UT vs. UConn: key stats

[armchair]

You want to know what UConn is about to win its 5th straight national title and we're watching tv after getting knocked out in the 2nd round and losing 26 games in two years. It's all about shooting, passing, assists:

UT UConn

Team shooting percentage: .430 .529
3-point shooting percentage .339 .404

Total shots attempted 1,973 2,249
3-point shots attempted 451 731
3-point shot made 153 295

Assists 468 852
Turnovers 429 428

What these numbers tell us is that UConn, as has been true for years, is....

1) UConn is an excellent passing team. Their assist total for the year is nearly DOUBLE our assist total. That is a HUGE discrepancy, and it is a discrepancy that has existed for more than a decade.

2) that UConn is an outstanding shooting team, due to their offense in general and their passing. The Husky's team shooting percentage was 10 points higher than ours. That is another HUGE discrepancy--and this gap between their good shooting and our mediocre/weak shooting has been the case for more than a decade. Their same strength, our same weakness.

More particularly, their offense creates a lot of 3-point shots, and they make a LOT of 3-point shots, as most good teams do nowadays. As with assists, the huskies made almost TWICE s many 3s as we did--and their 3-point shooting percentage was more than 6 points higher than hours. Again, huge. One of every three shots that UConn takes is a THREE compared to one of every four shots for us.

UConn winger Samuelson took 277 threes this year and her shooting percentage was .419. They had another player, Nurse, who took 152 treys and shot .467. Silly good numbers for both. (I didn't realize until doing this bit of research that Samuelson was No. 1 recruit in the country two years ago.)

Our best three-point shooter, Middleton, took a mere 108 threes--FAR fewer than Samuelson. However, Middleton shot a very respectable 39 percent from 3-point line. That's a good numer. It's not UConn good, but it is solid and it suggests, and I said multiple times during the year, that Middleton should have been taking more threes. Middleton is not 6'3", as Samuelson is, and is not going to get shots like the UConn player can; still, we should have been running plays that set up Middleton for threes. That should have been her basic role all year. She did not take enough threes.

Nared's 3-point shooting percentage was 38 percent--4 points lower than Samuelson. Nared is pretty the same height as Samuelson, and extremely athletic, and Nared should have taken more threes, too. If both Nared and Middleton could raise their 3-point shooting percentage by even 2 percentage points, and shoot more threes, we'd have a better offense.

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

You want to know what UConn is about to win its 5th straight national title and we're watching tv after getting knocked out in the 2nd round and losing 26 games in two years. It's all about shooting, passing, assists:

UT UConn

Team shooting percentage: .430 .529
3-point shooting percentage .339 .404

Total shots attempted 1,973 2,249
3-point shots attempted 451 731
3-point shot made 153 295

Assists 468 852
Turnovers 429 428

What these numbers tell us is that UConn, as has been true for years, is....

1) UConn is an excellent passing team. Their assist total for the year is nearly DOUBLE our assist total. That is a HUGE discrepancy, and it is a discrepancy that has existed for more than a decade.

2) that UConn is an outstanding shooting team, due to their offense in general and their passing. The Husky's team shooting percentage was 10 points higher than ours. That is another HUGE discrepancy--and this gap between their good shooting and our mediocre/weak shooting has been the case for more than a decade. Their same strength, our same weakness.

More particularly, their offense creates a lot of 3-point shots, and they make a LOT of 3-point shots, as most good teams do nowadays. As with assists, the huskies made almost TWICE s many 3s as we did--and their 3-point shooting percentage was more than 6 points higher than hours. Again, huge. One of every three shots that UConn takes is a THREE compared to one of every four shots for us.

UConn winger Samuelson took 277 threes this year and her shooting percentage was .419. They had another player, Nurse, who took 152 treys and shot .467. Silly good numbers for both. (I didn't realize until doing this bit of research that Samuelson was No. 1 recruit in the country two years ago.)

Our best three-point shooter, Middleton, took a mere 108 threes--FAR fewer than Samuelson. However, Middleton shot a very respectable 39 percent from 3-point line. That's a good numer. It's not UConn good, but it is solid and it suggests, and I said multiple times during the year, that Middleton should have been taking more threes. Middleton is not 6'3", as Samuelson is, and is not going to get shots like the UConn player can; still, we should have been running plays that set up Middleton for threes. That should have been her basic role all year. She did not take enough threes.

