But they are only "less athletic" if you put them on men's equipment. Mikaela Shiffrin would suck if she had to ski on the wrong size slalom skis. Just because men use 185cm, well, she has to too. Sorry, no 155s for you.
You never watch elite women's skiing, running (Keely? Mu? Femke? Sifan?), swimming or tennis and think they are "bad" at their sports. They aren't; they are literally the best women in the world.
But with basketball, just because the old gyms didn't have adjustable hoops, women look so different from men when they are playing.
People who are hating on women should be hating on the people who designed the old gymnasiums and fixed rims. It is not hard to make them adjustable.
I used to have a bit of hope that the transfer portal would help smaller schools. But it seems that right now it just allows the bigger school to raid any talent they missed on in recruiting. I doubt the parity ever arrives.
Duke is the worst offender. They have 11 transfers on the roster, including six grad students. They are basically a team of free agents.
When McCallie left the program, I thought it could be a hard rebuilding process. But Lawson took the short cut. Of course, she was a Vol and now a Dookie. So she must be doubly evil.
I dislike the tone of the OP and of this thread but women's basketball is objectively not as good as other women's sports. And there is a reason why.
Did it ever occur to anyone to let the women play on 9'4 foot rims so they had the same shot angles and dunks as the men? It would be awesome. They lower the nets in volleyball (7'4 vs. 7'11). They lower the hurdles in track. They use a smaller ball in basketball and a different three-point line.
It would be so much fun to watch women dunking. I bet it would be fun for them too. It is like a big piece of the game is missing for the women because nets weren't adjustable back in the olden-days when they wrote the rule book and now people are too stuck in the past to update the rules.
p.s. In my opinion, most sports (Tennis, golf, skiing, cycling, ski-jump, softball, swimming, running), the women's game is just as good as the men's game --- since it is relative to the ladies around them. Only basketball is "worse" because the hoops are set at the men's height.
Maybe I'm in the minority but I don't care about dunking. I enjoy ball movement- cutting, screening, finding the open man/woman. I enjoy watching defenses and offenses countering each other.
You might be in the minority, but you are in a good company. John Wooden once said "women's basketball is purer because it is played below the rim."
Hitting the ball across the net is the essence of volleyball. So the net has to be lower for women. Playing above the rim is not the essence of basketball. Putting the ball in the basket is, which can be done in so many different ways.
You never watch elite women's skiing, running (Keely? Mu? Femke? Sifan?), swimming or tennis and think they are "bad" at their sports. They aren't; they are literally the best women in the world.
Obviously, you haven't' talked to enough tennis fans. There are many misogynists among them who insist women's tennis is inferior because there are fewer aces, fewer unreturned serves, fewer net plays and rallies are longer. They are also people who prefer women's tennis precisely for those reasons. Tennis also has the identical dimensions of court and net for men and women.
The rallies also tend to be longer in women's volleyball in spite of lower net. And many people find that more entertaining. Boskovic is fun to watch because there aren't many women like her. But the game would be less interesting if most women could hit like her. And I'd rather watch players like Gabi anyway.
And it's interesting you included track and swimming in your discussion. Women don't race in a 90m sprint or 38km marathon. The swimming pools are also identical for men's and women's races. Anyone can tell how much slower women's time is. Yet that does not distract from out enjoyment of the sports.
Women's cannot beat or even catch up with men in "playing like men." If they want to make their sports popular, they have to make their game interesting in its own way. Tennis and volleyball have been already successful in that to an extent. Women's basketball should not try to become "more like men's basketball." It just needs to become a better version of their own game.
But they are only "less athletic" if you put them on men's equipment. Mikaela Shiffrin would suck if she had to ski on the wrong size slalom skis. Just because men use 185cm, well, she has to too. Sorry, no 155s for you.
You never watch elite women's skiing, running (Keely? Mu? Femke? Sifan?), swimming or tennis and think they are "bad" at their sports. They aren't; they are literally the best women in the world.
But with basketball, just because the old gyms didn't have adjustable hoops, women look so different from men when they are playing.
People who are hating on women should be hating on the people who designed the old gymnasiums and fixed rims. It is not hard to make them adjustable.
I agree. Good post.
nope women are less athletic than men. you guys are idiots
Is there a sport where the women's and men's rules are the exact same?
With swimming adding the "mile" to the women's side does that even everything up?
Track has different hurdle heights and hep vs dec, 100h vs 110h
Tennis has less sets. One of the Grand Slam events even used different balls for the ladies last year. That didn't go over well.
Volleyball has net height difference.
Basketball has ball size difference. In college the women play quarters and the men half's. Are the women playing 4 ten minute quarters? Is the women's pro game as long as the mens?
Softball besides the obvious difference to baseball, even play less innings.
skiing someone mentioned ski length, but what sport requires athletes to use the exact same individual equipment? Are the women's courses shorter?
Soccer I believe the ball is different.
So basically it does seem as if the sports were adjusted to height and strength differences it'd make things better. If the women are constantly compared to the men that's not going to advance the sport.
Part of the (toxic) feminism movement is to pretend women's basketball is equal to men's basketball. It is a product that generates revenue and the men's game is vastly superior but the agenda won't acknowledge that fact. Women have financial opportunities in other industries that favor them over men. These feminists ironically have one thing in common that they lack the self awareness to acknowledge--they are all selfish, entitled and ignorant. They are dragging anyone who joins their clan down with them whether it be males or females. Pure toxicity with the guise they're helping when they're actually hindering.
I come back to correct myself, women's basketball does operate at a net loss across the board. College and wnba. I knew that but my wording was off in the quoted post. Mens football/basketball revenue enables all the other sports to operate no holds barred. Woke espn sells out to being fake. Their debate shows also encourage their analysts to get in rows and say stuff they don't even truly believe themselves so they can get views and clicks. They probably hate covering women's basketball but the pretend to love it because they only care about preserving their image and their own pocketbooks. Espn is the fakest of the fake. I only watch and visit their website because of comprehensive coverage of men's football/basketball but you always have to deal with and sift through the crap product (look at ticket sales and interest) and agenda that is women's basketball.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
I dislike the tone of the OP and of this thread but women's basketball is objectively not as good as other women's sports. And there is a reason why.
Did it ever occur to anyone to let the women play on 9'4 foot rims so they had the same shot angles and dunks as the men? It would be awesome. They lower the nets in volleyball (7'4 vs. 7'11). They lower the hurdles in track. They use a smaller ball in basketball and a different three-point line.
It would be so much fun to watch women dunking. I bet it would be fun for them too. It is like a big piece of the game is missing for the women because nets weren't adjustable back in the olden-days when they wrote the rule book and now people are too stuck in the past to update the rules.
p.s. In my opinion, most sports (Tennis, golf, skiing, cycling, ski-jump, softball, swimming, running), the women's game is just as good as the men's game --- since it is relative to the ladies around them. Only basketball is "worse" because the hoops are set at the men's height.
Women want equality, equality means they play with the same rules as the men. I dislike how sports like Tennis change the rules. If women want equality it has to be true equality, not some grading curve.
I’m from Connecticut and went to UConn. The UConn women’s team sells out their 10,000 person home arena at least a few times each season. While men’s basketball is generally more popular, the women do have fans. As someone who has watched a lot of men’s and women’s basketball, the way they play is a bit different but if it’s a close game I don’t think one is more entertaining than the other.