Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
To the point you made where she is being picked on: yesterday I was telling my wife how this young woman seems to be handling everything with incredible grace.

She has to be in a massive pressure cooker.
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [Bumble Bee] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bumble Bee wrote:
To the point you made where she is being picked on: yesterday I was telling my wife how this young woman seems to be handling everything with incredible grace.

She has to be in a massive pressure cooker.

Is much of the interest in Caitlin Clark at least post NCAA from people more interested in controversy than actual basketball?

I am not contributing at all to the problems. I still have no interest in women's basketball. I think that used to be a "problem"

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Last edited by: spockman: Jun 10, 24 6:31
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [Bumble Bee] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bumble Bee wrote:
To the point you made where she is being picked on: yesterday I was telling my wife how this young woman seems to be handling everything with incredible grace.

She has to be in a massive pressure cooker.

I don't think statements like this help much. Coach probably could have kept that between the two of them.

https://x.com/.../1799858388026917146
Quote:
Fever head coach Christie Sides spoke on Clark's absence, revealing her true thoughts on the situation, given the amount of online debate this decision has stirred.

Sides didn't share too much insight into what she was feeling but addressed the conversation she had with Clark.

"Hey coach, they woke a monster," said Clark to Sides via Chloe Peterson on X.

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
windywave wrote:
Bumble Bee wrote:
I heard there was a mandatory spring camp that coincided with NCAA finals. Clark missed it so she wasn't put on the roster.
USA women's basketball is 70-3 since 1996. I'm sure they'll be fine.


Which highlights the stupidity of the idiots.

Your most valuable property in terms of growing the sport missed the "mandatory" camp because she was leading her team to the NCAA finals breaking every fucking record in the book so keep her off the team. Women's basketball deserves the fourth class status in the shadows as long as these morons are running it.


A rare occasion that we agree.

As per usual, I suspect windy's need to exercise his internet outrage muscles is probably not aligned with reality. I don't think there was a single mandatory camp. It might have been "mandatory" for the women who were already expected to be on the team, but it doesn't sound like attendance was some sort of mandatory check in the block to be eligible for the team.

The way it was explained on ESPN is that the women who were selected have all been part of multiple national team camps over the past 3 years. 8 of the 12 have Olympic experience, and most of the others have direct experience playing in the gold medal team at the latest World Cup. The April camp was another in a line of those camps, and was the last camp before the WNBA season where players could get used to playing with each other and get to know the coach's system. The selected players will have just about 7 practices before the Olympic tournament starts, so that experience in previous events and camps was important to having a team that already knows the system and each other's tendencies.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
The hundred of millions comment was an overall number I threw out for all of womens basketball, not just the games.

Another way of saying that is that it's just a nonsense number you made up.

Quote:
And that number is not as crazy as many of your are losing your shit over once you think about it..How much more in just olympic revenue, certainly 10's of millions.

Nobody is losing their shit, except for a handful of people who never followed women's basketball before but are now somehow emotionally invested in Caitlyn Clark.

Quote:
And then you build your fanbase world wide overnight...

Adding Clark to our Olympic team does not build a worldwide audience overnight. It just doesn't.


Quote:
SO now you have bigger sponsor dollars, bigger TV rights dollars, bigger contracts because she raised the bar so high that it has to float up to be near her. And lastly she has set a bar for shoe deals, clothing deals, and probably dozens of other products that are going to get on the Caitlin bandwagon, that alone is probably going to be a 100 million over the next 10 years..

All of this is fine, and is happening in the context of the WNBA, not the Olympics.

Quote:
Of course that would make a lot of people here happy if she got broke, then they could all say told you so and not have a clue as to what they really lost...

Again, I have to wonder what world you live in. Nobody here in the LR has expressed any desire for Clark not to do well.

Quote:
But continue on with your she just another rookie in the league, let her pay her dues, and lets pay attention to all the other great players that almost no one can name, or would recognize in the grocery line right in front of them...

Unlike you, who seem to be really angry about this for some reason, I'm just offering the potential reasons for why the women's national team made the decision they did, and why it's not necessarily some sort of conspiracy against Clark out of mean spiritedness or jealousy.


Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Unlike you, who seem to be really angry about this for some reason, //

No, no anger or emotion at all about all of this. Probably the internet speech makes it come off that way though, so there is that. My comments are just about this business decision being made, well not being made, where it could be a huge boon for womens basketball. It is a dispassionate observation on my part, dont really care one way or the other. I'm not a fan, although I did get sucked into the Caitlin bandwagon at NCAA's, and now follow her stats in the WNBA. So super casual at best, but in that group that could be tipped over since my young daughter is becoming interested because of Catlin mania.


We would have watched some of the US Olympic Games womens B-ball, but a hard pass now. Too many other sports on tap, and not enough time for those even. Just like when the first dream team went to the games, had not watched a single mens game in the olympics until then, and now spend some of my precious viewing hours every 4 years to catch a few games here and there. Dont think I'm alone in that either, so maybe in LA 4 years from now...
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [spockman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Is much of the interest in Caitlin Clark at least post NCAA from people more interested in controversy than actual basketball?