Nared's 3-point shooting percentage was 38 percent--4 points lower than Samuelson. Nared is pretty the same height as Samuelson, and extremely athletic, and Nared should have taken more threes, too. If both Nared and Middleton could raise their 3-point shooting percentage by even 2 percentage points, and shoot more threes, we'd have a better offense.

It's about coaching, not shooting, passing, or assists.

Good/interesting reading though.

 

[orangeluvr]

Didn't have to see all that to know uconn(ed) me is much better than us and the rest of the country. Nice post OP. :thumbsup:

 

[brassie]

It's about coaching, not shooting, passing, or assists.

Good/interesting reading though.

I don't want to speak for the OP, but I think that was their point.

UConn has a high FG % because they move the ball until the player with the best shot gets it. That's where the high assist numbers come from - unselfish team offense. Their passing in the half court is so crisp and accurate that the defense has a hard time shifting to cover the ball. That all comes from coaching.

 

[mike099]

I don't want to speak for the OP, but I think that was their point.

UConn has a high FG % because they move the ball until the player with the best shot gets it. That's where the high assist numbers come from - unselfish team offense. Their passing in the half court is so crisp and accurate that the defense has a hard time shifting to cover the ball. That all comes from coaching.

Exactly, now I am even more depressed about the next 2 years. Hope I am wrong, but I do not see the coaching getting better and not sure if the freshmen will develop with this coaching staff.

 

[HoopDR]

You want to know what UConn is about to win its 5th straight national title and we're watching tv after getting knocked out in the 2nd round and losing 26 games in two years. It's all about shooting, passing, assists:

UT UConn

Team shooting percentage: .430 .529
3-point shooting percentage .339 .404

Total shots attempted 1,973 2,249
3-point shots attempted 451 731
3-point shot made 153 295

Assists 468 852
Turnovers 429 428

What these numbers tell us is that UConn, as has been true for years, is....

1) UConn is an excellent passing team. Their assist total for the year is nearly DOUBLE our assist total. That is a HUGE discrepancy, and it is a discrepancy that has existed for more than a decade.

2) that UConn is an outstanding shooting team, due to their offense in general and their passing. The Husky's team shooting percentage was 10 points higher than ours. That is another HUGE discrepancy--and this gap between their good shooting and our mediocre/weak shooting has been the case for more than a decade. Their same strength, our same weakness.

More particularly, their offense creates a lot of 3-point shots, and they make a LOT of 3-point shots, as most good teams do nowadays. As with assists, the huskies made almost TWICE s many 3s as we did--and their 3-point shooting percentage was more than 6 points higher than hours. Again, huge. One of every three shots that UConn takes is a THREE compared to one of every four shots for us.

UConn winger Samuelson took 277 threes this year and her shooting percentage was .419. They had another player, Nurse, who took 152 treys and shot .467. Silly good numbers for both. (I didn't realize until doing this bit of research that Samuelson was No. 1 recruit in the country two years ago.)

Our best three-point shooter, Middleton, took a mere 108 threes--FAR fewer than Samuelson. However, Middleton shot a very respectable 39 percent from 3-point line. That's a good numer. It's not UConn good, but it is solid and it suggests, and I said multiple times during the year, that Middleton should have been taking more threes. Middleton is not 6'3", as Samuelson is, and is not going to get shots like the UConn player can; still, we should have been running plays that set up Middleton for threes. That should have been her basic role all year. She did not take enough threes.

Nared's 3-point shooting percentage was 38 percent--4 points lower than Samuelson. Nared is pretty the same height as Samuelson, and extremely athletic, and Nared should have taken more threes, too. If both Nared and Middleton could raise their 3-point shooting percentage by even 2 percentage points, and shoot more threes, we'd have a better offense.

That's on point ArmChair!!

 

[jkleno]

Geno 11
Pat 8
I hate that stat most of all

 

[LasVegasBill23]

It's about coaching, not shooting, passing, or assists.

Exactly..... but the hesitancy to make a change is ever present.... it ALWAYS boils down to coaching

 

[JFP]

Just a little change in play strategy could make a tremendous difference for UT's outside scoring. In the past the 3 point shooters have not existed in a helpful environment. Even
a great outside shooter can become just another streak shooter without team assistance and plays.

 

[brassie]

Exactly, now I am even more depressed about the next 2 years. Hope I am wrong, but I do not see the coaching getting better and not sure if the freshmen will develop with this coaching staff.

