UConn would have 4 loses w/ this one change.....

[DavidinNaples]

Critics of UConn's dominance of WCBB have long wished for a way to mandate parity. Whacky bloggers have even proposed limiting scholarships and/or "schedule boycotts" to dissuade recruits from flocking to play for Geno, CD and company. All the while, the simple answer was right under their nose. Shorten WCBB games to 5 minutes and if tied at the five minute mark, next basket wins.

Under this scheme, UConn would have four losses. Maryland and Memphis led UConn after five minutes and Stanford and Penn State were both tied, but scored the next basket. (Even BU and UCF were tied, but UConn scored next.) Of course, games are 40 minutes, not five, and those six teams lost by a combined 150+ points. Except for the first five minutes, the result was never in doubt.

On a serious note, this "first 5 minutes of play" by UConn gives many BYs heartburn. They always write UConn looked "sluggish, tired or out of synch." The truth is Geno has build this team for a forty minute marathon, not a five minute sprint. The team's conditioning will wear opponents down, his adjustments will deny whatever worked for even the briefest moment and UConn has too many weapons for all of them to be shut down. It is just a matter of time....

UConn is the #1 game on most team's schedules. Maryland and Duke were ready to finally take out UConn on their home court and exorcize the demons of countless beatings. At the beginning of games, opponents are more fired up, have fresher legs and more adrenaline pumping than 39 minutes later when TLAW is nailing her patented, final exclamation point, 3 from the corner.

So take heart Boneyarders, unlike boxing, in basketball you have to play the whole 40 minutes. Geno knows this and he's ready for the "fast and furious" opening. His team is in better condition, has more ways to score and most of all, has a defense that will shut you down until the offense buries your hopes and dreams. It is just a matter of time...
Go Huskies..!!

 

[Icebear]

That is more rational than Glenn's previously discussed suggestions in the other thread.

 

[UcMiami]

Another simple option, and one Geno uses in practice all the time ... handicapping. Start games with the score not 0 - 0 but based on a national ranking system. So the opening score at Memphis might be 25 - 0 against Uconn. Or treat players like jockeys in horse racing and add x lbs of lead to each player's uniform based on a national ranking system. Much better than boycotts and messing with recruiting rules which smacks of fear.

 

[rbny1]

Declare Tuck and Mosqueda-Lewis ineligible, leaving us with just seven scholarship players, and we would lose. Wait a minute, Tuck and Mosqueda-Lewis already missed a bunch of games and we won. Here's Plan B: declare Dolson, Stewart, Tuck and Mosqueda-Lewis ineligible, and see whether Geno can win with five scholarship players. If that doesn't work, declare the entire team ineligible.

 

[Phil]

That is more rational than Glenn's previously discussed suggestions in the other thread.

Low hurdle, so is asdkasdfkasfkewroweroew

 

[Phil]

I know there was some criticism of Lin Dunn's comments, but she had some good observations. Why aren't there more coaches showing up at WNBA practices? Why aren't there more coaches asking to sit in on Geno's practices? I understand the timing logistics of sitting in on a UConn practice, but there no excuse for not managing to sit in on a pro practice; I know the summers aren't dead time, but there's time to learn in the summer.

In other words, rather than handicap UConn, up your game. Let's face it, for all those who like the purity of the women's game, when you watch a game between say, a # 20 and a #30 team, are you honestly saying there is no room for improvement?

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

I know there was some criticism of Lin Dunn's comments, but she had some good observations. Why aren't there more coaches showing up at WNBA practices? Why aren't there more coaches asking to sit in on Geno's practices? I understand the timing logistics of sitting in on a UConn practice, but there no excuse for not managing to sit in on a pro practice; I know the summers aren't dead time, but there's time to learn in the summer.

In other words, rather than handicap UConn, up your game. Let's face it, for all those who like the purity of the women's game, when you watch a game between say, a # 20 and a #30 team, are you honestly saying there is no room for improvement?

Coaches need to be told this?

 

[UConnCat]

In other words, rather than handicap UConn, up your game. Let's face it, for all those who like the purity of the women's game, when you watch a game between say, a # 20 and a #30 team, are you honestly saying there is no room for improvement?

Forget #20 v #30, I started watching Duke v Georgia Tech -- two teams (one highly ranked) from the best conference in women's basketball -- and I stopped watching. Georgia Tech missed 54 (of 73) shots, a stat that surpasses the 50 shots it missed against Tenn.

 

[cohenzone]

How about UConn has to play 3 against 5, with 1 of the 3 playing with one hand tied behind her back and and the other two can only take 10 foot hook shots with their off hand.

