The most exciting NCAA tournament game will occur and its in the women's division!

You're right. When I would ask the girls on my school's basketball team "who you got in the final 4 this year" very few of them ever mentioned the women. Most of them never watched the women's game, just the men. Sorry but that's my experience.

Still, ESPN and the NCAA need to market the women more. I've always been a fan of womens basketball and have coaching tapes from Van Derveer of Stanford, Auriemma of UConn and Sheri Coales out of Oklahoma. They are great teachers and coaches.

What killed NCAAW for me was when for the last four years they tried to convince us that Teaira McCowan for Mississippi State was a woman. Pretty sure they were expelling people for questioning it.

The lone star wrote:

oldschoollrc wrote:

Also a bit crazy that both are white. Would the hype be the same if they were women of color? IDK.

No, but diversity is good right?

But they do play fun very smart basketball. Lets face it, the most boring shot in basketball is a 6'6" or taller guy dunking the ball. No skill there.

Yes, Diversity is good. I don't think that there's anything wrong with the Fact that its more interesting that it's two white girls. When two black quarterbacks or black tennis players face each other in a championship game that was more newsworthy because it was different and represented a breakthrough.

But also this game would be interesting regardless of the color or gender of the players. The background story of these two breakout stars is too great. This game will be a huge lift for women's basketball.

The the UCONN supporting cast is so much stronger than Iowa. UCONN has the old UCLA affect with John wordan. With the winning rep, all the best players keep going to UCONN.

Reminds me of the saying "white men can't jump".

oldschoollrc wrote:

Also a bit crazy that both are white. Would the hype be the same if they were women of color? IDK.

“hype” .... hahahaha ... never heard of either one you race-baiting idjit.

There is great irony here. My wife is a progressive female who would be the first to mention the unequal treatment of male versus female athletes, but she never watches female sports other than ice skating. She will watch men's basketball but not womens. I have watched more of the women's games than her. I bet your female players are the same, they'll bemoan the poorer treatment and coverage of women's basketball, but then will go watch the male games.

But these two freshman stars will generate interest in women's basketball.

They already have been "generating interest". This silly concept that only players and family care about womens college basketball is nonsense. Tell that to Paige Bueckers 700,000 Instagram followers not to mention all the NBAA players who love her game and find it entertaining. Not all of those people added her to get sandwich recipes...

Anyway, the stage is set. Looking forward to this super frosh match up everybody has been wanting but I was amused when ESPN's sideline reporter basically told people to chill out on the hype during the UConn - Syracuse game. Lead to an awkward silence when they went back to the game announcers who had been beating that drum all game lol. In the end these two are good friends and think all the Paige versus Caitlin talk is way overdone.

Boy, you married a winner.

fe husky fan wrote:

The lone star wrote:

There is great irony here. My wife is a progressive female who would be the first to mention the unequal treatment of male versus female athletes, but she never watches female sports other than ice skating. She will watch men's basketball but not womens. I have watched more of the women's games than her. I bet your female players are the same, they'll bemoan the poorer treatment and coverage of women's basketball, but then will go watch the male games.

But these two freshman stars will generate interest in women's basketball.

Boy, you married a winner.

Actually she is!

I. Rex wrote:

They already have been "generating interest". This silly concept that only players and family care about womens college basketball is nonsense. Tell that to Paige Bueckers 700,000 Instagram followers not to mention all the NBAA players who love her game and find it entertaining. Not all of those people added her to get sandwich recipes...

Anyway, the stage is set. Looking forward to this super frosh match up everybody has been wanting but I was amused when ESPN's sideline reporter basically told people to chill out on the hype during the UConn - Syracuse game. Lead to an awkward silence when they went back to the game announcers who had been beating that drum all game lol. In the end these two are good friends and think all the Paige versus Caitlin talk is way overdone.

There are good friends but we know that friendship ends when they are both on the court. It won't be a fair comparison though. The Uconn team is so much more athletic than the Iowa team. They easily dismantled Syracuse. The Uconn team is filled with stars. Iowa has a solid efficient workhorse center.

I hope the game stays close. I am rooting for Iowa since they are a clear underdog.

I coach a boy's high school team. I have recommended for a few years now that they watch Paige play because she is such a great, fundamentally sound and team-oriented player. Caitlin is also super exciting to watch. I can imagine quite a barn burner of a game. Will be fun.

The lone star wrote:

There are good friends but we know that friendship ends when they are both on the court. It won't be a fair comparison though. The Uconn team is so much more athletic than the Iowa team. They easily dismantled Syracuse. The Uconn team is filled with stars. Iowa has a solid efficient workhorse center.

I hope the game stays close. I am rooting for Iowa since they are a clear underdog.

Oh I think Clark will put up 30+ but Iowa will lose by 20. Connecticut is just to loaded.

The lone star wrote:

they'll bemoan the poorer treatment and coverage of women's basketball, but then will go watch the male games.

And? They deserve lesser and blatantly biased treatment because of this?

Here's the NCAA's mission statement:

"Our purpose is to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount"

I see equitable in there, but I don't see it in real life.

macdaddy 1.00102 wrote:

The lone star wrote:

they'll bemoan the poorer treatment and coverage of women's basketball, but then will go watch the male games.

And? They deserve lesser and blatantly biased treatment because of this?

Here's the NCAA's mission statement:

"Our purpose is to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount"

I see equitable in there, but I don't see it in real life.

I think you missed his point. Maybe female athletes should support female athletes. Following men's but not women's team reflects poorly on them.

Well, a 20 pt game was not very exciting, and the two freshman sensations were a bit underwhelming. Bueckers was probably the third best Huskie of the day.

Maybe that's why no one has posted here after the game.

The lone star wrote:

fe husky fan wrote:

Boy, you married a winner.

Actually she is!

pics?

When I have to tell the kids I teach to put away their women's NCAA brackets that is the time I will start to care about the NCAA women's games until then na

The only way to get the women’s game on a par with the men’s game is for women to watch sports with the same regularity as men watch sports. Unfortunately female viewership severely lags that of males so they rely on large subsidies from the men’s game, which is extremely profitable. The female tournament loses money.

Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:

Well, a 20 pt game was not very exciting, and the two freshman sensations were a bit underwhelming. Bueckers was probably the third best Huskie of the day.

Maybe that's why no one has posted here after the game.

I told people to relax on the hyping but no one listened. And I'll note BOTH players and BOTH coaches spent all week telling the press to relax on the hype about "PAIGE VS. CAITLIN!!!" because the game was going to be about the supporting cast which it absolutely was. So dont fault these kids that they didnt score 50 each. Clearly these two freshman had some nerves in the first half and neither shot well overall but Im not sure if I would call flirting with a triple double "underwhelming". If a male player had put up 18/9/8 all these inadequate misogynist troglodytes posting here would be saying the exact opposite about how impressive the talent was.

And anyway, to your point about Bueckers teammates having better games, why was no one impressed with Christyn Williams putting up 27 while being the only player this year who was able to shut down Clark for the majority of the game (she did have one third quarter burst of threes)? Or Evina Westbrook shooting 7 for 9 and finishing one rebound short of a triple double (thats right Connecticut nearly had TWO players with triple doubles during this "unimpressive" game...). Because no one is going to give those players the same consideration they would men who do the exact same thing. Skills are skills. And Connecticut is loaded with skilled players. So I was exactly right about the point difference (20) but figured Clark would get a few more points then that. Guess we'll have to see what Baylor can do against them.