I'll paraphrase ESPN's best WCBB announcer and analyst, UT alum Kara Lawson - "If you're going to get UConn, you better make it this year because no one is going to touch them for the next couple of years"

I think she was at least semi serious when she said they might win 200 in a row.

 

[Hoya Saxa]

I'll paraphrase ESPN's best WCBB announcer and analyst, UT alum Kara Lawson - "If you're going to get UConn, you better make it this year because no one is going to touch them for the next couple of years"

During one broadcast, Lawson said she attended a UConn practice and said that Azura Stevens has improved so much during the past year under the direction of the UConn coaching staff that Azura would be Lawson's preseason pick for national player of the year next year. Adding her to Nurse and the three returning first team All-Americans and Lawson has a point. That is a tough starting five.

 

[LasVegasBill23]

I'll paraphrase ESPN's best WCBB announcer and analyst, UT alum Kara Lawson - "If you're going to get UConn, you better make it this year because no one is going to touch them for the next couple of years"

I think she was at least semi serious when she said they might win 200 in a row.

Oh i am sure she WAS serious..... look at the next 2 years.... it is going to be same coaching staff... and the front line is not questioned.... Samuelson and Collier for both years.... and Gabby W one of those years and the other Collier for the second year.... and Azura Stevens..and Camara.... not to mention Megan Walker.....

Only place they need to solidify i think is guard.... have Nurse next year and Dangerfield is constant for the next 3.... we will see,.... but 200 is not out of the question...

 

[armchair]

Geno 11
Pat 8
I hate that stat most of all

and let me say that I started talking about our constant offensive woes back when it was still PS 7/8 national titles and Geno 5 or 6. With the exception of the last two Parker/Anosike years, where we had a couple of studs in and around the paint, we've not played good offensive basketball AT ALL--and the only reason we did during the Parker title years was Parker herself--it certainly wasn't our system. If you cared to look--and most UT fans didn't--it was pretty easy to see that Geno/UConn were going to blow past us unless improvements in recruiting and offensive coaching were made. Didn't happen, hasn't happened. And, yea, of course passing/assists/shooting comes down to your coaching--as if I haven't made that point enough.

 

[LasVegasBill23]

and let me say that I started talking about our constant offensive woes back when it was still PS 7/8 national titles and Geno 5 or 6. With the exception of the last two Parker/Anosike years, where we had a couple of studs in and around the paint, we've not played good offensive basketball AT ALL--and the only reason we did during the Parker title years was Parker herself--it certainly wasn't our system. If you cared to look--and most UT fans didn't--it was pretty easy to see that Geno/UConn were going to blow past us unless improvements in recruiting and offensive coaching were made. Didn't happen, hasn't happened. And, yea, of course passing/assists/shooting comes down to your coaching--as if I haven't made that point enough.

Could not agree more with everything you say Armchair.... many programs are blowing by us..... just on their offensive schemes alone.

 

[bballnut90]

and let me say that I started talking about our constant offensive woes back when it was still PS 7/8 national titles and Geno 5 or 6. With the exception of the last two Parker/Anosike years, where we had a couple of studs in and around the paint, we've not played good offensive basketball AT ALL--and the only reason we did during the Parker title years was Parker herself--it certainly wasn't our system. If you cared to look--and most UT fans didn't--it was pretty easy to see that Geno/UConn were going to blow past us unless improvements in recruiting and offensive coaching were made. Didn't happen, hasn't happened. And, yea, of course passing/assists/shooting comes down to your coaching--as if I haven't made that point enough.

They won in 2007 and 2008 in large part due to their defense. When locked in, other teams just couldn't score. Parker never played all that well in the Final Four. All of those wins were the product of outstanding defense, and great individual efforts from unheralded players (aka Anosike, Bobbitt and Augustus). Pat was never an offensive guru but those teams weren't bad offensively.

The big difference for the separation IMO is that Geno was able to land and develop marquee recruits at a time when many top programs were trending south. After 2008, literally every top 5-10 team was decimated by graduation and Connecticut returned their best players and brought in two more top 10 kids. For a quick recap--Tennessee lost their 5 senior starters, their expected PG (McMahan) and Baugh. LSU graduated all of their talent, Stanford lost Wiggins, Rutgers lost Ajavon/Carson, Maryland lost Langhorne and Harper, NC lost Erlana Larkins, and the last Elite 8 team was A&M who lost a couple of their top players too if I'm not mistaken.

