SouthernDukie
Member
I completely agree with both of you. I don’t know when I’ve ever had more of an intense dislike for a female basketball player in my life. She’s really the worst.
WNBA: The 2024 Regular Season and Playoffs
- Thread starter brevity
- Start date
I completely agree with both of you. I don’t know when I’ve ever had more of an intense dislike for a female basketball player in my life. She’s really the worst.
JasonEvans
Host, The Duke Basketball Roundup
Don't even get me started on how she defends that homophobe head coach at LSU. Every single woman who plays for that program should be ashamed of themselves. If Brittney Griner raised an elbow as Reese was coming across the lane and several of Angel's teeth were left laying on the floor I would be tempted to stand and applaud.
CameronBlue
Member
Fever home attendance:
2022 + 2023 (38 games): 113,300; 2,981/ game
2024: (7 games): 116,782; 16,683/ game
2022 + 2023 (38 games): 113,300; 2,981/ game
2024: (7 games): 116,782; 16,683/ game
bundabergdevil
Member
That’s great!
CameronBornAndBred
Well-known member
Without endorsements, Caitlin Clark is getting paid $76k this year. Her salary was paid from the attendance increase for just one game.
Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
Member
Yikes. Tickets are about $5?
This is the golden opportunity the U.S. Women's Olympic team is missing, and it's professional malpractice. The U.S. women are not going to lose, she could have easily been added and not cost the team. This is not the men's game where the world was catching up and the men were complacent.
In the Olympics 3 years ago, the U.S. point differential in the group stage was +37. They won their quarterfinal game by 24 points, their semi-final game by 20, and the final by 15 (which seems close by comparison, but they led by 19 going into the 4th quarter).
Stupid. The women's game needs all the eyeballs it can muster.
In the Olympics 3 years ago, the U.S. point differential in the group stage was +37. They won their quarterfinal game by 24 points, their semi-final game by 20, and the final by 15 (which seems close by comparison, but they led by 19 going into the 4th quarter).
Stupid. The women's game needs all the eyeballs it can muster.
SouthernDukie
Member
No doubt. It's the biggest blunder, in terms of putting a U.S. team together, that I can ever remember in my lifetime. And I've been watching since the 70's.
suggesting we take players who get the most views rather than those who the coaches determined are most likely to contribute to winning is an insult to the women who did make the team.
Sorry. This would not fly in the men's side, and we should not denigrate the women's game jst because it is likely US will win regardless.
Sorry. This would not fly in the men's side, and we should not denigrate the women's game jst because it is likely US will win regardless.
killerleft
Member
As God is my witness, I thought Christian Laettner could fly.
Way to mis-characterize what we are saying. It's a business. You make decisions based on what is best for the business. Period.
And also please explain Diana Taurasi. She's a much bigger slap in the face than Caitlin Clark.
US Basketball (in fact, any National team organization) shouldn't be run as a business and it's a shame so many are. It's what led to the Women's Soccer players making so much less which is an awful look for representing the country. Especially since national team orgs are monopolies.
What is and what should be are 2 very different things in all parts of life. So you deal with what is.
Should representing your country pay you anything at all? Should colleges have semipro athletes who don't graduate and don't take academics seriously? Especially football teams, where you KNOW you are damaging many young brains. Soccer may be just as bad. I don't have time to go on and on. And on.
Should representing your country pay you anything at all? Should colleges have semipro athletes who don't graduate and don't take academics seriously? Especially football teams, where you KNOW you are damaging many young brains. Soccer may be just as bad. I don't have time to go on and on. And on.
On the men's side, this is not an issue. It's well established and popular. So it's not an apples to apples comparison. The WNBA has been around for 27 years and this year it's getting more people watching and going to games than ever before.....because of Clark. Putting Clark on the team would be the opposite of denigrating the women's game. Such an opportunity missed to grow the game and get extra support for the women's national team. In particular with younger viewers who are all about Clark right now.
