What type of game do you prefer from our team? | The Boneyard

What type of game do you prefer from our team?

winlots

winlots

Joined
Oct 29, 2011
Messages
2,656
Reaction Score
4,690
The way this season is going set me to wondering. Do you go for the nail-biter games with their attendant excitement? Victorious blow outs? Some thing other than those? What floats your personal boat with regard to maximizing your viewing pleasure? Most often we lean toward the Fernando Lamas school of thought: like to sit back, relax, and hope they "look MAHvelous" with their performance. Your school of thought?
 
The close games are easier to keep in focus for me. They are also better in giving a clearer representation of the team at that point in time, and it usually means the opponent brought its best to the game. Always good to see players who may not be going to the national or even conference championships who try to bring it anyway. That's one of the best things about women's bball.

When the UConn teams had their superpowers, a blowout was an opportunity to watch aesthetically pleasing play. This year, however, the team has to rely on players who are still developing or are lesser talents, which also impacts on the team's top players, so a blowout usually means the opponent was having a bad game, not that the UConn team was necessarily brilliant.

I'd happily watch either type of game to see Crystal Dangerfield play.
 
wbball: you sure don't sound like a "novice" per your handle. Fine points. one of which triggered another thot: also pleases us to see a game where all the bench players get good experience. Key for their development. And interesting to see their progress.
 
I'm all for nail biters over blow outs although I do like to see UConn demolish ranked teams. Beating Podunk U by 60 points is boring. The other thing is to watch UConn play UConn style basketball - ball motion, player motion, execution, lots of assists. A simple offensive game plan - get the ball to the player with the open shot. We haven't seen that in a while. I think I saw one back door cut last night, few good screens and the team had more turnovers than assists.
 
I'm for the players to play up to their potential and with max effort, win or lose. But for most of the games this year, too many players collectively haven't played to their potential or max effort, which I believe has frustrated many fans. However, it does make following this team all the more exciting because many of us are hopeful that the team will find their mojo and make a run and write a magical ending for this season.
 
.-.
Not what we are seeing now. I don't mind them not blowing out every team, but the "beautiful" game that used to define this team isn't on display now. Sloppy mistakes, lack of confidence, and lack of hustle are things I never though I would see in such quantities from a UConn WBB team.
 
ccwarrior said:
Not what we are seeing now. I don't mind them not blowing out every team, but the "beautiful" game that used to define this team isn't on display now. Sloppy mistakes, lack of confidence, and lack of hustle are things I never though I would see in such quantities from a UConn WBB team.

ccwarrior: Sure do agree with you with regard to absence of "the beautiful game" and see repetitive appearance of very sloppy mistakes. Get a feeling that team is unusually up tight.??Do feel like most are exhibiting hustle. Feeling badly for Dangerfield who is playing her butt off for her last shot at a ring.
Expand ...
 
I thoroughly enjoy the blowouts - even against the Sisters of the Poor. The reason I enjoy them so much is because it generally means the team is playing really good. Stifling defense that leads to run outs, great half court offense that is just so pretty to watch, and good shooting %'s.

I do not enjoy close games, not against anyone. Not now, not ever. It's totally satisfying when they beat a top team especially in a big game like the NC or semis, etc. I'll take a close win any day but prefer nice comfortable 15-20+ point MOV's
 
winlots said:
The way this season is going set me to wondering. Do you go for the nail-biter games with their attendant excitement? Victorious blow outs? Some thing other than those? What floats your personal boat with regard to maximizing your viewing pleasure? Most often we lean toward the Fernando Lamas school of thought: like to sit back, relax, and hope they "look MAHvelous" with their performance. Your school of thought?
Expand ...
The close games way more exciting and realistic!
 
.-.
I don't care, blowout or nailbiter, what I like to see is good flow and good passing. There's nothing I like more than to see a basket scored with no dribbles, whether it's a layup or a three.
 
