UConn team attitude

[tomcat]

Open for debate, comment, or whatever:
I have a friend who I introduced to WCBB this year. We drove up to UCF and saw the UConn game. It was his first exposure to basketball of any kind in maybe 30 years. He enjoyed the game and started occasionally checking UConn scores, partly because he was a little interested and, I am sure, partly because it gives us one more thing to talk about.

Anyway, he watched the game last night, and afterward, sent me this question: "Did it seem to you that, at times, some UConn players were kind of going through the motions versus having their hearts and souls in it?"

I had never thought about that, but his question made me think about it. I think that ND played as if they had nothing to lose, and UCOnn did not, and that may have been reflected in the attitude of the UConn players. I'm not suggesting they were mailing it in, not at all. But I wonder if because it's expected that the team will be in the Final Four all the time, there's an element of routineness to it that may hurt these players and keep them from reaching the top.

Thoughts?

 

[oldude]

I never ceased to be amazed at some of the posts on this forum. Both you and your friend should be assured that UConn played their hearts out
last night, as did ND. ND won an incredibly tough game in OT. To suggest that the Huskies were somehow less motivated does an incredible disservice to some wonderful, highly motivated young women.

 

[tomcat]

Not saying they weren't motivated or that they didn't play their hearts out. I just think it's interesting that a sort-of-objective observer, looking at the way the ND players reacted to the game (not to winning, but to the game) and the way UConn players reacted, came up with that question. All the rest of my initial post was my (probably feeble) attempt to analyze why my friend would make that observation.

For the record, I've been watching UConn WBB since 1995. If they didn't play their hearts out, I would have stopped watching years ago.

 

[my2cents]

Its routine for the fans, we just have to grab our popcorn and watch these young ladies perform.
We don't see how hard they work to make getting to the Final Four 11 straight times become routine.
To Gabby and Kia, of course they are disappointed , however last night was a war and one of the most hard fought games a fan could ever witness.
Twice we came back from 5 point deficits with 40 seconds or so left. Once is miraculous, twice is unheard of. We lost when an All American made a great shot with a second left.
But to sum up this senior class...they we 148-3 over 4 years, all three games were overtime losses. After 40 minutes they were never behind.
The last two years, after losing three All Americans , drafted 1-2-3 in the WNBA draft,.a devastating loss to most programs, we were 72-2.
Both losses came in the final 4 to great teams, in overtime buzzer beaters.
Doesn't sound to me like a group that goes through the motions.

 

[JustinesGuy]

Maybe it's just a matter of personality's? The UCONN girls are very nice and well trained. Maybe it comes off robotic?

There are not many DT, Sue Bird, Shea Ralph types currently in a husky uniform.

Just a thought.

 

[CocoHusky]

You can't have it both ways! What is there to debate?

Not saying they weren't motivated or that they didn't play their hearts out.

Anyway, he watched the game last night, and afterward, sent me this question: "Did it seem to you that, at times, some UConn players were kind of going through the motions versus having their hearts and souls in it?"

 

[BostonCanuck]

It's not the players, they play hard and give their all. But certainly, the the half-court "motion" offense (and to a lesser extent, the Gabby Williams offense facilitated from the high post) became linear, mechanical, and predictable during the Kia Nurse era. That meant it could be analyzed and defeated by teams with sufficient talent on the floor to execute a savvy defensive game plan.

 

[Cheddie]

Part of it may be due to players' personalities. Gabby said pre-game that Crystal is very "serious" during games, but fun and "goofy" off-court. Geno has said Kia isn't naturally vocal, but prefers to lead by example. I don't see any UConn players as outwardly "fiery."
I also think across sports of all types that "underdogs" tend to build emotion as games go on and that usually shows in their demeanor. On the flip side, favorites locked in an unexpected struggle have to fight off nerves and jitters, and sometimes that displays as a more serious demeanor.
One of the greatest sports upsets I recall was the US hockey team's phenomenal defeat of the Russians in Lake Placid. The American kids were practically coming out of their skates, while the Russians looked stoic.

 

[JustinesGuy]

We don't have a lot of practice in end of game possessions where we need a score to win/tie. Heck, our starters are out usually before the 4th quarter.

