If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   NCAA basketball coach says women can score more if you give them an extra seven inches   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 27
    More: Obvious, NCAA, Geno Auriemma, basketball coach, rules committee, athleticism, Hartford Courant, shot clock, uconn  
•       •       •

1001 clicks; posted to Sports » on 24 Oct 2012 at 12:13 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



27 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-24 09:55:55 AM  
Well I guess that counts me out.

/goddamnitsomuch
 
2012-10-24 12:19:22 PM  
i2.photobucket.com

If they make this move, they won't need to have good fundamentals anymore. Won't be as much fun to watch.
 
2012-10-24 12:56:23 PM  
Too bad that means the average man can't help them out, eh?
 
2012-10-24 12:59:45 PM  
how about some john stocktons and bare midriffs?

/ya know.... to attract umm... fans....
//you know the ones im talking about
 
2012-10-24 01:08:34 PM  
I thought we were supposed to watch them because they were more 'funadamentally sound' than the men/boys.
 
2012-10-24 01:13:31 PM  
Yeah, and when I lower the rim in my backyard to 9.5 feet, I can dunk. Doesn't mean there's anybody on the planet who would be willing to pay to watch me play basketball.
 
2012-10-24 01:43:59 PM  
I don't really think it'd be any more entertaining to me, but it would definitely make the game more like the men's version. Like Geno pointed out, men's and women's volleyball play on different height and the court is the same size, so it's not like there isn't a precedent.
 
2012-10-24 02:41:58 PM  
Would like to disagree:

a.espncdn.com

/Worked on her computer a few times. Sweet girl.
//Sic' Em Lady Bears!
 
2012-10-24 02:53:43 PM  
I did not understand the outrage about this. "You can't discriminate against women by making them use a lower rim!"

They already use a freaking smaller ball, what's the difference if you lower the rim. Also if they shouldn't be discriminated against, then why not let them play (try out for) the men's teams. Some would undoubtedly make a men's team. The majority wouldn't, they could play intramurals (brother) like short and unathletic guys have to.

As to the point of whether this would encourage viewership, letmelaughevenharder.jpg. I think women's basketball has just about hit the apex of number of people who are going to care about it. I've watched some WNBA while flipping channels. It is not exciting. The fans are either there for the girls NTTIAWWT, or dad's trying to be supportive of their daughters.

The players, who I'm sure are athletic and good at basketball, certainly don't look it on the court. If you watch UConn or someone like that, they almost look competent, but how much of that is aided by the fact they're playing a team that couldn't beat an elite boys high school team?
 
2012-10-24 03:23:36 PM  
According to the coach, one way to attract more viewers is by lowering the rims from 10 feet by about seven inches to make the games more high-scoring and fast-paced.

Yeah, if there's one problem with basketball, it's that there's not enough scoring.

/sarcasm off
 
2012-10-24 03:25:45 PM  

puckrock2000: According to the coach, one way to attract more viewers is by lowering the rims from 10 feet by about seven inches to make the games more high-scoring and fast-paced.

Yeah, if there's one problem with basketball, it's that there's not enough scoring.

/sarcasm off


In basketball? No the scoring is fine. In what is charitably called "women's basketball?" Yes I think it could result in higher scoring, faster-paced games.
 
2012-10-24 03:39:12 PM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Would like to disagree:



/Worked on her computer a few times. Sweet girl.
//Sic' Em Lady Bears!


Her dick is bigger than any of ours.
 
2012-10-24 03:59:42 PM  

puckrock2000: According to the coach, one way to attract more viewers is by lowering the rims from 10 feet by about seven inches to make the games more high-scoring and fast-paced.

Yeah, if there's one problem with basketball, it's that there's not enough scoring.

/sarcasm off


That's certainly a problem in women's basketball. Because of how the NBA works, people generally equate high scoring with high talent. The NBA is a higher scoring league than the NCAA, which is generally higher scoring than the high school circuit. For the casual basketball fan, seeing a low score makes them think that the people playing just aren't competent, and not worth watching. Is it fair? No. Is it accurate? Not entirely. But that's the perception, and that's what has to be dealt with.
 
2012-10-24 04:47:32 PM  
Its about time they quit pretending its the same game.
 
