OT - UCONN Women

[Cheriehoop]

I can name the top programs but don't know the players. UConn, Notre Dame, Baylor, Maryland, Tennessee/LSU/La. Tech historically.

Now I have a question maybe you can answer if you don't mind. Is all the talent centralized in the top teams and is their enough talent that could sustain more parity if it spread out. I ask because just say you divided UConn up I still think the title comes from Notre Dame or South Carolina.

I think the women's game is improving as a whole with more attention but is there a difference in recruits ranked 1-10 than from 30-50?

I ask because if you recruited a team of top 100 talent kids in the men's game it could beat a team of top 10-20 talent kids in a one game scenario. Is the same possible in the women's game yet?

I think its possible but in the mens' game, those top 10 - 20 talented players wouldn't stay past their sophomore years. By junior, senior years those top 100 kids in their freshman year, move up and will be more than competitive. Hope this makes sense. Turnover is much slower in the womens game with players staying all 4 years. If you have a team with top 10-20 players in the womens' game , they will stay formidable and with an edge all 4 years.

 

[NYCSUGrad]

There are not enough skilled women to go around and that is not likely to change. The best players are so few in number that it is easy for them to gravitate to one team. It is a rare woman that has leaping ability.

Well that's probably a valid point. It necessitates a different style from the men. Different, however, does not necessarily mean uninteresting though. The women tennis players don't hit as many aces as men. Some would say too many aces are boring...

 

[pulaski74]

If there was a real market for college women in the WNBA like there is in mens college ball, how many of the UConn women would be there for 4 years? Any doubt that Breanna Stewart etc would have been one and done? Last year, Kentucky men was a team made up mainly of freshman against Wisconsin, a team mostly comprised of upperclassmen. The men are doing the same at Kentucky currently but because of the NBA draft, other more experienced teams not made up of top freshman recruits can still beat them while getting top media attention.It's a totally different world, the best recruits for women go to UConn (like UCLA in the men's game 50 years ago) and they stay 4 all four years.

Until the top recruits decide to select universities thinking they alone with a good coach can be a difference maker in getting a championship and recognition instead of needing an entire team of top recruits to be by their side to get it,they will continue to group together at a UConn. When Pat Summit retired, all the attention went to just one single team, UConn. Baylor, Stanford, Notre Dame etc have all been consistent top competitors putting money and emphasis on their womens' teams but what fans can name their coaches or top players from there? The media gives minimal coverage. How many SU fans can even name the women's SU starters? UConn fans care and take pride in their team, the rest of the country - meh- so the results shouldn't be surprising. Below is the link for the history of womens championships.

http://www.ncaa.com/history/basketball-women/d1

Agree w/ everything you say, but their record is pretty impressive.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I can name the top programs but don't know the players. UConn, Notre Dame, Baylor, Maryland, Tennessee/LSU/La. Tech historically.

Now I have a question maybe you can answer if you don't mind. Is all the talent centralized in the top teams and is their enough talent that could sustain more parity if it spread out. I ask because just say you divided UConn up I still think the title comes from Notre Dame or South Carolina.

I think the women's game is improving as a whole with more attention but is there a difference in recruits ranked 1-10 than from 30-50?

I ask because if you recruited a team of top 100 talent kids in the men's game it could beat a team of top 10-20 talent kids in a one game scenario. Is the same possible in the women's game yet?

Stanford as well.

 

[NineOneSeven]

I cannot watch women's basketball. There are absolutely some solid women players out there, but I just cannot watch the games.

 

[Alsacs]

I think its possible but in the mens' game, those top 10 - 20 talented players wouldn't stay past their sophomore years. By junior, senior years those top 100 kids in their freshman year, move up and will be more than competitive. Hope this makes sense. Turnover is much slower in the womens game with players staying all 4 years. If you have a team with top 10-20 players in the womens' game , they will stay formidable and with an edge all 4 years.

I agree. The men's game loses its top 10-20 talent each year to the NBA. While the women's game doesn't have that turnover.

I just wonder how big is the gap between top 20 talent and top 50 talent in the women's game?
I don't think the women's tournament had some nice upset this year two #7 seeds beat #2 seeds just like the men's tournament.

