It is currently Sun Jun 16, 2024 7:30 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 554 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 19  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 89511
Location: To the left of my post
veganfan21 wrote:
Idk, if Clark wants to taunt opposing players while beating their ass then it's fair game if opponents want to taunt her while ending her season. If you're gonna dish it then you should be able to take it. It's possible she already has this attitude, which is great for her.

Reese/LSU were obviously triggered by Clark's shit-talking and had a plan to dish out some of their own. What is interesting is they appeared to take offense on behalf of other players not on their team, particularly African American players. Reese's comments suggest if African American players were shit talking others the way Clark has then they'd be stigmatized and not celebrated (Reese/teammates are "too ghetto" while Clark is on the cover of major magazines). Though it's no fault of Clark's I actually believe this sentiment. Would love to be corrected by data but it's likely that any available data supports the notion that shit-talking black/hispanic players are not excused/rationalized/celebrated for their shit-talking the way white players seem to be. Again, if there's data out there saying the opposite, would love to see it.

No one really cares about women's sports so there isn't much experience with anyone getting offended at anything that happens in a women's sport.

I think it's pretty clear that in the men's division that people actually watch that no one cares about trash talking by any ethnicity. It happens all the time. Even the future CEO's on Northwestern's basketball team did it.

As I said before, this is about how NIL dollars are all going to elite male athletes and pretty white girls who post all the time on social media and may be above average players but that is why it is strange to go after the player of the year who is at least good at the sport. The LSU women's team can't really complain about the huge money the LSU gymnastics team is getting so it came down to this.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:43 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 77559
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
I can't believe a kid would give the finger to a bunch of taunting old hags.

_________________
Nas: Blago, who has single handedly destroyed CFMB?

Blago: https://youtube.com/shorts/Lftdxd-YXt8?feature=share

"You can’t love your country only when you win." -President Biden

"I don’t care about you; I just want your vote.”
Trump '24


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 56008
Nas wrote:
I can't believe a kid would give the finger to a bunch of taunting old hags.

:lol: yeah this stuff is all out of hand.

Clark was taunting and talking every game i watched her. She seemed fine with the LSU response. LSU won game. Time for people to go back to not caring

I was more irritated that they let the LSU coach act like a circus show

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:51 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 77559
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
RFDC wrote:
Nas wrote:
I can't believe a kid would give the finger to a bunch of taunting old hags.

:lol: yeah this stuff is all out of hand.

Clark was taunting and talking every game i watched her. She seemed fine with the LSU response. LSU won game. Time for people to go back to not caring

I was more irritated that they let the LSU coach act like a circus show


If a bunch of college kids want to show up and yell at her, I'm all for it. Some of these people are old enough to be her grandparents or even great grandparents. They should recognize how silly they look.

_________________
Nas: Blago, who has single handedly destroyed CFMB?

Blago: https://youtube.com/shorts/Lftdxd-YXt8?feature=share

"You can’t love your country only when you win." -President Biden

"I don’t care about you; I just want your vote.”
Trump '24


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80566
RFDC wrote:
Nas wrote:
I can't believe a kid would give the finger to a bunch of taunting old hags.

:lol: yeah this stuff is all out of hand.

Clark was taunting and talking every game i watched her. She seemed fine with the LSU response. LSU won game. Time for people to go back to not caring

I was more irritated that they let the LSU coach act like a circus show


I loved her look. Perfectly NOLA. Outrageous, flamboyant, goofy and a bit trashy. It was fun. She should have had one of those big carry out cups people walk around with on bourbon street. Let your freak flag fly

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 56008
good dolphin wrote:
RFDC wrote:
Nas wrote:
I can't believe a kid would give the finger to a bunch of taunting old hags.

:lol: yeah this stuff is all out of hand.

Clark was taunting and talking every game i watched her. She seemed fine with the LSU response. LSU won game. Time for people to go back to not caring

I was more irritated that they let the LSU coach act like a circus show


I loved her look. Perfectly NOLA. Outrageous, flamboyant, goofy and a bit trashy. It was fun. She should have had one of those big carry out cups people walk around with on bourbon street. Let your freak flag fly


Her look was fine. I am referring to how she was able to yell and bump officials whenever she wanted while clark got a T for tossing ball behind her back in frustration

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80566
I didn't know the cruddy espn talk shows were caring about this.

If they're in, I'm out.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Quote:
Even as the NCAA celebrates five decades of Title IX, a divide continues to exist between white and African American women over opportunities and perception. White players are seen as tough and fundamentally sound, Black players are viewed as flashy brawlers.

At one level, chickens were merely coming home to roost for Clark, whose trash talk gestures had been lauded throughout the NCAA tournament.

You can argue that it was Clark who started all of this. At least she didn’t back down.

Clark repeatedly made the “you can’t see me” gesture during Iowa’s win over Louisville in the Elite Eight. In media, she was heralded as confident and brash. Clark followed up her “you can’t see me” gesture Friday against South Carolina freshman guard Raven Johnson.