2012-10-24 04:49:40 PM  

lacydog: The NBA is a higher scoring league than the NCAA, which is generally higher scoring than the high school circuit. For the casual basketball fan, seeing a low score makes them think that the people playing just aren't competent, and not worth watching. Is it fair? No. Is it accurate? Not entirely. But that's the perception, and that's what has to be dealt with.


While I agree that lowering the rim would increase the perception of the athletic prowess of the women (the dunks would be a lot more authoritative, at minimum), it's not just that they're higher scoring. Anyone knows that HS games are usually 8-minute quarters (32 minutes), college games are 40 minutes, and NBA games are 48 minutes. Of course you're going to score more in more time.

Besides, the people who think the least of the WNBA are unlikely to be NBA fans. As I've become more of a basketball fan (and also a fan of athletes in lower tiers of professional sports, the ones people pretend don't exist), I've started to appreciate women's basketball much more.
 
2012-10-24 04:56:40 PM  

IAmRight: While I agree that lowering the rim would increase the perception of the athletic prowess of the women (the dunks would be a lot more authoritative, at minimum), it's not just that they're higher scoring. Anyone knows that HS games are usually 8-minute quarters (32 minutes), college games are 40 minutes, and NBA games are 48 minutes. Of course you're going to score more in more time.

Besides, the people who think the least of the WNBA are unlikely to be NBA fans. As I've become more of a basketball fan (and also a fan of athletes in lower tiers of professional sports, the ones people pretend don't exist), I've started to appreciate women's basketball much more.


I don't mean to be offensive, but why? It's a bell curve issue, why would you choose to watch a sport, just because it has women in it, when the elite of all three levels of male participation in the sport are likely to be better? Maybe your local high school guys couldn't beat an WNBA team, but it's a relatively commonly held belief that any given college men's team could, and likely even any decent ABA team. What's the draw?
 
2012-10-24 05:25:46 PM  

js34603: They already use a freaking smaller ball, what's the difference if you lower the rim. Also if they shouldn't be discriminated against, then why not let them play (try out for) the men's teams. Some would undoubtedly make a men's team. The majority wouldn't, they could play intramurals (brother) like short and unathletic guys have to.


It seems weird to me. Rims are at 10 feet (or as close as they could reasonably get it) for pretty much everyone from elementary school up all the time. Low rims would be weird. It's fine, I guess, for NCAAW and WNBA but for high school and whatnot you might end up with different height rims for practice and games depending whether the school has enough money for adjustable everything and I think that would make shooting really tough.

Leave the 10' rims, keep the smaller ball (smaller hands, after all), and dunking will be rare. Oh well. Volleyball is a little different because every playground in America doesn't have a regulation volleyball court, and if it does the net is farked up and two feet lower than it's supposed to be in the middle anyway.
 
2012-10-24 05:35:05 PM  

you have pee hands: js34603: They already use a freaking smaller ball, what's the difference if you lower the rim. Also if they shouldn't be discriminated against, then why not let them play (try out for) the men's teams. Some would undoubtedly make a men's team. The majority wouldn't, they could play intramurals (brother) like short and unathletic guys have to.

It seems weird to me. Rims are at 10 feet (or as close as they could reasonably get it) for pretty much everyone from elementary school up all the time. Low rims would be weird. It's fine, I guess, for NCAAW and WNBA but for high school and whatnot you might end up with different height rims for practice and games depending whether the school has enough money for adjustable everything and I think that would make shooting really tough.

Leave the 10' rims, keep the smaller ball (smaller hands, after all), and dunking will be rare. Oh well. Volleyball is a little different because every playground in America doesn't have a regulation volleyball court, and if it does the net is farked up and two feet lower than it's supposed to be in the middle anyway.


Adjustable rims aren't prohibitively expensive. There's tons in neighborhoods all over the place.

It probably would make shooting tough at first, but once women started practicing on it I'd assume they'd get used to it.

The thing is women's basketball just isn't the same game as men's. it is like your pickup game at the YMCA...yeah it is basketball but hardly the same sport as played by pro men.
 
2012-10-24 05:47:46 PM  

Mr Guy: IAmRight: While I agree that lowering the rim would increase the perception of the athletic prowess of the women (the dunks would be a lot more authoritative, at minimum), it's not just that they're higher scoring. Anyone knows that HS games are usually 8-minute quarters (32 minutes), college games are 40 minutes, and NBA games are 48 minutes. Of course you're going to score more in more time.

