Northwestern Wildcats

[Bart]

You're amazing.

Thanks, Lar. You’re not so bad yourself.

But seriously – when was the last time Northwestern was a serious threat to win the national title? This has been a pattern for years now. They can’t run with the big dogs anymore—let’s face it. Until they win another national championship, I don’t want to hear about their past accomplishments. What-have-you-done-for-me-lately is the engine that drives sports.

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

[LarryGamLax]

You're amazing.

Thanks, Lar. You’re not so bad yourself.

But seriously – when was the last time Northwestern was a serious threat to win the national title? This has been a pattern for years now. They can’t run with the big dogs anymore—let’s face it. Until they win another national championship, I don’t want to hear about their past accomplishments. What-have-you-done-for-me-lately is the engine that drives sports.

Dude, your vaunted BC has the exact same amount of National Titles as JMU...ONE! Let me repeat that for the hard of hearing ONE! That's good, but it's only one. And it took them FOUR times to get there. JMU did it in their only appearance...and they beat your vaunted BC. What does it say about your allusions of a Dynasty when one of your 3 losses, in the Finals, was to a team from a non-Power 5 conference or as you might say '2nd level'??

As Dale Krantz(Rossington-Collins Band) sang on "Opportunity" :

Opportunity is for the taking
Look inside yourself, you'll see
Then go clean up your own Backyard
Leave my yard to me

Way to avoid the point, Larry. This is the NU thread, not BC. Any thoughts on what I said about Northwestern? (And you show me one place where I wrote BC was a dynasty.)

I didn't avoid ONE DAMN POINT!! I have reached my breaking point with you and I'm not trying to continue with this BS. Please do not address anymore questions to me and I will avoid your topics. Thanks and continue to enjoy the Forum.

[8meterPA]

You're amazing.

Thanks, Lar. You’re not so bad yourself.

But seriously – when was the last time Northwestern was a serious threat to win the national title? This has been a pattern for years now. They can’t run with the big dogs anymore—let’s face it. Until they win another national championship, I don’t want to hear about their past accomplishments. What-have-you-done-for-me-lately is the engine that drives sports.

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

correct - get to the final 4 and you have a chance. Don't forget that UNC was literally an Ortega pipe shot away from a different outcome against BC and therefore a different national champion.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Duke and UVA didn't beat a ranked team other than each other

UVA at #14 Richmond win 15-9 on 2/19

UVA vs #16 VT win 12-10 2/27

UVA vs #25 Louisville 13-12 on 3/6

UVA at #22 JMU win 15-12 on 3/26

UVA vs UConn win 19-13 on 5/14 1st rd NCAA’s

Duke vs #18 VT win 12-8 2/21

Duke at #16 Louisville win 12-10 4/8

Duke vs #12 Maryland win 13-12 in 2nd rd of NCAA's

and were ranked in the top 10 all year due to OOC wins against bad teams.

Due also to so called “good losses”

Meanwhile a team like PSU beat MD twice and Rutgers once and wasn't even ranked.

Penn State also finished with a record of 4-9

Va Tech and Louisville wouldn't win a game in the Big Ten just like they didn't in the ACC other than against each other and the Va Tech win over UVA.

I think claiming Louisville and VT wouldn't win a single game in the Big 10 is nonsense. They won games in the ACC and they won games against ranked opponents outside. Louisville vs #24 Colorado win 12-9 on 2/18 in addition to the 13-9 win over VT. They also fought to a one goal loss at #8 Virginia and an overtime loss at #5 Boston College.

Virginia Tech in addition to the 20-15 win over #8 Virginia also won 10-5 at #19 Elon and lost in OT to #14 Jacksonville. Do you really maintain neither of these teams would be able to eke out a win against the likes of Ohio State (4-9) or Michigan (3-9)?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

That's all I can go by is the rearview mirror. Judging from their past performances, they are not a serious threat to win--not when they show up and get embarrassed and blown out. I have no doubt it's difficult to make the final four, but how can I take them seriously when they get there and crash out? In the '19 semi vs Maryland, the Terps scored the last 9 goals of the game for a 25-13 win. In '21 they gave up 6 of the last 7 to Syracuse for a 21-13 Orange win.

