NCAA Record broken

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It probably depends on how you define fundamentals. FT percentages? Shooting percentages? I'm not sure what those comparisons would reveal, but just thinking "out loud."

I have no numbers to back it up, but I don't think the women do anything better than the men. Is there one woman who has a better free throw percentage than any man? Possibly. From top to bottom, do the women do anything better than the men? I doubt it.

With regard to athletic ability, I say the following: How many women in the country can dunk a basketball? A handful

Pick a big high school randomly. 1000 students. How many boys are there in this school that can dunk that don't even play basketball?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It just total apples and oranges. If there's some guy who wins 90 NCAA games of chess in a row, does he break the record?

Agree. It's just a made-up record by ESPN hyping a show that they wanted to get viewers for. The win streak applies only and solely to Womans NCAA D1 basketball. You can't compare it to D2 or D3 Womans basketball, let alone Mens D1, D2, or D3. Or junior college. Or NAIA. Or high school basketball. Or competitive Grade 1 basketball.

Hell, none of 'em are close to the Globetrotter's record for consecutive wins anyway.

Kudos to the UConn ladies. But they hold the record for Womens D1 basketball only.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Agree. It's just a made-up record by ESPN hyping a show that they wanted to get viewers for. The win streak applies only and solely to Womans NCAA D1 basketball. You can't compare it to D2 or D3 Womans basketball, let alone Mens D1, D2, or D3. Or junior college. Or NAIA. Or high school basketball. Or competitive Grade 1 basketball.

Hell, none of 'em are close to the Globetrotter's record for consecutive wins anyway.

Kudos to the UConn ladies. But they hold the record for Womens D1 basketball only.

It was on ESPN? And I missed it? Like I missed the first 88? Dang!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by chseagle

Now as far as ESPN is concerned, the next big game is gonna be UConn vs. Stanford on the 30th.

And with any luck ESPN will get 87 viewers to watch it. Womans D1 basketball is a niche sport on television, same as the WNBA.

[chseagle]

Actually it was on ESPN2

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

It was on ESPN? And I missed it? Like I missed the first 88? Dang!

[chartrusepengui]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I don't think the women do anything better than the men.

Nope - Toooo easy. Not even going to go here. It wouldn't be right. Kind of like UConn playing the women of the Luther Home and not allowing walkers on the court! Nope - not gonna do it.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And with any luck ESPN will get 87 viewers to watch it. Womans D1 basketball is a niche sport on television, same as the WNBA.

Remember the measles outbreak that forced the NAC tournament in Hartford a number of years ago to be played in an empty arena with all of the cardboard cutout 'people' in the stands? I'm thinkin' sumpin' similar.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I have no numbers to back it up, but I don't think the women do anything better than the men. Is there one woman who has a better free throw percentage than any man? Possibly. From top to bottom, do the women do anything better than the men? I doubt it.

With regard to athletic ability, I say the following: How many women in the country can dunk a basketball? A handful

Pick a big high school randomly. 1000 students. How many boys are there in this school that can dunk that don't even play basketball?

Irrelevant...athleticism does not equate to "basketball". Lots of slam dunk phenoms can't play. And men are clearly better at athleticism. I don't think anyone has ever debated that point.

However, if you're talking about "pure basketball"...passing, screening, teamwork, etc., there is no reason why women couldn't be just as good or better.

That, of course, doesn't make it more fun to watch, but it could be "better".

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It probably depends on how you define fundamentals. FT percentages? Shooting percentages? I'm not sure what those comparisons would reveal, but just thinking "out loud."

The only thing that is comparable is free throw percentage. Everything else is completely different. You can't compare field goal percentage because that is affected by defense. Put men up against some women's team and see what their stats are for that game.

The most basic skills needed for a basketball player are to be able to run fast and to jump. Women can't do either one nearly as well as men.

When I was in college (D-III) the women's basketball team was pretty decent. For a couple practices they got 2 of the offensive linemen from the football team to come and play with them. The guys were athletic of course but they couldn't jump really high, they weren't super fast, and they weren't the slightest bit good at basketball. They didn't play basketball in HS, there is no way they would have made the team. If you would see their shooting form you would understand what I am saying. Well they just dominated the women. Just think what would have happened if these guys were even average HS players.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Cobra

The only thing that is comparable is free throw percentage. Everything else is completely different. You can't compare field goal percentage because that is affected by defense. Put men up against some women's team and see what their stats are for that game.The most basic skills needed for a basketball player are to be able to run fast and to jump. Women can't do either one nearly as well as men.

When I was in college (D-III) the women's basketball team was pretty decent. For a couple practices they got 2 of the offensive linemen from the football team to come and play with them. The guys were athletic of course but they couldn't jump really high, they weren't super fast, and they weren't the slightest bit good at basketball. They didn't play basketball in HS, there is no way they would have made the team. If you would see their shooting form you would understand what I am saying. Well they just dominated the women. Just think what would have happened if these guys were even average HS players.

I was thinking that as I wrote it. Good point.

The only reason I didn't go with high school is coaching. Frankly, I'd guess you could go into a YMCA on any Saturday morning and pick 8 or 9 guys who could form a team and beat the UConn team for the very reasons you state.

[zm1283]

To me this isn't a mens basketball vs. womens basketball thing. Yes, they are completely different in that I don't think the women's record should be THE record everyone else is judged by. I think there is a men's record and a women's record. I don't think the UCONN record is as impressive, and it has nothing to do with how good women are at basketball. It has to do with the fact that womens D1 basketball is EXTREMELY watered down. A handful of programs dominate the sport and the rest have no chance year in and year out. How many womens teams have a shot at a national title before the season starts? Five or six?...And that's in one of these years when UCONN isn't as dominant. I think you could honestly say that 20 or more mens teams have a shot at a national title before the season starts.

[deecee]

Why is this a discussion. Its good the players involved, but other than them and their families and the organization who cares?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by deecee

Why is this a discussion. Its good the players involved, but other than them and their families and the organization who cares?

The state of Connecticut?

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The state of Connecticut?

And all 20 of its citizens?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Welpe

And all 20 of its citizens?

Didn't JR say there were 89?