2009 was when Connecticut really took off. Geno was always a top rate coach, but it was the start of when his teams were able to elevate to their own stratosphere. It was also when he found himself peerless since Pat and Tennessee were declining, and no one else has been able to truly compete with the Huskies with any consistency.

His ability to build teams and develop players over their 4 years put him in his own category for this skill. Add in assembling rosters that are more talented than any other school (in his last ten title years, he's always had at least 2 top overall recruits on his team) and being able to identify other players who will work their butts off to improve and buy into his system, and he's found quite literally an unbeatable system. The next two years are going to be more of the same unless someone gets injured or something truly bizarre happens.

Coming into this season, Connecticut had a roster of 4 role players, zero size inside, and a PG who warmed the bench for her first three years. Fast forward 4 months and they're the overwhelming favorite to win their 5th straight title with another undefeated season. Next year and 2018-19 are only going to be worse.

 

[LasVegasBill23]

They won in 2007 and 2008 in large part due to their defense. When locked in, other teams just couldn't score. Parker never played all that well in the Final Four. All of those wins were the product of outstanding defense, and great individual efforts from unheralded players (aka Anosike, Bobbitt and Augustus). Pat was never an offensive guru but those teams weren't bad offensively.

The big difference for the separation IMO is that Geno was able to land and develop marquee recruits at a time when many top programs were trending south. After 2008, literally every top 5-10 team was decimated by graduation and Connecticut returned their best players and brought in two more top 10 kids. For a quick recap--Tennessee lost their 5 senior starters, their expected PG (McMahan) and Baugh. LSU graduated all of their talent, Stanford lost Wiggins, Rutgers lost Ajavon/Carson, Maryland lost Langhorne and Harper, NC lost Erlana Larkins, and the last Elite 8 team was A&M who lost a couple of their top players too if I'm not mistaken.

2009 was when Connecticut really took off. Geno was always a top rate coach, but it was the start of when his teams were able to elevate to their own stratosphere. It was also when he found himself peerless since Pat and Tennessee were declining, and no one else has been able to truly compete with the Huskies with any consistency.

His ability to build teams and develop players over their 4 years put him in his own category for this skill. Add in assembling rosters that are more talented than any other school (in his last ten title years, he's always had at least 2 top overall recruits on his team) and being able to identify other players who will work their butts off to improve and buy into his system, and he's found quite literally an unbeatable system. The next two years are going to be more of the same unless someone gets injured or something truly bizarre happens.

Coming into this season, Connecticut had a roster of 4 role players, zero size inside, and a PG who warmed the bench for her first three years. Fast forward 4 months and they're the overwhelming favorite to win their 5th straight title with another undefeated season. Next year and 2018-19 are only going to be worse.

True, at the start of this season, Conn had a team of players who were role players the year before.... and to be sure they have surprised.... with all the big gals on national rosters... Brown at Baylor, McGowan at Ms State etc.... it is amazing that Conn goes into each battle with 2 forwards 6'1" and 5'11", and the third forward is a 6'3" who hates to rebound... or so it seems.... my hat is off to them for what they have been able to accomplish.... they cowld be beaten in FF.... Ms State and both of other 2 teams are capable, so it will be interesting...

The first part of your post is curious..... are you saying that since 2008, every single team in top 10 has been decimated to graduation.... I understand this happens on occasion, but to say that this has happened on a constant basis for about 10 years... and that explains why one team has ruled the roost.... is questionable.... ND, Louisville, MD, they reload every year....

 

[UCMiami]

Interesting posts throughout this thread. And I think you look around at the better teams, the ones that do challenge Uconn and you see the same kind of stats - ND is always shooting around .500/400 overall and from three and is always around the top ten in assists, same with Baylor and MD - SC and MissState may be more reliant on defense but they are nearing those kinds of numbers on offense (MSS specifically in the NCAA tournament.) And you don't shoot 50% taking lots of difficult shots or contested shots. And you don't get easy shots unless you run good and patient offense, if you don't willingly pass up a decent shot to pass to a teammate who has a better one. And yes, that is mostly on the coaching, but it is also somewhat on the individual players being willing to sacrifice a little personal glory for a teammate.