Until they do different, I can't conclude or predict anything different. Like I said earlier--I love the Wildcats, but I'm not going to sugarcoat their last two dismal appearances in the NCAA semi's or their failure to reach the championship game since 2012.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

correct - get to the final 4 and you have a chance. Don't forget that UNC was literally an Ortega pipe shot away from a different outcome against BC and therefore a different national champion.

Northwestern came nowhere near having a single pipe shot decide their fate in their last 2 semifinal losses. In the '19 game vs Maryland, they never had the lead the entire game and lost 25-13 as they watched Maryland open both barrels in the end by scoring the last 9 goals of the game. In the game against Syracuse this past May, NU scored the first goal of the game and then trailed throughout, never getting closer than a 3 goal deficit with 7:27 left in the 2nd, only to allow 6 of the games final 7 goals to the Orange for a final of 21-13.

[LarryGamLax]

You're amazing.

Thanks, Lar. You’re not so bad yourself.

But seriously – when was the last time Northwestern was a serious threat to win the national title? This has been a pattern for years now. They can’t run with the big dogs anymore—let’s face it. Until they win another national championship, I don’t want to hear about their past accomplishments. What-have-you-done-for-me-lately is the engine that drives sports.

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

Thanks for that Bart. I did not understand how any team that makes it to the Final is NOT a serious contender for the NC. Made zero sense.

[hmmm]

Duke and UVA didn't beat a ranked team other than each other

UVA at #14 Richmond win 15-9 on 2/19

UVA vs #16 VT win 12-10 2/27

UVA vs #25 Louisville 13-12 on 3/6

UVA at #22 JMU win 15-12 on 3/26

UVA vs UConn win 19-13 on 5/14 1st rd NCAA’s

Duke vs #18 VT win 12-8 2/21

Duke at #16 Louisville win 12-10 4/8

Duke vs #12 Maryland win 13-12 in 2nd rd of NCAA's

and were ranked in the top 10 all year due to OOC wins against bad teams.

Due also to so called “good losses”

Meanwhile a team like PSU beat MD twice and Rutgers once and wasn't even ranked.

Penn State also finished with a record of 4-9

Va Tech and Louisville wouldn't win a game in the Big Ten just like they didn't in the ACC other than against each other and the Va Tech win over UVA.

I think claiming Louisville and VT wouldn't win a single game in the Big 10 is nonsense. They won games in the ACC and they won games against ranked opponents outside. Louisville vs #24 Colorado win 12-9 on 2/18 in addition to the 13-9 win over VT. They also fought to a one goal loss at #8 Virginia and an overtime loss at #5 Boston College.

Virginia Tech in addition to the 20-15 win over #8 Virginia also won 10-5 at #19 Elon and lost in OT to #14 Jacksonville. Do you really maintain neither of these teams would be able to eke out a win against the likes of Ohio State (4-9) or Michigan (3-9)?

Sure maybe Va Tech or Louisville could eke out a win against OSU or Michigan. But they'd end up with the same record and at the bottom of the standing as they did in the ACC. Every game you listed, with the exception of JMU who was terrible early last year is a joke. Va Tech lost to Davidson and finished 5-11. Louisville was also 5-11. Yes they won games in the ACC. Louisville beat Va Tech and Va Tech beat UVA. Do you really think either Va Tech or Louisville should have been ranked? Is their resume of wins at 5-11 actually better than PSU at 4-9 with 2 wins over MD and a win over Rutgers? Elon was only ranked at the time because they had beaten JMU, who as I said was terrible early last season 6-5. The ACC is constantly overrated. Even in the final IL poll. Va Tech was 20th at 5-11. Hopkins was only 19th at 8-7 with 3 wins over PSU, a win over Rutgers, 2 over OSU, 2 over Michigan and 3 1 goal losses to MD. If the Big Ten teams had the option of playing the Big South and ASUN teams that the ACC teams played they'd have the same records.