My other takeaway from the weekend is that Great White Hope-ism is gender neutral. What I’ve observed over the years is that whenever you have a white star in a sport dominated by Black athletes, the white star is swathed in extra layers of praise and adulation. This could be Christian McCaffrey in the NFL or Luka Doncic and Nikola Jokic in the NBA. Now we see it, or rather hear it, with Clark.

Make no mistake, Clark is one of the most talented basketball players the college game has seen. She has remarkable range. She has been favorably — and accurately — compared to Golden State Warriors guard Stephen Curry, with amazing ballhandling skills that allow her to get off 3-point shots, break down defenses and find open teammates with pinpoint passes. She’s also not described as cocky, but confident.

On Sunday, Reese simply gave it back to Clark. Many neutral observers and Clark’s fans were not pleased and played the sportsmanship and class card. Double standards: When we do it, it’s bravado. When you do it, it’s crass. When we play hard, it’s gritty. When you play hard, it’s thuggery.

I saw this this firsthand in the 1980s with John Thompson’s Georgetown team. They were routinely cast as villains and thugs. We saw the same thing with UNLV’s great teams of the 1990s. When UNLV played Duke for the national title in 1990, Duke’s players were cast as “choirboys” while UNLV players were cast as villains and thugs. Then, of course, there was Michigan’s Fab Five which, critics say, introduced hip-hop elements into basketball.

Now that the women’s game has grown and African American women continue to become increasingly prominent, the same stereotypes are emerging: Black women portrayed as rough-and-tumble street fighters, their white counterparts as stalwart, heady competitors.
This weekend’s semifinal and championship games made stereotypes and comparison easy: Iowa’s predominantly white team and a white star in Clark versus a South Carolina team with a Black coach and nearly all Black players. On Sunday, Iowa clashed with an LSU team consisting of mostly Black players and a Black star in Reese.

A perfect matchup for a polarized nation.

https://andscape.com/features/lsus-ange ... in-sports/

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:40 pm
Posts: 16058
pizza_Place: Boni Vino
Laurence’s analysis of the semifinal: “if the game had gone three more minutes, SC would have beaten Iowa.” :roll:

_________________
To IkeSouth, bigfan wrote:
Are you stoned or pissed off, or both, when you create these postings?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2020 8:05 pm
Posts: 21147
pizza_Place: Pizanos
Jaw Breaker wrote:
Laurence’s analysis of the semifinal: “if the game had gone three more minutes, SC would have beaten Iowa.” :roll:

Leery seems like a big SEC pride guy.

_________________
Peter Clavin wrote:
Because you are stupid, maybe read some books educate yourself.
Nardi wrote:
We walk, talk, and won't shit our pants


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80566
veganfan21 wrote:
Quote:
Even as the NCAA celebrates five decades of Title IX, a divide continues to exist between white and African American women over opportunities and perception. White players are seen as tough and fundamentally sound, Black players are viewed as flashy brawlers.

At one level, chickens were merely coming home to roost for Clark, whose trash talk gestures had been lauded throughout the NCAA tournament.

You can argue that it was Clark who started all of this. At least she didn’t back down.

Clark repeatedly made the “you can’t see me” gesture during Iowa’s win over Louisville in the Elite Eight. In media, she was heralded as confident and brash. Clark followed up her “you can’t see me” gesture Friday against South Carolina freshman guard Raven Johnson.




My other takeaway from the weekend is that Great White Hope-ism is gender neutral. What I’ve observed over the years is that whenever you have a white star in a sport dominated by Black athletes, the white star is swathed in extra layers of praise and adulation. This could be Christian McCaffrey in the NFL or Luka Doncic and Nikola Jokic in the NBA. Now we see it, or rather hear it, with Clark.

Make no mistake, Clark is one of the most talented basketball players the college game has seen. She has remarkable range. She has been favorably — and accurately — compared to Golden State Warriors guard Stephen Curry, with amazing ballhandling skills that allow her to get off 3-point shots, break down defenses and find open teammates with pinpoint passes. She’s also not described as cocky, but confident.

On Sunday, Reese simply gave it back to Clark. Many neutral observers and Clark’s fans were not pleased and played the sportsmanship and class card. Double standards: When we do it, it’s bravado. When you do it, it’s crass. When we play hard, it’s gritty. When you play hard, it’s thuggery.

I saw this this firsthand in the 1980s with John Thompson’s Georgetown team. They were routinely cast as villains and thugs. We saw the same thing with UNLV’s great teams of the 1990s. When UNLV played Duke for the national title in 1990, Duke’s players were cast as “choirboys” while UNLV players were cast as villains and thugs. Then, of course, there was Michigan’s Fab Five which, critics say, introduced hip-hop elements into basketball.

