Do you care as much as Auriemma thinks you do? (1 Viewer)

[General Tso]

My reference to sexism was warranted. Here is what I said, "Probably rooted in a little bit of repressed sexism."

Here is what I was responding to (among other things): "10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles."

It's one thing to say nobody cares about women's bball. I agree with this. It's another thing to say the women's game is not as pleasing to watch. I disagree with this but can totally understand why someone feels this way. It's also perfectly fine to say Geno is a blowhard.

But to denigrate 10 Championships just because it is women's sports? That just seems over the top.

It seems that you're the one reading the sexism into this No one said, that I can see, that it was because it was women's sports. It certainly wasn't said in the "10 women's titles....." comment. You just assumed that's what was meant.

What about women's basketball is fundamentally different from men's basketball, other than the fact that it's played by women?

 

[Tom Servo]

My reference to sexism was warranted. Here is what I said, "Probably rooted in a little bit of repressed sexism."

Here is what I was responding to (among other things): "10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles."

It's one thing to say nobody cares about women's bball. I agree with this. It's another thing to say the women's game is not as pleasing to watch. I disagree with this but can totally understand why someone feels this way. It's also perfectly fine to say Geno is a blowhard.

But to denigrate 10 Championships just because it is women's sports? That just seems over the top.

It seems that you're the one reading the sexism into this No one said, that I can see, that it was because it was women's sports. It certainly wasn't said in the "10 women's titles....." comment. You just assumed that's what was meant.

What about women's basketball is fundamentally different from men's basketball, other than the fact that it's played by women?

Other than bad fundamentals and skills that don't match the level of the men's game?

 

[Raider Nation]

It's apples and oranges. There are hundreds of good players in the men's game and the recruiting battle is fierce. There are a handful of excellent players in the women's game, and Geno gets most of them. Comparing his ten titles to Wooden's ten titles is like a 10-time World Badminton champion saying he just tied a jockey who won the Kentucky Derby 10 times. It doesn't compute.

 

[General Tso]

There are a handful of excellent players in the women's game, and Geno gets most of them.

You keep saying this but it's not accurate. Geno has gotten 4 of the top 10 recruits the last 6 years. Kentucky men's team has gotten 14. There has been much more hoarding of elite talent in the men's game - at least with Kentucky.You are correct that the talent level drops off sooner and more dramatically in the women's game. But the top tier programs (UConn, Notre Dame, Tennessee, Baylor, Rutgers, Stanford) all have the same access to the elite talent. And if you look at the recruiting the last 6 years there is no heavy advantage to UConn. Fact is, they just do it better than everyone else. I'm not crazy about the women's game, but I appreciate excellence when I see it.

 

[Raider Nation]

There are a handful of excellent players in the women's game, and Geno gets most of them.

You keep saying this but it's not accurate.

This is the first time I've said that.

 

[General Tso]

There are a handful of excellent players in the women's game, and Geno gets most of them.

You keep saying this but it's not accurate.

This is the first time I've said that.

Sorry, it was TLEF who said that.

 

[The Commish]

My reference to sexism was warranted. Here is what I said, "Probably rooted in a little bit of repressed sexism."

Here is what I was responding to (among other things): "10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles."

It's one thing to say nobody cares about women's bball. I agree with this. It's another thing to say the women's game is not as pleasing to watch. I disagree with this but can totally understand why someone feels this way. It's also perfectly fine to say Geno is a blowhard.

But to denigrate 10 Championships just because it is women's sports? That just seems over the top.

It seems that you're the one reading the sexism into this No one said, that I can see, that it was because it was women's sports. It certainly wasn't said in the "10 women's titles....." comment. You just assumed that's what was meant.

What about women's basketball is fundamentally different from men's basketball, other than the fact that it's played by women?

There's plenty different. We can start with the quantity of gifted athletes if you want and then move on to fundamentals. We can even get into the rules differences if you like or the "one and done" affect. The list can go on and on. Take your pick.

 

[General Tso]

My reference to sexism was warranted. Here is what I said, "Probably rooted in a little bit of repressed sexism."

Here is what I was responding to (among other things): "10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles."

It's one thing to say nobody cares about women's bball. I agree with this. It's another thing to say the women's game is not as pleasing to watch. I disagree with this but can totally understand why someone feels this way. It's also perfectly fine to say Geno is a blowhard.

But to denigrate 10 Championships just because it is women's sports? That just seems over the top.

