Im just tired of people comparing Geno Auriemma's Conneticut team to John Wooden's UCLA Team

[wallyhopp]

Other sports have some amazing accomplishments, and bottom line, People just dont care. Maybe thats how it is here. They will never get their due because the vast majority won't recognize it as anything special. Maybe theres some ignorance there but many sports, like Womens volleyball where Penn State just won their 4th straight national Title (with two undefeated seasons wedged in between) getting blown off. It's just a whatever moment.

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

On a superficial level I can say that right now this era of womans basketball is akin to the Wooden era in that the dollars as of now are not large enough to warrent women jumping to the professional ranks early.
Thats the same as the 70's in Mens basketball.
I hope for womens basketball this is a sign of things to come because truthfully I enjoy the passion of Womens college basketball more than I enjoy the grind of an 82 game season.

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

On a superficial level I can say that right now this era of womans basketball is akin to the Wooden era in that the dollars as of now are not large enough to warrent women jumping to the professional ranks early.
Thats the same as the 70's in Mens basketball.
I hope for womens basketball this is a sign of things to come because truthfully I enjoy the passion of Womens college basketball more than I enjoy the grind of an 82 game season.

 

[truthgetsbusy]

This post is a prime example of most NTers little knowledge of sports....

This streak is amazing because to do something successful 88 times is crazy.  And this is a team sport on a collegiate level.  UCONN has the best talent blah blah blah...so what.  This isn't about them winning championships, this is about them not losing ONE single game.  Thats more than talent on the court thats a program built on winning and intensity from the coach down to the equipment manager.  And whats the point of discussing if they could compete vs men?  That's not the point. 

And for you younger guys NCAA basketball wasn't the same as it is now back in the day.  Back then the top talent went to only a few select schools just like in today's womans game.  So yeah UCLA was stacked too.  Just tip your hat to the ladies. 

 

[truthgetsbusy]

This post is a prime example of most NTers little knowledge of sports....

This streak is amazing because to do something successful 88 times is crazy.  And this is a team sport on a collegiate level.  UCONN has the best talent blah blah blah...so what.  This isn't about them winning championships, this is about them not losing ONE single game.  Thats more than talent on the court thats a program built on winning and intensity from the coach down to the equipment manager.  And whats the point of discussing if they could compete vs men?  That's not the point. 

And for you younger guys NCAA basketball wasn't the same as it is now back in the day.  Back then the top talent went to only a few select schools just like in today's womans game.  So yeah UCLA was stacked too.  Just tip your hat to the ladies. 

 

[sundizzle]

I think the fact that they bring it every game is what is impressive. This is not impressive as a basketball achievement, but rather as an achievement at excellence. It is the reason people get respected for getting a 4.0, even if they took a bunch of easy classes. Effort on a day in and day out basis deserves to get recognized. Of course women's basketball is not that competitive, just like the NCAA was during it's inception, and just like the NBA was during it's start. It'll take a long time, but it will eventually get a lot more competitive. Once the daughters of this generation play sports (actually unlikely, videogames seems more likely).

On the other hand, I understand what the OP is saying. I helped out with a Div 1 powerhouse women's bball team when I was in college...and i absolutely murked em when I played against them. I'm not a big guy by any means, 5'8 155, but I still was easily the most dominant player on the floor even going 75%. If you have two players on a woman's team that are very very good...it's almost damn near impossible for them to lose.

 

[sundizzle]

I think the fact that they bring it every game is what is impressive. This is not impressive as a basketball achievement, but rather as an achievement at excellence. It is the reason people get respected for getting a 4.0, even if they took a bunch of easy classes. Effort on a day in and day out basis deserves to get recognized. Of course women's basketball is not that competitive, just like the NCAA was during it's inception, and just like the NBA was during it's start. It'll take a long time, but it will eventually get a lot more competitive. Once the daughters of this generation play sports (actually unlikely, videogames seems more likely).