The one thing that stands out to me compared to the other really good teams is they just broke the single season assist record with 852, and yet their leader in assists hasn't gotten 200. Instead they have 5 players each with over 100 assists for the second time in 3 years. And they have a sixth player with 82. The Uconn record for most assists in a year by a player is 235 set 15 years ago. Which doesn't even in the same neighborhood for the NCAA top yearly assist numbers for a player. Their offense never runs through a single player, every player on the floor can score efficiently and every player can and does pass to a teammate with a better shot.
On shooting percentage:
They have seven players that have played more than 10 minutes per game. The worst shooting percentage among those is their freshman Dangerfield shooting 41%, the next worst shoots 47% and their leading scorer shoots 69%.
On three pointers they have five players who have taken at least 30 threes, and the worst percentage is again Dangerfield at 32%, the next worst is at 40%
Again, you don't shoot those percentages if you are taking bad shots or contested shots.

 

[DaddyChoc]

where are the mojo gods to balance this out, speak up!

 

[Voltopia]

They won in 2007 and 2008 in large part due to their defense. When locked in, other teams just couldn't score. Parker never played all that well in the Final Four. All of those wins were the product of outstanding defense, and great individual efforts from unheralded players (aka Anosike, Bobbitt and Augustus). Pat was never an offensive guru but those teams weren't bad offensively.

The big difference for the separation IMO is that Geno was able to land and develop marquee recruits at a time when many top programs were trending south. After 2008, literally every top 5-10 team was decimated by graduation and Connecticut returned their best players and brought in two more top 10 kids. For a quick recap--Tennessee lost their 5 senior starters, their expected PG (McMahan) and Baugh. LSU graduated all of their talent, Stanford lost Wiggins, Rutgers lost Ajavon/Carson, Maryland lost Langhorne and Harper, NC lost Erlana Larkins, and the last Elite 8 team was A&M who lost a couple of their top players too if I'm not mistaken.

2009 was when Connecticut really took off. Geno was always a top rate coach, but it was the start of when his teams were able to elevate to their own stratosphere. It was also when he found himself peerless since Pat and Tennessee were declining, and no one else has been able to truly compete with the Huskies with any consistency.

His ability to build teams and develop players over their 4 years put him in his own category for this skill. Add in assembling rosters that are more talented than any other school (in his last ten title years, he's always had at least 2 top overall recruits on his team) and being able to identify other players who will work their butts off to improve and buy into his system, and he's found quite literally an unbeatable system. The next two years are going to be more of the same unless someone gets injured or something truly bizarre happens.

Coming into this season, Connecticut had a roster of 4 role players, zero size inside, and a PG who warmed the bench for her first three years. Fast forward 4 months and they're the overwhelming favorite to win their 5th straight title with another undefeated season. Next year and 2018-19 are only going to be worse.

*sigh* Cait McMahan was a terror before she suffered those injuries. I only saw her play a few times in high school but you could just tell she _hated_ to lose. It oozed off her. Every play, every point scored against her, it was personal. I really thought we'd scored a trump card when she signed on. Then she suffered that knee injury. Never looked the same. She might have been one of the best I'd seen play at that level before it. And there were other issues as well, to be sure, but those injuries just took away too much of her game.

Meanwhile Connecticut has definitely locked up the sport for the time being. There's just nothing out there that can handle them. They can cherry pick recruits, the attitudes of players in the game are different, it's easier to fill and maintain a bench, and they have a lot of external momentum on their side. In a way, their success is setting the whole game back, (to me at least), but it's not their fault. They're just playing at a different level -- and exposing how little anyone else can play and maintain consistency at that level by doing so. Which ... well, it sucks. It sucks that only one person has shown the ability to equal him and it sucks a million times more that she is no longer here.

It's funny though, I reflect on all of that, and it reminds me of something I've realized this past year - if UT doesn't show any signs of life in the next few years, I don't know how much longer I'll pay close attention. The primary attraction was always the excellence and the commitment to playing with as much energy as possible. I respected Summitt's presence and her skill and the program she built as a result of that. Oh well. I hope the recruits kickstart it. I really really do.