What's so stupid about the dominance thing is that it's quite possible that had LVille not knocked off Baylor last year, UConn might not have had the best path to an NC last year, and if that hadn't happened, it would have been 3 years since UConn's last championship. Excellence, yes, unbeatable forever, no. This year they have that aura because their offense is so good, but the reason they are always in the hunt is that their D rarely disappears from one year to the next. That is coaching and getting the players to buy in. If nothing else, the kids UConn gets are typically excellent scorers who might be hard to get to want to play D, but he gets that out of them. UConn is "dominant" for reasons that only partially relate to talent, because we all know teams like Duke and ND and Stanford and UNC get plenty of talent, but they are missing the thing that UConn has - a lot of NCs. They each are almost unbeatable except for an occasional year and often only lose to eachother, Tennessee never falls all that far from the top of the tree either and we shall see about Baylor.

Parity is more an issue than dominance because unlike men's hoops where lower teams give top teams a run for their money pretty often, especially within league, the gap between the top and the middle is too wide in women's hoops. Coaching isn't uniformly up to par and the commitment of the schools to women's hoops is far from what it needs to be overall. I also think schools hang on to coaches in woman;s hoops much longer than they ever would in men's hoops, and maybe it's because they can't do any better. People like Andy Landers and Harry Perreta would have been long gone from their men's programs.

 

[kibblesnbits]

New rule: UConn only receives credit for points scored in the first half. The other team gets to use the second half to catch up and win. Even money Geno would find a way to teach his team how to miss 2nd half shots while increasing the chance of offensive rebounds.

 

[Zorro]

I suggested several eminently possible means of handicapping the more successful teams a couple of days ago, (weighted sneakers, differential basket heights, vision-distorting eyewear, etc.) but my ideas were SO good that the mods felt obliged to disappear the entire thread before someone at the NCAA saw it!

 

[huskeynut]

I know there was some criticism of Lin Dunn's comments, but she had some good observations. Why aren't there more coaches showing up at WNBA practices? Why aren't there more coaches asking to sit in on Geno's practices? I understand the timing logistics of sitting in on a UConn practice, but there no excuse for not managing to sit in on a pro practice; I know the summers aren't dead time, but there's time to learn in the summer.

In other words, rather than handicap UConn, up your game. Let's face it, for all those who like the purity of the women's game, when you watch a game between say, a # 20 and a #30 team, are you honestly saying there is no room for improvement?

Not only do coaches need to be told this but they need to change their outlook completely.

Most teams have one potent scorer and then the supporting cast. When it comes crunch time, they go to the scorer. When you face Uconn, there are 5 scorers on the floor. So when it comes to crunch time, which is not often, Uconn has 5 options to score. Conversely, one scorer and a supporting cast makes defending an opponent easy. You know who is going to take the shot. It's not rocket science.

I cannot understand why more coaches are not learning then teaching the motion offense. I'm not saying its an easy offense to learn, its not. But once learned and practiced until "you can't get it wrong" it becomes a very difficult one to defend. Trick defenses do not work for long. It also means that the team comes before the individual.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Wbbfan1]

What's funny is Geno has advocated reducing scholarships from 15 to 12/13 and the other coaches have voted the proposal down. I don't recall the last time Geno had more then 13 players on Scholarship.

 

[Waquoit]

Sorry, but the OP is just plain wrong. If those rule changes were made, Geno would be way ahead of the curve in adjusting to them. The results would be the same.

 

[UcMiami]

Parity is more an issue than dominance because unlike men's hoops where lower teams give top teams a run for their money pretty often, especially within league, the gap between the top and the middle is too wide in women's hoops. Coaching isn't uniformly up to par and the commitment of the schools to women's hoops is far from what it needs to be overall. I also think schools hang on to coaches in woman;s hoops much longer than they ever would in men's hoops, and maybe it's because they can't do any better. People like Andy Landers and Harry Perreta would have been long gone from their men's programs.

I maintain the biggest factor in men's parity is that the lesser talent teams get those players for 4 years while the top end gets most of their players for 1 or 2 years max. Uconn would have a much harder time as would any of the top teams if Maya, Tina, KML, and Stewart all left school after their freshman years - Same for baylor with Griner, TN with Parker, etc. What makes for dominant programs is the ability to build and teach and plan in four year cycles rather than restarting every year. It is also why Wooden was able to do what he did and no men's coach will ever come close - he got the dominant player every couple of years and was able to keep him for 3 years of varsity play plus a freshman year of coaching.

 

[UcMiami]

I know there was some criticism of Lin Dunn's comments, but she had some good observations. Why aren't there more coaches showing up at WNBA practices? Why aren't there more coaches asking to sit in on Geno's practices? I understand the timing logistics of sitting in on a UConn practice, but there no excuse for not managing to sit in on a pro practice; I know the summers aren't dead time, but there's time to learn in the summer.

In other words, rather than handicap UConn, up your game. Let's face it, for all those who like the purity of the women's game, when you watch a game between say, a # 20 and a #30 team, are you honestly saying there is no room for improvement?

I actually think watching a pro practice is likely less beneficial to college coaches because the players are so much further along the curve of skill development and personal training - pro coaches do not need to teach the players proper defensive stance, etc. and they do not have to work on their conditioning, focus, intensity - the players that have those problems have long been weeded out of the process.