Now that the women’s game has grown and African American women continue to become increasingly prominent, the same stereotypes are emerging: Black women portrayed as rough-and-tumble street fighters, their white counterparts as stalwart, heady competitors.
This weekend’s semifinal and championship games made stereotypes and comparison easy: Iowa’s predominantly white team and a white star in Clark versus a South Carolina team with a Black coach and nearly all Black players. On Sunday, Iowa clashed with an LSU team consisting of mostly Black players and a Black star in Reese.

A perfect matchup for a polarized nation.

https://andscape.com/features/lsus-ange ... in-sports/


Michael Jordan is the most elegant player in the game and smart and tough.

Good talking to you.

Also I can point out several blue blood programs with reputations of perceived impeccability with a regular majority of african american players. Start with UNC or Kansas or UCLA. And Thompson teams didn't always have that reputation. Even early Ewing teams were darlings. They were actually considered kind of soft elitists until they brought in Michael Graham. That and an emerging style of rough play in the Big East changed its perception

Is a person who is the best player in the game and smashing all tournament records not in line for some over effusive praise? We're not talking about some ham and egger who just caught a hot streak.

Try to write a column that you haven't had in the can for a while, just waiting for a story to attach it to. Nuance is dead. I should not know more about college basketball than a professional writer.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
good dolphin wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Quote:
Even as the NCAA celebrates five decades of Title IX, a divide continues to exist between white and African American women over opportunities and perception. White players are seen as tough and fundamentally sound, Black players are viewed as flashy brawlers.

At one level, chickens were merely coming home to roost for Clark, whose trash talk gestures had been lauded throughout the NCAA tournament.

You can argue that it was Clark who started all of this. At least she didn’t back down.

Clark repeatedly made the “you can’t see me” gesture during Iowa’s win over Louisville in the Elite Eight. In media, she was heralded as confident and brash. Clark followed up her “you can’t see me” gesture Friday against South Carolina freshman guard Raven Johnson.




My other takeaway from the weekend is that Great White Hope-ism is gender neutral. What I’ve observed over the years is that whenever you have a white star in a sport dominated by Black athletes, the white star is swathed in extra layers of praise and adulation. This could be Christian McCaffrey in the NFL or Luka Doncic and Nikola Jokic in the NBA. Now we see it, or rather hear it, with Clark.

Make no mistake, Clark is one of the most talented basketball players the college game has seen. She has remarkable range. She has been favorably — and accurately — compared to Golden State Warriors guard Stephen Curry, with amazing ballhandling skills that allow her to get off 3-point shots, break down defenses and find open teammates with pinpoint passes. She’s also not described as cocky, but confident.

On Sunday, Reese simply gave it back to Clark. Many neutral observers and Clark’s fans were not pleased and played the sportsmanship and class card. Double standards: When we do it, it’s bravado. When you do it, it’s crass. When we play hard, it’s gritty. When you play hard, it’s thuggery.

I saw this this firsthand in the 1980s with John Thompson’s Georgetown team. They were routinely cast as villains and thugs. We saw the same thing with UNLV’s great teams of the 1990s. When UNLV played Duke for the national title in 1990, Duke’s players were cast as “choirboys” while UNLV players were cast as villains and thugs. Then, of course, there was Michigan’s Fab Five which, critics say, introduced hip-hop elements into basketball.

Now that the women’s game has grown and African American women continue to become increasingly prominent, the same stereotypes are emerging: Black women portrayed as rough-and-tumble street fighters, their white counterparts as stalwart, heady competitors.
This weekend’s semifinal and championship games made stereotypes and comparison easy: Iowa’s predominantly white team and a white star in Clark versus a South Carolina team with a Black coach and nearly all Black players. On Sunday, Iowa clashed with an LSU team consisting of mostly Black players and a Black star in Reese.

A perfect matchup for a polarized nation.

https://andscape.com/features/lsus-ange ... in-sports/


Michael Jordan

Good talking to you.

Also I can point out several blue blood programs with reputations of perceived impeccability with a regular majority of african american players. Start with UNC or Kansas or UCLA. And Thompson teams didn't always have that reputation. Even early Ewing teams were darlings. They were actually considered kind of soft elitists until they brought in Michael Graham. That and an emerging style of rough play in the Big East changed its perception

Try to write a column that you haven't had in the can for a while, just waiting for a story to attach it to. Nuance is dead. I should not know more about college basketball than a professional writer.


There is a ton of truth I there. Georgetown was definitely thought of as a team of thugs back in the day. Who can forget Michael Graham. UNLV had a similar rep and so did the Fab Five.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80566
The Missing Link wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Quote:
Even as the NCAA celebrates five decades of Title IX, a divide continues to exist between white and African American women over opportunities and perception. White players are seen as tough and fundamentally sound, Black players are viewed as flashy brawlers.

At one level, chickens were merely coming home to roost for Clark, whose trash talk gestures had been lauded throughout the NCAA tournament.