Besides, the people who think the least of the WNBA are unlikely to be NBA fans. As I've become more of a basketball fan (and also a fan of athletes in lower tiers of professional sports, the ones people pretend don't exist), I've started to appreciate women's basketball much more.

I don't mean to be offensive, but why? It's a bell curve issue, why would you choose to watch a sport, just because it has women in it, when the elite of all three levels of male participation in the sport are likely to be better? Maybe your local high school guys couldn't beat an WNBA team, but it's a relatively commonly held belief that any given college men's team could, and likely even any decent ABA team. What's the draw?


Any decently sized HS, at the very least, would be able to WNBA teams a run for the money. I would be shocked if a college mens team lost more than 1 of 10 games.
 
2012-10-24 06:26:53 PM  

lacydog: Because of how the NBA works, people generally equate high scoring with high talent. The NBA is a higher scoring league than the NCAA, which is generally higher scoring than the high school circuit.


Some of it is talent, but a big chunk of it is shot clock and game time. NBA is 24 sec and 48 min, college is 35 sec and 40 min, and high school at least in my area is none and 32 min.
 
2012-10-24 06:28:01 PM  

redmid17: Mr Guy: IAmRight: While I agree that lowering the rim would increase the perception of the athletic prowess of the women (the dunks would be a lot more authoritative, at minimum), it's not just that they're higher scoring. Anyone knows that HS games are usually 8-minute quarters (32 minutes), college games are 40 minutes, and NBA games are 48 minutes. Of course you're going to score more in more time.

Besides, the people who think the least of the WNBA are unlikely to be NBA fans. As I've become more of a basketball fan (and also a fan of athletes in lower tiers of professional sports, the ones people pretend don't exist), I've started to appreciate women's basketball much more.

I don't mean to be offensive, but why? It's a bell curve issue, why would you choose to watch a sport, just because it has women in it, when the elite of all three levels of male participation in the sport are likely to be better? Maybe your local high school guys couldn't beat an WNBA team, but it's a relatively commonly held belief that any given college men's team could, and likely even any decent ABA team. What's the draw?

Any decently sized HS, at the very least, would be able to WNBA teams a run for the money. I would be shocked if a college mens team lost more than 1 of 10 games.


I see people say that but have you watched an average high school basketball game lately? They're awful.

Now one of those powerhouse high school teams (e.g. Oak Hill) with future NBA players at every spot, yeah they could probably beat a WNBA team. The average big high school on the rich side of town? Nah I don't think so.
 
2012-10-24 06:37:38 PM  

js34603: redmid17: Mr Guy: IAmRight: While I agree that lowering the rim would increase the perception of the athletic prowess of the women (the dunks would be a lot more authoritative, at minimum), it's not just that they're higher scoring. Anyone knows that HS games are usually 8-minute quarters (32 minutes), college games are 40 minutes, and NBA games are 48 minutes. Of course you're going to score more in more time.

Besides, the people who think the least of the WNBA are unlikely to be NBA fans. As I've become more of a basketball fan (and also a fan of athletes in lower tiers of professional sports, the ones people pretend don't exist), I've started to appreciate women's basketball much more.

I don't mean to be offensive, but why? It's a bell curve issue, why would you choose to watch a sport, just because it has women in it, when the elite of all three levels of male participation in the sport are likely to be better? Maybe your local high school guys couldn't beat an WNBA team, but it's a relatively commonly held belief that any given college men's team could, and likely even any decent ABA team. What's the draw?

Any decently sized HS, at the very least, would be able to WNBA teams a run for the money. I would be shocked if a college mens team lost more than 1 of 10 games.

I see people say that but have you watched an average high school basketball game lately? They're awful.

Now one of those powerhouse high school teams (e.g. Oak Hill) with future NBA players at every spot, yeah they could probably beat a WNBA team. The average big high school on the rich side of town? Nah I don't think so.


That's why I said decent sized. A school with 2000 kids is probably not going to have much trouble. A rural school with 500 kids is probably not going to have the size to compete. Most of the reason why I think a decent HS squad could at least hang is the size and strength they'd have on the roster. Assuming they don't come up with some gender modifications to the rules like they did with the HS/US Women's hockey scrimmages (no checking) or the stories we see about a male scout squad playing a D-1 women's team (can't play above the rim, no pressing, can't remember others), I think the length, height, and strength would be pretty damn hard for a women's team to match up against.
 
