Who Really Gives A Shit About The U-Conn Women?

[CH David]

Not even a post in the Sports Bar about this.

ESPN is trying to make it seem huge that U-Conn's Women basketball team surpassed the UCLA Men's winning streak of 88 last night. 89 straight victories is impressive in any sport, but who really gives a shit? A bigger portion couldn't careless about Women's basketball than those that do. The WNBA gets maybe half the capacity in each stadium they play in. Other than those select few, the majority don't care, just like the majority don't care about Women's wrestling.

As impressive as it is, do you really give a fuck that the U-Conn women broke the 88 straight wins mark?

 

[Megatron]

Nope. Not one bit. Women's sports, even at the top level, is just incredibly awful to watch. With the lack of talented women to play D-1 basketball as there is, I'm not surprised someone made a huge run at it. That's not to say I don't think winning 89 straight games isn't impressive, it sure as hell is, but I just don't find it as good as the UCLA men's record because of the lack of talent in the women's pool, compared to the mens.

I'm not trying to disrespect their accomplishment, it certainly is amazing, but you couldn't pay me enough to watch a full game of womens sports (unless it involves them wearing either tight clothing or little to no clothing ).

 

[People's Champ]

I couldn't care less about it. There are what, 4 legit teams that could beat U-Conn? Even when they play their worst game they still win by like 23. There is no competition in women's college basketball.Plus, I just don't care about women's sports. Its a nice record, but it means absolutely nothing to me.

 

[CH David]

That's exactly what I was going for. I don't know if it came off clearly in my opening post, but I couldn't care less about it either. There was that Amazonian episode of Futurama where they say that they don't dunk like guys, but that they are about the fundamentals. That's all fine and dandy, but women's athletics (except maybe softball) just is not entertaining at all. The whole time SportsCenter was talking about it, I was just like "okay let's get to something actually worth watching!"

Another question that pops up, do you think that shows like SportsCenter are forced into having to cover it like they would a huge streak like a men's team coming close to it due to equal opportunity? That question is probably an automatic yes because it would be deemed sexist but it's a good thought to ponder. If there was no worry about being sexist, would it have opened SportsCenter or would it have been another clip in the highlights?

 

[LSN80]

Simply put, there is no comparison between the two records, and as such, I don't care. Back when Wooden's team was setting the record, there was parity in Men's basketball. It was believable that his team could be beaten, and they did play close games. They had several memorable come from behind victories.

The UConn woman's team can make no such claim. They've trailed for 188 minutes(4 and a half games)total, and 4 of their wins have been by 10 points or less. It's hard to find legitimacy to the record when there is no competition. If they were battling night in and night out in hard fought contests, then Id be impressed. But they're emptying their bench and their bench players are destroying the other team's starters. Without parity, there's no interest. I couldn't care less about the UConn women's record, and I'm tired of hearing Geno bitch about the lack of respect they get. It's a nice accomplishment and all, but it doesnt come close to comparing to the UCLA record.

 

[klunderbunker]

It's a cool thing but that's about it. It'll come and go and then we'll move on to something else. If a men's team gets to 89 and the Uconn streak is longer, I don't think anyone is really going to say they're the second longest streak. It's way too different of a game to really say that it's similar to UCLA's. It's impressive but I can't imagine this is something i'll be talking about in a few weeks or even days.

 

[LitasRevenge79]

Being a woman myself, I really don't see the big appeal in UConn being THIS GREAT. I mean, maybe if they overcame some big tragedy like in "We Are Marshall" or helped a mentally handicapped team-mate like in "Radio" or helped overcome racism like in "Remember the Titans" then maybe I'd be a bit more thrilled. But to be quite honest, until they get Barkley and his guys giving a good analysis of this team. To be frank, there are worse teams out there that get more coverage for other topics and nowadays winning tournaments is becoming fewer and less of a thing to be noted for. Even in today's society its more common for teams to be popularized for one of their players to be headlined for "Who shot who" or "Who's in rehab" or "Who's leaving the team for greener pastures." Call me old fashioned, but we get it UConn, you are great, you're the Lakers of collegiate, so be happy, and go home.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Simply put, there is no comparison between the two records, and as such, I don't care. Back when Wooden's team was setting the record, there was parity in Men's basketball. It was believable that his team could be beaten, and they did play close games. They had several memorable come from behind victories.