You can argue that it was Clark who started all of this. At least she didn’t back down.

Clark repeatedly made the “you can’t see me” gesture during Iowa’s win over Louisville in the Elite Eight. In media, she was heralded as confident and brash. Clark followed up her “you can’t see me” gesture Friday against South Carolina freshman guard Raven Johnson.




My other takeaway from the weekend is that Great White Hope-ism is gender neutral. What I’ve observed over the years is that whenever you have a white star in a sport dominated by Black athletes, the white star is swathed in extra layers of praise and adulation. This could be Christian McCaffrey in the NFL or Luka Doncic and Nikola Jokic in the NBA. Now we see it, or rather hear it, with Clark.

Make no mistake, Clark is one of the most talented basketball players the college game has seen. She has remarkable range. She has been favorably — and accurately — compared to Golden State Warriors guard Stephen Curry, with amazing ballhandling skills that allow her to get off 3-point shots, break down defenses and find open teammates with pinpoint passes. She’s also not described as cocky, but confident.

On Sunday, Reese simply gave it back to Clark. Many neutral observers and Clark’s fans were not pleased and played the sportsmanship and class card. Double standards: When we do it, it’s bravado. When you do it, it’s crass. When we play hard, it’s gritty. When you play hard, it’s thuggery.

I saw this this firsthand in the 1980s with John Thompson’s Georgetown team. They were routinely cast as villains and thugs. We saw the same thing with UNLV’s great teams of the 1990s. When UNLV played Duke for the national title in 1990, Duke’s players were cast as “choirboys” while UNLV players were cast as villains and thugs. Then, of course, there was Michigan’s Fab Five which, critics say, introduced hip-hop elements into basketball.

Now that the women’s game has grown and African American women continue to become increasingly prominent, the same stereotypes are emerging: Black women portrayed as rough-and-tumble street fighters, their white counterparts as stalwart, heady competitors.
This weekend’s semifinal and championship games made stereotypes and comparison easy: Iowa’s predominantly white team and a white star in Clark versus a South Carolina team with a Black coach and nearly all Black players. On Sunday, Iowa clashed with an LSU team consisting of mostly Black players and a Black star in Reese.

A perfect matchup for a polarized nation.

https://andscape.com/features/lsus-ange ... in-sports/


Michael Jordan

Good talking to you.

Also I can point out several blue blood programs with reputations of perceived impeccability with a regular majority of african american players. Start with UNC or Kansas or UCLA. And Thompson teams didn't always have that reputation. Even early Ewing teams were darlings. They were actually considered kind of soft elitists until they brought in Michael Graham. That and an emerging style of rough play in the Big East changed its perception

Try to write a column that you haven't had in the can for a while, just waiting for a story to attach it to. Nuance is dead. I should not know more about college basketball than a professional writer.


There is a ton of truth I there. Georgetown was definitely thought of as a team of thugs back in the day. Who can forget Michael Graham. UNLV had a similar rep and so did the Fab Five.


As I noted, not pre Graham they were not.

UNLV had a reputation because of its coach's history and location of the school...and ultimately that reputation was proven justified. And let's not pretend they didn't cultivate their image. It's like the Raiders of the 1970-2000s objecting that people thought they played dirty.

For every one you try to throw down to prove his point I can list one that refutes. Take Arkansas. I think they were most like UNLV in hellacious style of play. They even had a balck head coach. Yet, a reputation didn't attach to them.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
good dolphin wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Quote:
Even as the NCAA celebrates five decades of Title IX, a divide continues to exist between white and African American women over opportunities and perception. White players are seen as tough and fundamentally sound, Black players are viewed as flashy brawlers.

At one level, chickens were merely coming home to roost for Clark, whose trash talk gestures had been lauded throughout the NCAA tournament.

You can argue that it was Clark who started all of this. At least she didn’t back down.

Clark repeatedly made the “you can’t see me” gesture during Iowa’s win over Louisville in the Elite Eight. In media, she was heralded as confident and brash. Clark followed up her “you can’t see me” gesture Friday against South Carolina freshman guard Raven Johnson.




My other takeaway from the weekend is that Great White Hope-ism is gender neutral. What I’ve observed over the years is that whenever you have a white star in a sport dominated by Black athletes, the white star is swathed in extra layers of praise and adulation. This could be Christian McCaffrey in the NFL or Luka Doncic and Nikola Jokic in the NBA. Now we see it, or rather hear it, with Clark.

Make no mistake, Clark is one of the most talented basketball players the college game has seen. She has remarkable range. She has been favorably — and accurately — compared to Golden State Warriors guard Stephen Curry, with amazing ballhandling skills that allow her to get off 3-point shots, break down defenses and find open teammates with pinpoint passes. She’s also not described as cocky, but confident.

On Sunday, Reese simply gave it back to Clark. Many neutral observers and Clark’s fans were not pleased and played the sportsmanship and class card. Double standards: When we do it, it’s bravado. When you do it, it’s crass. When we play hard, it’s gritty. When you play hard, it’s thuggery.

