UConn vs. Stanford

[cardfan]

I am turning 60 this month, so I'm really not a dood either.

No, you are saying that Geno is not a better coach than Vandaveer. No facts involved there. You are guessing at who would go to Stanford if Geno was there.

I am SO looking forward to writing up my Stanford/UConn analysis.

You've already done your analysis, you have the better players. so you proved my pt- it comes down to talent. My question at the very beginning was what makes Geno a better coach than Tara? NCs or head to head which he leads by one?

The fact remains that Tara won 2 NCs before Geno won before his first, and it took him twice as long to win his first. So what's different? His 7 NCs and all of sudden Tara (VanDerveer) can't coach anymore? That makes no sense. She has 4 straight F4s and 2 NCs in the 90's, a Gold Medal, then 5 straight F4s in 2000's.

If you are basing it all on NCs, his 7 NCs to her 2, than fine, then I say it's because he has more talented players, including one very good one who did not get into Stanford. Also, any coach will tell you winning any championship is more than coaching, it's a lot of luck and stars lining up (match-ups, health of players, calls, etc).

 

[cardfan]

I am turning 60 this month, so I'm really not a dood either.

No, you are saying that Geno is not a better coach than Vandaveer. No facts involved there. You are guessing at who would go to Stanford if Geno was there.

I am SO looking forward to writing up my Stanford/UConn analysis.

Just curious, did you write an analysis before the Dec. 30, 2010 game at Maples (when we were ranked 9th, and broke your 90 game winning streak?) How about the one for the Tampa Final Four in '08? If so, I've love to read them as well. But if you cannot dig them up, I bet you said we were too slow and didn't match up with all your talent and quickness.

 

[Icebear]

I am turning 60 this month, so I'm really not a dood either.

No, you are saying that Geno is not a better coach than Vandaveer. No facts involved there. You are guessing at who would go to Stanford if Geno was there.

I am SO looking forward to writing up my Stanford/UConn analysis.

At 60 closer to dud than dood or dude. And I resemble that remark, too.

 

[JS]

You are completely wrong about admissions at Stanford. They do not admit athletes early.

It's been my understanding for some time that, while there's no formal early admission, there's an informal communication of one's chances that one can, as a practical matter, take to the bank.

Is that wrong?

 

[UConn990411]

You've already done your analysis, you have the better players. so you proved my pt- it comes down to talent. My question at the very beginning was what makes Geno a better coach than Tara? NCs or head to head which he leads by one?

Uh, doesn't Geno lead in both?

You're clearly just trolling at this point.

 

[UConnCat]

You've already done your analysis, you have the better players. so you proved my pt- it comes down to talent. My question at the very beginning was what makes Geno a better coach than Tara? NCs or head to head which he leads by one?

The fact remains that Tara won 2 NCs before Geno won before his first, and it took him twice as long to win his first. So what's different? His 7 NCs and all of sudden Tara (VanDerveer) can't coach anymore? That makes no sense. She has 4 straight F4s and 2 NCs in the 90's, a Gold Medal, then 5 straight F4s in 2000's.

If you are basing it all on NCs, his 7 NCs to her 2, than fine, then I say it's because he has more talented players, including one very good one who did not get into Stanford. Also, any coach will tell you winning any championship is more than coaching, it's a lot of luck and stars lining up (match-ups, health of players, calls, etc).

There's not one post in this thread that has suggested that "Tara can't coach anymore." So let's just stop with the straw man arguments.

Head-to-head match-ups between these two coaches doesn't really say a lot about who is the better coach. As I mentioned in another thread, for much the past 20+ years the teams only played if they happened to meet up in the NCAAs. The teams did not play at all between Dec 1997 and March 2005. Those were years in which UConn dominated WCBB and the teams not playing during those years helps Stanford in terms of its overall record against UConn.

I find it ironic that a Stanford fan is claiming that it's easier to recruit to Storrs than Stanford. It seems to me that every time UConn and Stanford go head to head for a recruit, Stanford wins. It's now at the point where we just assume Stanford will win all recruiting battles between the two schools. The reality is that the so-called small pool of players available to Stanford is not a convincing argument when it comes to basketball, particularly women's basketball in which so many good players are also great students. We're talking 15 scholarships over 4 years. (It's more of an issue with football and Stanford's recent football success tells me that Stanford may have slightly lessened its academic standards, at least for football players.) Let's not fixate too much on which coach has recruited more #1s; Diana and Tina weren't going to Stanford even if they had qualified academically. Year in and year out Stanford has great players on its roster and I think had the most talented roster in the country in 2011. That championship was Stanford's to lose...and it did.

I really don't have strong feelings about who's the better coach. They're both great coaches, but obviously I'm partial to Geno. I don't think there is a coach who prepares a team better for an opponent than Tara, but I don't think she's as good as Geno in her "in-game" adjustments.

 

[cardfan]

It's been my understanding for some time that, while there's no formal early admission, there's an informal communication of one's chances that one can, as a practical matter, take to the bank.

Is that wrong?

Not to take to the bank, per se. The communication is whether they have met the admission requirement deadline and whether they are on track. Tara will not pay for an official school visit if they have not been officially admitted.