He's a big UConn fan......
don't be like that, man.
I also don't believe that DT should be on the team based on performance....but she likely isn't on the team due to her potential to draw eyes.
Stray Gator
Moderator
I think that the arguments being made by those who favor including Caitlin Clark on the Olympic team and by those who oppose adding her to the roster both have merit. Accepting that the USA women are likely to win the gold medal again in any event, and that Clark is sufficiently talented to qualify for the team, the case for including Clark rests largely on the expectation that her immense popularity would present an opportunity to attract more viewers for the women's games at the Olympics. On the other side, those who oppose her inclusion maintain that a spot on the Olympic team is an honor or distinction that should be earned by the "best" players, with "best" being defined to encompass valued qualities beyond pure talent, such as experience in international competition and proven leadership skills. Some observers have further questioned whether it would be appropriate to create a spot for Clark because that would require removing a player already slated to be on the roster; and the player most frequently named as one who might be replaced is Diana Taurasi, who is slated to be in her sixth Olympics.
Because I see merit in both positions, I don't see either outcome as "wrong." But on balance, I'd be inclined to vote in favor of replacing Taurasi with Clark, for several reasons. First, no one disputes that Clark's participation would draw a substantial number of viewers who would not otherwise watch the women's games; aside from NBC and the sponsors, it seems to me that those who would benefit most from that added attention and interest would be the other players -- and not just those on the Olympic team, but all the women's basketball players in the WNBA and in college basketball. Second, to the extent that experience and leadership are factors to be considered, I believe that other players on the roster provide an ample reservoir that the team can draw upon, even without Taurasi; moreover, shouldn't the fact that this would enable Clark herself to acquire such valuable experience and skills, which would likely benefit future USA women's Olympic teams, militate in favor of her inclusion? Finally, the fact that Taurasi has already amassed a total of five Olympic gold medals would, IMO, militate in favor of affording the younger player a chance to earn and enjoy that achievement, rather than allowing the veteran to collect another medal that she can hang alongside the five she's already got.
Because I see merit in both positions, I don't see either outcome as "wrong." But on balance, I'd be inclined to vote in favor of replacing Taurasi with Clark, for several reasons. First, no one disputes that Clark's participation would draw a substantial number of viewers who would not otherwise watch the women's games; aside from NBC and the sponsors, it seems to me that those who would benefit most from that added attention and interest would be the other players -- and not just those on the Olympic team, but all the women's basketball players in the WNBA and in college basketball. Second, to the extent that experience and leadership are factors to be considered, I believe that other players on the roster provide an ample reservoir that the team can draw upon, even without Taurasi; moreover, shouldn't the fact that this would enable Clark herself to acquire such valuable experience and skills, which would likely benefit future USA women's Olympic teams, militate in favor of her inclusion? Finally, the fact that Taurasi has already amassed a total of five Olympic gold medals would, IMO, militate in favor of affording the younger player a chance to earn and enjoy that achievement, rather than allowing the veteran to collect another medal that she can hang alongside the five she's already got.
Throw viewership aside and I’ll argue till I’m blue in the face that Caitlin Clark would help this team more than Taurasi.
Game...set...match. (wrong sport, but who cares?)
https://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/40378767/sky-fever-angel-reese-caitlin-clark-tops-wnba-ratings
Please notice who is in the video in the article. Hint: it ain't Reese. Few in the game can pass and score like Caitlin. Not a bad rebounder for a guard, either.
https://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/40378767/sky-fever-angel-reese-caitlin-clark-tops-wnba-ratings
Please notice who is in the video in the article. Hint: it ain't Reese. Few in the game can pass and score like Caitlin. Not a bad rebounder for a guard, either.
Last edited:
HereBeforeCoachK
On Holiday
BOOM! This. So this.
While all of Stray Gator's points were valid, the one above is far and above the most important.
SouthernDukie
Member
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
This is a no-brainer. Caitlin should be on this team - period.