I saw this this firsthand in the 1980s with John Thompson’s Georgetown team. They were routinely cast as villains and thugs. We saw the same thing with UNLV’s great teams of the 1990s. When UNLV played Duke for the national title in 1990, Duke’s players were cast as “choirboys” while UNLV players were cast as villains and thugs. Then, of course, there was Michigan’s Fab Five which, critics say, introduced hip-hop elements into basketball.

Now that the women’s game has grown and African American women continue to become increasingly prominent, the same stereotypes are emerging: Black women portrayed as rough-and-tumble street fighters, their white counterparts as stalwart, heady competitors.
This weekend’s semifinal and championship games made stereotypes and comparison easy: Iowa’s predominantly white team and a white star in Clark versus a South Carolina team with a Black coach and nearly all Black players. On Sunday, Iowa clashed with an LSU team consisting of mostly Black players and a Black star in Reese.

A perfect matchup for a polarized nation.

https://andscape.com/features/lsus-ange ... in-sports/


Michael Jordan

Good talking to you.

Also I can point out several blue blood programs with reputations of perceived impeccability with a regular majority of african american players. Start with UNC or Kansas or UCLA. And Thompson teams didn't always have that reputation. Even early Ewing teams were darlings. They were actually considered kind of soft elitists until they brought in Michael Graham. That and an emerging style of rough play in the Big East changed its perception

Try to write a column that you haven't had in the can for a while, just waiting for a story to attach it to. Nuance is dead. I should not know more about college basketball than a professional writer.


There is a ton of truth I there. Georgetown was definitely thought of as a team of thugs back in the day. Who can forget Michael Graham. UNLV had a similar rep and so did the Fab Five.


As I noted, not pre Graham they were not.

UNLV had a reputation because of its coach's history and location of the school...and ultimately that reputation was proven justified.

For every one you try to throw down to prove his point I can list one that refutes. Take Arkansas. I think they were most like UNLV in hellacious style of play. They even had a balck head coach. Yet, a reputation didn't attach to them.


Being crooked and being thugs are 2 different things. UNLV wasn't a team of thugs. And if we are going to talk "crooked" programs there was none dirtier than Duke over the past 40 years or so. Coach K was never called on it and his teams were always presented as a team just full of "gritty" overachievers.
Who can forget Wojo and all of his floor slapping?

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 40415
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
Nobody called out Duke for being dirty? What fucking planet are you on? The one where Brandon Johnson will fund the police ? :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Caller Bob wrote:
Nobody called out Duke for being dirty? What fucking planet are you on? The one where Brandon Johnson will fund the police ? :lol:


More stupid trolling. I'm shocked.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80566
The Missing Link wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Quote:
Even as the NCAA celebrates five decades of Title IX, a divide continues to exist between white and African American women over opportunities and perception. White players are seen as tough and fundamentally sound, Black players are viewed as flashy brawlers.

At one level, chickens were merely coming home to roost for Clark, whose trash talk gestures had been lauded throughout the NCAA tournament.

You can argue that it was Clark who started all of this. At least she didn’t back down.

Clark repeatedly made the “you can’t see me” gesture during Iowa’s win over Louisville in the Elite Eight. In media, she was heralded as confident and brash. Clark followed up her “you can’t see me” gesture Friday against South Carolina freshman guard Raven Johnson.




My other takeaway from the weekend is that Great White Hope-ism is gender neutral. What I’ve observed over the years is that whenever you have a white star in a sport dominated by Black athletes, the white star is swathed in extra layers of praise and adulation. This could be Christian McCaffrey in the NFL or Luka Doncic and Nikola Jokic in the NBA. Now we see it, or rather hear it, with Clark.

Make no mistake, Clark is one of the most talented basketball players the college game has seen. She has remarkable range. She has been favorably — and accurately — compared to Golden State Warriors guard Stephen Curry, with amazing ballhandling skills that allow her to get off 3-point shots, break down defenses and find open teammates with pinpoint passes. She’s also not described as cocky, but confident.

On Sunday, Reese simply gave it back to Clark. Many neutral observers and Clark’s fans were not pleased and played the sportsmanship and class card. Double standards: When we do it, it’s bravado. When you do it, it’s crass. When we play hard, it’s gritty. When you play hard, it’s thuggery.

I saw this this firsthand in the 1980s with John Thompson’s Georgetown team. They were routinely cast as villains and thugs. We saw the same thing with UNLV’s great teams of the 1990s. When UNLV played Duke for the national title in 1990, Duke’s players were cast as “choirboys” while UNLV players were cast as villains and thugs. Then, of course, there was Michigan’s Fab Five which, critics say, introduced hip-hop elements into basketball.