Richmond didn't finish the season ranked
Elon didn't finish the season ranked
Louisville didn't finish the season ranked
UCONN didn't finish the season ranked

I stand by what I said.

[8meterPA]

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

correct - get to the final 4 and you have a chance. Don't forget that UNC was literally an Ortega pipe shot away from a different outcome against BC and therefore a different national champion.

Northwestern came nowhere near having a single pipe shot decide their fate in their last 2 semifinal losses. In the '19 game vs Maryland, they never had the lead the entire game and lost 25-13 as they watched Maryland open both barrels in the end by scoring the last 9 goals of the game. In the game against Syracuse this past May, NU scored the first goal of the game and then trailed throughout, never getting closer than a 3 goal deficit with 7:27 left in the 2nd, only to allow 6 of the games final 7 goals to the Orange for a final of 21-13.

UNC.BC.Ortega.Pipe.

You watched the game, right?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

correct - get to the final 4 and you have a chance. Don't forget that UNC was literally an Ortega pipe shot away from a different outcome against BC and therefore a different national champion.

Northwestern came nowhere near having a single pipe shot decide their fate in their last 2 semifinal losses. In the '19 game vs Maryland, they never had the lead the entire game and lost 25-13 as they watched Maryland open both barrels in the end by scoring the last 9 goals of the game. In the game against Syracuse this past May, NU scored the first goal of the game and then trailed throughout, never getting closer than a 3 goal deficit with 7:27 left in the 2nd, only to allow 6 of the games final 7 goals to the Orange for a final of 21-13.

UNC.BC.Ortega.Pipe.

You watched the game, right?

Yes--I watched the game. I know Ortega hit the pipe. I think Carolina should have won that game but they choked it away. I wrote "Northwestern came nowhere near having a single pipe shot decide their fate" Not Carolina.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Duke and UVA didn't beat a ranked team other than each other

UVA at #14 Richmond win 15-9 on 2/19

UVA vs #16 VT win 12-10 2/27

UVA vs #25 Louisville 13-12 on 3/6

UVA at #22 JMU win 15-12 on 3/26

UVA vs UConn win 19-13 on 5/14 1st rd NCAA’s

Duke vs #18 VT win 12-8 2/21

Duke at #16 Louisville win 12-10 4/8

Duke vs #12 Maryland win 13-12 in 2nd rd of NCAA's

and were ranked in the top 10 all year due to OOC wins against bad teams.

Due also to so called “good losses”

Meanwhile a team like PSU beat MD twice and Rutgers once and wasn't even ranked.

Penn State also finished with a record of 4-9

Va Tech and Louisville wouldn't win a game in the Big Ten just like they didn't in the ACC other than against each other and the Va Tech win over UVA.

I think claiming Louisville and VT wouldn't win a single game in the Big 10 is nonsense. They won games in the ACC and they won games against ranked opponents outside. Louisville vs #24 Colorado win 12-9 on 2/18 in addition to the 13-9 win over VT. They also fought to a one goal loss at #8 Virginia and an overtime loss at #5 Boston College.

Virginia Tech in addition to the 20-15 win over #8 Virginia also won 10-5 at #19 Elon and lost in OT to #14 Jacksonville. Do you really maintain neither of these teams would be able to eke out a win against the likes of Ohio State (4-9) or Michigan (3-9)?

