So this thread actually deals with three subjects, each of which could have its own thread:
1. The behavior of BYers who call other teams juvenile names, pick on players from other teams, and criticize UConn's coaches when things go wrong.
2. BYers who launch personal attacks or are overly snarky toward other BYers.
3. Those who descend into a pit of despair when the team loses a game and think the sky has fallen.
So what follows is a mixture of reactions to these three points, in no particular order and most likely scrambled together in spots.
I know what VolNation is, and have heard about it, but have never experienced it, so it is hard for me to believe that this board, even at its most stressed, is anything like that.
It's always hard to determine -- at least it is for me -- where normal high spiritedness ends and bad behavior begins. Maybe I've just gotten used to all these awful things people see here, but the tone of the board does not seem all that bad. I think it's normal to expect a certain level of snark when it comes to references to teams that are long-time rivals. It seems reasonable that on a board whose members dissect all things WCBB there would be second-guessing of some of what the coach does.
I'm sorry, but,the suggestion raised earlier that all the people who criticize the coaching want to be coaches themselves is just dumb. No, they don't want to be coaches themselves. Most recognize they are amateurs benefiting from hindsight and criticizing the actions of professionals -- in this case, very good ones. But don't they have a right to do so? I may think Geno should have switched defenses earlier in the game, say, and if I do, shouldn't I have the right to say that? I thought that ona sports board, discussions of "what-ifs" is what makes at least some of the world go around.
If I may make a suggestion, if someone thinks a BYer has gotten too personal with an attack on another poster, or is engaging in inappropriate name-calling when it comes to another team or worse yet, a particular player, raise that issue on the board in response to the post. Perhaps others will agree and perhaps the offending party will take the hint.
Posts that say the sky is falling after UConn loses a game are, yes, unrealistic, but are an accurate reflection of the feelings and loyalties of a fan base that cares deeply about its team and what happens to it. I, for example, have a really bad feeling about the future of the team next year because of what I perceive as a vacuum at center. Oh, I know UConn will win more than it's share of games, but it seems to me the lack of an experienced big will become problematic pretty quickly. Should I bring that subject to the board at a time when the general atmosphere ranges from dejection to despair? I'm thinkin' no.
But when someone is dejected or despairing, the way the fix the problem is not to say, in effect: "You know the way you are right now? Don't be that way." Which, in many ways, is what this thread is all about, IMHO.
On, and one other thing that I just have to say in response to the OP. People on other boards are making fun of the Boneyard because of its members' reaction to a UConn loss? And we should care why? This is one BYer who cares about this board and its people and does not give a damn whether people elsewhere think UConn fans overreact to things (which they do). As far as I'm concerned, if those other folks get some entertainment value from what we say, they must really be scratching for entertainment.
Does the persistent attitude that UConn should win everything all the time translate into arrogance? It does, sometimes. But if that is a true reflection of people's feelings (and most would acknowledge that those feelings are unrealistic), then (to quote the most overused and least meaningful cliche in the world), it is what it is. That is, truthfully, how people feel. I suspect they will get over it and just need to talk about it a little. Again, isn't that part of what the board is for?
As for personal comments against others, we had this back-and-forth a few weeks ago on the subject. As I recall, one particularly emotional exchange was being cited as an example of bad behavior. But when we all went back and looked at the exchange of posts, only one thing that the person had said could really be considered aggressive and in-your-face.
It seems likely that the moderators here see a great deal more than the rest of us and tamp down the worst of it, which is completely appropriate. They do a great job, from what I can see. But what they see ("overweening arrogance") and what we see may be two different things. Just a thought.