Now that the women’s game has grown and African American women continue to become increasingly prominent, the same stereotypes are emerging: Black women portrayed as rough-and-tumble street fighters, their white counterparts as stalwart, heady competitors.
This weekend’s semifinal and championship games made stereotypes and comparison easy: Iowa’s predominantly white team and a white star in Clark versus a South Carolina team with a Black coach and nearly all Black players. On Sunday, Iowa clashed with an LSU team consisting of mostly Black players and a Black star in Reese.

A perfect matchup for a polarized nation.

https://andscape.com/features/lsus-ange ... in-sports/


Michael Jordan

Good talking to you.

Also I can point out several blue blood programs with reputations of perceived impeccability with a regular majority of african american players. Start with UNC or Kansas or UCLA. And Thompson teams didn't always have that reputation. Even early Ewing teams were darlings. They were actually considered kind of soft elitists until they brought in Michael Graham. That and an emerging style of rough play in the Big East changed its perception

Try to write a column that you haven't had in the can for a while, just waiting for a story to attach it to. Nuance is dead. I should not know more about college basketball than a professional writer.


There is a ton of truth I there. Georgetown was definitely thought of as a team of thugs back in the day. Who can forget Michael Graham. UNLV had a similar rep and so did the Fab Five.


As I noted, not pre Graham they were not.

UNLV had a reputation because of its coach's history and location of the school...and ultimately that reputation was proven justified.

For every one you try to throw down to prove his point I can list one that refutes. Take Arkansas. I think they were most like UNLV in hellacious style of play. They even had a balck head coach. Yet, a reputation didn't attach to them.


Being crooked and being thugs are 2 different things. UNLV wasn't a team of thugs. And if we are going to talk "crooked" programs there was none dirtier than Duke over the past 40 years or so. Coach K was never called on it and his team were always presented as a team just full of "gritty" overachievers.


Yes and they are all dirty, which is why I wrote "perceived". But there are so many other programs that have the best players, are majority black in makeup and are not considered thugs, or whatever stupid name attaches, that the author has to hit the history books to even try to make an argument. I was in grade school when Georgetown won and John Thompson III is pushing 60.

The truth is that the "thugs" are memorable because of their infrequency, rather than it being a persistent bias

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80566
The Missing Link wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Quote:
Even as the NCAA celebrates five decades of Title IX, a divide continues to exist between white and African American women over opportunities and perception. White players are seen as tough and fundamentally sound, Black players are viewed as flashy brawlers.

At one level, chickens were merely coming home to roost for Clark, whose trash talk gestures had been lauded throughout the NCAA tournament.

You can argue that it was Clark who started all of this. At least she didn’t back down.

Clark repeatedly made the “you can’t see me” gesture during Iowa’s win over Louisville in the Elite Eight. In media, she was heralded as confident and brash. Clark followed up her “you can’t see me” gesture Friday against South Carolina freshman guard Raven Johnson.




My other takeaway from the weekend is that Great White Hope-ism is gender neutral. What I’ve observed over the years is that whenever you have a white star in a sport dominated by Black athletes, the white star is swathed in extra layers of praise and adulation. This could be Christian McCaffrey in the NFL or Luka Doncic and Nikola Jokic in the NBA. Now we see it, or rather hear it, with Clark.

Make no mistake, Clark is one of the most talented basketball players the college game has seen. She has remarkable range. She has been favorably — and accurately — compared to Golden State Warriors guard Stephen Curry, with amazing ballhandling skills that allow her to get off 3-point shots, break down defenses and find open teammates with pinpoint passes. She’s also not described as cocky, but confident.

On Sunday, Reese simply gave it back to Clark. Many neutral observers and Clark’s fans were not pleased and played the sportsmanship and class card. Double standards: When we do it, it’s bravado. When you do it, it’s crass. When we play hard, it’s gritty. When you play hard, it’s thuggery.

I saw this this firsthand in the 1980s with John Thompson’s Georgetown team. They were routinely cast as villains and thugs. We saw the same thing with UNLV’s great teams of the 1990s. When UNLV played Duke for the national title in 1990, Duke’s players were cast as “choirboys” while UNLV players were cast as villains and thugs. Then, of course, there was Michigan’s Fab Five which, critics say, introduced hip-hop elements into basketball.

Now that the women’s game has grown and African American women continue to become increasingly prominent, the same stereotypes are emerging: Black women portrayed as rough-and-tumble street fighters, their white counterparts as stalwart, heady competitors.
This weekend’s semifinal and championship games made stereotypes and comparison easy: Iowa’s predominantly white team and a white star in Clark versus a South Carolina team with a Black coach and nearly all Black players. On Sunday, Iowa clashed with an LSU team consisting of mostly Black players and a Black star in Reese.

A perfect matchup for a polarized nation.

https://andscape.com/features/lsus-ange ... in-sports/


Michael Jordan

Good talking to you.

