| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stever
Joined: 16 Nov 2004
Posts: 6918
Location: https://womensbasketballdaily.net
Back to top |
 Posted: 02/03/06 7:18 am ::: Rutgers apologizes ... 331 days later. |
Reply  |
|
http://www.rep-am.com/story.php?id=2421
"It took Rutgers University 331 days, but the Scarlet Knights finally issued an apology to UConn women's basketball coach Geno Auriemma Thursday for indiscretions that happened during and immediately following the Big East Tournament championship game last year." |
|
threefrom60
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 2576
Location: Olympia, WA
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/06 8:07 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Woah. I definitely did not see this coming. They got it in just before the first meeting between the two teams since the incident, however. Maybe that was part of the plan. Either to try to calm to waters, or perhaps... to try indirectly to stir things up again? Remind them what happened and try to distract them from the actual game? I doubt it. But it's a thought.
Edited to add - I replied before I read the article. It does mention that this was done 5 days before their first meeting since. But after reading it I get more of an impression of this being done to try to put out any angry, residual fire that may have still been burning in Geno or any of the players. When all of this went down last year, Rutgers was playing much better basketball than Connecticut. It's a bit more of a level playing field this year....
|
|
womens_hoops
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 2831
Back to top |
|
threefrom60
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 2576
Location: Olympia, WA
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/06 8:16 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Unfortunately, reporting that makes the apology alot less sincere.
|
|
dtsnms
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/06 9:21 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| It took 331 days for me to feel somewhat vindicated, but I did say last year that if the whole story were known, it might be looked at differently.
|
|
ThreeBall25
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 2791
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/06 2:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| threefrom60 wrote: |
| When all of this went down last year, Rutgers was playing much better basketball than Connecticut. It's a bit more of a level playing field this year.... |
Are you serious? UConn controlled that game and had last year's series won at 2-1. They won the Big East tourney and Rutgers didn't.
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/06 3:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The CT Post report that Stringer was facing discipline seems unlikely, given the amount of time that passed. Of course, that comment assumes a certain amount of competence on the part of the BEast, so maybe I'm being overoptimistic. An alternative, perhaps more likely theory is that an agreement was reached to avoid a suspension around in May or June, but that it took until now to get the wording done, but even that seems unlikely to me.
As for the comment about RU playing better than UConn going into that game, I'd like to say it was right, but it's not really correct.
Rutgers was playing well leading up to the BET, having beaten UConn at home and long-time nemesis Villanova on the road, and UConn had stumbled, losing at BC in the second-to-last regular season game (which gave RU the Big East regular season title). However, UConn played a very strong conference tournament, blowing out Syracuse and beating Notre Dame handily. RU had a pretty easy win over St. John's, but struggled mightily against Villanova, trailing for most of the game as I recall. At that point, UConn clearly was clicking, and RU was not.
|
|
dtsnms
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/03/06 3:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
The CT Post report that Stringer was facing discipline seems unlikely, given the amount of time that passed. Of course, that comment assumes a certain amount of competence on the part of the BEast, so maybe I'm being overoptimistic. An alternative, perhaps more likely theory is that an agreement was reached to avoid a suspension around in May or June, but that it took until now to get the wording done, but even that seems unlikely to me.
As for the comment about RU playing better than UConn going into that game, I'd like to say it was right, but it's not really correct.
Rutgers was playing well leading up to the BET, having beaten UConn at home and long-time nemesis Villanova on the road, and UConn had stumbled, losing at BC in the second-to-last regular season game (which gave RU the Big East regular season title). However, UConn played a very strong conference tournament, blowing out Syracuse and beating Notre Dame handily. RU had a pretty easy win over St. John's, but struggled mightily against Villanova, trailing for most of the game as I recall. At that point, UConn clearly was clicking, and RU was not. |
BeKnighted having lived in Fairfield County most of my younger life I will add the CT Post may be the worst newspaper I've ever read in terms of accuracy. Interesting that the Hartford Courant didn't report any discipline and CVS.
|
|
|
|
