I would even venture to say this. UCONN's womens team couldn't beat a good high school team. Could you imagine UCONN playing against Jarrod Sullinger and co. last season? I remember a story years ago in SI about Tennessee's womens team and how they practiced against a team of male students. These males students gave UT everything they could handle and more.
I can't speak for the Golden Era at UCLA because I was not alive during that time, but was the mens sport as watered down as what womens college basketball is today?
It's basically UConn, occasionally Tennessee, and thats about it.
"This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
"I can make all the stadiums rock."
They had a good run but I'm glad it's over. As has been already mentioned I was sick of seeing this on ESPN and for some reason I don't care for that Geno character.
I couldn't give less of a crap about women's college basketball, but to win 90 straight games in any sport is pretty darn impressive.
I'd rather listen to Kelch read the phone book than suffer through Thom Brennaman's attempt to make every instance on the field the most important event since the discovery of manned space flight. -westofyou
any HS w/ atleast 500 students in it would beat UCONN women. their tallest player is a 6ft 5in freshman center. they have 6 players under 6ft.
even at the HS level at a school of 500 every player is gonna be 6ft tall atleast, and their gonna have multiple bigs over 6ft 4in.
it would be a lot closer than against a D3 team b/c UCONN would be at a higher skill level but defensively a HS team is gonna have an advantage and offensively they will have shots against players they have 4+inches on.
i think you gotta get down to little tiny HS teams that have an enrollment of like 200 until the women could win.
and the game got a 1.5 tv rating. yeah it really had the attention of the Nation.
Last edited by webbbj; 12-31-2010 at 01:31 PM.
But I don't know how much Div. III guys play above the rim and that might be the difference. The women are very skilled in fundementals (maybe more than Div. 1 men), but lack the dynamic athleticism that men have. I think it would be a good ballgame. Maya Moore is the real deal and plays like a guy.
The motel of lost companions,
Waits with heated pool and bar
I resent ESPN cramming this down our throats. It didn't warrant all that coverage as their ratings proved. The competition in the women's game is severely lacking. The difference between the #10 womens team and the #1 is much greater than the same comparison in Div 1 men's.
This record means as much to me as if someone won 90 straight arm wrestling matches
Good record, but I am scratching my head because I don't even think it's in the same league as the men's record. (and it is not by definition)
It is certainly impressive, but like others have said I think speaks more to the general weakness of the competition than the domination of UConn. However you do have to give credit to the program for year after year always being good.
The coverage of it certainly was annoying though. Women's basketball is a third tier sport at best in most sport fans minds, but this was getting top billing. I wonder if there was a win streak for D3 Football or if a college wrestler or hockey team had a record win streak going what type of coverage it would get?
Most high-level women's D1 teams do this. Heck, a lot of high school varsity girls teams will scrimmage against fresman boys' teams in practice, if freshman boys' coaches ego will allow. And those generally provide decent practice settings if the kids take them seriously.
And you're generally right about D3 men's basketball. Generally the skill level and "basketball IQ" of those kids is pretty high, but with a few exceptions, they aren't great athletes. And the one's who are good athletes tend to be fairly unskilled.
There was a kid from the Dayton area a few years ago who went on to become a D3 All-American post at Wooster. Skill level, court awareness, hands, feet -- all off the charts. But he was only 6'4 and kinda bolted to the ground. I doubt if he could've grabbed the rim.
The difference might be the one or two good athletes you might find on a D3 team that would beat the women's team on the glass. I doubt you'd see a ton of difference in the guards at UConn and the guards at Mt. St. Joe's or Wilmington or Centre.
And for the record, I don't love women's college hoops but I will watch a good game every now and then because I'm a live sports junkie. I do enjoy the levl of competition that the upper echelon teams bring to the table and any good high school coach worth his salt will watch a women's game to steal offensive sets. That's probably the thing I like most about the women's game. They execute sets. Unlike the iso one-on-one garbarge that has largely trickled down from the NBA to the college game.
When all is said and done more is said than done.
Do you? Are you saying that women are inferior to men when it comes to stamina and that's why they play best-of-three sets instead of best-of-five, and why they play three rounds of golf instead of four? I have a lot more appreciation for women athletes than that. There hasn't been a physical difference in stamina for decades between men and women when it comes to athletics.
Women's tennis players are fat and out of shape?
Duh! Of course they are. Do you not watch professional women's tennis? When it takes 30 minutes to complete a match, where does stamina come into play and where does the energy spent come into play to offset the obvious calories that so many of them take in. There should not be a single fat woman playing professional tennis, but when you see the very best players, it has been commonplace for quite some time that they are fat and out of shape.
This certainly was not tongue-in-cheek. I meant every bit of the suggestion that women athletes get serious about their competitions if they want to be taken seriously in the sports world, while at the same time wanting to be paid the same as their male counterparts.
Use the same size basketball (which is such a joke that they use a smaller basketball than a 13-year old boy uses who is just 5 feet tall).
Play 4 rounds of golf.
Play best-of-five sets in tennis.
There's nothing physically different about women that they shouldn't be doing all three of these things.
Last edited by Kingspoint; 01-02-2011 at 02:36 AM.
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.