I disagree with that statement. There was just as less parity in men's basketball at the time. It was UCLA and everybody else. When the UConn women started their streak, they had teams like Baylor, Tennesse, Maryland, and Stanford who were just as good as they were.

The UConn woman's team can make no such claim. They've trailed for 188 minutes(4 and a half games)total, and 4 of their wins have been by 10 points or less. It's hard to find legitimacy to the record when there is no competition. If they were battling night in and night out in hard fought contests, then Id be impressed. But they're emptying their bench and their bench players are destroying the other team's starters. Without parity, there's no interest. I couldn't care less about the UConn women's record, and I'm tired of hearing Geno bitch about the lack of respect they get. It's a nice accomplishment and all, but it doesnt come close to comparing to the UCLA record.

So what if they only trailed for 188 minutes? You're going to discredit their streak because only four of their wins have been by 10 points or less? It's not their fault that they are better than everyone else. UCLA was better than everyone else at their peak. UCLA beat 18 ranked teams during their streak. UConn beat 30 during theirs.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Being a woman myself, I really don't see the big appeal in UConn being THIS GREAT. I mean, maybe if they overcame some big tragedy like in "We Are Marshall" or helped a mentally handicapped team-mate like in "Radio" or helped overcome racism like in "Remember the Titans" then maybe I'd be a bit more thrilled. But to be quite honest, until they get Barkley and his guys giving a good analysis of this team. To be frank, there are worse teams out there that get more coverage for other topics and nowadays winning tournaments is becoming fewer and less of a thing to be noted for. Even in today's society its more common for teams to be popularized for one of their players to be headlined for "Who shot who" or "Who's in rehab" or "Who's leaving the team for greener pastures." Call me old fashioned, but we get it UConn, you are great, you're the Lakers of collegiate, so be happy, and go home.

I'm sorry that nobody died in a plane crash or there wasn't anybody on the team that was mentally handicapped to garner your interest. It's very rare that you get headlines for doing something good in the world of sports and the UConn women are one of them. I don't need Barkley giving his analysis of how great this teams is. I've heard the opinion of many respected college basketball analysts and that's all I need to hear from.

 

[Thriller Ant]

I disagree with that statement. There was just as less parity in men's basketball at the time. It was UCLA and everybody else. When the UConn women started their streak, they had teams like Baylor, Tennesse, Maryland, and Stanford who were just as good as they were.

So what if they only trailed for 188 minutes? You're going to discredit their streak because only four of their wins have been by 10 points or less? It's not their fault that they are better than everyone else. UCLA was better than everyone else at their peak. UCLA beat 18 ranked teams during their streak. UConn beat 30 during theirs.

Speaking out of both sides your mouth there, aren't you? If those teams were just as good, as you said, then there would've been closer games. UCLA was pushed and had tough games. They were often in games where it was seriously in doubt whether they would win. UConn just has to show up and it is known that they will win because there is no competition. This isn't an overly impressive achievement, no matter how much you, ESPN or Geno Auriemma try to spin it, UCLA is still the gold standard as far as dominance in college basketball is concerned.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Speaking out of both sides your mouth there, aren't you? If those teams were just as good, as you said, then there would've been closer games. UCLA was pushed and had tough games. They were often in games where it was seriously in doubt whether they would win. UConn just has to show up and it is known that they will win because there is no competition. This isn't an overly impressive achievement, no matter how much you, ESPN or Geno Auriemma try to spin it, UCLA is still the gold standard as far as dominance in college basketball is concerned.

Did you notice that I said "when they started their streak"? There were just as many good teams in women's basketball as there were in men's basketball. UCLA gets praised and UConn gets criticized. That's all I'm seeing here.

 

[LSN80]

I disagree with that statement. There was just as less parity in men's basketball at the time. It was UCLA and everybody else. When the UConn women started their streak, they had teams like Baylor, Tennesse, Maryland, and Stanford who were just as good as they were.

There was FAR more parity in College BB for the men at the time, just as there always has been. UCLA had to contend with California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, USC, Washington and Washington State, and that was just out west that all played UCLA tough. They played and beat the team that ended their streak, Notre Dame, 4 times during that period, when ND was a powerhouse. You named four teams. I named 7 within their own friggin time zone. Yeesh.

So what if they only trailed for 188 minutes? You're going to discredit their streak because only four of their wins have been by 10 points or less? It's not their fault that they are better than everyone else. UCLA was better than everyone else at their peak. UCLA beat 18 ranked teams during their streak. UConn beat 30 during theirs.

