The UConn Women lost - Streak ends at 90 | Page 2 | WrestleZone Forums

The UConn Women lost - Streak ends at 90

I don't know if the quality of opponent was up to par, but I don't really complain about it. They had a great streak, big ups to them.
 
1. It sounds mean, but Condoleeza Rice is a very unattractive person.

2. How is it possible that UConn hasn't played Tennessee in this streak? That's rather surprising.
 
Holy crap, I feel like I just witnessed a piece of sports history.

Auriemma is behaving, good for him.

Side not: It looks like Condalisa brought the girl that she stood next to at parties to make her look more attractive to the game. God damn.
 
I don't know if the quality of opponent was up to par, but I don't really complain about it. They had a great streak, big ups to them.

And the quality of opponents UCLA played was up to par? Based on what, because they were guys?


UCLA probably had more of an advantage than UConn does now. Besides the fact UConn won more games, they also deal with much stricter recruiting rules, greater communication and technology, more competitive recruiting, and far more variety in basketball styles.

The ONLY reason people want to say UConn's streak wasn't as impressive is because they are girls. And that's just ridiculous.
 
Stanford matches up with UConn better than any other team in the country across the board. That's why they ended up beating a damn good UConn team.

This UConn team was beating great teams by 30-40 pts. NOW... let's see them lose at home. To say you beat this UConn team at home... that would be something any team could hang their hat on.
 
And the quality of opponents UCLA played was up to par? Based on what, because they were guys?


UCLA probably had more of an advantage than UConn does now. Besides the fact UConn won more games, they also deal with much stricter recruiting rules, greater communication and technology, more competitive recruiting, and far more variety in basketball styles.

The ONLY reason people want to say UConn's streak wasn't as impressive is because they are girls. And that's just ridiculous.

It is impressive, no doubt. At the same time though, can you even really compare the two? I mean, they're vastly different streaks.
 
It's not like it's UConn's men beating a bunch of women's teams, it's UConn's women. How are they "pretty different"?

You're making yourself look sexist.

I think men are more athletic, it's a big difference. They're more physical, too. Do you think a woman could play against men and do the same she had been doing to the women?
 
I think men are more athletic, it's a big difference. They're more physical, too. Do you think a woman could play against men and do the same she had been doing to the women?

Do you think if UCLA had played the Lakers or the Celtics during their win streak they would have won 88 in a row?


That doesn't make sense. Like I said, it wasn't UConn's men that were playing women, it was women playing women. It's an even playing field, UConn was just much better.
 
How are they vastly different?

It's because it's men vs women. He just doesn't want to say it.

But UConn's streak is much more impressive. They've won all but two games during the streak by more than 10 points, they've beaten TOP 5 teams by 20-30 points. We're talking Baylor at 2, Ohio State was in the top 10, and so was Duke, North Carolina, Texas and other big name women's programs. They've handled them like nothing.

UCLA had many, MANY close games during their streak, but their discipline helped them win those games. Consistency is the key to a streak and those teams were consistent in their play. Every highlight you see from UConn is the same highlight, just playing a different team. Think about that.
 
The [OFFICIAL] ScreaminNormanSmiley;2713890 said:
Because the UCLA had that streak in the middle of a nine year straight championship run. In the end the tournament is all that matters and UCLA had an overall longer period of domination.

That has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Streak though. But since we're on the topic, UConn has won 6 national titles since 2000, and they look poised to win many more.
 
How are they vastly different?

The times are really different, UCLA's streak was was 40 years ago. The sports are different. I mean, Men's and Women's basketball are different. Like I said, men are more athletic, the game is more physical, different court measurements, different timing, different ball sizes, etc.

Slyfox696 said:
Do you think if UCLA had played the Lakers or the Celtics during their win streak they would have won 88 in a row?

You got me there.

That doesn't make sense. Like I said, it wasn't UConn's men that were playing women, it was women playing women. It's an even playing field, UConn was just much better.

They're two different playing fields, that's why there is a record for MEN and one for WOMEN.
 
That has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Streak though. But since we're on the topic, UConn has won 6 national titles since 2000, and they look poised to win many more.

They probably will win many more. The only team I can see beating them is the team that beat them tonight, and Geno certainly won't let that happen again.
 
It's because it's men vs women. He just doesn't want to say it.
Because he knows how sexist it'll make him look.

But UConn's streak is much more impressive. They've won all but two games during the streak by more than 10 points, they've beaten TOP 5 teams by 20-30 points. We're talking Baylor at 2, Ohio State was in the top 10, and so was Duke, North Carolina, Texas and other big name women's programs. They've handled them like nothing.

UCLA had many, MANY close games during their streak, but their discipline helped them win those games. Consistency is the key to a streak and those teams were consistent in their play. Every highlight you see from UConn is the same highlight, just playing a different team. Think about that.
The other thing people don't think about is the game is SOO different today than it used to be. Crock keeps talking about athleticism, but the game wasn't dictated by athleticism when UCLA was on their streak. You couldn't carry the ball like they do today, you couldn't make body contact with the dribbler, you couldn't go over the back...officiating was much tighter. Furthermore, you didn't have the Internet to recruit (which means big name school automatically attracted top talent), the NCAA Tournament was by invite only and/or was a much smaller field (meaning if you wanted a championship, you had to go to a big college) and college sports didn't have the national television exposure they do now. Additionally, the varieties in the style of basketball being player are SOOO much different now than they were when UConn was making their run. Finally, when UCLA was making their run, there was no such thing as a three point shot, and the three point shot has proven to be a great equalizer in college basketball.

The other thing people don't think about is John Wooden got to recruit to LOS ANGELES! Beautiful weather, beautiful women. UConn is fucking cold with snow all the time.

UCLA had SOOO many more built-in advantages then than UConn does now. Oh, and they didn't win as many games. To say UConn's streak is not as impressive simply because they are women, when it's obvious they have to overcome MORE obstacles, is just pure sexism.
 
Sly, would you go as far as to say that the UConn women's streak is the most impressive of all time in team sports?
 
Sly wins. No point in arguing any longer.
surrender_flag.gif
 
The times are really different, UCLA's streak was was 40 years ago. The sports are different. I mean, Men's and Women's basketball are different. Like I said, men are more athletic, the game is more physical, different court measurements, different timing, different ball sizes, etc.
And UCLA's players were more athletic than UConn's...I'm sorry, but that's a stupid fucking argument. They are level playing fields. Yes, UConn's opponents aren't as athletic (although I would argue they get to play more athletically now than when UCLA made their run), but neither is UConn able to recruit the same athletes UCLA did.

You got me there.
Exactly. You can't compare apples to oranges, and then say one is better than another.

They're two different playing fields, that's why there is a record for MEN and one for WOMEN.
No, they are EVEN playing fields. Men play men and women play women. It's not like UConn is starting players like Kevin Durant. Their players are women too.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top