So when this situation presents itself we seem a bit panicked. The same thing happened with Chong last year. As great as our team is we don't have a player that wants to get in the 1-4 set and drive to the hoop and create. Danger is really the only girl capable of this right?
Instead we frantically try to force the ball into Lou's hands on the perimeter and of course what's that going to do?

I think that was a big problem. In the past it was give the ball to stewie, Maya, DT, and get out of the way.

 

[CocoHusky]

We don't have a lot of practice in end of game possessions where we need a score to win/tie. Heck, our starters are out usually before the 4th quarter.
So when this situation presents itself we seem a bit panicked. The same thing happened with Chong last year. As great as our team is we don't have a player that wants to get in the 1-4 set and drive to the hoop and create. Danger is really the only girl capable of this right?
Instead we frantically try to force the ball into Lou's hands on the perimeter and of course what's that going to do?
I think that was a big problem. In the past it was give the ball to stewie, Maya, DT, and get out of the way.

You have a valid point concerning this team not having enough 4th quarter meaningful (must score) possessions. This year it was only Texas and ND. However, your last point concerning " give the ball to Stewie, Maya, DT, and get out of the way" is high hyperbole at best and wrong mostly. The UCONN offense has never been that juvenile as to be that dependent on any single player.

 

[scubadog]

Maybe it's just a matter of personality's? The UCONN girls are very nice and well trained. Maybe it comes off robotic?

There are not many DT, Sue Bird, Shea Ralph types currently in a husky uniform.

Just a thought.

Or currently in any uniform ?

 

[oldude]

You have a valid point concerning this team not having enough 4th quarter meaningful (must score) possessions. This year it was only Texas and ND. However, your last point concerning " give the ball to Stewie, Maya, DT, and get out of the way" is high hyperbole at best and wrong mostly. The UCONN offense has never been that juvenile as to be that dependent on any single player.

Each of the other 3 teams in the FF has a “go to” scorer who they can give the ball to in an isolation play who is capable of beating a defender off the dribble or pulling up for a jumper. (Vivians, Durr & Ogunbowle) UConn doesn’t quite have that player.

While I agree that UConn’s offense has never depended on one player, when the Huskies had DT & Maya in particular, whenever the offense broke down somewhat, as it did last year vs MS St’s tough man-to-man, or Friday against ND’s zone, which neutralized much of what UConn tries to do on offense, it is invaluable to have one or more players who can put the ball on the floor and score.

 

[JustinesGuy]

Each of the other 3 teams in the FF has a “go to” scorer who they can give the ball to in an isolation play who is capable of beating a defender off the dribble or pulling up for a jumper. (Vivians, Durr & Ogunbowle) UConn doesn’t quite have that player.

While I agree that UConn’s offense has never depended on one player, when the Huskies had DT & Maya in particular, whenever the offense broke down somewhat, as it did last year vs MS St’s tough man-to-man, or Friday against ND’s zone, which neutralized much of what UConn tries to do on offense, it is invaluable to have one or more players who can put the ball on the floor and score.

Exactly

 

[bantamlaker]

Exactly

And if you want an example take a look at the last 2 minutes of the 2002 championship game. Oklahoma was making a run and we needed a score. The strategy was give the ball to Diana and clear out and of course DT came through with a 3 point play (getting their best player Stacey Dales to foul out in the process).

 

[CocoHusky]

Or currently in any uniform ?

Each of the other 3 teams in the FF has a “go to” scorer who they can give the ball to in an isolation play who is capable of beating a defender off the dribble or pulling up for a jumper. (Vivians, Durr & Ogunbowle) UConn doesn’t quite have that player. While I agree that UConn’s offense has never depended on one player, when the Huskies had DT & Maya in particular, whenever the offense broke down somewhat, as it did last year vs MS St’s tough man-to-man, or Friday against ND’s zone, which neutralized much of what UConn tries to do on offense, it is invaluable to have one or more players who can put the ball on the floor and score.