Im saying that its not as impressive as the UCLA men's streak. Did you see any one point victories during the UConn women's streak? No. UCLA beat Oregon by 1 and Maryland by 1 during their streak. Context is important when you look at a streak. UConn had 4 games they won within single digits, UCLA had 15. So when UConn was emptying their bench and still dominating other teams starters, UCLA was pushed to the limit on many occasions. Rankings in Men's BB are very different from women's basketball in that a top 15 team in Men's B-ball could and can be competitive with the No 1 team, while the same matchup in Women's basketball ends up in a route. When you only trail for 188 minutes, that exposes the lack of parity in the sport. That's my point.

Im not "discrediting" their streak. Anytime a team can win that many games in a row is certainly impressive. The women that have achieved that feat have my respect, but I dont care at the same time. Its nowhere near as impressive as the UCLA streak. Context and perspective are quite important here.

 

[Thriller Ant]

Did you notice that I said "when they started their streak"? There were just as many good teams in women's basketball as there were in men's basketball. UCLA gets praised and UConn gets criticized. That's all I'm seeing here.

UCLA gets praised because it was a series of great teams that achieved a dominant streak against solid competition. UConn doesn't get that same praise (I don't see anyone criticizing them, just stating it's not as impressive) because they had a series of great teams that achieved a dominant streak against incredibly weaker competition.

It would be the same as if Duke won 90 in a row against Division 1 opponents and UNC won 90 in a row against Division 3 teams. Would you consider those equal? No, and that's what is happening here. UConn's opponents are the equivalent of Division 3 level at this point due to a lack of talent in women's basketball. It's nice that they won that many, but saying they are better than UCLA is ridiculous.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

There was FAR more parity in College BB for the men at the time, just as there always has been. UCLA had to contend with California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, USC, Washington and Washington State, and that was just out west that all played UCLA tough. They played and beat the team that ended their streak, Notre Dame, 4 times during that period, when ND was a powerhouse. You named four team. I named 7 within their own friggin conference. Yeesh.

Oregon, Washington, Washington State, and Stanford were all terrible during that time so what does that say about UCLA that they could barely beat the bad teams. Hell, I could list off teams from the Big East.

Im saying that its not as impressive as the UCLA men's streak. Did you see any one point victories during the UConn women's streak? No. UCLA beat Oregon by 1 and Maryland by 1 during their streak. Context is important when you look at a streak. UConn had 4 games they won within single digits, UCLA had 15. So when UConn was emptying their bench and still dominating other teams starters, UCLA was pushed to the limit on many occasions. Rankings in Men's BB are very different from women's basketball in that a top 15 team in Men's B-ball could and can be competitive with the No 1 team, while the same matchup in Women's basketball ends up in a route. When you only trail for 188 minutes, that exposes the lack of parity in the sport. That's my point.

Im not "discrediting" their streak. Anytime a team can win that many games in a row is certainly impressive. The women that have achieved that feat have my respect, but I dont care at the same time. Its nowhere near as impressive as the UCLA streak. Context and perspective are quite important here.

UConn 65
Baylor 64

There you go.

I guess they should shut down women's college basketball because it appears UConn is clearly better than everybody else.

 

[Megatron]

1 game out of 89 certainly isn't that impressive. And UConn isn't criticized, it just isn't seen as the greatest streak ever like ESPN wants to make it out to be. Not with the lack of talent that there is in women's basketball. This UConn women's team probably would have no problem competing in something like the Olympics due to the lack of talent throughout womens basketball, which is really sad.

 

[LSN80]

Oregon, Washington, Washington State, and Stanford were all terrible during that time so what does that say about UCLA that they could barely beat the bad teams. Hell, I could list off teams from the Big East.







UConn 65
Baylor 64

There you go.

I guess they should shut down women's college basketball because it appears UConn is clearly better than everybody else.

Im not going to go back and forth with you man if youre going to take things out of context.I could list off teams from the Big East too, being from Pittsburgh. What does that have to do with anything? Im not saying in any way that this streak isn't impressive, the women aren't to be praised, and that its not a hell of an accomplishment. It is. But it pales in comparison to what UCLA did. My memory must not be as good as yours, because I remember those teams being much better then you give them credit for. There's less parity in Women's basketball right now then there ever has been in men's basketball. That's my point. Good for UConn. But it's not enough to get me to tune in.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

UCLA gets praised because it was a series of great teams that achieved a dominant streak against solid competition. UConn doesn't get that same praise (I don't see anyone criticizing them, just stating it's not as impressive) because they had a series of great teams that achieved a dominant streak against incredibly weaker competition.