On the other hand, I understand what the OP is saying. I helped out with a Div 1 powerhouse women's bball team when I was in college...and i absolutely murked em when I played against them. I'm not a big guy by any means, 5'8 155, but I still was easily the most dominant player on the floor even going 75%. If you have two players on a woman's team that are very very good...it's almost damn near impossible for them to lose.

 

[ricardo malta]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by Nako XL

you're wrong.

college women's basketball has a small turnover as far as players leaving early/coaches coming and going.  for the most part it's been the same group of players beating the same competition over that period of time.

You want to put forth the numbers for this? How many seniors play on each team (on average) as a percentage? The coach turnover (I'm sure it ain't 0) Even small amounts in overall change decrease the likelihood of this sort of winning streak exponentially.

Are we really arguing that an 88 game winning streak is statistically probable barring such factors as garbage competition and extreme positive variance?

I'm no math or stats genius. Maybe you are. Run a  regression. See how probable this is.

uconn hasn't lost since april 2008.  last year's team had 4 seniors.  this year all eligible players returned.  the coaching staff is exactly the same. there are 5 freshman this year, but the the team that went undefeated the past two seasons was exactly the same.

how many underclassmen left d1 basketball to declare for the wnba draft last year?

i never purported to be a statistician, you're the one who introduced the idea of their win streak being a statistical impossibility/anomaly because of all the player and coaching changes, and i'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic: last year's uconn team had 8 upper-classmen. women's players don't leave college early. there really isn't much coaching turnover of note.  the uconn team that dominated last season was the same team that did so the year before, and against the same competition.  of course they kept winning.

if anything it's of note this year since so many under classmen and freshmen are playing for the team.

The last 2 undefeated teams weren't the same.  You think losing Renee Montgomery, the Player of the Year, isn't a big deal?

 

[ricardo malta]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by Nako XL

you're wrong.

college women's basketball has a small turnover as far as players leaving early/coaches coming and going.  for the most part it's been the same group of players beating the same competition over that period of time.

You want to put forth the numbers for this? How many seniors play on each team (on average) as a percentage? The coach turnover (I'm sure it ain't 0) Even small amounts in overall change decrease the likelihood of this sort of winning streak exponentially.

Are we really arguing that an 88 game winning streak is statistically probable barring such factors as garbage competition and extreme positive variance?

I'm no math or stats genius. Maybe you are. Run a  regression. See how probable this is.

uconn hasn't lost since april 2008.  last year's team had 4 seniors.  this year all eligible players returned.  the coaching staff is exactly the same. there are 5 freshman this year, but the the team that went undefeated the past two seasons was exactly the same.

how many underclassmen left d1 basketball to declare for the wnba draft last year?

i never purported to be a statistician, you're the one who introduced the idea of their win streak being a statistical impossibility/anomaly because of all the player and coaching changes, and i'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic: last year's uconn team had 8 upper-classmen. women's players don't leave college early. there really isn't much coaching turnover of note.  the uconn team that dominated last season was the same team that did so the year before, and against the same competition.  of course they kept winning.

if anything it's of note this year since so many under classmen and freshmen are playing for the team.

The last 2 undefeated teams weren't the same.  You think losing Renee Montgomery, the Player of the Year, isn't a big deal?

 

[nako xl]

Originally Posted by Ricardo Malta

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by Nako XL

you're wrong.

college women's basketball has a small turnover as far as players leaving early/coaches coming and going.  for the most part it's been the same group of players beating the same competition over that period of time.

You want to put forth the numbers for this? How many seniors play on each team (on average) as a percentage? The coach turnover (I'm sure it ain't 0) Even small amounts in overall change decrease the likelihood of this sort of winning streak exponentially.

Are we really arguing that an 88 game winning streak is statistically probable barring such factors as garbage competition and extreme positive variance?

