Wow.....just Wow

[tycat947]

True character coming out in adversity..... We know that program lacks character overall.

Agreed! I wouldn't be surprised if she were just quoting Sulkey Mulkey from the post game locker room speech!

 

[KCRuf/Nek]

She doesn't sound bitter at all.

Actually that's pretty mild compared to OF after a loss.

 

[Stringmusic]

I am appalled at the poor English usage by a college student. She should be ashamed.

 

[OKUman]

Obviously a reflection of the coach's attitude. Seemed like Baylor developed an arrogance and sense of entitlement with their success.

Too bad. Good coach and great players but major lack of maturity.

Well as I remember Coach M and her teams have always had that attitude, even when they weren't playing for a championship.

 

[NMSooner'80]

The only use of "thug" in this thread, aside from yours, is in reference to the poster who quoted Brooklyn from a private post. We don't know whether that person is black or white, nor do we care. I think you may have projected that term onto Brooklyn

Thugs can definitely be White. I saw some playing against Sherri and Jan when they were in college (USAO had some scary ones back then, and they would have defined the "thug" title easily, based on how they acted, not how they looked).

 

[SoonerTraveler]

Sorry, there is nothing truly “private” on the internet, especially in the social media realm.

In the real physical world, the old saying by Benjamin Franklin is correct: Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead.

It is even harder than that to keep something private in the digital world.

 

[tycat947]

Pope was cut from Chicago Sky and has already posted about experience on Facebook (taken from BaylorFans.com). She gets some digs in about playing with Griner. Maybe why team chemistry is as important as talent.

http://www.baylorfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=256618

 

[SoonerNorm]

I have a different take on what it means if players don't get along personally. Since BU only lost 4 games total in the last 3 years, I would say it means nothing. Shag and Kobe didn't get along either but they still won championships.

 

[MsProudSooner]

I have a different take on what it means if players don't get along personally. Since BU only lost 4 games total in the last 3 years, I would say it means nothing. Shag and Kobe didn't get along either but they still won championships.

Yes, it's true that Baylor only lost 4 games in the last 3 years. They had the best post player yet to play women's basketball and surrounded her with a supporting cast with excellent skills. In those 4 years, they never had to deal with losing key players to injury for any extended period of time. Yet they only won 1 NC and went to 2 Final Fours. They only lost 4 games, but ultimately, they underachieved - if you use Final Fours and National Championships as your measuring stick. Would Geno or Pat Summit - in her prime - have been more successful with the same amount of talent? What was missing? I think one missing ingredient was chemistry. The other thing that they didn't have was a coach who could create a team that was confident, but humble.

Yes, teams can win championships even if they don't have good chemistry. But 20 years after that championship is won, you have nothing to show for your efforts but a hunk of metal. The 2012/13 Sooner team didn't win any championships. But because of their chemistry they have taken things away from this season that they will benefit from for the rest of their lives. If you only measure the success of your team by championships, this probably doesn't matter to you. But, if you care about the players on the team you support as people as well as players, it's huge.

 

[tycat947]

Yes, it's true that Baylor only lost 4 games in the last 3 years. They had the best post player yet to play women's basketball and surrounded her with a supporting cast with excellent skills. In those 4 years, they never had to deal with losing key players to injury for any extended period of time. Yet they only won 1 NC and went to 2 Final Fours. They only lost 4 games, but ultimately, they underachieved - if you use Final Fours and National Championships as your measuring stick. Would Geno or Pat Summit - in her prime - have been more successful with the same amount of talent? What was missing? I think one missing ingredient was chemistry. The other thing that they didn't have was a coach who could create a team that was confident, but humble.

Yes, teams can win championships even if they don't have good chemistry. But 20 years after that championship is won, you have nothing to show for your efforts but a hunk of metal. The 2012/13 Sooner team didn't win any championships. But because of their chemistry they have taken things away from this season that they will benefit from for the rest of their lives. If you only measure the success of your team by championships, this probably doesn't matter to you. But, if you care about the players on the team you support as people as well as players, it's huge.

:clap:clap:clap

 

[SoonerNorm]

Yes, it's true that Baylor only lost 4 games in the last 3 years. They had the best post player yet to play women's basketball and surrounded her with a supporting cast with excellent skills. In those 4 years, they never had to deal with losing key players to injury for any extended period of time. Yet they only won 1 NC and went to 2 Final Fours. They only lost 4 games, but ultimately, they underachieved - if you use Final Fours and National Championships as your measuring stick. Would Geno or Pat Summit - in her prime - have been more successful with the same amount of talent? What was missing? I think one missing ingredient was chemistry. The other thing that they didn't have was a coach who could create a team that was confident, but humble.