Sure maybe Va Tech or Louisville could eke out a win against OSU or Michigan. But they'd end up with the same record and at the bottom of the standing as they did in the ACC. Every game you listed, with the exception of JMU who was terrible early last year is a joke. Va Tech lost to Davidson and finished 5-11. Louisville was also 5-11. Yes they won games in the ACC. Louisville beat Va Tech and Va Tech beat UVA. Do you really think either Va Tech or Louisville should have been ranked? Is their resume of wins at 5-11 actually better than PSU at 4-9 with 2 wins over MD and a win over Rutgers? Elon was only ranked at the time because they had beaten JMU, who as I said was terrible early last season 6-5. The ACC is constantly overrated. Even in the final IL poll. Va Tech was 20th at 5-11. Hopkins was only 19th at 8-7 with 3 wins over PSU, a win over Rutgers, 2 over OSU, 2 over Michigan and 3 1 goal losses to MD. If the Big Ten teams had the option of playing the Big South and ASUN teams that the ACC teams played they'd have the same records.

Richmond didn't finish the season ranked
Elon didn't finish the season ranked
Louisville didn't finish the season ranked
UCONN didn't finish the season ranked

I stand by what I said.

You're qualifying what you said, actually. That's different than standing by what you said.

[Bart]

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

That's all I can go by is the rearview mirror. Judging from their past performances, they are not a serious threat to win--not when they show up and get embarrassed and blown out. I have no doubt it's difficult to make the final four, but how can I take them seriously when they get there and crash out? In the '19 semi vs Maryland, the Terps scored the last 9 goals of the game for a 25-13 win. In '21 they gave up 6 of the last 7 to Syracuse for a 21-13 Orange win.

Until they do different, I can't conclude or predict anything different. Like I said earlier--I love the Wildcats, but I'm not going to sugarcoat their last two dismal appearances in the NCAA semi's or their failure to reach the championship game since 2012.

I was going to not respond to this but I just can't. I don't want to start the BS that was previous but I am going to say the following.

This type of view, in my opinion, comes from the outside looking in. NW was absolutely a threat the last two years....they were in the games. I will give you a hint, winning is hard. It is really hard. Only those people whom have stepped into the arena and put themselves out there understand that fact. If you have ever played in an NCAA tournament game you would realize that you take every single opponent seriously. As soon as you do not, you loose. You can not understand that until you have tried to accomplish what NW did the past two seasons. I assure you SU took NW seriously in the semifinals this year as did Maryland the year before.

You speak of the last two losses like it is some type of pox on the NW lacrosse program. It isn't, at least in my opinion. I can assure you of two things: 1) there is no one more disappointed in those losses than the players and coaches on those teams 2) they would not care what you want to conclude or predict. It is your right to have these notions and I am not telling you that you do not have that right but in my opinion they are shallow and come from the side of sports that really adds nothing to the overall context of the kids playing the game.

NW has made the final 4 the last two times the tourney has been held. That in itself makes them a threat to win. It is always easy to judge in your review mirror when you have not had to actually drive the car to the place you are looking back at. It is always easy to look back at the stats and replays of the game and harden your conclusions but I will reiterate......winning is hard. Will NW win in the near future? Heck if I know. They may continue to "crash out" as you say or they may have the right chemistry, get a few favorable bounces and win it all.

It is your opinion. You are entitled to it as am I entitled to my opinion on this matter. I am not attempting to rehash old quarrels but IMO, there is a different side to this equation.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

That's all I can go by is the rearview mirror. Judging from their past performances, they are not a serious threat to win--not when they show up and get embarrassed and blown out. I have no doubt it's difficult to make the final four, but how can I take them seriously when they get there and crash out? In the '19 semi vs Maryland, the Terps scored the last 9 goals of the game for a 25-13 win. In '21 they gave up 6 of the last 7 to Syracuse for a 21-13 Orange win.

Until they do different, I can't conclude or predict anything different. Like I said earlier--I love the Wildcats, but I'm not going to sugarcoat their last two dismal appearances in the NCAA semi's or their failure to reach the championship game since 2012.

I was going to not respond to this but I just can't. I don't want to start the BS that was previous but I am going to say the following.

