OT Kinda: Men’s CBB Today

[HuskyWarrior611]

We had this discussion in another thread about how well known the talent in today’s game is or isn’t. Y’all know me, if I get called out for not knowing what I’m talking about I’m just going to find examples.

From people who are overall basketball/sports fans (not just people who are cbb specialists), there’s so many who say they can’t name stars in today’s game. Here’s another example. NSFW (kinda)

I’m hoping cbb can get back to that point though of being that breeding ground for stars it used to be.

 

[OkaForPrez]

When the game of basketball is played correctly, there are no star players, only star teams. We are playing the best team basketball that we’ve possibly ever played on the men’s side this year and can’t decide who our own best player is. That is exactly as it should be.

 

[HuskyHawk]

When the game of basketball is played correctly, there are no star players, only star teams. We are playing the best team basketball that we’ve possibly ever played on the men’s side this year and can’t decide who our own best player is. That is exactly as it should be.

I think this is the right answer. The 90's and 00s were the peak of ISO basketball. There was a lot of one on one, beat your man in the sport, so the elite players at that game were easy to identify. Now? Passing is a much bigger skill. Off ball movement matters more. Being a smart player who can read the defense and react. On defense it's not just one on one man defense but switchability, being able to guard bigger and smaller guys that matters. It's much more of a team game than it used to be. UConn exemplifies that like no other team in college basketball.

If we somehow run it back playing this style, it will put another nail in the coffin of basketball as it was.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

When the game of basketball is played correctly, there are no star players, only star teams. We are playing the best team basketball that we’ve possibly ever played on the men’s side this year and can’t decide who our own best player is. That is exactly as it should be.

Isn’t women’s basketball played this way?

Asking because they still seem to have stars.

I don’t think there are star teams outside of us either.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

I think this is the right answer. The 90's and 00s were the peak of ISO basketball. There was a lot of one on one, beat your man in the sport, so the elite players at that game were easy to identify. Now? Passing is a much bigger skill. Off ball movement matters more. Being a smart player who can read the defense and react. On defense it's not just one on one man defense but switchability, being able to guard bigger and smaller guys that matters. It's much more of a team game than it used to be. UConn exemplifies that like no other team in college basketball.

If we somehow run it back playing this style, it will put another nail in the coffin of basketball as it was.

Think development of stars are important to the overall game of basketball. If college basketball isn’t the place for that, it’s not doing its job to help the overall game of basketball.

 

[Stew Crew]

Certainly, early entry plays a role. Players are typically not around long enough, and no individual rivalries can develop. The fans used to get to see great players for 4 years. Now, it is rare that a 1st round talent stays more than 2 years. In the early Big East, Ewing, Mullin, Coleman, Charles Smith, Pinckney, Malik Sealy, Reggie Williams all stayed 4 years. I think Pearl Washington, Billy Owens, Ray Allen stayed 3. Most, if not all, were the equivalent of a lottery pick. Walter Berry and Iverson stayed 2 years.

 

[Tenspro2002]

Isn’t women’s basketball played this way?

Asking because they still seem to have stars.

I don’t think there are star teams outside of us either.

WBB is heavily promoting its stars as a way to draw casual fan interest.

I don't think MBB suffers that same issue. Furthermore, WBB stars are the same from year to year (Clark, Bueckers, etc.), while MBB stars usually leave after a year.

 

[Letsgohuskies11]

Isn’t women’s basketball played this way?

Asking because they still seem to have stars.

I don’t think there are star teams outside of us either.

How many stars can you name outside Angel Reese, Caitlin Clark or any of the UConn women's team?

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

How many stars can you name outside Angel Reese, Caitlin Clark or any of the UConn women's team?

Juju Watkins is for sure a star. I love watching her play she’s different. Almost 30 PPG as a freshman is nuts.

South Carolina has a few as well with a PG whose name I can’t remember (it’s not an easy name) and then their center Kamila who’s like 6’7.

LSU also has Hailey, the transfer from Louisville.

The women’s tournament is going to be a lot of fun to watch this year with so many great teams with a lot of talent.

