Sheryl Swoopes on Clark

[CL82]

It's hard to believe there is this much...or any...confusion about a player as high profile and well known as Clark. But it is SO easy to fact check, there's just no reason for a goof like that.

Yeah, but it's not like she's going break out her phone and check it during this on air conversation, so though she's clearly wrong, I'm not that troubled by it. Now, the fact that she didn't retract this immediately afterward is a bad look.

Absolutely agree that she really should've been aware of Clark's circumstances if she follows the college game. As you point out, it's not as if Clark is a low profile player flying under the radar.

 

[cancontent]

The essence of what she was saying is fine but the context in which she said is unfortunate. Note: The part at the end was embarrassing.

Anyone see parallels to what Coach Auriemma said recently about Big East transfers?

The parallel I see is the recent Pivot podcast with Michael Porter Junior if anything. His misunderstanding of pay equity, along with comments that the women's game doesn't bring in fans or that the rims need to be lowered for the women's game was painful.

 

[BRS24]

Methinks Iowa WBB had the best response.

 

[IArick]

No asterisk needed if she only plays 4 full years.

She actually lost 8 games during her freshman year due to COVID. Iowa only played 4 Out of Conference Games rather than the normal 12. Regardless she is still on pace to do it earlier than Plum.

 

[jdote33]

Can I ask this? Why is Sheryl being given this new opportunity in the past three years to have a microphone in her face? She is a known abuser of players and was fired from a job because of it. Since, she's on podcasts like this one (bold face lying), all over the media, and on ESPN.

Sheryl isn't misinformed or confused. She is clearly lying, unprepared, and trying her best to downplay Caitlin and her accomplishments because......(fill in the blank).

This is a great point. It's a weird state of affairs in this new media world. I'm empathetic, as she is an all time great and has the sweat equity and time spent in the sport to seemingly have a voice. But at the same time to be that incorrect is strange, especially because I think she has an active role in wcbb media covering big 12 games. So it's a weird dichotomy. Everyone has their preference but id rather hear a fan\journalist who is invested talk about the game than a player who obviously knows the game of basketball but is not as obsessed. It's interesting.

 

[Twelve]

Anyone know if Kelsey Plum or Kelsey Mitchell received as much negativity/criticism as Caitlin Clark? What is driving that and the spread of misinformation?

Maya scored 3036 points in 154 games. 3 seasons with Tina and 2 seasons with Renee. If Caitlin pulled a Barry Sanders and walked away from Iowa basketball today, she would have played 31 less games than Maya. That is a full season for approximately 340-68 teams.

Go Caitlin! Go UConn!

 

[Blacketh’D]

Meh. She clearly wasn’t paying much attention to Caitlin’s career. They did fact check though on the podcast so she didnt walk away from the conversation still thinking that Clarke was in a 5th or 6th year. This drives most of the points ppl don’t like from the conversation. Breaking the record and being older than most of her competition. The point about jacking up 40 shots was just hyperbole to say “she’s not taking that many shots as a rookie in the W”. She just said she won’t be doing what she’s doing in college immediately as a pro. Most people get the main points about what she said, but seems no one listened to or watched the whole discussion for their own clarity. I don’t know why people think she needs to apologize or walk her comments back. It’s still a terrible look to have the completely wrong perspective going in to the conversation, but it’s just round table talking about relevant sports topics. They aren’t out here claiming to be experts, they are just former players jumping on the podcast bandwagon

 

[BRS24]

NLC chimes in -

 

[UConnCat]

LaChina Robinson taking on anyone who dares to criticize Swoopes on what she said is quite the take on X. Stamp those accomplishments on her forehead and she can say whatever she wants.

 

[Vowelguy]

LaChina Robinson taking on anyone who dares to criticize Swoopes on what she said is quite the take on X. Stamp those accomplishments on her forehead and she can say whatever she wants.

As fans of the NBA NFL MLB have long known, and fans of the W are now learning: just because you’re a great player doesn’t mean you’re smart or a good analyst.

 

[nwhoopfan]

LaChina Robinson taking on anyone who dares to criticize Swoopes on what she said is quite the take on X. Stamp those accomplishments on her forehead and she can say whatever she wants.

