OT: Mazz and area media make the region look idiotic

[XLIX]

Tough to care about this when any decent boy's high school team could mop the floor with them.

 

[upstater1]

I don't think I've posted on this forum in 5 years.

You linking to Mazz is why he does this. He is a mouth breathing moron and you giving him clicks vindicates him. He is easily the worst member of the Boston media and that includes Borges and CHB. At least Felger is just an outright troll in the same vein as Skip Bayless. Mazz isn't. He's just stupid. Stop linking to anything he does, please.

I never listen to him, I don't read him.

But this is on CBS Sports nationally.

People who never heard of this wanker don't know who he is. I am saying the impression they get of Boston people after reading him and others... well, it's not good.

 

[Deus Irae]

There are so many things wrong with that article I don't know where to begin but it is stupidity and sheer laziness to say that.

For instance, look at recruiting. Auriemma doesn't even get the top classes. Other schools do. So it's a combo of the hard work the players put in, more than anyone because he's the most demanding, and his system.

Auriemma is not like Calipari. He is not getting the best classes year after year. Although, he is getting the best one next year, for the first time in a very long time.

The article is fine. I'd be happy to bash Mazz over this if he weren't correct. The problem is that he's dead on. There are problems with your response posts, and some of the posters here crying about Mazz's piece are being idiotic, but I really don't care enough about the topic to get into it.

 

[patfanken]

Mazz sometimes makes me ashamed to be a Tufts grad.

 

[meatface]

Tough to care about this when any decent boy's high school team could mop the floor with them.

Seriously we need an eyeroll response option, just because you don't care doesn't mean they aren't good.

 

[XLIX]

Seriously we need an eyeroll response option, just because you don't care doesn't mean they aren't good.

They're good - actually great - within the context of women's basketball. But the level of competition is that of high school boys (actually, the league is probably not even really that talented).

 

[meatface]

They're good - actually great - within the context of women's basketball. But the level of competition is that of high school boys (actually, the league is probably not even really that talented).

Yeah that's complete BS and based on nothing other than you thinking girls can't possibly be as good as boys, I'm not saying they are the equivalent of the Men's D1 programs or anything but dont be putting out crap just because its what you assume. It be like me assuming the reason your screen name is XLIX is because that's when you jumped on the bandwagon, I have no evidence of that so I don't treat it like fact.

 

[XLIX]

Yeah that's complete BS and based on nothing other than you thinking girls can't possibly be as good as boys,

Um, we are talking about athletic competition. Sorry if this hurts your feelings but yes.... once you hit a certain age, girls aren't as good as boys. I'd take the CT HS state champs over the UConn women and lay 15 (if not more).

I'll bet you didn't even know that the top-tier women's basketball teams use men on their practice squad. And why is that? Because the typical male also-ran intramural pick-up player provides a tougher level of competition for the women starters than any of the other women on the team. And the dirty little secret - despite what the media says - is that the also-ran intramural pick-up player men regularly outperform the women in such scrimmages.

It be like me assuming the reason your screen name is XLIX is because that's when you jumped on the bandwagon, I have no evidence of that so I don't treat it like fact.

That analogy makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[meatface]

Um, we are talking about athletic competition. Sorry if this hurts your feelings but yes.... once you hit a certain age, girls aren't as good as boys. I'd take the CT HS state champs over the UConn women and lay 15 (if not more).

I'll bet you didn't even know that the top-tier women's basketball teams use men on their practice squad. And why is that? Because the typical male also-ran intramural pick-up player provides a tougher level of competition for the women starters than any of the other women on the team. And the dirty little secret - despite what the media says - is that the also-ran intramural pick-up player men regularly outperform the women in such scrimmages.

That analogy makes no sense whatsoever.

Lots of programs practice against men, its not new or even unreported but your assumption that they always win is based on nothing and your assumption that a high school team would win is again not based on biology because even though the top high school players are probably better than Womens collegr players they are spread out among all High schools and unlikely to have enough players who can compete with a college team, even on a state champion team. As for my analogy, ill just answer with an eyeroll response that hopefully will exist soon.

 

[DarrylS]

In the days of Gammons and McDonough et al we all craved anything they wrote and they were revered by most. They were the sports pinnacle..

Then came the great coaches like Belichick and Francona.. and they had to take a back seat some like Borges got butthurt and have tried to payback Belichick, unsuccessfully.

Now they gauge their success with Facebook likes and Twitter followers, everyone loves to watch a train wreck.. unfortunately.

It is like a tree in the forest, if no one clicked on their vitriol.. would they exist??? Maybe if they ignore them, they will go away..

 

[TennisBallHead]

The article is fine. I'd be happy to bash Mazz over this if he weren't correct. The problem is that he's dead on. There are problems with your response posts, and some of the posters here crying about Mazz's piece are being idiotic, but I really don't care enough about the topic to get into it.

You cared enough to post in the thread. I like when you always do that. Make one smug, know-it-all comment and then say you don't care enough to explain it.

 

[1960Pats]

Mazz sometimes makes me ashamed to be a Tufts grad.

