Let me be clear, I'm free to disagree, and strongly, with the tenor and content of anyone's posts, including yours. In this case, multiple people have been doing such labelling.OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 9:31 amI'll tell you what MDlaxfan76--if you don't like my posts, don't read them--or go pound sand. Either suits me just fine. I'm coming to see that Mr. Mauer is an astute observer.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 9:24 am I'm sorry, this "underperformer" stuff is amazingly tired, as was the "choker" nonsense. Being dismissive of youngsters and teams playing very high caliber ball, yet not winning a NC is the opposite of the spirit of the game.
Over on the men's side, would we have said that Yale was a chronic underperformer (decade after decade of not making it into the top 10)...until they weren't? Or Loyola? or...
Were their players in those non championship seasons deserving of dismissal?
Note, I made the same statement about those who diss the UNC men's program...pointing out that 2016 was simply the year that they caught that final run magic instead of some other team...but often in the mix, often beating very, very good teams
Sure, marvel at the terrific play of specific kids, admire a given program's steady maintenance of a winning culture, etc...but don't diss kids, nor programs which haven't broken through...
I disagree with all of that nonsense. So, said so. And why.
Do you want this to be personal?
Does that give you some jollies?
For that matter, does dissing a bunch of youngsters and coaches give you jollies?
BTW, if you don't want to read my objections, you don't need to do so.