 

[rvwsleep]

What's funny is Geno has advocated reducing scholarships from 15 to 12/13 and the other coaches have voted the proposal down. I don't recall the last time Geno had more then 13 players on Scholarship.

Correct. And the idea of limiting scholarships to 3 a year, as that board suggested, would have little effect on UConn. They would be essentially the same team with 3 scholarships per year.

 

[trisailin]

If the goal is parity at any "cost" (including ignoring what the student/athletes want), then it's simple. Just do away with recruiting. Go to a draft. Bottom school (based on something - maybe Sagarin or Massey rankings) chooses first. Almost impossible that a team would get two superstars. You would have several EDD and Delaware situations every year.

Of course, player development to get to the next level would be pretty problematic (Though EDD showed she was able to rise above). But for the "parity first" crowd, that is a small price to pay.

My real thought on this though is that parity STILL wouldn't exist as obviously there are some MUCH better coaching staffs than others. I'm pretty convinced that Geno, Chris, Shea, and Marissa could take an average group of kids and have them perform at an above average level.

 

[Blueballer]

Another simple option, and one Geno uses in practice all the time ... handicapping. Start games with the score not 0 - 0 but based on a national ranking system. So the opening score at Memphis might be 25 - 0 against Uconn. Or treat players like jockeys in horse racing and add x lbs of lead to each player's uniform based on a national ranking system. Much better than boycotts and messing with recruiting rules which smacks of fear.

"Another simple option, and one Geno uses in practice all the time ... handicapping." - Don't the refs do that all the time once the score becomes lopsided?

 

[reno tony]

I got it, I got it, I really have it. Let UCONN start the season with only 9 Scholarship players. Then take UCONN's number one scorer for the last two years and make her sit out 8 or 10 games and make their number one player off the bench sit out the same length of time. Then make them play some ranked teams and see how they do.

7T TO GO​

 

[huskybill]

Declare Tuck and Mosqueda-Lewis ineligible, leaving us with just seven scholarship players, and we would lose. Wait a minute, Tuck and Mosqueda-Lewis already missed a bunch of games and we won. Here's Plan B: declare Dolson, Stewart, Tuck and Mosqueda-Lewis ineligible, and see whether Geno can win with five scholarship players. If that doesn't work, declare the entire team ineligible.

I like your plan B with one more change. Fire Geno and make Brenda the coach.

 

[HoopsFan21]

If the goal is parity at any "cost" (including ignoring what the student/athletes want), then it's simple. Just do away with recruiting. Go to a draft. Bottom school (based on something - maybe Sagarin or Massey rankings) chooses first. Almost impossible that a team would get two superstars. You would have several EDD and Delaware situations every year.

Of course, player development to get to the next level would be pretty problematic (Though EDD showed she was able to rise above). But for the "parity first" crowd, that is a small price to pay.

My real thought on this though is that parity STILL wouldn't exist as obviously there are some MUCH better coaching staffs than others. I'm pretty convinced that Geno, Chris, Shea, and Marissa could take an average group of kids and have them perform at an above average level.

Actually I've thought that if they really wanted to balance things out some sort of scholarship limit would be required. You can't have a draft because these are college kids, and you can't tell them where they are able or not able to matriculate. The only way to do it is with NCAA scholarship rules. Each team gets 10 players. While Geno would be successful in any system, it would certainly spread the talent around a little bit more and limit UConn's ability to stock pile the #1, #2, and #6 players from a single class.

 

[Icebear]

Given the rate of injury in the women's game a ten player limit would be a disaster. There are teams that literally would not have had a player available off the bench. That would be real good for the sport.

 

[Boxerpups4me]

I think UConn's dominance is fine. It won't last forever obviously and these things are always cyclical anyway. UConn has dominated before and dropped off a bit, then came back strong, so this is nothing we haven't seen before. I think the amazing thing is how Geno has been able to keep his program at the top for so long. There is def more parity in WCBB than there ever has been before and your seeing unranked teams play competitively against ranked teams and even pulling off upsets.

 

[HoopsFan21]

Given the rate of injury in the women's game a ten player limit would be a disaster. There are teams that literally would not have had a player available off the bench. That would be real good for the sport.

You could still have walk-ons that would not count against the scholarhsip limit. In this case UConn could have their ten players and then a few walk-ons in case of injury. Basically a limit like this would shift the balance of the team by exchanging a couple of good players with less talented ones. Even though UConn only plays with 9 scholarship players, having a hard 10 limit would definitely change the way players are recruited and teams planned. A five recruit class like Hartley and Dolson's for example would be a thing of the past, and teams that cast a wide net hoping some of them pan out would have to be a little more choosy. I'm not saying I agree with doing something like this, but it would pretty much be the only way to bring a little more parity to the game. Kind of like what happened when the NCAA reigned in the number of football scholarships to 85.