Caitlin Clark got throat-punched last night

OnlyTheObscure

All-Conference
Jul 3, 2025
3,234
4,637
113
WNBA is full of players with almost zero coordination. You can see it in their shooting form and inability to catch. Carrington is a prime example of it.

it’s like the most worthless player in junior high. They just do full court hack because they have no skills.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ktrain1969
Mar 8, 2010
7,805
15,111
113
WNBA is full of players with almost zero coordination. You can see it in their shooting form and inability to catch. Carrington is a prime example of it.

it’s like the most worthless player in junior high. They just do full court hack because they have no skills.
But these are the best... that's basically putting down the entire sport of women's basketball...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jerome Silberman

LafayetteBear

Heisman
Nov 30, 2009
34,749
10,214
113
To be fair, I don't watch a ton of basketball or sports in general other than college football.

When I DO manage to see a NFL game, I'm always amazed at how much faster and more polished the game is compared to college ball. The difference between mens college basketball and the NBA is even greater. Those dudes in the NBA are crazy athletic... Every person on the foor looks superhuman to me.

Not so much with women's basketball. I've watched a couple of games over the years, mostly just hoping the USCjr's women's team would lose. I don't see a whole lot of difference between the college and pro games there.

Sign me up for the Bill Burr opinion of the WNBA:


hopefultiger: I'm responding to your post, but it could have been any number of different posts. So many posters case on the WNBA, on womens' basketball, or both, because it is far less athletic than NBA basketball. And it is.

But womens' basketball and mens' basketball are two completely different games. That's the case with every single comparison of the mens' and womens' versions of a given sport. IMHO, the problem lies with viewers who go in expecting that the womens' game is gonna be a close approximation of the mens' game. They're always going to be disappointed.

But if you pay any attention (and clearly, you are under no obligation to do so), you will note that the womens' game has grown in athleticism and athletic skill over time. Some years back, you would NEVER see a woman shooting a jumper from 20 feet out without hoisting it from her midsection, as opposed to shooting it with the kind of motion men have long used (hands over their head, with essentially a one handed wrist flick). There are a few women who can even dunk the ball now. That was certainly not the case back in the day.

The womens' game will continue to evolve, just as the mens' game has evolved over time. There was a time, albeit long ago, when major college mens' basketball players all employed a two-handed, flat footed set shot on all shots from outside. Hank Luisetti, who played at Stanford from 1935 to 1939,, revolutionized outside shooting by popularizing the running one-handed push shot—an early precursor to the jump shot.
 
Last edited:

hopefultiger13

Heisman
Aug 20, 2008
11,266
18,100
113
hopefultiger: I'm responding to your post, but it could have been any number of different posts. So many posters case on the WNBA, on womens' basketball, or both, because it is far less athletic than NBA basketball. And it is.

But womens' basketball and mens' basketball are two completely different games. That's the case with every single comparison of the mens' and womens' versions of a given sport. IMHO, the problem lies with viewers who go in expecting that the womens' game is gonna be a close approximation of the mens' game. They're always going to be disappointed.

But if you pay any attention (and clearly, you are under no obligation to do so), you will note that the womens' game has grown in athleticism and athletic skill over time. Some years back, you would NEVER see a woman shooting a jumper from 20 feet out without hoisting it from her midsection, as opposed to shooting it with the kind of motion men have long used (hands over their head, with essentially a one handed wrist flick). There are a few women who can even dunk the ball now. That was certainly not the case back in the day.

The womens' game will continue to evolve, just as the mens' game has evolved over time. There was a time, albeit long ago, when major college mens' basketball players all employed a two-handed, flat footed set shot on all shots from outside. Hank Luisetti, who played at Stanford from 1935 to 1939,, revolutionized outside shooting by popularizing the running one-handed push shot—an early precursor to the jump shot.
I'd agree with this for sure. It is a different game. I'd say tennis is the same. Personally, I don't watch much tennis either, but I don't think I've ever watched a complete men's match. Most of what I've seen is dudes hitting the ball so hard that the other guy can't return it. The match seems to hinge on a few plays over the match when the opponent is able to break serve. Women's tennis is MUCH better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL

THE_DEVIL

All-American
Dec 16, 2022
4,832
9,956
113
Fever got outplayed last night. They were due for a bad night. The good thing going forward is that if that was a bad night they hung tough.

REBOUND the f'n basketball and while you are at it BOX OUT!!!!

Once again the bigs decided they did not know how to rebound. MT needs to go up strong and quick instead of finessing everything. There are very few people with her strength and hops. The thing is, defensively (other than rebounding) they are playing some pretty good defense compared to early in the year. Clark is actually stepped up a bit on defense also.

Clark seemed a bit disinterested all night. Standard defense on her.

KM. Enough said.

 
Tiger Illustrated

Latest

  1. 01 Tiger Illustrated Inside the contrast in styles between how Clemson and LSU are handling practices this month
  2. 02 Tiger Illustrated Friday Clemson Football & Recruiting Nuggets
  3. 03 Rivals Clemson, Oklahoma, Georgia three to watch as touted LB Jay Schell's junior visits take shape
  4. 04 Tiger Illustrated What Clemson's real depth chart looks like on the offensive line following scrimmage No. 2
  5. 05 Tiger Illustrated Takeaways from Clemson's Thursday scrimmage