They just need the gap between UConn and Texas to become much closer. A 2 seed should have a chance to beat a 1 seed.

 

[Marsh01]

If there was a real market for college women in the WNBA like there is in mens college ball, how many of the UConn women would be there for 4 years? Any doubt that Breanna Stewart etc would have been one and done? Last year, Kentucky men was a team made up mainly of freshman against Wisconsin, a team mostly comprised of upperclassmen. The men are doing the same at Kentucky currently but because of the NBA draft, other more experienced teams not made up of top freshman recruits can still beat them while getting top media attention.It's a totally different world, the best recruits for women go to UConn (like UCLA in the men's game 50 years ago) and they stay 4 all four years. Until the top recruits decide to select universities thinking they alone with a good coach can be a difference maker in getting a championship and recognition instead of needing an entire team of top recruits to be by their side to get it,they will continue to group together at a UConn. When Pat Summit retired, all the attention went to just one single team, UConn. Baylor, Stanford, Notre Dame etc have all been consistent top competitors putting money and emphasis on their womens' teams but what fans can name their coaches or top players from there? The media gives minimal coverage. How many SU fans can even name the women's SU starters? UConn fans care and take pride in their team, the rest of the country - meh- so the results shouldn't be surprising. Below is the link for the history of womens championships. http://www.ncaa.com/history/basketball-women/d1

Ive watched a lot of the womens games this year. They are a fun team to watch.

If i am not mistaken didnt jewel lloyd from ND leave early to go to the wnba?

The problem is with 15 scholarships it gives a team like uconn to stockpile talent year after year.

 

[TheCusian]

I don't mind seeing a dynasty - it's fun to watch and root against Goliath. The real problem is that the gulf between them and everyone else is too big. Sucks the joy of watching sports out of it.

Go Syracuse Orange this Fri - both teams!

 

[MSOrange]

I don't mind seeing a dynasty - it's fun to watch and root against Goliath. The real problem is that the gulf between them and everyone else is too big. Sucks the joy of watching sports out of it.

Go Syracuse Orange this Fri - both teams!

This is exactly how I feel. It's not so much the domination, it's that nobody else has a chance that takes the fun out of it. Looks like South Carolina kept it to 10 points, but even the recap of that game say UConn was in control the whole game.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Ive watched a lot of the womens games this year. They are a fun team to watch.

If i am not mistaken didnt jewel lloyd from ND leave early to go to the wnba?

The problem is with 15 scholarships it gives a team like uconn to stockpile talent year after year.

The WNBA requires a player to be a minimum of 22 years old, completed their college eligibility , to have graduated from a 4 year college or be 4 years removed from high school.

 

[NYCSUGrad]

The WNBA requires a player to be a minimum of 22 years old, completed their college eligibility , to have graduated from a 4 year college or be 4 years removed from high school.

Is that too strict a standard? Or is it a good one because it emphasizes the importance of a college education? I think you could argue either way. However, the women probably don't have as many opportunities as the men do to make a career in basketball, whether as a professional player in the NBA, the NBDL or dozens of overseas leagues, or as a coach or commentator/journalist or any other type of related field (trainer, athletic director, etc etc.) so the emphasis on academics may be more important for them.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Is that too strict a standard? Or is it a good one because it emphasizes the importance of a college education? I think you could argue either way. However, the women probably don't have as many opportunities as the men do to make a career in basketball, whether as a professional player in the NBA, the NBDL or dozens of overseas leagues, or as a coach or commentator/journalist or any other type of related field (trainer, athletic director, etc etc.) so the emphasis on academics may be more important for them.

The really low salaries in the WNBA also makes having an education imperative. Many of the best WNBA players go overseas to China, Australia etc to earn better money than here in the states.

 

[NYCSUGrad]

The really low salaries in the WNBA also makes having an education imperative. Many of the best WNBA players go overseas to China, Australia etc to earn better money than here in the states.

Hmm. I don't follow the league so didn't know that. Obviously they don't get the same amount of revenue the NBA does, but I'd be interested to know the teams' profit margins, if any, compared to the salaries they pay.