Exactly

I would urge all of you one on one player type advocates to go back and look more closely at the last basket by Arike. This was not an isolation play and not that different than many of the plays that UCONN runs. Note that the ball was given to Arike on the wing by the ND PG, also notable was Jessica Shepard came from the baseline to set set a screen on Gabby Williams (Arike's assigned defender) forcing a switch of Napheesa onto Arike. Arike made the shot but that was not a "give the ball to Arike and get out of the way", it was a well designed ND team play utilizing 3 ND players.

 

[oldude]

I would urge all of you one one player type advocates to go back and look more closely at the last basket by Arike. This was not an isolation play and not that different than many of the plays that UCONN runs. Note that the ball was given to Arike on the wing by the ND PG, also notable was Jessica Shepard came from the baseline to set set a screen on Gabby Williams (Arike's assigned defender) forcing a switch of Napheesa onto Arike. Arike made the shot but that was not a "give the ball to Arike and get out of the way", it was a well designed ND team play utilizing 3 ND player.

Sorry Coco, but I have to disagree. The screen by Shepard was expressly called to get an isolation with Ogunbowle matched up against a slower defender on the perimeter. If Pheesa overplayed her, Ogunbowle would have blown right by her to the basket. As it was, Ogunbowle set up Pheesa with a couple dribbles, then stepped back for the winning jump shot. That is a classic isolation play in my book.

 

[AussieHusky]

Not saying they weren't motivated or that they didn't play their hearts out. I just think it's interesting that a sort-of-objective observer, looking at the way the ND players reacted to the game (not to winning, but to the game) and the way UConn players reacted, came up with that question. All the rest of my initial post was my (probably feeble) attempt to analyze why my friend would make that observation.

For the record, I've been watching UConn WBB since 1995. If they didn't play their hearts out, I would have stopped watching years ago.

I get what your friend may have seen....probably that everything UCONN tried, things that usually work against other teams, ND seemed to have an answer for. And the players were at their wits end, hence the appearance of "going through the motion". Even for me, I could see what UCONN was trying to do and could also clearly see how ND was disrupting them. For the most part, the players had no Plan B (same as against MSU last year). The players played hard, but if most of what you are doing is being disrupted, you may feel that it does not matter what you do and your body langauge may show it to an outside observer.

 

[Longtime fan]

Its routine for the fans, we just have to grab our popcorn and watch these young ladies perform.
We don't see how hard they work to make getting to the Final Four 11 straight times become routine.
To Gabby and Kia, of course they are disappointed , however last night was a war and one of the most hard fought games a fan could ever witness.
Twice we came back from 5 point deficits with 40 seconds or so left. Once is miraculous, twice is unheard of. We lost when an All American made a great shot with a second left.
But to sum up this senior class...they we 148-3 over 4 years, all three games were overtime losses. After 40 minutes they were never behind.
The last two years, after losing three All Americans , drafted 1-2-3 in the WNBA draft,.a devastating loss to most programs, we were 72-2.
Both losses came in the final 4 to great teams, in overtime buzzer beaters.
Doesn't sound to me like a group that goes through the motions.

These statistics not only annoy me, but they are misleading. I would throw out every win against teams in the AAC, because they are not remotely competitive with UCONN, and have zero chance of beating UCONN unless they substantially upgrade their programs. And since they have done nothing since the league began ( maybe S. Florida ) , it doesn't appear that they intend to . I can't count a win over SMU when that team barely, and at the last second, scored two points in the first half against UCONN. These games are like playing against 6th graders. So each Uconn player gets 20 ( my estimate ) "free" wins per season which, times four equals 80. So 80 of any UCONN senior's wins don't count.

The important thing is the fine record against real teams, and those in the tournament. This still results in an impressive record, and is the envy of every woman's BB player in the country. But please, leave out the damn games agains Tulsa and East Carolina, etc. It simply balloons the success out of all proportion and meaning. When we start, regularly, being defeated by Tulane and East Carolina, we can re-assess.

 

[AussieHusky]

Sorry Coco, but I have to disagree. The screen by Shepard was expressly called to get an isolation with Ogunbowle matched up against a slower defender on the perimeter. If Pheesa overplayed her, Ogunbowle would have blown right by her to the basket. As it was, Ogunbowle set up Pheesa with a couple dribbles, then stepped back for the winning jump shot. That is a classic isolation play in my book.