This type of view, in my opinion, comes from the outside looking in. NW was absolutely a threat the last two years....they were in the games. I will give you a hint, winning is hard. It is really hard. Only those people whom have stepped into the arena and put themselves out there understand that fact. If you have ever played in an NCAA tournament game you would realize that you take every single opponent seriously. As soon as you do not, you loose. You can not understand that until you have tried to accomplish what NW did the past two seasons. I assure you SU took NW seriously in the semifinals this year as did Maryland the year before.

You speak of the last two losses like it is some type of pox on the NW lacrosse program. It isn't, at least in my opinion. I can assure you of two things: 1) there is no one more disappointed in those losses than the players and coaches on those teams 2) they would not care what you want to conclude or predict. It is your right to have these notions and I am not telling you that you do not have that right but in my opinion they are shallow and come from the side of sports that really adds nothing to the overall context of the kids playing the game.

NW has made the final 4 the last two times the tourney has been held. That in itself makes them a threat to win. It is always easy to judge in your review mirror when you have not had to actually drive the car to the place you are looking back at. It is always easy to look back at the stats and replays of the game and harden your conclusions but I will reiterate......winning is hard. Will NW win in the near future? Heck if I know. They may continue to "crash out" as you say or they may have the right chemistry, get a few favorable bounces and win it all.

It is your opinion. You are entitled to it as am I entitled to my opinion on this matter. I am not attempting to rehash old quarrels but IMO, there is a different side to this equation.

The only thing I disagree with you on is your assessment of me personally which I don’t think adds anything except rancor to these boards whenever you and I or anybody else disagrees. I am who I am and my background is what it is. It gets awfully tedious to read about what a shallow person I am and how shallow my thoughts are every time I share my perspective that doesn’t come from a background of playing or having had children who played. Everything else you said about the teams and the games and how difficult it is to win and making it to the final four, I am in complete agreement with you on. I’ve been very clear all along that I’ve never played the game and that I’ve never had children who played the game except for my oldest son who briefly played for a portion of a semester in the eighth grade. Apart from that my only exposure to the game has been no different than any other sport—NFL, NHL, WTA, MLB, etc. That’s where my opinion comes from. I view the sport of women’s lacrosse as a fan. I love this sport. I have never fallen in love with a sport like I have this one. But I am allowed to share my perspective even though my background is different than most of the people who frequent these boards. You and I had a very similar exchange waaaaay back when—thousands of posts ago. Your perspective hasn’t changed nor has mine. My hope is that there is room enough on these boards for someone like me in addition to someone like you to coexist peacefully without getting personal. We both come from completely different backgrounds. That shouldn’t restrict either of us from voicing our opinions on what we see. And for the record, I wasn’t alone on this one. My original post had support.

[Bart]

I am confused. When is a team that is in the final four not a serious threat to win the championship? It is easy to say now that it is over but in a one and done tournament the longer you go the more serious you are to win a championship. Do you have any idea as to the difficulty in making it to the final four? Seriously, not a threat to win? Easy to say that in the review mirror.

That's all I can go by is the rearview mirror. Judging from their past performances, they are not a serious threat to win--not when they show up and get embarrassed and blown out. I have no doubt it's difficult to make the final four, but how can I take them seriously when they get there and crash out? In the '19 semi vs Maryland, the Terps scored the last 9 goals of the game for a 25-13 win. In '21 they gave up 6 of the last 7 to Syracuse for a 21-13 Orange win.

Until they do different, I can't conclude or predict anything different. Like I said earlier--I love the Wildcats, but I'm not going to sugarcoat their last two dismal appearances in the NCAA semi's or their failure to reach the championship game since 2012.

I was going to not respond to this but I just can't. I don't want to start the BS that was previous but I am going to say the following.

This type of view, in my opinion, comes from the outside looking in. NW was absolutely a threat the last two years....they were in the games. I will give you a hint, winning is hard. It is really hard. Only those people whom have stepped into the arena and put themselves out there understand that fact. If you have ever played in an NCAA tournament game you would realize that you take every single opponent seriously. As soon as you do not, you loose. You can not understand that until you have tried to accomplish what NW did the past two seasons. I assure you SU took NW seriously in the semifinals this year as did Maryland the year before.