It seems that you're the one reading the sexism into this No one said, that I can see, that it was because it was women's sports. It certainly wasn't said in the "10 women's titles....." comment. You just assumed that's what was meant.

What about women's basketball is fundamentally different from men's basketball, other than the fact that it's played by women?

There's plenty different. We can start with the quantity of gifted athletes if you want and then move on to fundamentals. We can even get into the rules differences if you like or the "one and done" affect. The list can go on and on. Take your pick.

How about we focus on the differences between the games that would justify the statement that 10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles?

 

[Jack White]

My reference to sexism was warranted. Here is what I said, "Probably rooted in a little bit of repressed sexism."

Here is what I was responding to (among other things): "10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles."

It's one thing to say nobody cares about women's bball. I agree with this. It's another thing to say the women's game is not as pleasing to watch. I disagree with this but can totally understand why someone feels this way. It's also perfectly fine to say Geno is a blowhard.

But to denigrate 10 Championships just because it is women's sports? That just seems over the top.

It seems that you're the one reading the sexism into this No one said, that I can see, that it was because it was women's sports. It certainly wasn't said in the "10 women's titles....." comment. You just assumed that's what was meant.

What about women's basketball is fundamentally different from men's basketball, other than the fact that it's played by women?

There's plenty different. We can start with the quantity of gifted athletes if you want and then move on to fundamentals. We can even get into the rules differences if you like or the "one and done" affect. The list can go on and on. Take your pick.

How about we focus on the differences between the games that would justify the statement that 10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles?

There's no need to compare these things.

Women's basketball is a different sport from men's basketball.

Why isn't it enough to say Geno has dominated his sport like no other coach has . . . without comparing him to Wooden and Sha-CHEF-ski?

 

[The Commish]

My reference to sexism was warranted. Here is what I said, "Probably rooted in a little bit of repressed sexism."

Here is what I was responding to (among other things): "10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles."

It's one thing to say nobody cares about women's bball. I agree with this. It's another thing to say the women's game is not as pleasing to watch. I disagree with this but can totally understand why someone feels this way. It's also perfectly fine to say Geno is a blowhard.

But to denigrate 10 Championships just because it is women's sports? That just seems over the top.

It seems that you're the one reading the sexism into this No one said, that I can see, that it was because it was women's sports. It certainly wasn't said in the "10 women's titles....." comment. You just assumed that's what was meant.

What about women's basketball is fundamentally different from men's basketball, other than the fact that it's played by women?

There's plenty different. We can start with the quantity of gifted athletes if you want and then move on to fundamentals. We can even get into the rules differences if you like or the "one and done" affect. The list can go on and on. Take your pick.

How about we focus on the differences between the games that would justify the statement that 10 women's titles is worth roughly 1.5 men's titles?

I'll go down this path with you (even though it wasn't my comment) if you can tell me why it's necessary to compare them at all? Personally, I don't believe they are similar enough to warrant the comparison. Other than some of the rules being similar, it's really not apples to apples comparison IMO.

 

[General Tso]

Eh, we don't have to. I was only responding to the negative comments about Geno's accomplishment. Hopefully I've made my point by now. I don't think it is on par with Wooden's 10 titles, but it's pretty damn close. I get it that people don't like women's hoops. But I just think it's nuts to dismiss UConn's dynasty just because there aren't penises involved. Geno may be a blowhard, but it is no accident what he's done. He knows how to lead women, which is a rare talent and one that many of us would probably do well to learn from.

 

[EYLive]

People dismiss UConn's dominance because it's in a low level league. Nobody cares when Toby Chang's team wins the local YMCA tournament.

 

[Parrothead]

we need a "Would UConn beat a WNBA team" thread..

 

[The Commish]

Eh, we don't have to. I was only responding to the negative comments about Geno's accomplishment. Hopefully I've made my point by now. I don't think it is on par with Wooden's 10 titles, but it's pretty damn close. I get it that people don't like women's hoops. But I just think it's nuts to dismiss UConn's dynasty just because there aren't penises involved. Geno may be a blowhard, but it is no accident what he's done. He knows how to lead women, which is a rare talent and one that many of us would probably do well to learn from.

Few would disagree with you. That's why I don't understand why you keep going back to this narrative when no one has said such. As I said before, we could go down the path if you like, but I don't understand why you'd want to. Even though based on your comments, you seem like you want to.