OT: Tufts grad eh? I have a pretty interesting story related to Tufts.

I made a donation to Tufts many years ago in the name of a family friend who graduated from the school way back when. Soon after I started getting notices about my Tufts class reunion that was coming up. It was addressed to me as a doctor but I never attended the school. The closest I got was having breakfast at their cafeteria years ago.

Soon I got another letter from Tufts and decided that I should find the doctor with my name and let him know that they're looking for him. I did find him and let his receptionist know that I was getting his 15th reunion notice and he might want to contact the school. I stopped getting the letters after that.

Move ahead to the present, about 20 years after that all took place, and my son and his family moved to a town up north and guess who my daughter-in-law has as her new doctor. Yup, the same man with my name. What are the odds of that happening?

 

[archstanton543]

You linking to Mazz is why he does this. He is a mouth breathing moron and you giving him clicks vindicates him.

He's not, though. He plays a troll on the radio and in his columns.

You see, the old guard grew up in the 80's when the Celts were king and the rest of the teams were has-beens (the Bruins), "cursed" (Red Sox), or incompetent (Patriots) so they got used to hitting that "all-negative, all the time" beat. And they were right to do so because three of the four big teams were horrible.

Now, when the 90's came along and the Sox and Pats improved, they were stuck in their ways. They changed their tone slightly to "sure they're okay now, but it's a matter of time before the wheels come off" and the fanbases ate it up because up until that point, the writers were right.

Then the '00's happened and the fanbases became optimistic one-by-one. The Pats won, the Sox won, the Celts won and then finally the B's won. The fanbases couldn't be happier but the old guard found that playing Debbie Downer got them more clicks, ears and eyes on their drivel (not dribble, people!). They basically sold their credibility for better ratings.

That's why I implore you. Stop listening to or reading them. Tell other people to stop listening and reading and why you stopped. They won't change until you hit them where it hurts. Their ratings (and, therefore, wallets).

 

[Jackson 2]

In the days of Gammons and McDonough et al we all craved anything they wrote and they were revered by most. They were the sports pinnacle..

Then came the great coaches like Belichick and Francona.. and they had to take a back seat some like Borges got butthurt and have tried to payback Belichick, unsuccessfully.

Now they gauge their success with Facebook likes and Twitter followers, everyone loves to watch a train wreck.. unfortunately.

It is like a tree in the forest, if no one clicked on their vitriol.. would they exist??? Maybe if they ignore them, they will go away..

Correct. And around here, the slightest, most miniscule, most trivial slight, perceived or otherwise, will generate a "how dare they" thread in under 2.1 seconds. And that thread will, correpondingly, generate pages of posts characterized by outrage. The targeted mediots, meanwhile, giggle all the way to the bank.

 

[upstater1]

Um, we are talking about athletic competition. Sorry if this hurts your feelings but yes.... once you hit a certain age, girls aren't as good as boys. I'd take the CT HS state champs over the UConn women and lay 15 (if not more).

I'll bet you didn't even know that the top-tier women's basketball teams use men on their practice squad. And why is that? Because the typical male also-ran intramural pick-up player provides a tougher level of competition for the women starters than any of the other women on the team. And the dirty little secret - despite what the media says - is that the also-ran intramural pick-up player men regularly outperform the women in such scrimmages.

That analogy makes no sense whatsoever.

A really good boys' high-school team will beat them. But we're talking good boys teams. Other boys' teams will not (and I'm not talking about bad teams, but mid-level ones).

Have a look at UConn's Gabby Williams. I doubt boys on most average basketball teams possess her athleticism. She's a freak. The top boys teams will have 7 or 8 guys with more athleticism (a lot more). A mid-level basketball team will not have 1 like her.

She'll be faster than those boys, and she'll jump higher, and especially she'll be much quicker--goes without saying that she'll have more skills shooting, dribbling.

 

[upstater1]

The article is fine. I'd be happy to bash Mazz over this if he weren't correct. The problem is that he's dead on. There are problems with your response posts, and some of the posters here crying about Mazz's piece are being idiotic, but I really don't care enough about the topic to get into it.

He says UConn stacks top players against teams with "tomato cans." It's not true.

Easy to prove.

Look at the recruiting rankings.

This isn't a mystery.

 

[Jackson 2]

He says UConn stacks top players against teams with "tomato cans." It's not true.

Easy to prove.

Look at the recruiting rankings.

This isn't a mystery.

Hey, no facts! Knock that **** off!

 

[captain stone]

Mazz sometimes makes me ashamed to be a Tufts grad.

Isn't John TonAsse a Tufts grad too?

 

[Deus Irae]

He says UConn stacks top players against teams with "tomato cans." It's not true.

Easy to prove.

Look at the recruiting rankings.

This isn't a mystery.

The article is at the link. In it, he does not say what you claim.

Hey, no facts! Knock that **** off!

No worries. He wasn't posting facts.

 

[jmt57]

Mazz sometimes makes me ashamed to be a Tufts grad.

Between Mazz and Tomase it's a wonder that you or any other sports fan admits they went to Tufts, despite their renowned academics.