Yes, teams can win championships even if they don't have good chemistry. But 20 years after that championship is won, you have nothing to show for your efforts but a hunk of metal. The 2012/13 Sooner team didn't win any championships. But because of their chemistry they have taken things away from this season that they will benefit from for the rest of their lives. If you only measure the success of your team by championships, this probably doesn't matter to you. But, if you care about the players on the team you support as people as well as players, it's huge.

Baylor was missing great outside shooters. Would Geno have won more? Maybe, maybe not. I think he is the best coach in women's basketball but he loses games too so it's impossible to say if he would have won more with those teams.

It is not feasible to expect all players on a team to like each other. Sure, we would prefer they did but really, it doesn't matter if they don't. They may not like each other and they might not like the coach. But, if they behave themselves, are good students, and do everything they can to make the team successful, that's all anyone can ask of them.

 

[SoonerNorm]

There seems to be a difference of opinion as to what "team chemistry" means. I take it that some here interpret that term as to how well the players get along.

I have a different interpretation. I believe it means how well they 'work' together. Getting along is not a prerequisite of how well they work together. I played on teams in which there was tension between certain players but no one watching one of our games would ever know it because all of that was left off the court and/or playing field. You have too much jealousy and huge egos to expect everyone will get along as friends.

 

[35TangoTango]

There seems to be a difference of opinion as to what "team chemistry" means. I take it that some here interpret that term as to how well the players get along.

I have a different interpretation. I believe it means how well they 'work' together. Getting along is not a prerequisite of how well they work together. I played on teams in which there was tension between certain players but no one watching one of our games would ever know it because all of that was left off the court and/or playing field. You have too much jealousy and huge egos to expect everyone will get along as friends.

I think your interpretation is essentially correct. However, it's a lot easier for players to work well together if they are close both on and off the court. From what I've heard about A&M this year, that lack of getting along definitely interfered with how well they worked together on the court. As a result, one player quit, one is transferring, and one went pro a year early.

An additional caveat is that in order to work well together, each player must accept her role on the team. From Pope's remarks, she wasn't too happy about her role, compared to Griner's. I think she played a lot harder when Griner wasn't on the floor. But then I don't think Pope's ego would have allowed her to be a good team player in any situation.

 

[MsProudSooner]

There seems to be a difference of opinion as to what "team chemistry" means. I take it that some here interpret that term as to how well the players get along.

I have a different interpretation. I believe it means how well they 'work' together. Getting along is not a prerequisite of how well they work together. I played on teams in which there was tension between certain players but no one watching one of our games would ever know it because all of that was left off the court and/or playing field. You have too much jealousy and huge egos to expect everyone will get along as friends.

You are putting words into other people's mouths. My definition of chemistry is they make each other better. They are as happy for their teammates success as they are their own. While that can theoretically happen if the players don't like each other off the court, it's much more likely to happen if they get along. That doesn't mean they are BFFs, but that they respect each other on and off the court.

 

[SoonerNorm]

You are putting words into other people's mouths. My definition of chemistry is they make each other better.

I think your definition is different from the others that I have read about. It is very hard, if not impossible, for fans to know if each player is making others better. Coaches would know but I'm not sure fans ever would.

They are as happy for their teammates success as they are their own. While that can theoretically happen if the players don't like each other off the court, it's much more likely to happen if they get along. That doesn't mean they are BFFs, but that they respect each other on and off the court.

I disagree with that part. If two players don't like each other it's highly unlikely they care if the other has personal success. But, you need for each one to play their best at all times and for them to still work together on the court for the benefit of the team.

 

[35TangoTango]

I think your definition is different from the others that I have read about. It is very hard, if not impossible, for fans to know if each player is making others better. Coaches would know but I'm not sure fans ever would.

In my mind, "working well together", "each player making the others better", and "the whole is more than the sum of the parts", are either all the same thing, or are all parts of chemistry.

 

[tycat947]

I think your interpretation is essentially correct. However, it's a lot easier for players to work well together if they are close both on and off the court. From what I've heard about A&M this year, that lack of getting along definitely interfered with how well they worked together on the court. As a result, one player quit, one is transferring, and one went pro a year early.

