Game Thread: Lady Vols v UCONN; Thurs. 8PM; on ESPN

[montbb47]

No, it's not JUST about having the best players. The players have to be coached up--and coached up well. Of course we could use more talent---but it's not like we've got nobody. Jackson and Horston are two of the best offensive players in the country, even accounting for Horston's sometimes erratic play. There isn't a coach in the country who wouldn't die to have those two. Hollingshead is good and getting better. And we've got some complementary players with varying degrees of talent.

We have talent AND coaching issues. UConn hasn't been great for 20 years simply because of their talent. Geno had no talent when he started--none. I've said this many times over the years: When UConn and UT started playing each other, we had more talent--but UConn showed it was well coached and soon became a much better (more efficient) offensive team than we were. When he started UConn was a nothing program and we were the game's big dog. We see what happened over time--because of coaching disparities. UConn became the big dog and we became a little dog. He built that program because he's a great coach--period. Great coaches overachieve with their talent--win more than they might be expected to win--and then the talent starts to notice and come. McGraw did the same thing at Notre Dame--great coach.

Do we overachieve or underachieve with our talent? We underachieve--and it's been true for 15 years because our coaching hasn't been good enough. PERIOD. Harper is a decent/solid coach--not a great coach--and she is a poor recruiter, and so this is where we are. I'm not suggesting that we lost last night because of coaching alone--but if Geno took our team of last night and Harper took his team, what would the game's outcome have been? I don't know--but I'd bet the house that Harper's UConn team wouldn't win by 17.

Best post in the buckett.

 

[Blueconn]

Pretty sure I know the facts.

Lucky for you.

 

[madtownvol]

I saw a LV team that simply lacked the quickness and speed to match uconn, not only in the paint but especially on the perimeter. They defended our guards so well our offense ground to a halt much of the time. Our defense was simply not there, and the 57% from three and 55% overall shows it. Points in the paint were even, but points off of turnovers and fast break points were the difference, and that's defense, quickness, and speed superiority for them. They are simply more talented and athletic than we are.

If you factor in what Uconn had sitting on the bench, 100% correct assessment. The two teams that were on the floor, I think it was closer than that. In the stretches were the LVs closed the big lead, it was clear we could match up. The LVs dominated the glass which is another measure of speed and athleticism. Execution let us down. we could not hit enough outside shots and mid range to spread the floor which made the team easy to defend. Conversely, we had to respect the outside shooting of UConn and that spread the floor and opened up lanes.

We were so slow in running the half court and very stagnant at times. It is like what do you think is going to change by standing around? We can blame the PGs for holding on to the ball for too long (which was a problem on several possessions) but the team has to help the point guards out by MOVING.

 

[Prophet1]

Hmm, five players who need to score in the paint and have no conisistent outside shot? What could possibly go wrong?

Nothing going wrong. I see defense , scoring and wins. Three point shooters in the present starting five against uconn , what went wrong ?
O yeah everything.

 

[Prophet1]

If you factor in what Uconn had sitting on the bench, 100% correct assessment. The two teams that were on the floor, I think it was closer than that. In the stretches were the LVs closed the big lead, it was clear we could match up. The LVs dominated the glass which is another measure of speed and athleticism. Execution let us down. we could not hit enough outside shots and mid range to spread the floor which made the team easy to defend. Conversely, we had to respect the outside shooting of UConn and that spread the floor and opened up lanes.

We were so slow in running the half court and very stagnant at times. It is like what do you think is going to change by standing around? We can blame the PGs for holding on to the ball for too long (which was a problem on several possessions) but the team has to help the point guards out by MOVING.

Sound like you talking about Striplin , Puckett and maybe Darby.

 

[youcancallmeAl]

If you factor in what Uconn had sitting on the bench, 100% correct assessment. The two teams that were on the floor, I think it was closer than that. In the stretches were the LVs closed the big lead, it was clear we could match up. The LVs dominated the glass which is another measure of speed and athleticism. Execution let us down. we could not hit enough outside shots and mid range to spread the floor which made the team easy to defend. Conversely, we had to respect the outside shooting of UConn and that spread the floor and opened up lanes.

We were so slow in running the half court and very stagnant at times. It is like what do you think is going to change by standing around? We can blame the PGs for holding on to the ball for too long (which was a problem on several possessions) but the team has to help the point guards out by MOVING.

