out that we went from 820 to 980 in just one year (largely due to heavy roster turnover). If a number can be that volatile, it does not reflect systemic issues - merely isolated ones. Ergo, it is an inherently flawed metric.

For example, if your team averages a dreadful 50 ppg one year, brings in better players the next year, and averages 80 ppg, the rolling average is still rather poor (65 ppg). But is the problem that your offensive system stinks, or was it that the team averaging 50 ppg had no talent?

To be honest, if we had shown only marginal academic improvement in 2011, I would have come out on the side that we deserved what we got. But since we'd already fixed our problems and the data clearly showed the academic issues were outdated, I think it's pretty clear folks had an agenda and we were in the crosshairs. But the kids got the best revenge possible - they took their trophy and sent their leader scurrying off the national championship stage with his tail between his legs.

 

[HawkHusky]

Only thing I'd change is by saying 2007-11 (even though it is factually accurate), she is including our last title team in the "problem era", and that team had a 980 APR.

Just something I'm sensitive to, since I feel that the 2011 team has been slandered way too frequently. Due to the fact we won the title and were banned two years later, the natural assumption is that we won with kids who weren't going to class.

Perhaps pumping Pat Lenehan is a reach, too.

Pat travels and practices just as much as anyone else on the team.

 

[Waquoit]

Good restraint. She could have said so much more but the haters wouldn't have been able to process it.

 

[selles]

Right. 2011 was part of the rolling average, but as a year on its own, it was a successful year. I too wish she concentrated on the few years that actually were a problem, just to further prove a point that it was an aberation rather than the norm.

Understand what you're saying, but it's a letter to the editor - you have to keep it clear and simple. I think it's a great letter.

 

[UConn990411]

I'm usually not worried about what fans of other teams or media clowns think about UConn, but it really does seem like people from all over go out of their way to diminish UConn's success.

Former conference mates like BC, Providence and Syracuse - all of which used to be on similar levels as programs - seem jealous of the fact that UConn has left 'em in the dust. On the other hand, traditional basketball powers - the "Blue Bloods," as they like to call themselves - seem threatened by, and unwilling to accept, the new kids on the block.

I can't tell you how many times I've read and heard the garbage about how UConn's success only goes back 15 years. In reality, UConn has been a dominant national program since '91 - when they were a buzzer-beater away from a Final Four - and a dominant local program way before then. It may have taken till '99 to finally break through, but when you have as many titles as Duke and more than Kansas, how are you not considered on the same level?

And the constant criticism doesn't end at men's bball. In women's hoops, everyone thought it was fine and dandy when Tennessee owned the sport. But with UConn, we keep seeing those debates pop up about whether UConn's dominance is bad for the sport. And I can't help but laugh when ACC and B1G fans trash our football program after inviting the likes of Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Maryland and Louisville to their conferences in recent years ... when UConn football has been as good or better than ALL of them.

That's why I love the mentality of Calhoun and Geno, and I love even more that Shabazz and Susan seemed to have adopted it. You're gonna continue to trash us? Fine, we'll just keep winning.

 

[SubbaBub]

The APR goose was cooked and penalty served (scholarship loss) before 2011. That was the whole point. The ban was an added on after the fact using data we'd already served the penalty, that left it impossible to avoid the ban even if the 2011 squad had an APR of 1000.

This can not be stated enough times.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Right. 2011 was part of the rolling average, but as a year on its own, it was a successful year. I too wish she concentrated on the few years that actually were a problem, just to further prove a point that it was an aberation rather than the norm.

She reported the period accurately, and simply missed the opportunity to note that 2011 itself had a 980 score. Small matter. Terrific letter.

 

[scotty0330]

The 98% graduation rate that Duke is lauded for is misleading. You read the article 98% of Duke's players who have matriculated for four years have received degrees. Funny the Corey Maggette's, Elton Brand's, Kyrie Irvings etc are excluded when we speak about Duke. When matter switches to other schools like UCONN we are not allowed such relief.

 

[intlzncster]

Only thing I'd change is by saying 2007-11 (even though it is factually accurate), she is including our last title team in the "problem era", and that team had a 980 APR.

Just something I'm sensitive to, since I feel that the 2011 team has been slandered way too frequently. Due to the fact we won the title and were banned two years later, the natural assumption is that we won with kids who weren't going to class.
Perhaps pumping Pat Lenehan is a reach, too.

Hey, that's just about how most other programs achieve sensibility. If you got it, flaunt it. UCONN was way too passive and did not get out in front of things in the past.

 

[Kembacity]

The 98% graduation rate that Duke is lauded for is misleading. You read the article 98% of Duke's players who have matriculated for four years have received degrees. Funny the Corey Maggette's, Elton Brand's, Kyrie Irvings etc are excluded when we speak about Duke. When matter switches to other schools like UCONN we are not allowed such relief.

Yeah, but I thought Duke runs the NCAA, thats how it works right? Coach K wants something, it gets done. It doesnt lead to championships it seems, just more and more bickering from coach ratface

 

[Deepelm]

Shabazz on the dean's list.

A total of 5 according to the article. I wonder who the other 4 are?

 

[Gurleyman]

Pat travels and practices just as much as anyone else on the team.

Yes, true. And no disrespect to a very bright kid for his academic accomplishments. But our academic problems were based on the performance of scholarship athletes. Walkons aren't measured in any of the data. So pointing out that we have a bright walkon who never plays isn't really addressing any of the criticisms of the program. And it waters down the larger point she's making.

But on the flip side, it gave him some nice publicity for his accomplishments, so no great crime. My bigger issue is adding to the perception that the 2011 team was deficient academically, even in a casual sort of "2007-11" sense. Our issues were pre-2011, and I think it's important that people know that.

In fact (and this strays off topic, too) when you think about our last three titles and the All-Americans who led them, Okafor graduated in 2.5 years (for all intents and purposes), Kemba basically finished in 3 (minus a few stray credits - not sure if he's finished those up) and Napier will graduate on time on the Dean's List. Rip was a good student, too - just left early.

 

[freescooter]

Great job by Susan Herbst. But tell the truth. How many would have even come up with the name Pat Lenehan if I asked you to name everyone on the roster?