I would say it a little differently. I really enjoyed the style of play when Breanna, MoJet, Tuck, Kia, Steff, et al. were playing for UConn. There was a precision, passing, movement, and scoring that I do not know if I will ever see again in either men's or woman's basketball again. That is what I miss the most.
 
Of course, a precision offense is very enjoyable but this cant always happen. especially against the better teams. What set us apart in my mind and I hope to see again was an intense manic defense with guards pressuring all the time and our posts challenging every single shot irrespective of the score allowing us to get our fast break going
 
I'll take whatever style gets a win. That's the name of the game - a win.

If we grind it out, okay. If its a blowout, that's okay too.

We are a spoiled fan base. We have had years of superior talent that allowed a great flow. Our talent was better. We crushed teams with great efficiency. The game has changed. We started getting challenged by Muffett & ND in the last years of the old Big East. And what program was responsible for ND's improvement - UConn. Just like we challenged Tennessee and eventually took over the top spot. . Tennesse was the standard bearer and their play and stature helped build UConn. Now other teams are recruiting top talent and challenging for the top spot. These same teams are also using the motion offense that use to crush them.

But a little history people. UConn's first NCAA tournament appearance was 1989. First final four appearance was 1991. UConn has appeared in every tournament since 1989. 20 final four appearances, 12 in a row. 11 national championships, 18 Big East tournment championships. 6 AAC tournament championships. Outside of maybe Tennessee, no other team has such an impressive record. I don't see any of the present highly ranked teams running such a record. Do you?

I will continue to root for this "flawed" team. To quote Tug McGraw "You gotta believe."
 
I believe in excellence, which is what drew me to UConn, a school with which I have no connection. It all started many years ago when a fellow mystery bookseller, a little gnome of a man, now deceased, who was almost a team mascot for a while, turned me on to UConn basketball, knowing I was a big fan as well as a coach of female teams (mainly softball).

It all started for me on a visit to California in the 1950s when as an 11-year-old I found myself at a fast pitch softball tournament down the street from my grandma’s house. Where I came from in Colorado, men’s adult fast pitch was the No. 1 ticket. My dad managed, my uncles played on a team that I served on as batboy. Watching these teen girls play at an incredibly high level blew me away. UConn wbb blew me away.

I enjoy watching teams, more than individual players, excelling. It doesn’t make any difference to me if they win by 2 or 40. It is the execution I enjoy. I do prefer games that aren’t dominated by giants; for example, watching Griner in college was a big ho-hum for me, but I can understand why others appreciate that style of play.
 
Last edited:
.-.
winlots said:
The way this season is going set me to wondering. Do you go for the nail-biter games with their attendant excitement? Victorious blow outs? Some thing other than those? What floats your personal boat with regard to maximizing your viewing pleasure? Most often we lean toward the Fernando Lamas school of thought: like to sit back, relax, and hope they "look MAHvelous" with their performance. Your school of thought?
Expand ...

Fernando Álvaro Lamas y de Santos? That Fernando Lamas? Huh? At the moment, put him in as the 5th starter. (Oh: you mean Billy Crystal AS FL.)
To answer your question in one word: BEAUTIFUL. Though MAHVELOUS will do . . .
 
I do believe this team is less talented (no matter what their hs rankings say), but I also see a lack of confidence and attention to detail. I have also witnessed this team get out-hustled at times - Geno’s comments that he should be teaching effort must be driving him crazy. Perhaps it is generational, or the competition with other programs divides the few great players who have skill/confidence/non-stop motor, but I as a coach would much rather have players who are ranked a bit lower but have a high work ethic and are a bit nasty (in a good way - hate to lose at anything).
 
I'd prefer a series of games similar to those of the "Breanna Stewart" era. Games where we had 5 solid starters (and a serviceable bench) that were completely in sync, and could all score. Games where they clamped down on the defensive end of the court. Games that made their opponents earn every point it got. No freebies or easy baskets.