Wow, just lost some respect for LaChina. So because an athlete accomplished a lot during their playing career, they can say absolutely anything they want and never get called on it? That is a TERRIBLE take. Who will be next up to put their foot in their mouth in this ongoing saga?

 

[sharris25]

As fans of the NBA NFL MLB have long known, and fans of the W are now learning: just because you’re a great player doesn’t mean you’re smart or a good analyst.

It is incredulous that people are trying to make the whole topic of the conversation about the record. It was not, and it is not like we havent seen many journalist on the men's arena get facts like that incorrect once or twice in their professional lives or arguments. The bigger issue is that she was discussing the progression of Caitlyn and Angel Reese into the league and for some reason, no one is to critque (notice i did not say criticize) Caitlyn Clark or her game without it being considered some form of blasphemy. Swoopes was telling her truth, which is based in fact. Ionescu and Plum were supposed to be transformational, but neither were that in their fist year or two and that is exactly what Swoopes stated in her opinion. She is not the only pro that has stated this fact. Also, she will have to be able to guard the guards and wings without getting cooked, with no allowance for the hang in the paint zone she has bacially played all of her college career. Caitlyn maybe able to get to all star status with her talent and skillset, but this "she will be MVP level" her first year is a reach. All this worship, may turn into what we have seen in the NBA, where pros go out of their way to attack her game on the court because they have been told she is the best coming in, ala Lonzo Ball, and even this year with the Victor Weymbena treatment.

 

[cancontent]

LaChina Robinson taking on anyone who dares to criticize Swoopes on what she said is quite the take on X. Stamp those accomplishments on her forehead and she can say whatever she wants.

If you're going to show the tweet, include her follow up comments. Provide all the context versus snippets.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Ionescu and Plum were supposed to be transformational, but neither were that in their fist year or two

Ionescu was seriously hindered by ankle issues for at least her first 2 seasons as a pro.

 

[UConnCat]

If you're going to show the tweet, include her follow up comments. Provide all the context versus snippets.

I chose not to because her "context" added nothing to her original take in my opinion. Swoopes' comments on that podcast went beyond simply being factually incorrect.

 

[cancontent]

I chose not to because her "context" added nothing to her original take in my opinion. Swoopes' comments on that podcast went beyond simply being factually incorrect.

Maybe to you, but others asked if she thought Swoopes didn't deserve to be corrected in response to your post. She clearly states that there was nothing wrong with that.

Regardless if it adds to your take, it's her full statement. Leaving that out leads some to assume because they didn't look further into it. Let them come to their own conclusions with all the information, not a snippet.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

Without an Ipad, Google, off camera statisticians, etc.these "professional" broadcasters would make the same factual error as Swoopes. Have at it, but some of you are acting as if she kidnapped the Lindbergh baby. Name ONE talking head that is factually correct 100% of the time?

 

[UConnCat]

Maybe to you, but others asked if she thought Swoopes didn't deserve to be corrected in response to your post. She clearly states that there was nothing wrong with that.

Regardless if it adds to your take, it's her full statement. Leaving that out leads some to assume because they didn't look further into it. Let them come to their own conclusions with all the information, not a snippet.

I disagree. The premise of Robinson’s point - it was simply getting a fact or two wrong - was off so her “context” seemed irrelevant to me. You can respond however you see fit as you did.

 

[Rowdy831]

I have no issue with her having her own opinion. I even agree with her point about fifth years not qualifying for records.

Was simply pointing out how ridiculous Swoopes sounds for stating Clark passing Plum shouldn’t count because Clark is using her extra year. Nearly everything she said about Clark was blatant misinformation. She also stated Clark “probably takes 40 shots a game” and that she’s supposed to be killing cause she’s “25 playing against 20 years.” I thought it was a little weird how she was making stuff up to discredit Clark’s game and accomplishments.

Clark will be the best player in the WNBA next year so maybe then Swoopes will waste time learning about her. Every team she plays is trying to do one thing, stop Caitlin Clark, and they are failing every night. She will do for the WNBA what Jordan did for the NBA and the ladies will finally be able to make some money playing BB.