An additional caveat is that in order to work well together, each player must accept her role on the team. From Pope's remarks, she wasn't too happy about her role, compared to Griner's. I think she played a lot harder when Griner wasn't on the floor. But then I don't think Pope's ego would have allowed her to be a good team player in any situation.

Good point. Was wondering how A&M with all that talent and Blair didn't fare that well in the tourney.

 

[True Colors]

Obviously a reflection of the coach's attitude. Seemed like Baylor developed an arrogance and sense of entitlement with their success.

Too bad. Good coach and great players but major lack of maturity.

A couple of years ago a person at the university of texas started shooting up a library with an assault rifle. Then he committed suicide. An Oklahoma football player responded on twitter as follows:

“Hey everyone in Austin, tx.......kill yourself #evillaugh.”

then he followed that up by posting

“Everyone in austin, tx disregard that last tweet....y'all will mess around n do it lmao.”

TC

 

[True Colors]

First, it is stupid to post something like this on any social networking page where it can be seen by the world. I don't know if Pope is a good person or a bad person but controlling emotions is something she needs to work on.

Secondly, people in general complain waaaaaay too much about the officials. Refs make mistakes just like we all do. But, officiating is almost never the reason a team wins or loses. Players can play harder. Players can defend better. Players can follow up shots and get second chance opportunities. Players can take better care of the basketball. Players can go harder after rebounds. Coaches can do a better job of managing the game, making adjustments, changing strategy, etc. Games are won and lost by players and coaches (mostly players). When you lose, take responsibility, practice harder for the next game, and always leave it all on the court.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/scores106/106259/NCAAF701879.htm

OU coach Stoops still hot over bad call; Oregon coach moves on

EUGENE, Ore. (AP) - There are no bad feelings between Oregon's Mike Bellotti and Oklahoma's Bob Stoops. Both are having difficulty with last Saturday's blown call.

Bellotti because it taints the Ducks' victory, and Stoops because, well, the Sooners got robbed.

``It was unfortunate that there were errors made because it does take away,'' Bellotti said. ``It's difficult for Oklahoma and it's difficult for Oregon.''

The two coaches spoke Tuesday morning about Oklahoma's 34-33 loss Saturday, a game in which an incorrect call on an onside kick led to Oregon's winning touchdown in the final minute.

``He just apologized and said that it's unfortunate that the two of us have got to be in the middle of it,'' Stoops said.

The Pac-10 reviewed two plays on Oregon's game-winning drive - an onside kick that gave the Ducks possession and a pass interference call one play before Oregon's winning touchdown.

The league said the onside kick was touched by an Oregon player before it had traveled the required 10 yards, and, therefore, the ball should have been awarded to Oklahoma. Video also shows an Oklahoma player actually recovered the ball, although that aspect of the play was not reviewable under the instant replay rule.

The subsequent pass interference call against Oklahoma was also reviewed by the conference, which found it did not have indisputable evidence that the pass was tipped, as Stoops had claimed.

The league suspended the officials responsible for one game, and commissioner Tom Hansen apologized for the mistake. Conference spokesman Jim Muldoon said the Pac-10 will put its policy of using league officials for non-conference games before its athletic directors at their next meeting on Oct. 12.

Stoops said Tuesday he was speaking for the last time on the matter, but had promised his players he would voice their concerns.

``We can't sit here and say OK,'' Stoops said. ``It's unacceptable and inexcusable, to them (the players) and to us, because we can't get it back, and they earned it. That's the hard truth of it, and now our situation is severely altered.''

Oregon, now 3-0, moved up in the polls from No. 18 to No. 15 after the win. Oklahoma (2-1) dropped from No. 15 to No. 17.

``I feel very fortunate for us to have won that football game, not for the officials' errors, but for how our team played,'' Bellotti said. ``We were lucky, we made plays and we never gave up. It's unfortunate that any team had to lose, or the efforts of my players are questioned, because of officials' errors.''

The loudest protest came from University of Oklahoma president David Boren, who wrote Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg and requested, among other things, that the conference request that the game ``should not go into the record books as a win or a loss by either team in light of the level of officiating mistakes.''

Meanwhile, the instant replay official at the game said he feels like he is under siege after receiving menacing phone calls and a death threat.

``They not only threatened me, they threatened my wife and kids,'' Gordon Riese said.

Police are investigating the calls and keeping an eye on the official's neighborhood.