I'm no math or stats genius. Maybe you are. Run a  regression. See how probable this is.

uconn hasn't lost since april 2008.  last year's team had 4 seniors.  this year all eligible players returned.  the coaching staff is exactly the same. there are 5 freshman this year, but the the team that went undefeated the past two seasons was exactly the same.

how many underclassmen left d1 basketball to declare for the wnba draft last year?

i never purported to be a statistician, you're the one who introduced the idea of their win streak being a statistical impossibility/anomaly because of all the player and coaching changes, and i'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic: last year's uconn team had 8 upper-classmen. women's players don't leave college early. there really isn't much coaching turnover of note.  the uconn team that dominated last season was the same team that did so the year before, and against the same competition.  of course they kept winning.

if anything it's of note this year since so many under classmen and freshmen are playing for the team.

The last 2 undefeated teams weren't the same.  You think losing Renee Montgomery, the Player of the Year, isn't a big deal?

there were only 3 seniors on that team (renee being one of them) and they had 11 players (5 of which were juniors, and 1 baby mama -- my boo Caroline Doty) return for the next season when they went undefeated again.

if you think i'm arguing what they're doing isn't remarkable because the first two seasons were essentially the same teams, you're mistaken.  i think what they're doing is spectacular.  i'm just saying that the argument that there must be zero competition outside of uconn in women's basketball because different uconn teams keep coming and going undefeated under auriemma, is wrong.  because the first two undefeated teams featured the same 11 players beating up on the same teams that couldn't beat them the year before. it makes sense that they would do more of what they did the season prior.

 

[nako xl]

Originally Posted by Ricardo Malta

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by Nako XL

you're wrong.

college women's basketball has a small turnover as far as players leaving early/coaches coming and going.  for the most part it's been the same group of players beating the same competition over that period of time.

You want to put forth the numbers for this? How many seniors play on each team (on average) as a percentage? The coach turnover (I'm sure it ain't 0) Even small amounts in overall change decrease the likelihood of this sort of winning streak exponentially.

Are we really arguing that an 88 game winning streak is statistically probable barring such factors as garbage competition and extreme positive variance?

I'm no math or stats genius. Maybe you are. Run a  regression. See how probable this is.

uconn hasn't lost since april 2008.  last year's team had 4 seniors.  this year all eligible players returned.  the coaching staff is exactly the same. there are 5 freshman this year, but the the team that went undefeated the past two seasons was exactly the same.

how many underclassmen left d1 basketball to declare for the wnba draft last year?

i never purported to be a statistician, you're the one who introduced the idea of their win streak being a statistical impossibility/anomaly because of all the player and coaching changes, and i'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic: last year's uconn team had 8 upper-classmen. women's players don't leave college early. there really isn't much coaching turnover of note.  the uconn team that dominated last season was the same team that did so the year before, and against the same competition.  of course they kept winning.

if anything it's of note this year since so many under classmen and freshmen are playing for the team.

The last 2 undefeated teams weren't the same.  You think losing Renee Montgomery, the Player of the Year, isn't a big deal?

there were only 3 seniors on that team (renee being one of them) and they had 11 players (5 of which were juniors, and 1 baby mama -- my boo Caroline Doty) return for the next season when they went undefeated again.

if you think i'm arguing what they're doing isn't remarkable because the first two seasons were essentially the same teams, you're mistaken.  i think what they're doing is spectacular.  i'm just saying that the argument that there must be zero competition outside of uconn in women's basketball because different uconn teams keep coming and going undefeated under auriemma, is wrong.  because the first two undefeated teams featured the same 11 players beating up on the same teams that couldn't beat them the year before. it makes sense that they would do more of what they did the season prior.

 

[DownByLaw]

Originally Posted by TruthGetsBusy

This post is a prime example of most NTers little knowledge of sports.... 

Zing!

 

[DownByLaw]

Originally Posted by TruthGetsBusy

This post is a prime example of most NTers little knowledge of sports.... 

Zing!

 

[drop knee 101]

Problem with some people here is that they are trying to discredit something they pretty much know nothing about. 