You speak of the last two losses like it is some type of pox on the NW lacrosse program. It isn't, at least in my opinion. I can assure you of two things: 1) there is no one more disappointed in those losses than the players and coaches on those teams 2) they would not care what you want to conclude or predict. It is your right to have these notions and I am not telling you that you do not have that right but in my opinion they are shallow and come from the side of sports that really adds nothing to the overall context of the kids playing the game.

NW has made the final 4 the last two times the tourney has been held. That in itself makes them a threat to win. It is always easy to judge in your review mirror when you have not had to actually drive the car to the place you are looking back at. It is always easy to look back at the stats and replays of the game and harden your conclusions but I will reiterate......winning is hard. Will NW win in the near future? Heck if I know. They may continue to "crash out" as you say or they may have the right chemistry, get a few favorable bounces and win it all.

It is your opinion. You are entitled to it as am I entitled to my opinion on this matter. I am not attempting to rehash old quarrels but IMO, there is a different side to this equation.

The only thing I disagree with you on is your assessment of me personally which I don’t think adds anything except rancor to these boards whenever you and I or anybody else disagrees. I am who I am and my background is what it is. It gets awfully tedious to read about what a shallow person I am and how shallow my thoughts are every time I share my perspective that doesn’t come from a background of playing or having had children who played. Everything else you said about the teams and the games and how difficult it is to win and making it to the final four, I am in complete agreement with you on. I’ve been very clear all along that I’ve never played the game and that I’ve never had children who played the game except for my oldest son who briefly played for a portion of a semester in the eighth grade. Apart from that my only exposure to the game has been no different than any other sport—NFL, NHL, WTA, MLB, etc. That’s where my opinion comes from. I view the sport of women’s lacrosse as a fan. I love this sport. I have never fallen in love with a sport like I have this one. But I am allowed to share my perspective even though my background is different than most of the people who frequent these boards. You and I had a very similar exchange waaaaay back when—thousands of posts ago. Your perspective hasn’t changed nor has mine. My hope is that there is room enough on these boards for someone like me in addition to someone like you to coexist peacefully without getting personal. We both come from completely different backgrounds. That shouldn’t restrict either of us from voicing our opinions on what we see. And for the record, I wasn’t alone on this one. My original post had support.

I did not call you a shallow person. I do not know you personally, you could be a really great guy/gal. I called your notion on this shallow, big difference, at least to me. And yes, I believe your perspective changes once you have had an iron in the fire. In general, I find those whom have never done so are the most critical.

I also did not say you could not voice your opinion. I do not know if I ever have, I may have, but you have that right. Your opinion on this was bold so when you say something like that you should expect there might be some bold statements to the opposite.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

I did not call you a shallow person. I do not know you personally, you could be a really great guy/gal. I called your notion on this shallow, big difference, at least to me. And yes, I believe your perspective changes once you have had an iron in the fire. In general, I find those whom have never done so are the most critical.

I also did not say you could not voice your opinion. I do not know if I ever have, I may have, but you have that right. Your opinion on this was bold so when you say something like that you should expect there might be some bold statements to the opposite.

I felt like it was implied. My background shouldn’t matter in the least. Jackie MacMullan is a female sports writer here in Boston. She has written about the Celtics for decades. She never played NBA basketball. Karen Guregian has been covering the New England Patriots for decades. She never played NFL football. They are both often critical of the teams they cover. But they also write positive things as well. I post a great deal of positive opinions about the sport and the teams, the coaches and the players, and even an occasional play-by-play or color commentator. Do those also warrant criticism because I have not played the game and I don’t have a daughter who plays the game?