Stoops implored fans that no one should be singled out for the outcome.

Bellotti said overlooked was Oregon's effort on the final play of the game - Oklahoma's field goal attempt from 42 yards out that would have given the Sooners the victory.

The Ducks blocked the kick.

``I'm as proud of that play and that effort as anything I've ever seen in coaching my entire career,'' Bellotti said.

Stoops said the Sooners were ready to move on. Next up for the Sooners is Middle Tennessee. Oregon has a bye.

``It's behind us. We're motivated,'' Stoops said. ``We've got another game coming up and we're going to keep getting better. That's all the motivation we need.''

 

[MsProudSooner]

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/scores106/106259/NCAAF701879.htm

OU coach Stoops still hot over bad call; Oregon coach moves on

EUGENE, Ore. (AP) - There are no bad feelings between Oregon's Mike Bellotti and Oklahoma's Bob Stoops. Both are having difficulty with last Saturday's blown call.

Bellotti because it taints the Ducks' victory, and Stoops because, well, the Sooners got robbed.

``It was unfortunate that there were errors made because it does take away,'' Bellotti said. ``It's difficult for Oklahoma and it's difficult for Oregon.''

The two coaches spoke Tuesday morning about Oklahoma's 34-33 loss Saturday, a game in which an incorrect call on an onside kick led to Oregon's winning touchdown in the final minute.

``He just apologized and said that it's unfortunate that the two of us have got to be in the middle of it,'' Stoops said.

The Pac-10 reviewed two plays on Oregon's game-winning drive - an onside kick that gave the Ducks possession and a pass interference call one play before Oregon's winning touchdown.

The league said the onside kick was touched by an Oregon player before it had traveled the required 10 yards, and, therefore, the ball should have been awarded to Oklahoma. Video also shows an Oklahoma player actually recovered the ball, although that aspect of the play was not reviewable under the instant replay rule.

The subsequent pass interference call against Oklahoma was also reviewed by the conference, which found it did not have indisputable evidence that the pass was tipped, as Stoops had claimed.

The league suspended the officials responsible for one game, and commissioner Tom Hansen apologized for the mistake. Conference spokesman Jim Muldoon said the Pac-10 will put its policy of using league officials for non-conference games before its athletic directors at their next meeting on Oct. 12.

Stoops said Tuesday he was speaking for the last time on the matter, but had promised his players he would voice their concerns.

``We can't sit here and say OK,'' Stoops said. ``It's unacceptable and inexcusable, to them (the players) and to us, because we can't get it back, and they earned it. That's the hard truth of it, and now our situation is severely altered.''

Oregon, now 3-0, moved up in the polls from No. 18 to No. 15 after the win. Oklahoma (2-1) dropped from No. 15 to No. 17.

``I feel very fortunate for us to have won that football game, not for the officials' errors, but for how our team played,'' Bellotti said. ``We were lucky, we made plays and we never gave up. It's unfortunate that any team had to lose, or the efforts of my players are questioned, because of officials' errors.''

The loudest protest came from University of Oklahoma president David Boren, who wrote Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg and requested, among other things, that the conference request that the game ``should not go into the record books as a win or a loss by either team in light of the level of officiating mistakes.''

Meanwhile, the instant replay official at the game said he feels like he is under siege after receiving menacing phone calls and a death threat.

``They not only threatened me, they threatened my wife and kids,'' Gordon Riese said.

Police are investigating the calls and keeping an eye on the official's neighborhood.

Stoops implored fans that no one should be singled out for the outcome.

Bellotti said overlooked was Oregon's effort on the final play of the game - Oklahoma's field goal attempt from 42 yards out that would have given the Sooners the victory.

The Ducks blocked the kick.

``I'm as proud of that play and that effort as anything I've ever seen in coaching my entire career,'' Bellotti said.

Stoops said the Sooners were ready to move on. Next up for the Sooners is Middle Tennessee. Oregon has a bye.

``It's behind us. We're motivated,'' Stoops said. ``We've got another game coming up and we're going to keep getting better. That's all the motivation we need.''

The are some major difference between the 2 situations.

1) There was a general outcry from people other than just OU fans - people who had no vested interest in the outcome - regarding the Oregon game. I haven't heard anyone other than Baylor fans whine about the officiating in their game against Louisville.

2) The replay official involved was fired over the incident. I haven't heard a word about any actions taken against the officials in the Baylor/Louisville game.