If you go position by position there was only one player we had who was superior to her match-up, and that was Jordy. Maybe Rickea and her matchup was a wash, I dunno. But at every other position we were at a deficit in skill, athleticism, size, speed, quickness, etc. And that included anyone we started or brought off the bench. We simply do not have the roster to compete with the Uconn. They would win 10 out of 10 matches with us.

 

[JFP]

If you go position by position there was only one player we had who was superior to her match-up, and that was Jordy. Maybe Rickea and her matchup was a wash, I dunno. But at every other position we were at a deficit in skill, athleticism, size, speed, quickness, etc. And that included anyone we started or brought off the bench. We simply do not have the roster to compete with the Uconn. They would win 10 out of 10 matches with us.

Multimillion dollar executives develop a top notch staff to get out and get all done that one person can't do. They rarely need to have unproductive persons and let them know what they must do.

 

[Rooster1]

If you go position by position there was only one player we had who was superior to her match-up, and that was Jordy. Maybe Rickea and her matchup was a wash, I dunno. But at every other position we were at a deficit in skill, athleticism, size, speed, quickness, etc. And that included anyone we started or brought off the bench. We simply do not have the roster to compete with the Uconn. They would win 10 out of 10 matches with us.

I think that is probably true. Even with their roster problems, their starting 5 will beat anyone if they shoot like they did against UT, but that is not likely to happen, as good as they shoot 57% is top end stuff.

 

[madtownvol]

Sound like you talking about Striplin , Puckett and maybe Darby.

Honestly, every one falls into this trap, some more than others,

 

[rogatl]

If you factor in what Uconn had sitting on the bench, 100% correct assessment. The two teams that were on the floor, I think it was closer than that. In the stretches were the LVs closed the big lead, it was clear we could match up. The LVs dominated the glass which is another measure of speed and athleticism. Execution let us down. we could not hit enough outside shots and mid range to spread the floor which made the team easy to defend. Conversely, we had to respect the outside shooting of UConn and that spread the floor and opened up lanes.

We were so slow in running the half court and very stagnant at times. It is like what do you think is going to change by standing around? We can blame the PGs for holding on to the ball for too long (which was a problem on several possessions) but the team has to help the point guards out by MOVING.

Standing around on offense has been a Lady Vols trademark just as much as rebounding for many years. Just baffles me why we can't fix it. It started in CPS last years and has continued through both CHW and CKH. I truly like CKH and so wish she was the answer, She says ALL the right things and knows what the issues are but just doesn't see, to be able to impose her will on her teams. She is way to passive in-game. Even Rebecca Lobo was calling for a timeout by LV last night when UCONN was on a run but of course none was a called. We just got further behind.

 

[Amb3096]

If you go position by position there was only one player we had who was superior to her match-up, and that was Jordy. Maybe Rickea and her matchup was a wash, I dunno. But at every other position we were at a deficit in skill, athleticism, size, speed, quickness, etc. And that included anyone we started or brought off the bench. We simply do not have the roster to compete with the Uconn. They would win 10 out of 10 matches with us.

At least yesterday, Hollingshead matched up well with Dorka. But I disagree that Rickea and Edwards was a wash; Edwards is the better player on both ends of the ball and it showed last night. She can guard Jackson, but Jackson can’t guard her.

They’re kind of playing Jackson out of position. She’d be better at the wing. She can get away against less talented 4’s, but she’ll get exploited against the elite ones like Edwards or Reese on Sunday. The ideal lineup for Tennessee would be Horston at the 2 and Jackson at the 3 with a true PG and a true PF. The problem is that the PFs on the team are too slow (Puckett, Striplin) or can’t shoot more than 5-ft from the basket (Franklin). Ideally, you want a big who has a face up game out to about 15-17 feet.

If Jackson/Horston had more reliable 3-pt shots, they’d be unstoppable at the shooting guard/wing spots.

 

[Harvey Peak]

Based on what? How can you call a college basketball player trash without a clue about who she is? BTW she's actually a pretty good baller. You can watch her next year in the W.

Dorka finished her BA Degree in 3 years @ Ohio State and is finishing up her MA this year. Judging from your posts, I'd peg you at about a 3rd grade reading level?