I would like to be able to offer my opinions without being criticized because I never played the game or I don’t have a daughter in the game, so my opinion isn’t worth as much as yours. The post in question here – did I use facts to back it up? If I offered the same opinion about the New York Yankees, would that make any difference?

I would just like to have my opinions assessed at face value—not based on whether I played the game or I have a daughter who plays the game.

[8meterPA]

I did not call you a shallow person. I do not know you personally, you could be a really great guy/gal. I called your notion on this shallow, big difference, at least to me. And yes, I believe your perspective changes once you have had an iron in the fire. In general, I find those whom have never done so are the most critical.

I also did not say you could not voice your opinion. I do not know if I ever have, I may have, but you have that right. Your opinion on this was bold so when you say something like that you should expect there might be some bold statements to the opposite.

I felt like it was implied. My background shouldn’t matter in the least. Jackie MacMullan is a female sports writer here in Boston. She has written about the Celtics for decades. She never played NBA basketball. Karen Guregian has been covering the New England Patriots for decades. She never played NFL football. They are both often critical of the teams they cover. But they also write positive things as well. I post a great deal of positive opinions about the sport and the teams, the coaches and the players, and even an occasional play-by-play or color commentator. Do those also warrant criticism because I have not played the game and I don’t have a daughter who plays the game?

I would like to be able to offer my opinions without being criticized because I never played the game or I don’t have a daughter in the game, so my opinion isn’t worth as much as yours. The post in question here – did I use facts to back it up? If I offered the same opinion about the New York Yankees, would that make any difference?

I would just like to have my opinions assessed at face value—not based on whether I played the game or I have a daughter who plays the game.

You have to know your audience and the audience here is comprised of current players, former players, parents of current players, parents of former players, current coaches, former coaches, refs, well hopefully you get the idea.

So when you express an opinion, which you are obviously entitled to, that is "bold" or perhaps misguided or even wrong - you will get feedback. When you make emphatic statements, just to name a few, about NW reaching the final four but never having a chance, or UNC choking, or judging players to be marginal - I can tell you that you are getting a collective eyeroll. And when you can't read the room and know maybe when it's time to back off just a bit - because the "room" or "audience" are people who have years and years of real on the field experience are giving you insight from those years of real experience and you can't acknowledge that - well then the conversation becomes pretty non productive.

just my 2 cents.

[Bart]

I did not call you a shallow person. I do not know you personally, you could be a really great guy/gal. I called your notion on this shallow, big difference, at least to me. And yes, I believe your perspective changes once you have had an iron in the fire. In general, I find those whom have never done so are the most critical.

I also did not say you could not voice your opinion. I do not know if I ever have, I may have, but you have that right. Your opinion on this was bold so when you say something like that you should expect there might be some bold statements to the opposite.

I felt like it was implied. My background shouldn’t matter in the least. Jackie MacMullan is a female sports writer here in Boston. She has written about the Celtics for decades. She never played NBA basketball. Karen Guregian has been covering the New England Patriots for decades. She never played NFL football. They are both often critical of the teams they cover. But they also write positive things as well. I post a great deal of positive opinions about the sport and the teams, the coaches and the players, and even an occasional play-by-play or color commentator. Do those also warrant criticism because I have not played the game and I don’t have a daughter who plays the game?

It shouldn't? The two you bring up are sports writers that cover sports they have never played. For the vast majority of people, their target audience, that fact means little. Do you think for the select few that have been directly involved in the NBA/NFL might have a different opinion based on the fact the two writers have never had the same experiences as them and are making their observations having never experience the situations they are commenting on first hand? IDK for certain but I would suggest so.

I would like to be able to offer my opinions without being criticized because I never played the game or I don’t have a daughter in the game, so my opinion isn’t worth as much as yours. The post in question here – did I use facts to back it up? If I offered the same opinion about the New York Yankees, would that make any difference?