 

[General Tso]

Eh, we don't have to. I was only responding to the negative comments about Geno's accomplishment. Hopefully I've made my point by now. I don't think it is on par with Wooden's 10 titles, but it's pretty damn close. I get it that people don't like women's hoops. But I just think it's nuts to dismiss UConn's dynasty just because there aren't penises involved. Geno may be a blowhard, but it is no accident what he's done. He knows how to lead women, which is a rare talent and one that many of us would probably do well to learn from.

Few would disagree with you. That's why I don't understand why you keep going back to this narrative when no one has said such.

Post # 108.

 

[The Commish]

Eh, we don't have to. I was only responding to the negative comments about Geno's accomplishment. Hopefully I've made my point by now. I don't think it is on par with Wooden's 10 titles, but it's pretty damn close. I get it that people don't like women's hoops. But I just think it's nuts to dismiss UConn's dynasty just because there aren't penises involved. Geno may be a blowhard, but it is no accident what he's done. He knows how to lead women, which is a rare talent and one that many of us would probably do well to learn from.

Few would disagree with you. That's why I don't understand why you keep going back to this narrative when no one has said such.

Post # 108.

Missed it

It's one comment though, so we should probably give it the attention it requires.

 

[General Tso]

No big deal. I like RN and I get a kick out of all this. I used to live right around the corner from Geno so I feel this weird sense of loyalty to the guy. I'm normally not such a wet blanket.

 

[Jack White]

Eh, we don't have to. I was only responding to the negative comments about Geno's accomplishment. Hopefully I've made my point by now. I don't think it is on par with Wooden's 10 titles, but it's pretty damn close. I get it that people don't like women's hoops. But I just think it's nuts to dismiss UConn's dynasty just because there aren't penises involved. Geno may be a blowhard, but it is no accident what he's done. He knows how to lead women, which is a rare talent and one that many of us would probably do well to learn from.

It's not close to Wooden, not at all. C'mon.

 

[General Tso]

Great article comparing the relative accomplishments of Wooden and Auriemma. http://sports.cbslocal.com/2015/04/08/is-geno-auriemma-in-the-same-league-as-john-wooden/

Connecticut head coach Geno Auriemma won his 10th national title (3rd straight) last night with a 63-53 victory over Notre Dame. The 10 titles ties him in college basketball history with legendary UCLA mens basketball coach John Wooden.

That of course begs the question: Does Geno belong in the same conversation as The Wizard of Westwood?

Let me first start by stating the obvious. Mens and womens basketball are two entirely different games. Aside from the obvious gender difference, the styles of play between the two games are completely different. Womens basketball tends to be more fundamentally sound and played below the rim (not a slight, just an observation). Mens basketball players techniques may not be the greatest but their overwhelming athleticism can often overcome some fundamental flaws. That isnt to say womens basketball players arent incredibly well tuned athletes, they are.

With that said, this conversation cant directly correlate, but we can try. First, one of the main complaints you hear about womens basketball is that its always the same teams that win. Thats true. Since 1982, only 14 teams have won a national championship. That said, in the span of Woodens career at UCLA (1948-1975) there were 14 teams that won titles (including Woodens 10). So thats 14 teams in 27 years. If you extend it out 6 more years to get to the 33 we included in the womens game its only 17 teams that won a title at least once. The mens game was just as top heavy in this period.

We glorify the mens game today for the parity that is involved. Thats certainly true for the early rounds of the tournament when we see more upsets year-over-year from mid major teams. But overall, in the history of the mens NCAA championship since 1939 only 35 teams have won a national championship. So overall, the parity isnt as great as it would seem to be. There are programs that are perennial national title contenders and have been for a long time.

Why mention this? Its the main criticism you hear about womens basketball: No one new wins. Top high school players only want to go to certain schools. I could make the same argument for the mens game. Top recruits are always considering the Kentuckys, Dukes, Arizonas, UCLAs, etc.

The difference is, we glorify Wooden (rightfully so) for being able to consistently get the best players and for his ability to adapt to the changes in the game as they came. Geno doesnt get the same credit. Girls only want to go there. Well doesnt Geno, like Wooden, deserve credit for building a program that consistently attracts the top players?

Im not denying Woodens greatness but when he was in the midst of that dominant run he had two of the top college basketball players ever to play the sport. Bill Walton and Lew Alcindor (aka Kareem Abdul Jabar). Its not as if he won 10 titles with severely under talented teams. He had the same dominant level of talent and ability that Geno has had.

Thats not a knock against Coach Wooden or his ability to coach. Its more meant to say that he had the same advantages Coach Auriemma has in the womens game today.