 

[oldude]

I do believe that anyone who reports or comments on sports in various public media forums has an obligation to be prepared and do everything possible to get things correct. Swoopes made a number of points on the podcast as follows:

1. Both Clark & Reese will have to get used to playing in the W, and their immediate success is not a sure thing (Probably correct)
2. Clark is currently playing in her 5th (Covid) season and Plum only played 4 seasons (WRONG)
3. Clark takes more shots (40?) per game (WRONG, she averages just under 20. A lot of her scoring is from the FT line.)
4. Clark is older (25?) than Plum was. (WRONG again)

A couple additional points:

• While Swoopes was rambling on in her stream of consciousness, where were the 3 guys on the panel who sat there like bumps on a log. Didn’t any of them know anything about WBB?
• I do agree that the 4 year vs 5 year records will create a “Roger Maris” effect in college sports.
• For the record, Clark has played 123 games so far, 16 fewer than Plum

There has already been some talk about Clark breaking the all-time college basketball scoring record held by Pete Maravich. That discussion should immediately stop for several reasons:

• It serves no useful purpose to compare men’s and women’s records in sports where they don’t compete against each other. MBB & WBB are two different games and it demeans both to compare records and achievements.
• As everyone should know, Maravich averaged an incredible 43 ppg over 3 seasons (freshmen were not eligible for the varsity). A few years back there was considerable controversy when Antoine Davis of Detroit Mercy looked like he might break Pistol Pete’s record. Playing in his 5th varsity season, mercifully , Davis fell short by 4 pts.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

I do believe that anyone who reports or comments on sports in various public media forums has an obligation to be prepared and do everything possible to get things correct. Swoopes made a number of points on the podcast as follows:

1. Both Clark & Reese will have to get used to playing in the W, and their immediate success is not a sure thing (Probably correct)
2. Clark is currently playing in her 5th (Covid) season and Plum only played 4 seasons (WRONG)
3. Clark takes more shots (40?) per game (WRONG, she averages just under 20. A lot of her scoring is from the FT line.)
4. Clark is older (25?) than Plum was. (WRONG again)

A couple additional points:

• While Swoopes was rambling on in her stream of consciousness, where were the 3 guys on the panel who sat there like bumps on a log. Didn’t any of them know anything about WBB?
• I do agree that the 4 year vs 5 year records will create a “Roger Maris” effect in college sports.
• For the record, Clark has played 123 games so far, 16 fewer than Plum

There has already been some talk about Clark breaking the all-time college basketball scoring record held by Pete Maravich. That discussion should immediately stop for several reasons:

• It serves no useful purpose to compare men’s and women’s records in sports where they don’t compete against each other. MBB & WBB are two different games and it demeans both to compare records and achievements.
• As everyone should know, Maravich averaged an incredible 43 ppg over 3 seasons (freshmen were not eligible for the varsity). A few years back there was considerable controversy when Antoine Davis of Detroit Mercy looked like he might break Pistol Pete’s record. Playing in his 5th varsity season, mercifully , Davis fell short by 4 pts.

I take these podcasts with a grain of salt...even the popular ones. Everybody has one! They're like a Saturday morning visit to the barbershop!

 

[oldude]

I take these podcasts with a grain of salt...even the popular ones. Everybody has one! They're like a Saturday morning visit to the barbershop!

Yes, but this podcast was like asking the barber to take a little off the top and coming out with a buzz cut….

 

[LETTERL]

I will admit to being one who, apparently, did not listen to/watch the whole thing. I only saw the part of the clip where she mentions that Clark is playing her 5th year and questioning whether the record would be legitimate if she played longer than Plum did. Toward the end of the clip I saw (it was only a 2-minute version), and I mean right before it cut off, Swoopes was acting doubtful about her facts.

That was all I saw. I would be interested to hear her take on Clark's and Reese's prospects for success in the WNBA; I did not see or hear that part.

I was sort of disappointed in Swoopes, again based on the short version I saw, with the way she handled herself when discussing Clark and the record and for having her facts so completely wrong.

But that is JMNSHO.

 

[cancontent]

I will admit to being one who, apparently, did not listen to/watch the whole thing. I only saw the part of the clip where she mentions that Clark is playing her 5th year and questioning whether the record would be legitimate if she played longer than Plum did. Toward the end of the clip I saw (it was only a 2-minute version), and I mean right before it cut off, Swoopes was acting doubtful about her facts.

