Geno Auriemma: UConn's Dominance Won't Last Forever, So Appreciate It
Questions:
- To you, what qualifies a sports team as having a dynasty?
- Do you think there should be regulations in place to prevent sports dynasties? Why or why not?
- How could sports leagues preemptively prevent dynasties from occurring?
- What other ways could sports dynasties affect sports (aka TV viewership, etc.)?
1. Personally, what qualifies a sports team as having a dynasty is a very long stretch of winning success combined with a consistently great coaching staff and player(s) on the team.
ReplyDelete2. I do not believe there should be any regulations in place to prevent sports dynasties. Sports dynasties are something fans and sports historians marvel over and are talked about for years after they are over. Putting something in place that would restrict the formation of these dynasties would end some of the most intriguing and astonishing things that can occur in sports. While some fans and critics may argue that they are unfair and make sports boring, if some organization and city is able to build such a successful rule there is no reason to destroy what they've built just because the playing fields are not constantly level. All sports teams go through successful and very unsuccessful stretches so to argue that regulations should be put in place is unwise.
4. Dynasties can, however, affect sports in commercial ways as well. Teams that experience these long stretches of success receive more TV viewership, sponsorship deals, ticket sales, etc. leading to more financial revenue and success that many of their competitors. For example, the New England Patriots have much greater TV ratings and ticket sales, with winning 5 championships since 2002, than the Cleveland Browns who haven't even made it to a Super Bowl yet.
1. What qualifies a sports team as having a dynasty, in my eyes, is repeated success over a long period of time. A team that is not only considered the best for this period of time, but also winning multiple championships during this period is one that can be considered a dynasty.
ReplyDelete2. In my opinion. it would make no sense to put regulations on greatness. It's not their fault that they're good at what they do. Trying to force teams to be worse or players to be restricted from playing where they want to would cause a whole great deal of other issues that would ruin the NCAA entirely. As the title of the article mentions, their greatness won't last forever. For the decade or so that this team's success lasts, why not just watch and learn? Maybe other teams can take some notes on what teams like UCONN do and try to emulate it to form their own dynasty one day. It's just part of the game and is something all teams strive for. In my eyes, it's actually something that makes sports more interesting. Plus, who doesn't love to see a so called "dynasty" get knocked off by an underdog?
4. Although I see why some people might think a team that's as good as UCONN can kill viewership, I honestly think a team like this can make people want to watch more. The talent is immense and being able to say you saw them win all these games is pretty cool. Also, pretty much every team they play has nothing to lose against them, so there's always the chance that they go out their and knock them off, which would be historic on its own.
1) I think that a sports dynasty is a team which is able to become very successful and maintain that success for a long period of time. Uconn Woman's Basketball would be a perfect example of a sports dynasty.
ReplyDelete2) I do not think that regulations should be put in place to stop a team from becoming a dynasty. As long as that team followed all the rules in place to achieve there success then there should be nothing to talk about.
4) While I understand that watching a "blowout" of a game is not nearly as exciting as a close one, it is not Uconn's worry. Uconn should not worry about the opinion of others and continue to beat the less capable teams. It is up to the other teams to take lessons from Uconn and determine what they are doing that makes their team so hard to beat.
ReplyDelete1. To me, what qualifies a sports team as having a dynasty is a successful team with many wins and/or championships, just like the UCONN Huskies.
2. No, I do not think there should be regulations in place to prevent sports dynasties. There is so much that goes into a sports dynasty and there should not be a regulation on their skills. As coach Geno Auriemma spoke to many fans, he said, "This isn't going to last forever," he said of his program’s remarkable success over 33 years. “But while it is going on, let's keep coming out and enjoying it.” Not all sports dynasties last forever, so you may as well make the most of it when the team is at their prime.
4. Sports dynasties could affect sports in a positive way. They usually cause more excitement, people will want to attend their games, and they will get more viewers on T.V.