Yes. A lot of the coverage is about drama. Relatively little coverage is about her play, or her numbers. It's about whether she's being treated badly because of jealousy. Or if she's being snubbed from the national team. Or if she's getting too much or too little attention. Or it's coverage about the coverage, media making themselves the story as they discuss whether male sports commentators who didn't use to cover the WNBA are now covering Clark properly. Etc, etc.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
Quote:
Is much of the interest in Caitlin Clark at least post NCAA from people more interested in controversy than actual basketball?


Yes. A lot of the coverage is about drama. Relatively little coverage is about her play, or her numbers. It's about whether she's being treated badly because of jealousy. Or if she's being snubbed from the national team. Or if she's getting too much or too little attention. Or it's coverage about the coverage, media making themselves the story as they discuss whether male sports commentators who didn't use to cover the WNBA are now covering Clark properly. Etc, etc.


They're covering both.

If she has a great game, the cover the game, the tied or broken record, the pace for the season, etc.

If there's some drama, they cover that.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BarryP wrote:
slowguy wrote:
Quote:
Is much of the interest in Caitlin Clark at least post NCAA from people more interested in controversy than actual basketball?


Yes. A lot of the coverage is about drama. Relatively little coverage is about her play, or her numbers. It's about whether she's being treated badly because of jealousy. Or if she's being snubbed from the national team. Or if she's getting too much or too little attention. Or it's coverage about the coverage, media making themselves the story as they discuss whether male sports commentators who didn't use to cover the WNBA are now covering Clark properly. Etc, etc.



They're covering both.

If she has a great game, the cover the game, the tied or broken record, the pace for the season, etc.

If there's some drama, they cover that.

I gotta admit my interest in women's basketball is normally zero. During the NCAA's it went up a little bit and now with those over it is back hovering around zero. Whether she made the Olympic team would not changed my not watching the women or for that fact the men's team in the Olympics.
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is like Gwen Jorgensen Olympic drama. People crying to put in a B level athlete just cause they are popular
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [synthetic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
synthetic wrote:
This is like Gwen Jorgensen Olympic drama. People crying to put in a B level athlete just cause they are popular

I don't think that's a fair characterization. Clark is more than a B player in the WNBA. She's top 5 in the league in assists and 3pt shots made, and she's top 15 in points per game, minutes per game, top 20 in steals and efficiency. She looks like a lock for rookie of the year.

The issue is not so much that she's a B grade player, but that there's a lot of experienced players available for the team, and you'd have to choose one of them to get rid of to make room for her. She's 22, and the youngest player selected is 26.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [synthetic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
synthetic wrote:
This is like Gwen Jorgensen Olympic drama. People crying to put in a B level athlete just cause they are popular


Decided to get your troll going today? With this and the CrossFit thing in the other forum. Which no one bit on because everyone knows you pretty well at this point.
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
synthetic wrote:
This is like Gwen Jorgensen Olympic drama. People crying to put in a B level athlete just cause they are popular



Decided to get your troll going today? With this and the CrossFit thing in the other forum. Which no one bit on because everyone knows you pretty well at this point.

im trolling here, the other thread is not a troll thread... did you even read it ? I really would love to see them do a head on TT challenge
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [synthetic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm not going to all of the sudden pretend to be a WNBA expert, but I saw some memes comparing Clark to Tauasi, and Clark is doing better than her stat wise.

The defense was that Taurasi is 41 years old, which is fair.

But she made the team.

*shrug* Again, I'm not an expert. I'm curious if she really earner her way on the team, or if she's a big name (many said the same about Larry Bird).

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Caitlin Clark (Sports Pioneer) [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
windywave wrote:
Bumble Bee wrote:
I heard there was a mandatory spring camp that coincided with NCAA finals. Clark missed it so she wasn't put on the roster.
USA women's basketball is 70-3 since 1996. I'm sure they'll be fine.


Which highlights the stupidity of the idiots.

Your most valuable property in terms of growing the sport missed the "mandatory" camp because she was leading her team to the NCAA finals breaking every fucking record in the book so keep her off the team. Women's basketball deserves the fourth class status in the shadows as long as these morons are running it.


A rare occasion that we agree.

As per usual, I suspect windy's need to exercise his internet outrage muscles is probably not aligned with reality. I don't think there was a single mandatory camp. It might have been "mandatory" for the women who were already expected to be on the team, but it doesn't sound like attendance was some sort of mandatory check in the block to be eligible for the team.

The way it was explained on ESPN is that the women who were selected have all been part of multiple national team camps over the past 3 years. 8 of the 12 have Olympic experience, and most of the others have direct experience playing in the gold medal team at the latest World Cup. The April camp was another in a line of those camps, and was the last camp before the WNBA season where players could get used to playing with each other and get to know the coach's system. The selected players will have just about 7 practices before the Olympic tournament starts, so that experience in previous events and camps was important to having a team that already knows the system and each other's tendencies.

You really think the last spot on the roster will make or break the US getting a gold medal?

They fucked up the PR and brand management. In a few years if they're wondering why the sport still hasn't taken off well this would be just one more data point
Quote Reply

Prev Next