I'll be the first to tell you that I do not follow women's college hoops closely at all, but upon simple research, I do know one thing now

316-24 since 2001 is

.  I knew they were a winning program but I had no idea to what extent. and to have 88 games in a row through several season is astounding.

A winning percentage of 93% is impressive in ANY DIVISION 1 sport, male or female.

For the people who consider themselves to be sports fans and are are not able to understand  this, it pretty much says that yall don't know what the hell you are watching.   Im not saying you should be in utter disbelief and think  its the best thing that has ever happened in sports, but to try and explain why you think its weak and discredit them? SMH

 

[drop knee 101]

Problem with some people here is that they are trying to discredit something they pretty much know nothing about. 

I'll be the first to tell you that I do not follow women's college hoops closely at all, but upon simple research, I do know one thing now

316-24 since 2001 is

.  I knew they were a winning program but I had no idea to what extent. and to have 88 games in a row through several season is astounding.

A winning percentage of 93% is impressive in ANY DIVISION 1 sport, male or female.

For the people who consider themselves to be sports fans and are are not able to understand  this, it pretty much says that yall don't know what the hell you are watching.   Im not saying you should be in utter disbelief and think  its the best thing that has ever happened in sports, but to try and explain why you think its weak and discredit them? SMH

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by Nako XL

you're wrong.

college women's basketball has a small turnover as far as players leaving early/coaches coming and going.  for the most part it's been the same group of players beating the same competition over that period of time.

You want to put forth the numbers for this? How many seniors play on each team (on average) as a percentage? The coach turnover (I'm sure it ain't 0) Even small amounts in overall change decrease the likelihood of this sort of winning streak exponentially.

Are we really arguing that an 88 game winning streak is statistically probable barring such factors as garbage competition and extreme positive variance?

I'm no math or stats genius. Maybe you are. Run a  regression. See how probable this is.

uconn hasn't lost since april 2008.  last year's team had 4 seniors.  this year all eligible players returned.  the coaching staff is exactly the same. there are 5 freshman this year, but the the team that went undefeated the past two seasons was exactly the same.

how many underclassmen left d1 basketball to declare for the wnba draft last year?

i never purported to be a statistician, you're the one who introduced the idea of their win streak being a statistical impossibility/anomaly because of all the player and coaching changes, and i'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic: last year's uconn team had 8 upper-classmen. women's players don't leave college early. there really isn't much coaching turnover of note.  the uconn team that dominated last season was the same team that did so the year before, and against the same competition.  of course they kept winning.

if anything it's of note this year since so many under classmen and freshmen are playing for the team.

There is no question that winning 88 in a  row is a statistical improbability. That's not debatable. However, improbable things do happen from time to time and what is debatable is the degree to which this streak is improbable.

I'm not saying that it's solely because of variance or lack of competition. Like I stated earlier, it is most likely a result of several factors. Some of the factors are the lack of competition and variance being on their side.

I'll take your word that many underclassmen and freshman are playing this year which lens even more credence to the fact that what they are doing is statistically improbable and has to do with a host of other factors besides their own skill level.

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by Nako XL

you're wrong.

college women's basketball has a small turnover as far as players leaving early/coaches coming and going.  for the most part it's been the same group of players beating the same competition over that period of time.

You want to put forth the numbers for this? How many seniors play on each team (on average) as a percentage? The coach turnover (I'm sure it ain't 0) Even small amounts in overall change decrease the likelihood of this sort of winning streak exponentially.

Are we really arguing that an 88 game winning streak is statistically probable barring such factors as garbage competition and extreme positive variance?