1. What qualifies a sport's team to have a dynasty? Well, a dynasty is a sequence of rulers of the same family and or organization. Together as a team, the UCONN Women's basketball team has a 100-0 winning streak since they came apart of the AAC Conference. To go 100-0 as a team, to me, that's the definition of a dynasty. They are rulers on the court.
ReplyDelete2. There should not be any regulations on sport's dynasties. When you join a sport's team, you become a member of not only that organization, but also that family. You can't prevent sport's dynasties. And if you could, why start now? It's not the NCAA's fault that the UCONN Women's basketball team has a great coaching staff and trainers. You can't prevent that. It's not the Patriots fault that they have been to the super bowl in the past 3 out of 4 years. Even if a coach says to the media that a team's dynasty won't last, it doesn't men that that is true.
4. When team's like UCONN Women's basketball excel on the court, more and more attention is received to them. Who wouldn't want to watch a dominating sport's team take to the court. It is exciting for sport's teams. Although I can understand why people might think that a team as successful as UCONN and Duke may be destroying viewership, this just may hook people onto wanting to watch more and more of these teams play. Yes, Duke Men's basketball has the most Championship wins, people still love to see them being televised. Many many viewers are all for watching Duke take on the Tar Heels. That's because how into it they get. So, although sports teams may take a toll on viewership, people are still going to be in favor of, and not in favor of watching a televised sport's game
In my opinion a sport team qualifies in having a dynasty is a long series of winning streaks along with the team having a great coaching staff and having really good players on their team.
ReplyDeleteI dont think that there should be any regulations on a sport's dynasties. Not all sport's dynasties last forever so the team should be able to enjoy their success streak. Its not a team fault for having a great coaching staff and great players so there shouldn't be regulations on that. Even though some fans may say that it makes the sports boring by allowing these dynasties there is no reason to destroy what a team has worked very hard to build.
Sports dynasties can have a positive effect on sports, they build up excitement and get more viewers to watch the games.
1) I think what qualifies a sports team to have a dynasty is having a long winning streak as well as amazing players. I think that dynasties always have good coaching as well as god chemistry on and off the court. Having good chemistry in a sports team is everything. Knowing what your teammates next step is crucial in succeeding in a professional setting. Also if a great player is on one team then they can recruit other amazing players to their team; thus, an dynasty forms. An example of that is the Miami heat of 2012 and 2013. They had 3 superstars on their teams and won two championships in a row. Lebron and Dwyane wade, had such amazing chemistry and the heat to their victory.
ReplyDelete2) I do not think there should be regulations to prevent sports dynasties. Sports dynasties are something people talk about for years after they conclude. Putting a rule or regulation against these dynasties would affect sports in a negative way. This is because fans can never have the joy of their team being the best and celebrating with other fans from far and wide. Dynasties are what bring places together and what form so many amazing friendships. All sports teams go through the same struggle to acquire players so if they are great, why penalize the organization?
1. A sports dynasty is a team that has been met with an abundance of success over long period of time. In an effort to maintain that success the team will sign the best players and staff.
ReplyDelete2. No, there definitely should not be regulations against dynasties in sports. No one team is great forever. For example, the Chicago Bulls were never as good and probably never will be as good as they were in the 90s. Like Geno Auriemma's UConn Women's basketball team, sports dynasties in sports will come and go.
4. In terms of all sports dynasties over the years, the UConn women's basketball team is an outlier. Going 101-0 in all ACC is unheard of in any sport. Most so-called dynasties don't always win championships. For example the Yankees are considered to be a dynasty and yet hasn't won a World Series since 2009. Also, dynasties encourage teams to be their best. That is the essence of sports that would be impossible without it.
1) If a team has dyansty, they not only have a many wins, but also a time of triumph, like the Cubs winning the world series after doing so poor for so long.
ReplyDelete2) No, a dynasty does not come through cheating or having an unfair advantage, it shows how great a team has been over a long period of time.
3) There's nothing that can be done for a league or a sport to prevent dynasties, they should just let them be as it keeps fans engaged.
4) I think (Atleast for the dynasty's games) the tv viewership would go up, especially because the other team would become the underdog, and would drive fans to enjoy the game and tune in.