Also I can point out several blue blood programs with reputations of perceived impeccability with a regular majority of african american players. Start with UNC or Kansas or UCLA. And Thompson teams didn't always have that reputation. Even early Ewing teams were darlings. They were actually considered kind of soft elitists until they brought in Michael Graham. That and an emerging style of rough play in the Big East changed its perception

Try to write a column that you haven't had in the can for a while, just waiting for a story to attach it to. Nuance is dead. I should not know more about college basketball than a professional writer.


There is a ton of truth I there. Georgetown was definitely thought of as a team of thugs back in the day. Who can forget Michael Graham. UNLV had a similar rep and so did the Fab Five.


As I noted, not pre Graham they were not.

UNLV had a reputation because of its coach's history and location of the school...and ultimately that reputation was proven justified.

For every one you try to throw down to prove his point I can list one that refutes. Take Arkansas. I think they were most like UNLV in hellacious style of play. They even had a balck head coach. Yet, a reputation didn't attach to them.


Being crooked and being thugs are 2 different things. UNLV wasn't a team of thugs. And if we are going to talk "crooked" programs there was none dirtier than Duke over the past 40 years or so. Coach K was never called on it and his teams were always presented as a team just full of "gritty" overachievers.
Who can forget Wojo and all of his floor slapping?


Johnny Dawkins and Tommy Amaker were floor slappers and the first players to shape the Duke public perception.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 40415
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
The Missing Link wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
Nobody called out Duke for being dirty? What fucking planet are you on? The one where Brandon Johnson will fund the police ? :lol:


More stupid trolling. I'm shocked.

The Missing Link wrote:
Just Asking A Question!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
good dolphin wrote:
Johnny Dawkins and Tommy Amaker were floor slappers and the first players to shape the Duke public perception.

So did Bobby Hurley. Which only further validates the point. Amaker and Dawkins were never considered to be "gritty" "hard nosed" players while Hurley and Woj were.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:49 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 77559
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
I thought we hated Duke because their players came from middle classed two parent homes.

_________________
Nas: Blago, who has single handedly destroyed CFMB?

Blago: https://youtube.com/shorts/Lftdxd-YXt8?feature=share

"You can’t love your country only when you win." -President Biden

"I don’t care about you; I just want your vote.”
Trump '24


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
I thought we hated Duke because their players came from middle classed two parent homes.

A lot of people hated them because of clowns like Vitale. Vitale and ESPN in general always presented them as a squeaky clean, model program.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80566
The Missing Link wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
Johnny Dawkins and Tommy Amaker were floor slappers and the first players to shape the Duke public perception.

So did Bobby Hurley. Which only further validates the point. Amaker and Dawkins were never considered to be "gritty" "hard nosed" players while Hurley and Woj were.


This is kind of indicative of the whole article "this is how I feel".

YOU don't think Amaker was. I certainly did. His numbers would seem to support me.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Quote:
'Crafty' Vs. 'Sneaky': How Racial Bias In Sports Broadcasting Hurts Everyone



"But instead, what we were highlighting, in many ways, is implicit bias and the subtle ways that race actually operates, when it comes to talking about some of these historical stereotypes, about what it means to be Black and physically superior and, at the same time, intellectually inferior, and, on the other hand, what it means to be lighter-skinned or white."

Same Action, Different Description

Dr. Ray and his co-author Dr. Steven Foy, of the University of Texas, Rio Grande Valley, transcribed 52 men’s college basketball broadcasts, including 11 championship games. They were looking at the ways broadcasters talk about players of different skin tones, and whether racial bias was at play.

"Are people talking about the size and height of darker skin tone players because they're actually larger?" Foy says. "Or are they talking about them in that way because of stereotypes about them being larger?"

So they tracked all of the data about the actual size and skill of the players.

"Points per game, rebounds per game, assists per game, fouls per game — we took into account all of those factors," Ray says. "And we still found that skin tone and race, in a lot of ways, was the most significant factor determining how commentators talk about players."

Crafty Vs. Sneaky



In their study, Ray and Foy found "crafty" to be a word often used to describe white players.

"Most definitely," Ray says. "I mean, when we went into this, we thought that we would see commentators talking a lot about just the raw intellect of players. But we didn't find that at all. I mean, there were a few instances where they talked about their intellect and oftentimes that was directly linked to their GPA. It was a very small percentage of our sample.



"What we found, more so, were these subtle ways that they talked about craftiness."

Here's an example from the broadcast of the 2010 national championship game between Butler and Duke.

We’ve talked about Matt Howard and how crafty he is, Jim. Scheyer is much the same way as a perimeter player. Knows how to use that height at 6' 5" very effectively to get into the lane.

"This clip talked about two players. And then, interestingly, they talked about how this player supposedly uses their craftiness to actually do something physical," Ray says. "I mean, this is the way it comes out for lighter-skinned players. If it was a darker-skinned player, they wouldn't have mentioned craftiness. Instead, they would have talked about their ability to jump up and get the rebound in some kind of physical way.