I'm no math or stats genius. Maybe you are. Run a  regression. See how probable this is.

uconn hasn't lost since april 2008.  last year's team had 4 seniors.  this year all eligible players returned.  the coaching staff is exactly the same. there are 5 freshman this year, but the the team that went undefeated the past two seasons was exactly the same.

how many underclassmen left d1 basketball to declare for the wnba draft last year?

i never purported to be a statistician, you're the one who introduced the idea of their win streak being a statistical impossibility/anomaly because of all the player and coaching changes, and i'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic: last year's uconn team had 8 upper-classmen. women's players don't leave college early. there really isn't much coaching turnover of note.  the uconn team that dominated last season was the same team that did so the year before, and against the same competition.  of course they kept winning.

if anything it's of note this year since so many under classmen and freshmen are playing for the team.

There is no question that winning 88 in a  row is a statistical improbability. That's not debatable. However, improbable things do happen from time to time and what is debatable is the degree to which this streak is improbable.

I'm not saying that it's solely because of variance or lack of competition. Like I stated earlier, it is most likely a result of several factors. Some of the factors are the lack of competition and variance being on their side.

I'll take your word that many underclassmen and freshman are playing this year which lens even more credence to the fact that what they are doing is statistically improbable and has to do with a host of other factors besides their own skill level.

 

[heliumclinton]

There is only lack of competition when they are playing UConn that's the point

the rest of women college ball for the most part is competitive

UConn is dominant that's it. To not lose ONE game out of 88? Just give credit where credit is due

 

[heliumclinton]

There is only lack of competition when they are playing UConn that's the point

the rest of women college ball for the most part is competitive

UConn is dominant that's it. To not lose ONE game out of 88? Just give credit where credit is due

 

[doublejs07]

Watching OTL etc., and people are LEGITIMATELY pissed that the Women are gonna break this record.

1. Many of the women's analysts are defending the game and the legitimacy of what is potentially going to be accomplished tonight.

2. Folks are sad about Wooden's passing and that his record is going to fall in the same year. On top of it all, the nay-sayers are arguing that the womens game has little-to-no parity

this is gonna be ugly, and this record by UConn will not really be appreciated IMO.

 

[doublejs07]

Watching OTL etc., and people are LEGITIMATELY pissed that the Women are gonna break this record.

1. Many of the women's analysts are defending the game and the legitimacy of what is potentially going to be accomplished tonight.

2. Folks are sad about Wooden's passing and that his record is going to fall in the same year. On top of it all, the nay-sayers are arguing that the womens game has little-to-no parity

this is gonna be ugly, and this record by UConn will not really be appreciated IMO.

 

[drop knee 101]

they are replaying the baylor/uconn game right now on espn U, for those of u who wanna get a glimpse of two of the best teams this year

 

[drop knee 101]

they are replaying the baylor/uconn game right now on espn U, for those of u who wanna get a glimpse of two of the best teams this year

 

[shuges]

Originally Posted by TruthGetsBusy

This post is a prime example of most NTers little knowledge of sports....

This streak is amazing because to do something successful 88 times is crazy.  And this is a team sport on a collegiate level.  UCONN has the best talent blah blah blah...so what.  This isn't about them winning championships, this is about them not losing ONE single game.  Thats more than talent on the court thats a program built on winning and intensity from the coach down to the equipment manager.  And whats the point of discussing if they could compete vs men?  That's not the point. 

And for you younger guys NCAA basketball wasn't the same as it is now back in the day.  Back then the top talent went to only a few select schools just like in today's womans game.  So yeah UCLA was stacked too.  Just tip your hat to the ladies. 

 

[shuges]

Originally Posted by TruthGetsBusy

This post is a prime example of most NTers little knowledge of sports....

This streak is amazing because to do something successful 88 times is crazy.  And this is a team sport on a collegiate level.  UCONN has the best talent blah blah blah...so what.  This isn't about them winning championships, this is about them not losing ONE single game.  Thats more than talent on the court thats a program built on winning and intensity from the coach down to the equipment manager.  And whats the point of discussing if they could compete vs men?  That's not the point. 

And for you younger guys NCAA basketball wasn't the same as it is now back in the day.  Back then the top talent went to only a few select schools just like in today's womans game.  So yeah UCLA was stacked too.  Just tip your hat to the ladies.