You keep saying you generated your opinions based on your experiences watching sports for so many years. That is fine and dandy. Others are sharing their opinions generated from years of first hand experience either as a player, coach or even a parent. You are using facts but perhaps others are using their personal experiences? Facts can be black or white...those colors get a bit grey when you have actually experienced the act you are talking about. Case in point, NW is not a serious contender in your eyes. That is fine and your opinion. If someone has actually played in a game like that they might posit that NW was absolutely a serious contender the last two times they were in the final four. Why? They were in the game and once in the game anything can happen.

As for the Yankees, I would have no basis or experience to make that type of judgement....other than I loath baseball.

Is your opinion worth as much as others who have had direct experience?? IDK, that is up to the reader. I will say that my opinion is worth the time it took me to type it out on the keyboard. Nothing more, nothing less. If people choose to agree...fine. If people choose to tell me to STFU...that is fine as well.

I would just like to have my opinions assessed at face value—not based on whether I played the game or I have a daughter who plays the game.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

You have to know your audience and the audience here is comprised of current players, former players, parents of current players, parents of former players, current coaches, former coaches, refs, well hopefully you get the idea.

So when you express an opinion, which you are obviously entitled to, that is "bold" or perhaps misguided or even wrong - you will get feedback. When you make emphatic statements, just to name a few, about NW reaching the final four but never having a chance, or UNC choking, or judging players to be marginal - I can tell you that you are getting a collective eyeroll. And when you can't read the room and know maybe when it's time to back off just a bit - because the "room" or "audience" are people who have years and years of real on the field experience are giving you insight from those years of real experience and you can't acknowledge that - well then the conversation becomes pretty non productive.

just my 2 cents.

Before I respond to this, I’m just curious – did you see my response to your Ortega post?

[8meterPA]

You have to know your audience and the audience here is comprised of current players, former players, parents of current players, parents of former players, current coaches, former coaches, refs, well hopefully you get the idea.

So when you express an opinion, which you are obviously entitled to, that is "bold" or perhaps misguided or even wrong - you will get feedback. When you make emphatic statements, just to name a few, about NW reaching the final four but never having a chance, or UNC choking, or judging players to be marginal - I can tell you that you are getting a collective eyeroll. And when you can't read the room and know maybe when it's time to back off just a bit - because the "room" or "audience" are people who have years and years of real on the field experience are giving you insight from those years of real experience and you can't acknowledge that - well then the conversation becomes pretty non productive.

just my 2 cents.

Before I respond to this, I’m just curious – did you see my response to your Ortega post?

Yes, and maybe i wasn't being as clear as I thought was. My point was that - that by making it to the final four - you absolutely have chance of winning the NC. In this case, UNC was literally a post shot away from changing the make up of the final game and we wouldn't be talking about BC as champion. If NW and Syracuse played 10 times, would Syracuse win all 10? doubtful - Syracuse was the better team on that day but doesn't mean that NW didn't have a chance or be included in the discussion.

BC was in in the final 4, 4 times and won it all once. Does that mean that they never had a shot the previous 3 times or choked? No it doesn't.

That is the point - it's incredibly hard to reach the final 4, the teams all belong, and they all have legit shot to win. The Ortega post shot being an example of how it all could of changed.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Yes, and maybe i wasn't being as clear as I thought was. My point was that - that by making it to the final four - you absolutely have chance of winning the NC. In this case, UNC was literally a post shot away from changing the make up of the final game and we wouldn't be talking about BC as champion. If NW and Syracuse played 10 times, would Syracuse win all 10? doubtful - Syracuse was the better team on that day but doesn't mean that NW didn't have a chance or be included in the discussion.

BC was in in the final 4, 4 times and won it all once. Does that mean that they never had a shot the previous 3 times or choked? No it doesn't.

That is the point - it's incredibly hard to reach the final 4, the teams all belong, and they all have legit shot to win. The Ortega post shot being an example of how it all could of changed.

Gotcha – but do you also see my point that Northwestern was trailing by so much toward the end of both semifinal games that a pipe shot wouldn’t have made any difference?