- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: UCONN women up 40 in their title game
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:29 pm to Broseph Barksdale
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:29 pm to Broseph Barksdale
quote:
Is women's college basketball the sport most prone to total blowouts like this? And I'm not just talking about UConn. It seems to have the least amount of parity of any sport I can think of.
I have a theory behind this, and I think it's because of two main reasons:
1. Male phenotypes in physical traits tend to have a much flatter bell curve (and higher standard deviation). Ergo, you'll simply have many, many more men than women who are two or three standard deviations above median height (the ideal heights for elite basketball players), and thus, a much deeper natural pool of players from which to draw. Most D-1 women's teams have the requisite height (i.e., their centers are 6'3" to 6'5"), but they're all drawing from a pool that is about a fifth or a tenth as big as the men's pool of centers, and thus, can't be as discriminating when it comes to skill.
2. With that much smaller pool of players, volleyball tends to take a ton of the elite athletic talent that would otherwise gravitate towards women's basketball. It would be a deeper game without volleyball, but still not the competitiveness of men's.
0
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:39 pm to c on z
quote:
Blowouts, yeah, but not to the magnitude. And in this particular game, in the NCAAT, a 1 seed did get upset by a 16 seed.
That Stanford team was dealing with so many injuries
Yeah a 16 beat a 1 in WBB tourney but it was a weird scenario. Imagine if a men's 1 seed had to deal with injuries to their main players. They would probably still win, but we saw what happened with Syracuse a few years ago when they lost Fab Melo and should have lost to UNC Asheville.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:17 pm to cardswinagain
At least Katie Lou is attractive. 10-10 from 3 wow. Obligatory pic
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:19 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
The lie is that any of them are good to begin with. An 8th grade AAU team would absolutely THRASH UCONN. Against a good varsity team I'm not sure they'd break 20. They wouldn't cross halfcourt all game against a college men's team if they pressed. Women are objectively bad at basketball. The best women's players EVER at the peak of their skill wouldn't start past the varsity high school level on a men's team. UCONN is not good, they are just better than the other garbage women's team. You wouldn't notice any difference between them and bumfuvk women's university against a men's team. But we keep patting them on the back and trying not cringe as we watch them try hard. This post was edited on 3/6 at 7:16 pm
BINGO.....someone else gets it
4 6t or shorter frat brothers and I beat the piss out of members of the 1988 LA Tech NC team in a pick up game. It wasn't even fun.
This post was edited on 3/6/17 at 10:21 pm
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:25 pm to Roger Klarvin
I find it interesting you got four diwnvotes. I'd bet those downvotes never played at the high school level.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:39 pm to NOSTRODAMUS
I think we all know this.
Tennessee and Pat Summitt would get rec league guys at UT to scrimmage with her team...just so they could get physical.
Not a high school team - average students who would play pick-up games in college.
She didn't think it hurt her teams that the guys would dominate...or hurt their confidence...she just wanted them more physical.
The problem with women's basketball...is that there are so very few extra male chromosomes to go around. So very few players.
I made a point in a few threads back that for some reason...college basketball totally exposes the difference in athleticism between males and females more than any other sport. By far. Women's basketball doesn't even look like the same sport...Women's tennis looks like the same sport. Volleyball, etc.
But Women's basketball - might be evidence that basketball player - men's basketball - are the best athletes on the planet...because they so different between the women.
Women's volleyball, softball, tennis (which takes amazing skill) are immensely watchable...especially tennis...women's basketball is immensely unwatchable.
For some reason, basketball isn't suited for women...which is why .01% of the players dominate...they are outliers. They most likely have far more testosterone (women have testosterone...great female athletes have a lot more of it) than the average female...and they dominate.
So you have about 15-20 semi-guys spread around two or three teams...playing against a bunch of girls...in a sport that exposes you for un-athleticism.
Tennessee and Pat Summitt would get rec league guys at UT to scrimmage with her team...just so they could get physical.
Not a high school team - average students who would play pick-up games in college.
She didn't think it hurt her teams that the guys would dominate...or hurt their confidence...she just wanted them more physical.
The problem with women's basketball...is that there are so very few extra male chromosomes to go around. So very few players.
I made a point in a few threads back that for some reason...college basketball totally exposes the difference in athleticism between males and females more than any other sport. By far. Women's basketball doesn't even look like the same sport...Women's tennis looks like the same sport. Volleyball, etc.
But Women's basketball - might be evidence that basketball player - men's basketball - are the best athletes on the planet...because they so different between the women.
Women's volleyball, softball, tennis (which takes amazing skill) are immensely watchable...especially tennis...women's basketball is immensely unwatchable.
For some reason, basketball isn't suited for women...which is why .01% of the players dominate...they are outliers. They most likely have far more testosterone (women have testosterone...great female athletes have a lot more of it) than the average female...and they dominate.
So you have about 15-20 semi-guys spread around two or three teams...playing against a bunch of girls...in a sport that exposes you for un-athleticism.
This post was edited on 3/6/17 at 10:41 pm
Posted on 3/7/17 at 7:51 am to NOSTRODAMUS
quote:
4 6t or shorter frat brothers and I beat the piss out of members of the 1988 LA Tech NC team in a pick up game. It wasn't even fun.
Nostro we need you to coach the TD Men's team in our hypothetical game against the UConn women's team
the last time this thread popped up on here, Kracka and i were talking about getting the band back together for one last ride
Posted on 3/7/17 at 7:59 am to Roger Klarvin
quote:
[u]
The lie is that any of them are good to begin with. An 8th grade AAU team would absolutely THRASH UCONN. Against a good varsity team I'm not sure they'd break 20. They wouldn't cross halfcourt all game against a college men's team if they pressed.
Women are objectively bad at basketball. The best women's players EVER at the peak of their skill wouldn't start past the varsity high school level on a men's team. UCONN is not good, they are just better than the other garbage women's team. You wouldn't notice any difference between them and bumfuvk women's university against a men's team.
But we keep patting them on the back and trying not cringe as we watch them try hard.
This is EXACTLY how the rest of the SEC feels about Texas AM football. Such a joke.
Posted on 3/7/17 at 10:01 am to SlowFlowPro
In
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News