« Great work, Orlando, see ya, Vince | Main | Good city for football, good weather for football, and maybe even a good game »


Jeff Anderson

You do write about basketball and you pretend to knwo sports just under the cover of being a "columnist" you know that newspapers are old fashion just like you.


Tom wrote, "What are people talking about? What do they ask me about when I run into them, or when they call or email? What do they talk about to each other in the gym, the bar, the coffee shop?"

Very well put. And I can promise you they aren't talking about UConn women's hoops. The streak is remarkable. They have dominated their sport as no team has ever dominated its sport, with the possible exception of UNC-CH soccer. But not many people follow women's hoops, no matter how badly ESPN wants us to. (We also don't follow soccer, no matter how badly ESPN wants us to.) I barely keep track of the Chqarlotte 49ers women's team, and I went to school there.

There is nothing evil about a person who doesn't follow a niche sport, which women's hoops certainly is.


Why must we say that they are breaking the UCLA mens record? Are they not just breaking there own record night in and night out? When ever a mens team surrpasses a womens record we do not say the mens team is breaking the womens record. And I believe that if someone did it would be deemed sexist or not the same. The UConn ladies record is very impressive but I do not believe they will be breaking the mens record tonight just extending there own.


We can only pray that your editor finds reason to let you go soon. Since your cancer, you ahve become a bitter old man. You need a few months off to reflect on what it is you do Tom. If it is not fun anymore, leave. Trust me, we all are growing tired of your negative attitude towards sports you are too busy to become educated on.


Apparently, Tom, you also didn't follow the entire interview. He didn't say that anybody was a "bad person" or "sexist" because they don't watch women's basketball. You are having a knee-jerk reaction because you are only hearing what you want to hear.


As was already stated, they are not breaking the UCLA record. Instead, they are establishing their own.

Congrats to UCONN on what they are accomplishing.

However, I'll be glad when the hype dies down.


UCONN to me is the same as Jeff Johnson winning five Nascar Championships in a row. I don't care and don't try to make me care. In my opinion, at the end of the day, if these records, championships, runs, titles, etc. don't bring growth or butts in seats at a stadium or in front of a television, what have you really achieved other than a personal or team milestone? In our day and age, if your sport isn't growing, it's dying.


See, I even got his name wrong. Should be Jimmie Johnson not Jeff.


"Action speaks louder than words but not nearly as often."
Mark Twain

"Napoleon is always right."
George Orwell


what this has to do with a streak of a MEN'S basketball team is beyond me. That's like saying a female 100 meter sprinter who wins 10 straight races tops a men's sprinter's record of winning 9 straight races. The records are RELATED but DIFFERENT


A Broads Basketball Team in Connecticut? Seriously?


I don't care. At the same time, it should be pointed out that UCLA paid for a lot of the talent that made their streak possible. Hopefully the same can't be said for the UNCONN women. Then again, watching women's basketball is somewhat akin to watching paint dry so, again, who cares.


No Tom, not caring about the Husky's winning streak doesn't make you a bad person, just as not reading your articles doesn't make me any less informed about the sports world. However, not caring about the streak makes you a bad sportswriter. This streak is an important accomplishment in sports history and ought to be recognized by anyone in the business.

As for the idea that it's not important because the public doesn't ask or talk about it, that's the excuse given everytime the status quo is maintained. Change comes from doing and talking about things that seems irrelevent or unpopular at the time, but subsequently changes history.


Regardless of how dominant UCLA was, there were still lots of good men's basketball teams that played then. That is what made UCLA's streak so significant.
Women's basketball is made up of UConn, 3-4 other pretty good teams, and then about 100 teams that only exist because of Title IX. Its like saying if the Carolina Panthers won 100 straight games, but played only the high school state champions. Is it really that significant?
As much as I wish I cared about women's college ball, I just don't.

The comments to this entry are closed.