Once again - the article is in the kids section of the Post. It is written for kids. Fred Bowen is an author that makes his living writing sports books for KIDS. I have bought a couple of his books for my grandson. That aside, there is absolutely nothing in what he wrote that is negative.
Obviously, the need to defend our girls against such scurrilous attacks by yet another hack sports writer is just too much for some to some to ignore. I have a mental image of some BY fans spending their day googling WCBB articles just looking for something that they can focus on as negative about their girls. Ignoring a dozen comments praising the team they home in like a GPS guided missile on something that might be interpreted as negative - "They are too good".
Kids on the Boneyard are being offended. I say fire the hack!
The article is published for all to read, is it not? Secondly, what difference does it make? If what you are saying stating off with 1st sentence that "UCONN is the problem," the very 1stsentence in fact, doesn't that resonate even more and what does it matter who it is written if what you say as a 1st sentence or two a statement stating UCONN is THE problem? Third-
a little sneaky/insidious as bags said. He was astute enough to pick up on the South Carolina game as not that close but then he made MD feel like a blowout. Was the Md game played at UCONN (I emphasize - ON UCONN's HOMECOURT.) a blowout? Don't we really believe he KNEW about the South Carolina game but didn't KNOW about the Md game?
Ignoring comments like these it is obvious that some posters (not all. I emphasize - emphatically so - NOT ALL.) feel a need that only their opinion on what is too much or too little matters which is a form of arrogance. The same arrogance we often have to read from the Gotlieb's etc. Public comments that are just unnecessary regardless of age. Some just seem to want to bury their head in the sand whenever a poster/writer/former coach says anything wrong about UCONN on a small level or maybe a larger level and then pop up and then sometimes mis-characterize the poster that defends. They prefer to read negative points of view. THAT is fine. But when those posters start to mischaracterize other posters in a personal manner as if only their view is king, that's the sign or arrogance and/or trollism. Just like the guy that was challenged on other thread about Chong. The back-and-forth wasn't insulting until he couldn't resist calling Geno a more-or-less negative nickname and mentioned certain players should leave. Yet this is the SAME GUY that spoke highly of UCONN -- yet THAT is what we are supposed to take-away from his comments and IGNORE any of his other negative stuff? It is okay if some do, but why can't he be challenged?
***Same here with this guy that wrote the article. There was 1-NO REASON to say UCONN was a problem. 2-- No reason to compare men's vs women's game. (On this thread someone mentioned what Geno has thought about competition yet a counter can't be what Gneo thinks of the comparison's between men and women?). 3-- No reason for him to be astute enough to pick off game vs USC as not that close because of the score but NOT astute enough to pick up on the Md game. 4- No reason for the last statement of the last sentence of his paragraph when we have been challenged in last year's finals vs ND and vs Md this year. It's not one point - there are four. For those of us that think he is wrong about #4, believe in Geno's comment in number 2,don't believe the writer didn't know about number 3, and read how teh 1st sentence starts off with UCONN IS THE PROBLEM when in NO WAY does it need ot read that way FROM AN EXPERIENCED WRITER - we're supposed to IGNORE all this because he is sending it to kids? Really? And then all of us get lumped into being called "thin-skinned" all because some other posters only want to impose their pov? Nah. The story got challenged as it should. He is not being tarred.