Games that they out rebound their opponent 2-1, and have 25+ assists. Games where the opponent goes to the line less than 10 times, and shoots less than 20% from the arc. Games that featured 6-10 fast-break layups. Games where our defense would turn you over at least 12+ times. Games that the opposition didn't dare drive the lane, because they had become "gun-shy". :eek: Games where the outcome was pretty much known BEFORE the tip. The only question was what would be the MOV?

Games that took ALL of the fight out of their opponents by the middle of the second quarter, and had the opposition lose their legs, wheezing, bending over and grabbing their shorts by halftime. Games that had the opposing coaches bewildered:

1579381860337.png


Games where there was no need for Geno to pace the sidelines and bark out instructions, he could just sit back, relax and eat popcorn. Games against the top ranked teams that UConn DOMINATES in EVERY phase of the game, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that IF they (the other teams) made it to the FF, they'd being playing for 2nd place.

Those are the kinds of games I'd like to see. Throw-back games of the old days. Is that too much to wish for? :rolleyes: (Did I leave anything out?) ;)

One more thing, games that make top 10 recruits (every year) want to commit to UConn (early) and be part of it’s family and tradition, along with (of course) winning multiple national championships. Duh.
 
Last edited:
The deep bench of the Stewart era is a myth. 2014 season vs Stanford early in the season. A 19 point UConn win but at the loss of a starter as Ogwumike knocks KML to the floor on her elbow and after the game Tuck is out with a bad knee. UConn travels to MD and beats No 5 by 17 or so and then repeats that at No 13 Penn St. And they do it with 7 players suited up.
It was Stewart who addressed the student body looking for 2 walk-ons.
 
CocoHusky said:
I might be in the minority here but I really really like these UCONN WBB blowouts especially when the team is playing on the road.
Expand ...
The term "blowout" may be a thing of the past with this current team.:rolleyes:
 
.-.
Alydar said:
The deep bench of the Stewart era is a myth. 2014 season vs Stanford early in the season. A 19 point UConn win but at the loss of a starter as Ogwumike knocks KML to the floor on her elbow and after the game Tuck is out with a bad knee. UConn travels to MD and beats No 5 by 17 or so and then repeats that at No 13 Penn St. And they do it with 7 players suited up.
It was Stewart who addressed the student body looking for 2 walk-ons.
Expand ...
The deep bench of the Stewart era was definitely not a myth as compared to any of the post- Stewart era UCONN teams. Using your own example of the 2013-14 Team KML would miss only 8 games during that season while Tuck would miss the majority of the season. Tuck was technically not a starter therefore she was part of that depth that would also include Banks, Stokes, & Chong. This was arguably UCONN’s deepest team in numbers and variety because each starter had an adequate backup.
 
donalddoowop said:
The term "blowout" may be a thing of the past with this current team.:rolleyes:
Expand ...
If I define blowout to be a win by more than 30 points then this team has had 5 blowouts so far this year. Last year at this same time there were 9 blows. This season Temple was a 29 pt win and Wichita State was a 28 point win so I’m not exactly starving for blowouts.
 
I'd like to see a comfortable 20 point lead at half time and not lose it in the Third Quarter. Then I like to see Geno substitute liberally in the later half of the third and fourth quarter so all player get 7-10 minutes of playing time. I think the Starters need to see significant playing time for conditioning and basketball skills. I would also like to see Evelyn Adebayo become a more productive player as she's a big body the team needs. If that's not to happen, then I hope Batouly Camera is fully healthy and she provides the rebounding the team could use.
 
huskeynut said:
But a little history people. UConn's first NCAA tournament appearance was 1989. First final four appearance was 1991. UConn has appeared in every tournament since 1989. 20 final four appearances, 12 in a row. 11 national championships, 18 Big East tournment championships. 6 AAC tournament championships. Outside of maybe Tennessee, no other team has such an impressive record. I don't see any of the present highly ranked teams running such a record. Do you?
Expand ...

No need for the qualifier. UConn has the most impressive record in WCBB history. Period. And it’s not particularly close.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,516
Messages
4,580,028
Members
10,489
Latest member
smAAAll


Top Bottom