Certainly, early entry plays a role. Players are typically not around long enough, and no individual rivalries can develop. The fans used to get to see great players for 4 years. Now, it is rare that a 1st round talent stays more than 2 years. In the early Big East, Ewing, Mullin, Coleman, Charles Smith, Pinckney, Malik Sealy, Reggie Williams all stayed 4 years. I think Pearl Washington, Billy Owens, Ray Allen stayed 3. Most, if not all, were the equivalent of a lottery pick. Walter Berry and Iverson stayed 2 years.

The height of the one and done era was great!

 

[aceboon]

as someone who took about 12 years off and just got back into watching alot more MBB as a whole instead of just mainly UConn and the top 10, MBB has a big time marketing problem and the women's side is definitely winning on that end in regards to storylines/narratives/star names.

 

[superjohn]

as someone who took about 12 years off and just got back into watching alot more MBB as a whole instead of just mainly UConn and the top 10, MBB has a big time marketing problem and the women's side is definitely winning on that end in regards to storylines/narratives/star names.

Who are all the women's players? I watch sports constantly and the only ones I can name are Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese, and Paige Bueckers.

Caitlin Clark I've known about for two seasons because the media goes crazy for her. Reese I only know because she got into it a little with Caitlin Clark and Bueckers because I'm a UConn fan. I haven't heard Bueckers name once this season.

 

[aceboon]

Who are all the women's players? I watch sports constantly and the only ones I can name are Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese, and Paige Bueckers.

Caitlin Clark I've known about for two seasons because the media goes crazy for her. Reese I only know because she got into it a little with Caitlin Clark and Bueckers because I'm a UConn fan. I haven't heard Bueckers name once this season.

tbh I don't even really hear Paige's name ringing bells like that this year, UConn women aren't even a big factor or relevant in the storylines other than discussing their injuries. I hear and see Juju Watkins name more in media/social media but then again my algorithm is probably different than other folks on this board.

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

If the 2024 draft is the weakest in recent memory like they say, then it stands to reason that there aren't many "star" players in the 2023 recruiting class (current freshmen).

Some years will be good, some wont. Next year will have the Montverde kid, and a few others who are going to get a huge media push.

This stuff is cyclical, like most things.

Also, UConn is awesome, but they play on fox, not espn. So espn wont give them as much media coverage, and unfortunately thats where more people get their sports media info

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

as someone who took about 12 years off and just got back into watching alot more MBB as a whole instead of just mainly UConn and the top 10, MBB has a big time marketing problem and the women's side is definitely winning on that end in regards to storylines/narratives/star names.

I’m going to sound like a broken record, but it’s hard to market transfers.

If people thought one and done was hard to develop a connection to then imagine one and dones that you may not hear from again after their year with the school. At least with freshman one and dones the media had a reason to hype these guys because their names are going to have a shelf life after college basketball (plus they were just super exciting to watch).

It’s harder to invest that much attention and get casual fans to care about guys that aren’t going to be heard from much after their one year at a program.

I’m not even sure who is the best former transfer player in the NBA is currently.

 

[ninety-nine]

Who are all the women's players? I watch sports constantly and the only ones I can name are Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese, and Paige Bueckers.

Caitlin Clark I've known about for two seasons because the media goes crazy for her. Reese I only know because she got into it a little with Caitlin Clark and Bueckers because I'm a UConn fan. I haven't heard Bueckers name once this season.

Bueckers completely dominated what's normally a pretty good Marquette team yesterday, with UConn playing very shorthanded (only seven players available due to injuries, including Aaliyah Edwards now out with a broken nose). Hopefully she'll get more mentions in the media as we segue into the NCAA tournament.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

tbh I don't even really hear Paige's name ringing bells like that this year, UConn women aren't even a big factor or relevant in the storylines other than discussing their injuries. I hear and see Juju Watkins name more in media/social media but then again my algorithm is probably different than other folks on this board.

Juju dropping 51 and 11 in a win @ top 5 Stanford was probably the best performance in college hoops this year.

 

[Kenny11]

On sports radio, the conversation in the last few weeks I've heard about men's college basketball is that there are no stars, fans only care about their brackets and don't pay attention until March, nobody knows the players, transfer portal has made it too hard to follow etc. Also, that there are no great teams.

I disagree with the last part. UConn was a great team last season and is again this season. Houston looks great, too.

I also think the NBA is so popular (not with tv ratings) but with its presence on social media, sports debate shows, youtube and other places you can find highlights that fans feel that NCAA basketball is too much of a step down in talent. Everyone is always focused on the draft and the truth is that so many college stars just don't become stars in the nba. If a player stays in college more than 2 years its looked at as a weakness.