 

[ncteacher88]

I don't know of any other coach who has such a strong international player pipeline as does Auriemma. Tennessee has had some second-tier-level success with a few players, but we are not bringing in players that are likely to one day land roster spots in the W.

Perception plays a big role in everything. Jose Fernandez at USF recruits internationally quite well. This year, 9 of his 14 players are foreign born. Then there is the "other" USF (San Francisco) with Molly Goodenbour. One year she had 12 players from ten different countries, not including the USA, and twice as many foreign born players than American born players. Uconn has had a total of 16 international players (counting the new recruit who will not play this year), of which four are from Canada. Six are on this year's team. Therefore, both of these teams have had almost as many international players in a single year as UConn has in its history. I assume the change is the type of player's UConn wishes to recruit, which is becoming more difficult to find in the USA (as per Geno), and easier overseas, especially since the world is catching up to the USA talent wise. Also, until this year, the majority of UConn's foreign recruits were also relatively "second tier." They include: Abebayo, Sadiqu, Rigsby, Arblic, Grossman, who are not exactly household names, and you can probably include Bettencourt from this year's team.

 

[brassie]

I don’t think half this team would stay and play for Geno. I think his no excuse, in your face style would run half off. I think Kelli is a players coach who tries to be tuff, very few can pull that off and be successful. I think Geno would be happy that half left if he took over because some might think it would be soft ones leaving.

BUT I do believe part of the problems are coaching and the team that was left would overachieve with Geno. they executed their cuts and picks perfectly last night. Excellent Xs and Os.

Auriemma has proven over and over that if a player commits to his coaching, they will leave the team as a much better player. I think a couple of current examples are Muhl (IMO one of the best PG in the country) who started out as an out of control foul waiting to happen and Edwards an underachiever that will be an AA before she leaves.

 

[brassie]

Dorka finished her BA Degree in 3 years @ Ohio State and is finishing up her MA this year. Judging from your posts, I'd peg you at about a 3rd grade reading level?

WTH brought that on? I think you might have a comprehension problem and the insult was completely unfair.

 

[Volfan2012]

No, it's not JUST about having the best players. The players have to be coached up--and coached up well. Of course we could use more talent---but it's not like we've got nobody. Jackson and Horston are two of the best offensive players in the country, even accounting for Horston's sometimes erratic play. There isn't a coach in the country who wouldn't die to have those two. Hollingshead is good and getting better. And we've got some complementary players with varying degrees of talent.

We have talent AND coaching issues. UConn hasn't been great for 20 years simply because of their talent. Geno had no talent when he started--none. I've said this many times over the years: When UConn and UT started playing each other, we had more talent--but UConn showed it was well coached and soon became a much better (more efficient) offensive team than we were. When he started UConn was a nothing program and we were the game's big dog. We see what happened over time--because of coaching disparities. UConn became the big dog and we became a little dog. He built that program because he's a great coach--period. Great coaches overachieve with their talent--win more than they might be expected to win--and then the talent starts to notice and come. McGraw did the same thing at Notre Dame--great coach.

Do we overachieve or underachieve with our talent? We underachieve--and it's been true for 15 years because our coaching hasn't been good enough. PERIOD. Harper is a decent/solid coach--not a great coach--and she is a poor recruiter, and so this is where we are. I'm not suggesting that we lost last night because of coaching alone--but if Geno took our team of last night and Harper took his team, what would the game's outcome have been? I don't know--but I'd bet the house that Harper's UConn team wouldn't win by 17.

It is about having the best talent and you will see that the National Champion will come from the three most talented teams which are SC, Stanford. and UConn. You can coach a team to a certain point but the talent wins out in the end. One of them will be wearing the crown come the end of the season. Not just this season but every season you can pick out two or three teams that will be the Champion. No Jackson and Horston are not the two best offensive players in the country. They are great offensive players but there are some that are at the same level or better. I can easily recognize that overall as a team UConn has more talent then Tennessee. We can match anyone they have with Jackson and Horston after that it is certainly to their advantage.

 

[Amb3096]

WTH brought that on? I think you might have a comprehension problem and the insult was completely unfair.

Think this was in response to the poster who called Dorka trash.

 

[ncteacher88]

I don’t think half this team would stay and play for Geno. I think his no excuse, in your face style would run half off. I think Geno would be happy that half left if he took over because some might think it would be soft ones leaving. BUT I do believe part of the problems are coaching and the team that was left would overachieve with Geno. they executed their cuts and picks perfectly last night. Excellent Xs and Os.