1. A dynasty is when a team has a very long stretch of winning/multiple championships in a row ('90s Bulls, '60s-'70s Celtics)
ReplyDelete2. No because there are no logical regulations. If for instance a team drafts very well and builds up a good team over a few years, then good for them, they deserve any winning they can get.
3. The league commissioner can veto possible trades and thats about it. Free agents can go wherever they want. Even the trade thing isn't entirely fair
4. Dynasties are good for viewership and ratings so good for the league (money=good). This is a reason why leagues probably wouldn't want to stop dynasties.
1. I think what qualifies a team as a dynasty if said team wins multiple championships in a short span. Teams don't have to win a championship every year but they must be close together. For instance, the warriors are a dynasty in my mind because they have been good for multiple years and have won two championships in three years.
ReplyDelete2. I think dynasties are good to a certain extent. It is cool to watch a team play and just dominate for years, but it is also good for different teams to be in the mic because everyone loves diversity. In regards to regulations, there aren't many that can be set in college because the big programs are always going to attract the big high school players. In the NBA you can set a tougher salary cap to disallow teams from getting big name players with big contracts.
1.
ReplyDeleteA sports dynasty can be interpreted many different ways. In my opinion, a sports dynasty is when a team is dominant towards other teams for a long period of time. A dynasty does not have to last a certain amount of time. A dynasty can last 5 years or 50 years. Dynasty’s are also a lot of work. A dynasty needs strong leaders, whether it’s from the coaching staff or from the players themselves. The Patriots, you could say, the past 10-15 years are considered a dynasty. They've won 4 superbowls under the same coaching staff and under the same quarterback. They are a classic example of a dynasty in sports today.
4.
What other ways could sports dynasties affect sports (aka TV viewership, etc.)?
Dynasties can only affect sports in a positive way. A dynasty creates an enemy for every single team and their fan base. It makes their own and other fan bases stronger. A dynasty always has a target on their back because everyone wants to destroy the beast. Dynasties create popular TV contracts and viewerships.
To you, what qualifies a sports team as having a dynasty?
ReplyDeleteI think a team can qualify as a sports dynasty if they have a very distinguished record and have had years of success such as the Uconn women's team has had, then I think that they can qualify as a dynasty.
Do you think there should be regulations in place to prevent sports dynasties? Why or why not?
I think it would be a terrible idea to put regulations in place to prevent sports dynasties. I personally think sports dynasties allow for better viewership and more exposure for the sport. I probably wouldn't have known much about women's basketball, particularly women's college basketball if it weren't for the dynasty of Uconn. It's the same thing with the Golden State Warriors in my opinion. People who don't watch basketball will probably be more inclined to watch it if they hear about an incredible team. Also, the head coach of the women's Uconn team, Geno Auriemma said ‘this won’t last forever’ and how she has ‘hammered this point recently.’ No dynasty lasts forever, and that includes the Uconn team. I also really like watching dynasties myself, especially if they are upset. I can however see the other side of the argument with arguments like “they get the best recruiting class” or how some viewers might not like it.
I think in order to be considered a dynasty a franchise has to have an improbable amount of wins over a large amount of time. Not just championships, but prowess during the regular season, for instance teams such as the spurs and the patriots and staples tennis have dynasties. There should not be regulations in place to prevent dynasties because they are a natural part of the sport. One team is bound to be better than other teams and if the coaching staff knows what's good for them, resigning those players can lead to a dynasty. No dynasty lasts forever so just let each one run its course. Sports leagues I don't think can do much to prevent dynasties from occurring however the teams definitely can by mimicking the team that is successful and taking their strategies. Another strategy could be trade blocking the team that continuously wins. Much of the time the team sends supposedly mutually beneficial trades but often they are just tricking the other team. I guess a league could put a limit on the number of draft picks a team can have so they can not get a bunch of sick young people who carry their team for years to come. I do not believe that dynasties are ad for the viewership of a sport, if anything they are good because it builds a name for the sport through a team. With the UCONN women's basketball team, without them in the sport, women's college basketball would have so many less viewers except this team is so famous for being so good that people watch. Dynasties overall however bad for the other teams in the league, are good for a sport.