I really do think there needs to be an effort to make some changes to regain some popularity. Eliminating or greatly reducing "cupcake games" should be on top of that list.

 

[aceboon]

Juju dropping 51 and 11 in a win @ top 5 Stanford was probably the best performance in college hoops this year.

yup, and her game is very aesthetically pleasing to watch when she's not bricking

 

[ctchamps]

Women are less likely to watch sports than men by a significant amount. From a media's perspective they are a huge untapped market.

The women's national soccer team recently demonstrated they were significantly more popular and followed than the mens national soccer team.

In Georgia women's gymnastics garners huge support from both men and women fans in that state.

Women's basketball has "suffered" a long history of domination by two programs - Tennessee and UConn. There was a significant drop off from these two teams and maybe two other teams for several decades. There were very few upsets in the NCAA tournaments.

Now there are different programs taking the lead and this year the parity in the top twenty is about as close to it's ever been outside of South Carolina.

Paige may not be talked about in the same way Clark is in the national media but she has a lot of national following on the other platforms such as Tik Tok. There are other women's athletes who have huge followings on these platforms as well.

So imo media is trying to exploit this momentum and bring in the female market to sports as well as male fans to women's sports.

Concern about mens bb losing its media exposure is premature. We should be enjoying this quiet period because the ESPN hype machine will be stroking Duke and Cooper Flagg a lot next year. I'm already gagging.

 

[Ha Who]

The media doesn’t talk about this, but look at this article about Pete Maravich. They note that freshman we’re not allowed to play during his time. His stats were incredible

Loading…

www.sportskeeda.com

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

Women are less likely to watch sports than men by a significant amount. From a media's perspective they are a huge untapped market.

The women's national soccer team recently demonstrated they were significantly more popular and followed than the mens national soccer team.

In Georgia women's gymnastics garners huge support from both men and women fans in that state.

Women's basketball has "suffered" a long history of domination by two programs - Tennessee and UConn. There was a significant drop off from these two teams and maybe two other teams for several decades. There were very few upsets in the NCAA tournaments.

Now there are different programs taking the lead and this year the parity in the top twenty is about as close to it's ever been outside of South Carolina.

Paige may not be talked about in the same way Clark is in the national media but she has a lot of national following on the other platforms such as Tik Tok. There are other women's athletes who have huge followings on these platforms as well.

So imo media is trying to exploit this momentum and bring in the female market to sports as well as male fans to women's sports.

Concern about mens bb losing its media exposure is premature. We should be enjoying this quiet period because the ESPN hype machine will be stroking Duke and Cooper Flagg a lot next year. I'm already gagging.

In every one of these cases where women sports were talked about, it’s because it was good. When you have a good product, people push it. The women’s game today is a great product. US women’s soccer wins gold medals compared to the men’s who hardly qualify.

After all the talk about how to make the women’s game better over the years it actually makes me happy to see it get the deserved attention it wanted because it’s such a good product with legitimate stars. Even if our women’s aren’t involved as much in it (mostly due to the craziest string of injury luck you could think of).

When Duke gets hype because of Flagg next year it will be because he’s a legit star and good product to promote.

If you have a good product, it will be promoted it.

Want to add yes, the media also tries to look into new markets to tap into constantly. Wonder if they’ll ever tap into the obvious next choice of markets once the women’s is tapped out. Lol

 

[storrsroars]

That these two clowns couldn't even name Zach Edey or even Filipowski (not for good reasons) pretty much suggests they don't watch college hoops.

 

[superjohn]

That these two clowns couldn't even name Zach Edey or even Filipowski (not for good reasons) pretty much suggests they don't watch college hoops.

It's funny that the guy who doesn't watch college basketball creates a thread about two other guys who don't watch college basketball.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

That these two clowns couldn't even name Zach Edey or even Filipowski (not for good reasons) pretty much suggests they don't watch college hoops.

The point is, they are basketball fans who don’t feel like it’s worth watching college basketball. If it was worth watching, they would watch like they watch the women’s game.

This is a common issue amongst sports guys who don’t have niche’s in college hoops.

 

[HitDog]

It's funny that the guy who doesn't watch college basketball creates a thread about two other guys who don't watch college basketball.

Or soccer