Now, the 10 titles for UCLA and Coach Wooden came in a span of 12 seasons. Thats ridiculous. You cant match that. So, no 10 championships for Geno doesnt mean hes on the same level because no one is on that level.

However, Coach Auriemma has won his 10 in 20 years. But in that stretch, his teams eclipsed Woodens teams for most consecutive wins (90 wins in a row from 2008-2011 as opposed to UCLAs 88 from 71-74). UConn was just as dominant in the womens game over that stretch as UCLA was on the mens side.

Overall coaching records are similar as well. Wooden was 664-162 (.804) in his 29 seasons between Indiana State and UCLA. Auriemma is 916-134 (.872) in 29 seasons all at UConn. The wins are inflated for Auriemma because of the longer schedule I know. On average teams play about 10 more games per season than they did when Wooden was coaching.

Im not saying that Geno Auriemma is better than John Wooden. This isnt meant to do that. But this is meant to at least give the man credit for what hes been able to do and bring to light the hypocrisy of the way we look at mens basketball in Woodens time vs. womens basketball now. Judging by how dominant only a few teams have been in each of those time periods, the numbers are more comparable than you might have realized.

 

[EYLive]

Levi Shaminsky's crew dominated the Jewish Alliance League for 2 decades. Where's his article?

 

[nirad3]

we need a "Would UConn beat a WNBA team" thread..

Dan Patrick asked him this the other morning and he said that his team from a few years back would probably have made the WBNA playoffs or something like that.

 

[Jack White]

Why do all the apostrophes drop out when you paste in here?

Coach Woodens would be aghast.

 

[GoFishTN]

Eh, we don't have to. I was only responding to the negative comments about Geno's accomplishment. Hopefully I've made my point by now. I don't think it is on par with Wooden's 10 titles, but it's pretty damn close. I get it that people don't like women's hoops. But I just think it's nuts to dismiss UConn's dynasty just because there aren't penises involved. Geno may be a blowhard, but it is no accident what he's done. He knows how to lead women, which is a rare talent and one that many of us would probably do well to learn from.

You have seen some of these "girls", right?

 

[flapgreen]

Ironic that Geno sees it that way when most of the women's tournament games are blowouts and tge same handful of teams win it every year. He's blinded by jealousy.

 

[tdoss]

Independence High School (Charlotte, NC) has the record for public school football win streak with 109 straight wins without a loss.

Does anyone give a crap? Do many outside of Charlotte even know...hell, do people in Charlotte even know?

It's just like last year, when Wichita State entered the NCAA tournament with a perfect 34-0 record,

How many on this board had Wichita State winning the tournament or even respected their #1 seeding in the brackets?

Not many...why? Because they play against weak @zz competition in that craptastic conference.

Any year, there are probably 4-10 teams that could win it all in the men's bracket.

In women's, every year...it's what...3-4 max...if you're being generous?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

In women's, every year...it's what...3-4 max...if you're being generous?

Dayton made the elite eight as a 7 seed in the women's tourney this year and that was tied for the 2nd lowest seed to EVER reach the elite eight. Meanwhile in the men's game, seven #11 seeds have made the elite 8 in the same time span and countless others between 7-10 have made it as well.

The lowest seed to ever win it all in the women's game is a 3 seed. The lowest in the men's game is an 8 seed.

It's obviously very different and there is a ton less parity in the women's game. To be fair though, John Wooden benefitted from the same. The modern game is very different than the one he coached so citing a bunch of modern statistics and differences to the women's game isn't necessarily fair.

 

[TLEF316]

There are a handful of excellent players in the women's game, and Geno gets most of them.

You keep saying this but it's not accurate.

This is the first time I've said that.

Sorry, it was TLEF who said that.

You keep harping on the fact that he isn't getting top 10 recruits every single year but miss out on a very key factor (that distinguishes it from the men's game). 99.999999% of women's basketball players stay all 4 years.

The UCONN starting 5 in the title game this year consisted of.... (god I hate that I'm doing research on women's basketball....)

Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis- #1 recruit in class of 2011

Breanna Stewart- # 1 recruit in class of 2012

Moriah Jefferson- #2 recruit in class of 2012

Morgan Tuck- # 6 recruit in class of 2012

Kia Nurse- # 33 in class of 2014

So they have one starter who isn't an upperclassman ranked in the top 6 of her class (and she's Canadian, so there's a good chance she was underranked due to lack of exposure)

The lack of physicality and pace of the women's game means you can get by with a thinner rotation (especially when you have 4 top 6 ranked juniors and seniors in the line up). No top 10 PF is going to commit to UCONN knowing they have to sit behind stewart or Mosqueda Lewis for 3 years. But that doesn't matter, because Stewart is better than anyone else he can get.