I am hesitant to share this video (many of you have probably seen it) but it directly relates to the comment above. It involves character and recruiting.



Side Note: Here is an additional video from Kara Lawson that is also quite interesting about "things being hard."

 

[Volfan2012]

If you factor in what Uconn had sitting on the bench, 100% correct assessment. The two teams that were on the floor, I think it was closer than that. In the stretches were the LVs closed the big lead, it was clear we could match up. The LVs dominated the glass which is another measure of speed and athleticism. Execution let us down. we could not hit enough outside shots and mid range to spread the floor which made the team easy to defend. Conversely, we had to respect the outside shooting of UConn and that spread the floor and opened up lanes.

We were so slow in running the half court and very stagnant at times. It is like what do you think is going to change by standing around? We can blame the PGs for holding on to the ball for too long (which was a problem on several possessions) but the team has to help the point guards out by MOVING.

Harper went away from what was working in the second quarter. Insisted on starting the ones she has been starting to begin the third quarter. They are not our best players quickly dug another hole that we didn't get out of.

 

[Darth_Vol]

I was really hoping this game would be for the Lady Vols what the Alabama game was for the football team this year. What a huge disappointment that has really taken the air out this season (which was already significantly deflated).

Time to cancel the series, again. Tennessee will never beat UConn under Harper...

 

[madtownvol]

I was really hoping this game would be for the Lady Vols what the Alabama game was for the football team this year. .

Dude that is a good one. Thanks for lightening up the mood .You were hoping that the LVs won, brilliant use of irony. HAHAHAHA

 

[GameTime]

Standing around on offense has been a Lady Vols trademark just as much as rebounding for many years. Just baffles me why we can't fix it. It started in CPS last years and has continued through both CHW and CKH. I truly like CKH and so wish she was the answer, She says ALL the right things and knows what the issues are but just doesn't see, to be able to impose her will on her teams. She is way to passive in-game. Even Rebecca Lobo was calling for a timeout by LV last night when UCONN was on a run but of course none was a called. We just got further behind.

So true friend...It drives me nuts the way our players often just stand and wait for a pass, instead of cutting through the lane and shaking off their defender....This has always been a major weakness of this coach's offensive philosophy, and is one of her many weaknesses as a coach...

 

[creekdipper]

I wouldn't exactly call Svetlana Abrosimova "second tier."

 

[ncteacher88]

Time to cancel the series, again. Tennessee will never beat UConn under Harper...

There was talk during the game yesterday about how much longer Geno will coach, (I watched the replay as I was in Knoxville) and they speculated that yesterday possibly might be his last trip to Knoxville. With the players he has coming back, and the top recruits that he has coming in, I doubt this will be the case. However, IF he were to leave, and IF Kelli coaches for many more years, and IF all the prognosticators on here are correct about the demise of UConn after Geno retires, then that statement has a great chance to be false. One way to make that statement a safer bet would be if you had said, "Tennessee will never beat UConn under Harper, while Geno is still coaching."

 

[Voltopia]

There was talk during the game yesterday about how much longer Geno will coach, (I watched the replay as I was in Knoxville) and they speculated that yesterday possibly might be his last trip to Knoxville. With the players he has coming back, and the top recruits that he has coming in, I doubt this will be the case. However, IF he were to leave, and IF Kelli coaches for many more years, and IF all the prognosticators on here are correct about the demise of UConn after Geno retires, then that statement has a great chance to be false. One way to make that statement a safer bet would be if you had said, "Tennessee will never beat UConn under Harper, while Geno is still coaching."

I don't think demise is the right word. Decline, perhaps. It won't happen immediately. The legacy effect will linger for some years, much as it did for us. You'll still be signing great classes for a while. But eventually - a few more losses here, an upset there, maybe a few whiffs on the Final Four. It'll be gradual. I think UConn wins 88 or even 90% of their games? Maybe more? Whatever it is, that number will decline. A few more recruits go elsewhere. There's less media coverage, less attention, as there's no HOF coach to cover. Attendance wavers, goes up, goes down, maybe it sticks for a while, but only as long as you're winning like you used to. And throughout all of that, time marches on. That's not a demise, it's just a decline.