 

[savannahfan]

Interesting posts throughout this thread. And I think you look around at the better teams, the ones that do challenge Uconn and you see the same kind of stats - ND is always shooting around .500/400 overall and from three and is always around the top ten in assists, same with Baylor and MD - SC and MissState may be more reliant on defense but they are nearing those kinds of numbers on offense (MSS specifically in the NCAA tournament.) And you don't shoot 50% taking lots of difficult shots or contested shots. And you don't get easy shots unless you run good and patient offense, if you don't willingly pass up a decent shot to pass to a teammate who has a better one. And yes, that is mostly on the coaching, but it is also somewhat on the individual players being willing to sacrifice a little personal glory for a teammate.

The one thing that stands out to me compared to the other really good teams is they just broke the single season assist record with 852, and yet their leader in assists hasn't gotten 200. Instead they have 5 players each with over 100 assists for the second time in 3 years. And they have a sixth player with 82. The Uconn record for most assists in a year by a player is 235 set 15 years ago. Which doesn't even in the same neighborhood for the NCAA top yearly assist numbers for a player. Their offense never runs through a single player, every player on the floor can score efficiently and every player can and does pass to a teammate with a better shot.
On shooting percentage:
They have seven players that have played more than 10 minutes per game. The worst shooting percentage among those is their freshman Dangerfield shooting 41%, the next worst shoots 47% and their leading scorer shoots 69%.
On three pointers they have five players who have taken at least 30 threes, and the worst percentage is again Dangerfield at 32%, the next worst is at 40%
Again, you don't shoot those percentages if you are taking bad shots or contested shots.

Most all of these posts point out good shooting. But to make a added point of your surprise at UConn's assist total. Watching the tourney this year and most years lately, I see a whole lot of dribbling around by everyone but the post type players. I mean dribbling and dribbling and dribbling until the player can get a drive that as maybe an 50-50 chance of success.(usually to short to get it up over someone standing around near the goal)Or the dribbler gets caught and has to get rid of the ball or has to throw up a prayer. UConn passes for open shots, that's one reason for their high made %. ..

TEAM BALL at its finest..

Coaching period.

 

[PointGuard]

and let me say that I started talking about our constant offensive woes back when it was still PS 7/8 national titles and Geno 5 or 6. With the exception of the last two Parker/Anosike years, where we had a couple of studs in and around the paint, we've not played good offensive basketball AT ALL--and the only reason we did during the Parker title years was Parker herself--it certainly wasn't our system. If you cared to look--and most UT fans didn't--it was pretty easy to see that Geno/UConn were going to blow past us unless improvements in recruiting and offensive coaching were made. Didn't happen, hasn't happened. And, yea, of course passing/assists/shooting comes down to your coaching--as if I haven't made that point enough.

Excellent! Unfortunately the offensive part of the game had passed Pat by and by the time she started corrective action (for example Harry Parretta" her devastating illness was taking hold.

Pat was a dynamic and super competitive woman who, forget wcbb, will go down in history as being a significant contributor to the development of women. To me it doesn't matter that she was 4 of 13 against Geno over all and 0 of 4 in NC's beginning on 1995.

 

[armchair]

As I've said before, I watched UConn play us 20 or so years ago. We won the game--Geno's early days--but they were a much better passing team; they just didn't have the talent. I knew if they got talent were going to be trouble. We've long had strong talent but our offensive coaching has been a joke--the Vols have been terrible passing and shooting team for ages. we haven't been a good passing/shooting team in forever. It is why the program has gone to pot--and yet our lame coaches NEVER fix it. UConn shoots threes as well as we shoot twos, and shoots two much better than we do. Write Currie and tell him we need a new, youngish, tough-minded, smart coach. I have. Otherwise, the program will continue to wither.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

2017 record versus Mississippi State:

UConn 0-1
Lady Vols 1-1

 

[DaddyChoc]

Damn It.... Thanks!

 

[Martic]

and let me say that I started talking about our constant offensive woes back when it was still PS 7/8 national titles and Geno 5 or 6. With the exception of the last two Parker/Anosike years, where we had a couple of studs in and around the paint, we've not played good offensive basketball AT ALL--and the only reason we did during the Parker title years was Parker herself--it certainly wasn't our system. If you cared to look--and most UT fans didn't--it was pretty easy to see that Geno/UConn were going to blow past us unless improvements in recruiting and offensive coaching were made. Didn't happen, hasn't happened. And, yea, of course passing/assists/shooting comes down to your coaching--as if I haven't made that point enough.

S glad you pointed that out. So few people seem to realize that CHW is just following what she learned from Pat and it wasn't working for Pat either. Something has to change.