ReplyDeleteI do not think there should be any regulations in place to prevent sports dynasties. Sports dynasties come from years of hard work and execution. Dynasties are not just born overnight. There could potentially be regulations on the makings of super teams, like the Golden State Warriors, who have multiple all stars on the team. However, there are regulations like salary caps that prevent teams from getting all of the best players. If they are able to find a way around it and work it out between players, then good for them. This said, long term, there is no fair regulation that could be put in place to prevent super teams, let alone dynasties
ReplyDeleteI think that the only way for leagues to preemptively prevent dynasites from occuring would be to prevent unfair trades from happening. Another way would be to get lots of teams to offer appealing trades to powerful teams. There is really no other way to prevent dynasties from occuring, as like I said, they are not born overnight
Dynasties could affect viewership of sports by attracting more people to specific games. They could also attract people to new sports in general. For example, if someone hears about a huge dynasty, they might want to watch the sport, and could take interest in a new sport.
1.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think that a sports dynasty can be classified as a sports team that has had repeated success throughout the years. When you hear the sport, you subconsciously think of a specific sports teams, for example, when you hear college football, you think of Alabama, when you think of basketball, you think of the Cavs and the Warriors.
2.
I do not think there should be regulations to be put in place to prevent sports dynasties because it is a part of what makes sports so great. Every year each person that makes up the team leaves their mark on the dynasty and creates a large desire for players to want to compete because it helps add to the sense of team. Also, dynasties increase the level of competition for teams that go against these dynasties that win all the time. Putting regulations in place to prevent sports dynasties would hurt the sports world as people marvel at how teams have obtained dommance for so long.
ReplyDeleteTo have a dynasty I believe you must win multiple championships in a relatively close period of time. I think the front office and coaching staff must also stay consistent throughout a dynasty. When the staff of a team changes that usually means that the team has had a fall from form. I also think that for a team to be classified as a dynasty winning must automatically come to ones mind when they hear the teams name. There is an instant association between success and a team who is a dynasty.
I do not think leagues should have regulations to prevent sports dynasties. Putting these regulations in sports would get rid of the natural rise and fall of teams that occurs in every sport. Dynasties are a cornerstone of every sport and without them there would be very little memorable history to a league.
1. In my eyes I believe that dynasties are defined by having lots of success over a long period of time, having a large following and strong fan base, and also having something unique about them that makes them more interesting and engaging to watch.
ReplyDelete2. I do not believe that there should be regulations in place to prevent teams from becoming dynasties. If they worked hard enough to become a dynasty and followed the rules presented to them, they should be able to become dynasties.
3. Personally, I don't believe that much can be done to prevent dynasties based on my loose definition of the term.
4. I believe that dynasties would affect sports in positive ways most of the time. There will most likely be an increase in people watching their games both on TV and in the stands and a heightened level of passion and excitement surrounding the games.
1. For a sports team to be a dynasty, they must consistently dominate their league for a long period of time. Sports teams often go on win streaks, but in order to be a dynasty the team must also be successful and well known with a wide fan base.
ReplyDelete2. There should not be regulations on dynasties because that said team is winning games fairly. Their players obviously work hard, so putting regulations on them would be unfair to not only the team but the fans as well.
3. There is not much to do to stop dynasties. Team chemistry and skill can not and should not be prevented.
4. I think dynasties are good for sports. It draws people to watch games and cheer on the teams, and with that comes success in merchandise and the business aspect of the team. Fans love when their team becomes the best in the league, so the sport is more enjoyable to watch.
1.)
ReplyDeleteTo me, What qualifies a sports team as having a dynasty is a lot of wins, over a number of years, with lots of fans.
2.)
I do not think that there should be regulations in place to prevent sports dynasties because as long as teams are doing what they should be, playing faire, and following the rules theres no harm.
3.)
I do not think Sports leagues could preemptively prevent dynasties from occurring.