That was all I saw. I would be interested to hear her take on Clark's and Reese's prospects for success in the WNBA; I did not see or hear that part.

I was sort of disappointed in Swoopes, again based on the short version I saw, with the way she handled herself when discussing Clark and the record and for having her facts so completely wrong.

But that is JMNSHO.

That's the thing. I don't think many of us have seen the whole thing. Some on social media have claimed she gets corrected on her mistakes, but I haven't had time to go back and listen to the full version. If true, the host(s) at least tried to correct things during the discussion.

 

[cancontent]

I will admit to being one who, apparently, did not listen to/watch the whole thing. I only saw the part of the clip where she mentions that Clark is playing her 5th year and questioning whether the record would be legitimate if she played longer than Plum did. Toward the end of the clip I saw (it was only a 2-minute version), and I mean right before it cut off, Swoopes was acting doubtful about her facts.

That was all I saw. I would be interested to hear her take on Clark's and Reese's prospects for success in the WNBA; I did not see or hear that part.

I was sort of disappointed in Swoopes, again based on the short version I saw, with the way she handled herself when discussing Clark and the record and for having her facts so completely wrong.

But that is JMNSHO.

That's the thing. I don't think many of us have seen the whole thing. Some on social media have claimed she gets corrected one her mistakes, but I haven't had time to go back and listen to the full version. If true, the host(s) at least tried to correct things during the discussion.

And Swoopes has owned up to her errors. I don't believe it invalidates her ability to speculate on how Clark's game translates at the next level.

 

[BigTenGuy]

https://x.com/GreggDoyelStar/status/1755264405754007799?s=20

Indy Star columnist with a take, in part, on the Swoopes kerfuffle.

 

[cancontent]

https://x.com/GreggDoyelStar/status/1755264405754007799?s=20

Indy Star columnist with a take, in part, on the Swoopes kerfuffle.

A take is one way to look at it. Some valid points, but I always cringe when I read comments stating that she's the best ever in women's college basketball. UConn fans would argue Stewart especially because of her 4 consecutive national titles and leading UConn to an insane undefeated streak.

Also not sure on the most impactful athlete in any sport comment. What is this based on? Us "old heads" as a friend would call me would argue Magic, Bird and Jordan for basketball, Pele, Beckham, and Messi for soccer, Brady for the NFL.

Yes she's helped to bring in insane viewing numbers. How about the growth in viewership, prior to this season? It's a myopic take to me.

Of course her impact on the game has been immense. Love what it has done for the game overall, but to discount the impact of other players and teams these last few years which has helped isn't right in my opinion.

 

[TheFarmFan]

Since I feel like almost every poster in this thread is on the same wavelength, and we're talking about a fact-lite, two-minute rant from a quasi-washed out pro decades past her peak relevance, it may be time to let this ship sail before the sports forum equivalent of Godwin's law is proven true.

 

[DefenseBB]

To me, both LaChina and Sheryl are showing their gross ignorance on a game that they are supposed to be subject matter experts. Add in the fact that Sheryl was a head coach at the D1 level (and failed spectacularly!) really shows she should is a complete knucklehead and I am fine with more twitter callouts to her that either cajole her into a real apology or get her to exit the platform. I also hope LaChina reads and recognizes that achievements and comments are two very different actions and one doesn't allow for the tolerance of another when there is no correlation.

I would never have even clicked on a Sheryl Swoopes article as I lost all respect for her on how she handle (or mishandled) her one HC gig.

 

[GCKSFN4L]

I just watched the interview and I definitely think this whole thing was blown out proportion. Did Sheryl say some things that was absolutely not correct, yes she definitely fumbled on that. She was also fact checked not to long after in the interview as well about Caitlin only being a 4 year senior.

I believe there was some hyperbole of 40 shots a game that was also incorrect but I do think overall she wasn't as malicious as people make it out be. Sheryl said Caitlin will be a great pro just not immediately, she also said that she likely won't take as many shots as she does in college as well. I don't think those statements is as hate induced as portrayed when watching the that portion of the interview in its full context.