It would be the same as if Duke won 90 in a row against Division 1 opponents and UNC won 90 in a row against Division 3 teams. Would you consider those equal? No, and that's what is happening here. UConn's opponents are the equivalent of Division 3 level at this point due to a lack of talent in women's basketball. It's nice that they won that many, but saying they are better than UCLA is ridiculous.

I've never said that they are better than UCLA. I'm still going to stand by argument that there were the same amount of great teams in men's basketball and in women's basketball. If a team won 88 straight games in today's men's college basketball, it would be more impressive than what UCLA did because you have players leaving school early all the time. There are many similarites between what UConn and UCLA did and I'm not trying to say one is better than the other. They are both great streaks in college basketball.

 

[CH David]

So LJL, do you actually give a shit about the U-Conn women?

Women's sports alone (again, women's softball may be the exception) just isn't entertaining. What can they do that wows me like the guys? Nothing. College basketball, I love it. The Illini are my team, but I can't for the life of me watch the women. Same with U-Conn. There is nothing entertaining about it. The streak is impressive, I said that at the start, but the majority, myself included, just don't care that they have won 89 straight games.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

So LJL, do you actually give a shit about the U-Conn women?

Women's sports alone (again, women's softball may be the exception) just isn't entertaining. What can they do that wows me like the guys? Nothing. College basketball, I love it. The Illini are my team, but I can't for the life of me watch the women. Same with U-Conn. There is nothing entertaining about it. The streak is impressive, I said that at the start, but the majority, myself included, just don't care that they have won 89 straight games.

I do. I watch women's volleyball and softball occasionally all the time. I've enjoyed women's basketball more than I have men's basketball throughout my life. I've watched the WNBA since it first started in 1997 and I didn't watch my first NBA game until 1999 or 2000. I can watch a whole game of WNBA or women's college basketball much easier than I can their male counterparts unless the Spurs are playing of course. I'm not saying that one streak is more impressive than the other or trying to discredit either. They are both great streaks in their own right and should be acknowledged and celebrated but in today's sports, comparison is all we got.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

The majority of the people that watch sports are guys, and even larger of a percentage of those people are the people who listen to sports-talk-radio. That being said, I would assume that most of them are chauvinists and can't look at a group of women doing something more impressive than men.

Who freaking cares which one is better? Winning 89 games in a row of Div. 1 basketball is freaking impressive. Winning 89 games in a row of paper, rock, scissors would be impressive. Winning 89 of ANYTHING in a row is something to be acclaimed.

 

[DirtyJosé]

Women's sports alone (again, women's softball may be the exception) just isn't entertaining. What can they do that wows me like the guys? Nothing. College basketball, I love it. The Illini are my team, but I can't for the life of me watch the women. Same with U-Conn. There is nothing entertaining about it. The streak is impressive, I said that at the start, but the majority, myself included, just don't care that they have won 89 straight games.

To be totally fair amigo, if I personally were to have anything I didn't care about stripped away from SportsCenter, it'd be nothing but NFL and NBA scores, followed by blooper reels. It's news, and whether it's truly big news or not, the media simply chose to push it as the big item today over anything else. I don't think any stations were forced to push it simply because it was a women's thing; even if there were such rules in place, I doubt it'd mandate that the coverage must be in the headlines. Majority or not, for the people that do care this is neat moment. It's not like you're being forced to start attending women's college basketball games. Where's the harm in letting the girls have their day?

 

[Theo Mays]

It's an impressive feat no matter if it was men, women, children, aliens, animals, etc... pulling it off. To win 89 games in a row is just spectacular and I do care a bit about the streak. Now I'm no expert on womens basketball, but it is something I've discussed with friends before. Hell I've even won some money doing a March Madness bracket before. We get it that womens sports will never be as mainstream or entertaining as men sports, but what this team has achieved is impressive in its own right and they deserve whatever credentials or media following that they can get.

It is getting the media love right now and it is deserved as the sporting season is slow right now minus the bowl games going. Once Christmas rolls around it'll die down as the NBA will come into a big holiday gaming day and the NFL playoffs are right around the corner.