So no, Geno doesn't have a roster of 15 top 10 recruits, but he has the best roster in the country every single year (other than the rarity of a freak like that chick from Baylor a few years ago)

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I'm not going to compare Geno to wooden but how many of you Wooden experts were even alive and knew the game and advantages he had back then?

 

[The Commish]

Great article comparing the relative accomplishments of Wooden and Auriemma. http://sports.cbslocal.com/2015/04/08/is-geno-auriemma-in-the-same-league-as-john-wooden/

Connecticut head coach Geno Auriemma won his 10th national title (3rd straight) last night with a 63-53 victory over Notre Dame. The 10 titles ties him in college basketball history with legendary UCLA mens basketball coach John Wooden.

That of course begs the question: Does Geno belong in the same conversation as The Wizard of Westwood?

Let me first start by stating the obvious. Mens and womens basketball are two entirely different games. Aside from the obvious gender difference, the styles of play between the two games are completely different. Womens basketball tends to be more fundamentally sound and played below the rim (not a slight, just an observation). Mens basketball players techniques may not be the greatest but their overwhelming athleticism can often overcome some fundamental flaws. That isnt to say womens basketball players arent incredibly well tuned athletes, they are.

With that said, this conversation cant directly correlate, but we can try. First, one of the main complaints you hear about womens basketball is that its always the same teams that win. Thats true. Since 1982, only 14 teams have won a national championship. That said, in the span of Woodens career at UCLA (1948-1975) there were 14 teams that won titles (including Woodens 10). So thats 14 teams in 27 years. If you extend it out 6 more years to get to the 33 we included in the womens game its only 17 teams that won a title at least once. The mens game was just as top heavy in this period.

We glorify the mens game today for the parity that is involved. Thats certainly true for the early rounds of the tournament when we see more upsets year-over-year from mid major teams. But overall, in the history of the mens NCAA championship since 1939 only 35 teams have won a national championship. So overall, the parity isnt as great as it would seem to be. There are programs that are perennial national title contenders and have been for a long time.

Why mention this? Its the main criticism you hear about womens basketball: No one new wins. Top high school players only want to go to certain schools. I could make the same argument for the mens game. Top recruits are always considering the Kentuckys, Dukes, Arizonas, UCLAs, etc.

The difference is, we glorify Wooden (rightfully so) for being able to consistently get the best players and for his ability to adapt to the changes in the game as they came. Geno doesnt get the same credit. Girls only want to go there. Well doesnt Geno, like Wooden, deserve credit for building a program that consistently attracts the top players?

Im not denying Woodens greatness but when he was in the midst of that dominant run he had two of the top college basketball players ever to play the sport. Bill Walton and Lew Alcindor (aka Kareem Abdul Jabar). Its not as if he won 10 titles with severely under talented teams. He had the same dominant level of talent and ability that Geno has had.

Thats not a knock against Coach Wooden or his ability to coach. Its more meant to say that he had the same advantages Coach Auriemma has in the womens game today.

Now, the 10 titles for UCLA and Coach Wooden came in a span of 12 seasons. Thats ridiculous. You cant match that. So, no 10 championships for Geno doesnt mean hes on the same level because no one is on that level.

However, Coach Auriemma has won his 10 in 20 years. But in that stretch, his teams eclipsed Woodens teams for most consecutive wins (90 wins in a row from 2008-2011 as opposed to UCLAs 88 from 71-74). UConn was just as dominant in the womens game over that stretch as UCLA was on the mens side.

Overall coaching records are similar as well. Wooden was 664-162 (.804) in his 29 seasons between Indiana State and UCLA. Auriemma is 916-134 (.872) in 29 seasons all at UConn. The wins are inflated for Auriemma because of the longer schedule I know. On average teams play about 10 more games per season than they did when Wooden was coaching.

Im not saying that Geno Auriemma is better than John Wooden. This isnt meant to do that. But this is meant to at least give the man credit for what hes been able to do and bring to light the hypocrisy of the way we look at mens basketball in Woodens time vs. womens basketball now. Judging by how dominant only a few teams have been in each of those time periods, the numbers are more comparable than you might have realized.

"I'm not interested in comparing the two since they are so different, but I'm going to try".