2012-10-24 07:26:41 PM  
If the 10' rim has been standard for more or less a century, why don't we just re-set it higher (for the men's game) based either on:

1) Data showing that men are--on average--x inches taller now than c. 1920

2) Data showing that pro basketball players are--on average--y inches taller now than, say, the 1940s.


There are some statements out there by NBA folk saying that a higher rim for men would mean more fundamentals, less dunking, etc. But if audiences wanted a game more like midcentury--where they called traveling, you couldn't turn the ball over while dribbling, and couldn't keep a hand on the guy you're guarding--then the NBA and NCAA would enforce things it that way.

As to the women: I didn't know about the smaller ball, but understand it. Likewise, what if the ball the men used was enlarged (based on pro-players' hands being doubtless larger on average than 70 years ago)?
 
2012-10-25 08:37:22 AM  
This is why feminism sucks.

Yes, Men are willing to change the rules of every game to shut you shrieking harpies up.

So can you shut up?

/no?
 
2012-10-25 09:15:17 AM  

you have pee hands: It seems weird to me. Rims are at 10 feet (or as close as they could reasonably get it) for pretty much everyone from elementary school up all the time. Low rims would be weird.


You get used to it. My old middle school had something like 11-12' rims on the outdoor courts, I assume so people wouldn't come from around the neighborhood and dunk on them and destroy them. You'd have to warm up for a bit longer to readjust your shot, but it wasn't too hard.

Mr Guy: I don't mean to be offensive, but why? It's a bell curve issue, why would you choose to watch a sport, just because it has women in it, when the elite of all three levels of male participation in the sport are likely to be better?


I'm not necessarily a fan; it's not like I see that a game is on TV and seek it out (unless New York is playing - you might think it's because I live in the state now, but it's actually because a girl that went to my HS and led our team to the state title while I was a senior (she was a freshman) and a state-record undefeated streak plays for them now). It's just that I'm no longer in the camp of HAHA THEY'RE SO TERRIBLE THEY SHOULD JUST QUIT. They're the best women in the world at what they do and the way we get more talented women into sports is by making opportunities for them to play at a professional level. Of course there are limits imposed by size, speed, and strength - but they're getting stronger and faster and bigger each year.

While I was in the camp of "the NBA should just eliminate it because it's unprofitable," I'm now in the camp of "kudos to the NBA for being the only professional sports league that is committed enough to women's participation in the sport that they've actually created a league that little girls can see and use to inspire them to potentially play professionally one day."

/having had a daughter recently has probably accelerated this view, as I'm going to give her every opportunity to at least get a basketball scholarship
//I'm also of the opinion that more sporting events = better. It's becoming one of my pet peeves when people say that events that they don't like should be eliminated. Hey, there are tens to hundreds of thousands of fans of virtually every sport, and if the people running the league are either making money or losing it at a rate that they don't mind, who the f*ck are you to say they should eliminate it? I'd rather watch a WNBA game than more "sports entertainment" from ESPN (except for most 30 for 30 films)
 
2012-10-25 02:54:39 PM  

IAmRight: //I'm also of the opinion that more sporting events = better. It's becoming one of my pet peeves when people say that events that they don't like should be eliminated. Hey, there are tens to hundreds of thousands of fans of virtually every sport, and if the people running the league are either making money or losing it at a rate that they don't mind, who the f*ck are you to say they should eliminate it? I'd rather watch a WNBA game than more "sports entertainment" from ESPN (except for most 30 for 30 film


Personally, I say they should eliminate the WNBA because the WNBA is paid for by the NBA, and is part of the reason why tickets are cost prohibitive.
 
2012-10-25 10:50:50 PM  

Mr Guy: and is part of the reason why tickets are cost prohibitive.


They're not cost prohibitive if they continue to sell 'em.

Also, they're not going to lower prices if they eliminate the WNBA. This is something people bring up when they're upset about salaries, too. Why would they lower prices when they can just pocket the money instead? People are already accepting of current prices.
 
Displayed 27 of 27 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report