AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
College Basketball News, Rumor and Humor
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
I figured he was on the hot seat & wouldn't survive. Recruiting was very good, but he didn't win. Even changed his system and got the same result.
Who knows if there's any legit info, but I want this to be true. Baylor would fall off a cliff without Drew.
Baylor will go big to replace him. It's not like them to just let something die without doing anything.
Wait...
I agree with Doug on this (his point, not his tone or level of annoyance). It's a different sport, so it's not breaking a record. For example, we look at all time wins by CBB coaches as separate lists for men & women.
Last edited:
Preston Slaughter
Well-Known Member
I don't understand why ESPN does this. All it does is alienate men's basketball fans. If you want me to watch/appreciate women's basketball then you should highlight the things about the sport and competition that are unique and interesting. Don't tear down something I care about with ridiculous comparisons and expect me to get onboard with it. Pete Maravich did it before there was a three point line and with a much bigger ball. His record isn't broken. Caitlin Clark is good and her accomplishments are awesome.You're not going to convince me to watch her by dragging what I care about through the mud.
But I crushed that in backyard wiffle ball.
Wait the ball was bigger?
Men's basketball is 3cm bigger.
Ah I thought he meant that the men’s basketball was bigger during Pete’s era
Counterpoint - **** Doug Gottlieb.
The dumbest part of comparing Clark to Maravich is the simultaneously ignoring of Pearl Moore's record for women's basketball that Clark won't come close too. Yes, lets compare a Women's record to a Men's, but not compare to a Women's record that was set in the late 70's, but at an equivalent of a DII school. The NCAA still doesn't recognize those pre-NCAA women's sports records. Nevermind the fact that there was no 3pt line back then, and for the most part, in the Men's game at least, freshman were not allowed to play varsity, so they only got 3 years to set records.
Huge case to determine the future of college athletics.
Good luck to those players, who don't get athletic scholarships and I doubt the program generates enough income to pay for the costs associated with running the program. They are a glorified club team with a paid coach.
And Clark didn't play the same level of competition as Maravich, so why compare? There was probably also less disparity between "DII" and "DI" in Pearl's time than there is today due to lack of programs offering basketball and overall development of talent. Also normalizing by shots per game is stupid. Better scorers take more shots. If that was the case why don't we compare the gal who takes one shot per game and use that as a factor.
Facts, Pete averaged 44 pts/game over 3 years (consistent 43.8-44.5), playing 83 total games without a 3 point shot or a shot clock. Caitlin is averaging 28.3 pts per game over 130 games, with a shot clock and a 3 pt line, with her average increasing 5 pts per game this season. The two are not comparable. Congratulations to Caitlin for setting the current NCAA D1 Women's scoring record, but it isn't comparable to Pete. And logically if we compare her to Pete, you have to compare her to Pearl (who averaged 30.6 pts per game over 127 games), to not would be logical fallacy.
If the athletes get determined to be university employees, wouldn't all of the things they're provided such as meals and housing be considered taxable compensation? Between that and union dues, I'm not sure what these Dartmouth players expect to gain from this. If they expect to be paid a salary, I wouldn't be surprised if the Ivy League stopped sponsoring sports directly. They might move to Club level for everything if they think "athlete employees" is a compromise of their academic mission.
They're going to collectively bargain for their share of the massive Ivy League media rights! This is meaningless until it happens at a power conference school. Then I'll be very interested in how the chips fall. As for now, I'm going to ignore it.
Some law firm is likely paying them to do this trial balloon, probably ex-players that are now lawyers
cu3x
Well-Known Member
The 83 v. 130 games makes it ridiculous.
The fact they are using different size balls, with the same size baskets, really makes it a joke.
The standard basketball size used in college (NCAA) basketball for men and women is the same size that is used in both the NBA and WNBA, which is 29.5in (size 7) for men and 28.5in (size 6) for women.
And in the pre-NCAA AIAW days (Pearl Moore's time) they used the 29.5 in ball. The smaller ball was introduced to NCAA in 1984.
Buffsbball
Well-Known Member
This was pretty entertaining to stumble onto today, even the same measurements...for a brief moment my mind was wondering how he reobtained his college eligibility, then saw the stats and was like no way our Tyler Bey would be putting up 2.6 points at MO state.
I can't wait until a huddle conversation goes like this:
Coach: Billy, you really need to get on the floor for those loose balls, you just gave up on that one and every possession counts.
Billy: It's in our Collective Bargaining Agreement that going to the floor for loose balls is not part of our job description.
On a more serious note, there will be significant issues around "voluntary" hours expected of the player to watch film, get extra shots, work out and get treatment in the training room. There are a ton of hours logged by players for their sport which go beyond the number of hours the NCAA limits things to with the official time spent.