"Here it is, the same action, something simple, like jumping for a rebound, and all of a sudden it completely transposes the way that players are talked about."


Here's how announcers described a Black player a little later in that same 2010 national championship broadcast.

Here comes streaky, sneaky Willie Veasley, a terrific offensive rebounder for his size, and he just weaseled his way to the basket.

"When you hear the words 'weaseled out' and 'sneaky,' I mean, the connection that it has to thinking about kind of non-human type of behaviors," Ray says. " Kinda 'weaseled out' is more animalistic, right? It has this criminal, sneaky element to it. And these are the ways that we hear darker-skinned players talked about in ways that we don't hear lighter-skinned players talked about.' "

The Greater Implications

Of course, none of this is new.

"It became plain as I was growing up and more and more African Americans athletes became prominent and entered the sports, white players are 'gritty.' White players are 'smart.' " Only A Game analyst Charlie Pierce says. "African American athletes have, quote-unquote, 'natural abilities.' In basketball, if somebody did a remarkable move that nobody'd seen before, it was dismissed as 'playground stuff.' When Bob Cousy did it, it was genius."

"If you look at white players as more intelligent or more imbued with intelligence than Black players, who are you going to give the jobs for in coaching and general manager to when they retire?" asks journalist Derrick Z. Jackson.

Jackson says these stereotypes play out when Black people apply for other jobs, too.

"And that, ultimately, has massively damaging effects across all of American society," Jackson says. "There probably is not a Black man alive today who has not, at one point or another, been asked if they're an athlete. It's as if we can do nothing else, but catch a ball or dunk it or run around a track."

"I teach a race, gender and sports class at Penn State," Dr. Amira Rose Davis says, "and every semester without fail, the non-athlete Black kids in my class tell stories of how many times it was assumed that they’re athletes. I had one student, particularly, who was 6'2", Black kid, Black guy, who said he doesn't have a week on campus — and he was a junior — he doesn't have a week on campus in which there was not some assumption about a team that he belongs to.



https://www.wbur.org/onlyagame/2020/06/ ... dcast-bias

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 3:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
You also see it play out with respect to coaching. Look at someone like a Ty Lue. Ty Lue didn't make it to the NBA based on "superior" athletic ability or because he was a "great talent". This and yet he was still perceived as a dude that couldn't "think" the game well enough to be a good coach.

As far as college basketball or even football goes I can't think of one head coach that ever was bestowed with the "genius" coach label either.

All of the "genius" coaches were invariably always white.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 3:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2022 12:07 pm
Posts: 1945
pizza_Place: Roseangela's
The Missing Link wrote:
You also see it play out with respect to coaching. Look at someone like a Ty Lue. Ty Lue didn't make it to the NBA based on "superior" athletic ability or because he was a "great talent". This and yet he was still perceived as a dude that couldn't "think" the game well enough to be a good coach.

As far as college basketball or even football goes I can't think of one head coach that ever was bestowed with the "genius" coach label either.

All of the "genius" coaches were invariably always white.

Given the numbers of coaches (even in women's hoops), it's hard to argue with that.

I wonder if there's a racial difference in who takes (or who is offered) those graduate assistant jobs right out of college. I also know that in the old days you needed a BA and sometimes even an MA to be a head coach at certain D1 schools. Some of that may work against Black coaches. They also might just not be hired because people think they were stupid . . . which is weird, because Kevin O'Neill always got jobs.

_________________
Warren Newson wrote:
I like black prostitutes from the 70's


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 3:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Thomas-Sox-WorldSeries wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
You also see it play out with respect to coaching. Look at someone like a Ty Lue. Ty Lue didn't make it to the NBA based on "superior" athletic ability or because he was a "great talent". This and yet he was still perceived as a dude that couldn't "think" the game well enough to be a good coach.

As far as college basketball or even football goes I can't think of one head coach that ever was bestowed with the "genius" coach label either.

All of the "genius" coaches were invariably always white.

Given the numbers of coaches (even in women's hoops), it's hard to argue with that.

I wonder if there's a racial difference in who takes (or who is offered) those graduate assistant jobs right out of college. I also know that in the old days you needed a BA and sometimes even an MA to be a head coach at certain D1 schools. Some of that may work against Black coaches. They also might just not be hired because people think they were stupid . . . which is weird, because Kevin O'Neill always got jobs.


In all the years of coaching you'd think there be at least one that would have been considered a "genius". Never has been.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 4:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80566
If I were to tell you I already named two of them in this thread, well before the question was asked, you'd deny it, so what can I do?

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Caitlin Clark
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2023 5:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
good dolphin wrote:
If I were to tell you I already named two of them in this thread, well before the question was asked, you'd deny it, so what can I do?
Say it's your opinion. However it's obvious that the gritty label is reserved for "certain" types of players. And "heady" as well.

And when it comes to coaches forget it. You never hear of black coaches being "great strategists".

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 554 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 19  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group