You took the words right out of my mouth...or should I say my keyboard, Oldude! Iso-play because you create an isolated mismatch with your play call (Shepard's screen), and let your shot creator create their own shot (jump shot or dribble drive) base on what they are most effective at. The question is, if the roles were reversed, could such a play have been called for any of the UCONN five on the floor at that time? My opinion: Lou (probably not, handle not good enough to put defender off balance, more a screen and shoot or screen and straight line drive to the hoop type - risk of creating a charge in the paint a possibility), Nurse (probably not, ball handling shaky at best and has not shown it in the past), Gabby (defender would lay off and dare her to shoot, she's not confident in her outside shot still-though in the game she made at least one under pressure), Pheesa (maybe, but handle also shaky, has not shown a lot in the past, also more straight line drive player as to be expected as a Big), Crystal (maybe at best, but size disadvantage against defender and at the rim). But on UCONN's bench, would any player have had the ability to make such a play? Would Z or Meg? IMO, Meg, more likely (maybe handle not like Arike's but good enough, with size and has shown slashing and finishing abilities in the past). Just my opinion, but feel free to comment...lol!

 

[hoopingcrane]

I never ceased to be amazed at some of the posts on this forum.

Especially on those very rare occasions when they lose. The lack of appreciation for the unparalled success of this program is astounding.

 

[AussieHusky]

Especially on those very rare occasions when they lose. The lack of appreciation for the unparalled success of this program is astounding.

I would rather look at it differently as opposed to being unappreciative. An analogy, may not be perfect....your teenager is an "A" student, always top of her class. You are proud as a parent, especially considering all of the distractions that affect that age group, and you see how her peers are performing, and you go...I am so blessed to have such a focused and high character teenager in this day and age. But occasionally your "A" student gets a "C", still pass, but below yours and their expectation. What would be your response. Would it be, the "C" is no problem, you always get "A's" so no biggie. Or would you say...well, you got a "C" this time, below your expectation, so let's try to figure out why you got a "C" when you always get a higher mark. Maybe you need extra help, tutoring or suggestions...? As a parent, and like most parents, I assume the response would be the later. The responses you see are not for lack of appreciation for our Huskies and all that they have accomplished, it is more a collective sharing of their own disappointment with the outcome. I know that they are disappointed at the outcome they have said so themselves), and are probably at their wits end as to why this happened. We as die-hard fans are just expressing our opinions on the why, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[tomcat]

You can't have it both ways! What is there to debate?

Two different people. I did not say they weren't playing their hearts out. My friend, watching elsewhere and asking me afterward, observed that it seemed to him they were not playing that way."

 

[CocoHusky]

Two different people. I did not say they weren't playing their hearts out. My friend, watching elsewhere and asking me afterward, observed that it seemed to him they were not playing that way."

I see the old...

 

[my2cents]

These statistics not only annoy me, but they are misleading. I would throw out every win against teams in the AAC, because they are not remotely competitive with UCONN, and have zero chance of beating UCONN unless they substantially upgrade their programs. And since they have done nothing since the league began ( maybe S. Florida ) , it doesn't appear that they intend to . I can't count a win over SMU when that team barely, and at the last second, scored two points in the first half against UCONN. These games are like playing against 6th graders. So each Uconn player gets 20 ( my estimate ) "free" wins per season which, times four equals 80. So 80 of any UCONN senior's wins don't count.

The important thing is the fine record against real teams, and those in the tournament. This still results in an impressive record, and is the envy of every woman's BB player in the country. But please, leave out the damn games agains Tulsa and East Carolina, etc. It simply balloons the success out of all proportion and meaning. When we start, regularly, being defeated by Tulane and East Carolina, we can re-assess.

So are you really saying , because you don't like the league, the wins don't count?
Please, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on here

 

[Tenspro2002]

A lot of this is spot on.

The offense, and to a large extent the on-court personality of the players, became very robotic. When it's working, it's beautiful. But it also becomes predictable and easy to defend for an opponent (coach and players) who has seen it numerous times. And we never developed a player with the moxie to take over a game when needed.