OK. This is going to sound dumb. But, I think it has some applications.
When I lived in Germany in the seventies, I had some long discussions with a rather old man who had been a German colonel (his claims). He made an observation. When the structure was maintained, the German fighting machine was superb. The men were regimented and knew exactly what to do. But, if you cut off the supply lines or killed off the officers or key non-coms, the Germans were no longer effective. But, the Americans became perhaps even more dangerous. They had lived a different life, one in which there was a need to think for themselves (I guess that he meant rural America). They adapted, thought of ways to accomplish some goal.
I think this applies a lot in coaching, and in teaching for that matter. You can regiment by teaching facts to be regurgitated. But, does that teach what to do?
When I watch Kim Mulkey's team, it may be the most disciplined team in the nation. They execute brilliantly, and they devastate lesser teams. Yet, when they run up against an adversary that is their equal in talent, like a UConn, they don't execute as well. They are thrown out of their rhythm, game plan. This happened when they met Texas A&M with A&M winning the title. It was like A&M had more control than they should have.
UConn, on the other hand, is very well disciplined. Yet, it seems that they don't really need Geno during a game. Their players seem to be able to adapt on the fly. It isn't as regimented. They are taught basketball, as opposed to discipline. As long as the robotic technique works, it wins. At times, it doesn't.
I don't see Sherri as a regimented disciplinarian. I think she wants her players to understand and accomplish on their own. She does use discipline for one thing---her inbounds plays. They work. I look at some teams as nothing more than a series of inbound plays.
I think that the best team that Sherri had was that type of team. The 2002 team was a match for the 2002 UConn team. I don't know that any other team in history was a match for that 2002 UConn team until Breanna Stewart and her crew came along. That team seemed to think on their own. They seemed to be an extension of Sherri on the court, especially Stacy. I think Sherri was hoping that Morgan Hook and Maddie Manning would be the next Stacy. I don't know that Morgan had the talent. I think Maddie does, but she hasn't shown the temperament yet.
I do think that Sherri is assembling the makings of another potential good team. I had hoped that Maddie would fulfill her potential. But, we could really use her next year, if she would come back. We need a steadying influence on the Vivi, Nancy, EJ, Gabbi group when we had our three freshmen. I have very high hopes for Ana and Shaina Pellington. They seem to be the type of building blocks that you would need. I like having a forward who loves to rebound. The description reminds me of Nina Davis, whom I love. But, if we do make it into a title team, I think it will be because they buy into understanding basketball and learning what to do on the floor themselves. Nancy and Vivi inside with a couple of shooting guards and a point who is as fast as DRob? That is what I hope is coming. That would make Nancy into a unique commodity, a very tall player with a team around her.