The times that I've heard the coaches talk about recruiting, they do not use it as an excuse, at all. However, it is daunting the number of kids they can recruit, which has to be in line with Stanford's admission numbers and acceptance rates. They can't go after all kids at an all star Nike camp, it's usually 10%. When they do see a great bball player, obviously their first question is whether she has the grades and scores to get in. All parties have to be very organized and very committed to the process early on.

It is true that Stanford typically get the players who have been accepted and offered a scholie, minus about 10; including Lobo, Bird, Diggins, a few to UCLA and one to UCSB. But the number of student athletes who are game changers like the O sisters, Appel, Wiggins, don't come around that often, and when they do, they are surrounded by very solid talent, but not necessarily super stars. Sure, Tara has had chances to win more than 2 NCs, but Sally Bell, injuries, bad luck, bad matches ups (TN in '08) ruined some of those chances. That said, in the big picture, I think she is an outstanding coach and has more, with less.

 

[pap49cba]

You are completely wrong about admissions at Stanford. They do not admit athletes early. And yes, they have to meet the same requirements as all students and they follow the same process as the general applicant pool. In 2011, 2, 437 freshman were admitted and just over 34,000 applied.

My best friend's daughter got a swimming scholarship at Stanford and your statement is bull.

 

[cardfan]

There's not one post in this thread that has suggested that "Tara can't coach anymore." So let's just stop with the straw man arguments.

Head-to-head match-ups between these two coaches doesn't really say a lot about who is the better coach. As I mentioned in another thread, for much the past 20+ years the teams only played if they happened to meet up in the NCAAs. The teams did not play at all between Dec 1997 and March 2005. Those were years in which UConn dominated WCBB and the teams not playing during those years helps Stanford in terms of its overall record against UConn.

I find it ironic that a Stanford fan is claiming that it's easier to recruit to Storrs than Stanford. It seems to me that every time UConn and Stanford go head to head for a recruit, Stanford wins. It's now at the point where we just assume Stanford will win all recruiting battles between the two schools. The reality is that the so-called small pool of players available to Stanford is not a convincing argument when it comes to basketball, particularly women's basketball in which so many good players are also great students. We're talking 15 scholarships over 4 years. (It's more of an issue with football and Stanford's recent football success tells me that Stanford may have slightly lessened its academic standards, at least for football players.) Let's not fixate too much on which coach has recruited more #1s; Diana and Tina weren't going to Stanford even if they had qualified academically. Year in and year out Stanford has great players on its roster and I think had the most talented roster in the country in 2011. That championship was Stanford's to lose...and it did.

I really don't have strong feelings about who's the better coach. They're both great coaches, but obviously I'm partial to Geno. I don't think there is a coach who prepares a team better for an opponent than Tara, but I don't think she's as good as Geno in her "in-game" adjustments.

I was being sarcastic vs. straw man/woman. I agree head to head doesn't say a lot, I was asking what DD thought. I know our history quite well as I've been at most all of the games, minus the last 2 at Storrs. You said yourself we had down years, mostly due to losing King to ACLs and Carey for good. We are never that deep in great talent, and when we lose one or two, it is devastating, especially to pg's.

Sure, many people would pick Stanford over Storrs, but UConn is THE team in town with all fan adulation, private jets, and media following. Stanford flys coach and barely makes the local and evening news. It's easy to see why some kids would want the former.

I think they are both great coaches, but I'm not going to say Geno is better coach than Tara because he has more NCs. They have each shown strengths and weaknesses in games and recruiting. Geno got out coached in Tampa and at Maples. She was out coached at Storrs and other F4s, plus Appel having a broken foot didn't help. We got Appel, Yamasaki, both O sisters over UConn, you got Bird, Lobo, Dee, and Tina. We obviously disagree that there are enough talented players who call get into Stanford. Sure, we get some, but not the number you do.

Yes, we were the best team in 1997 and lost. And we were the best team in 2011 and lost as well, with no true pg, again.

 

[cardfan]

Can you cite an official source for your allegations? I don't mean a quote from Tara - something from the school.

It's not an allegation.

Google is a very powerful search tool.

 

[cardfan]

My best friend's daughter got a swimming scholarship at Stanford and your statement is bull.

there are early admits at Stanford, which includes all students.

 

[cardfan]

I know you guys are busy chatting over your win over MD. Congrats.

I wanted to provide 2 links regarding recruiting athletes at Stanford, including football. The first article is from 2007 and the Director of Admissions who is no longer there, but it summarizes the challenges the coaches face. Football is better because of Andrew Luck and the legacy he began. And btw, football has a 90% graduation rate.

http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/HIGHER-STANDARDS-Stanford-teams-finding-it-s-2589894.php#page-1
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/17516277/stringent-standards-help-stanford-elevate-itself-in-recruiting

 

[wallman]

Well I am hoping all those role playing recruits are reading cardfans threads as we would love to have you at UCLA but we wouldn't be putting you down and giving all the glory to our coach, we would give you your due!!!

 

[Alydar]

dood, I'm just providing facts how recruiting works at Stanford based on hearing it directly from the folks who work there, to the players and parents who went through the process.

I'd love to stay and chat, but gotta run.

Have a great day.

Yeah, All those unbiased sources. Do you think any of them would actually say that exceptions have been made for an exceptional athlete? Is a parent or an employee going to say that corners are cut? H*ll, Pat Summitt said that Bruce Pearl was an honorable and honest man of outstanding character.