Should Clark be on the Olympic team? | Page 6 | The Boneyard

Should Clark be on the Olympic team?

Should CC be on Olympic team?

  • Yes

    Votes: 78 41.1%

  • No

    Votes: 90 47.4%

  • I don’t know

    Votes: 22 11.6%
  • Total voters
    190
Status
Not open for further replies.
So when does this "grow the game" bubble burst? Last night's game with the Sun was an example of too much media on one player. ESPN had the score, the Sun up 20 with Clark basically doing nothing, yet the only video highlights on the site were the two threes she made. Nothing else until after the game. Once the casual Clark fan gets bored and moves to another shiny thing, then the WNBA is in trouble. They do have to start promoting...heavily...all the current and past stars and their achievements. Plus, everyone forgets Pearl Monroe is still the leading scorer in college basketball history, she just predated the NCAA. Regardless, as everyone starts to realize that Clark's stats are pretty normal for the upper level players, and not as amazing as expected (there are lots of pretty amazing players in the W) then where does all the interest come from? Being left off the team is as it should be, she's not ready quite yet. I'm sure she will be, but not yet. Frankly, for her own interests, it's probably best that she isn't on the team...how would that International audience react if she throws a few turnovers away? Let her get a semblance of consistency, then all is good. But the media has to change the focus of who they want to highlight. There are some pretty special rookies heading into the league next year, also...
 
Dream Team did this in '92 - the first year NBA players were allowed to participate in the Olympics. They had a roster that included Christian Lattner as the probable 12th roster spot. Lattner was a college All-American at the time. Promoting the future, I suspect.
 
Dogdude said:
So when does this "grow the game" bubble burst? Last night's game with the Sun was an example of too much media on one player. ESPN had the score, the Sun up 20 with Clark basically doing nothing, yet the only video highlights on the site were the two threes she made. Nothing else until after the game. Once the casual Clark fan gets bored and moves to another shiny thing, then the WNBA is in trouble. They do have to start promoting...heavily...all the current and past stars and their achievements. Plus, everyone forgets Pearl Monroe is still the leading scorer in college basketball history, she just predated the NCAA. Regardless, as everyone starts to realize that Clark's stats are pretty normal for the upper level players, and not as amazing as expected (there are lots of pretty amazing players in the W) then where does all the interest come from? Being left off the team is as it should be, she's not ready quite yet. I'm sure she will be, but not yet. Frankly, for her own interests, it's probably best that she isn't on the team...how would that International audience react if she throws a few turnovers away? Let her get a semblance of consistency, then all is good. But the media has to change the focus of who they want to highlight. There are some pretty special rookies heading into the league next year, also...
Expand ...
This is where I’m at. Like at this point you aren’t growing the game you are growing one players profile at expense of the game.
 
I look at first time 5x5 Olympians such as Copper, Plum, Young and Thomas who have all spent anywhere from 5-11 years in the WNBA grinding away for this opportunity. The tears of these players who wasn't sure if this day will ever come despite resumes and accolades that show they earned their spots. To take that away from these players for the sake of one player's popularity is slap in a a face to those who truly earned it.

And at this time I have yet to see Clark's popularity help elevate anyone else's popularity so far in the WNBA. So I'm not sure how her sitting on the end of the bench at Olympics will elevate any of the other players that some have claimed. What I have seen was Clark's fans attack her teammates and coach since the season started. I have also seen these new fans attack and talk down anyone who plays decent defense on her or happens to foul her.

So I'm glad she's not on the team. Having something to work towards is something that could really be motivating for her in the long run. The distraction and negativity that surrounds anything involving lately it isn't worth for Team USA. Also I hate that all of a sudden viewership is more important than merit at the Olympics of all places. The whole thing just feels hypocritical and this discussion would only happen with women's basketball. I haven't heard any cries for Tiger Woods to represent Team USA in golf or if it's really about viewership numbers then a 60 year old Michael Jordan playing with LeBron James and Steph Curry is what the men's team is missing then.
 
.-.
triaddukefan said:
who are the people on the right ?
Expand ...
The upper right is former UConn great, all American, national champion, Jen Rizzotti.
 
triaddukefan said:
who are the people on the right ?
Expand ...
Clockwise from upper-left: Augustus, Staley, Rizzotti, Donaphin, Milton-Jones.

“The team was selected by the USA Basketball Women’s National Team Committee and approved by the USA Basketball Board of Directors. In addition to Rizzotti, the committee includes Dawn Staley(University of South Carolina), Bethany Donaphin (WNBA) and Dan Padover (Atlanta Dream), as well as athlete representatives Seimone Augustus and DeLisha Milton-Jones.” USAB Announcement
 
baggerbob said:
No she's not even close to what players like Stewie, and A'ja did in their first year in the WNBA. You can also add Parker, and Maya Moore who had much better first years.
Expand ...
Unless I've lost my bearings, Stewie, A'ja, Maya and Candace aren't rookies this year, which was the point of discussion.
visitingcock said:
So why are we looking only at her? Waaaaaaahhhhhhh! Boston should be on the team. She had great rookie stats - for a full, rather than part of, a year. She was an allstar selection and Rookie of the Year. Waaaaaaahhhhhhhhh! But that wasn't enough to beat out the chosen ones. Boston hasn't earned a spot despite an excellent first year,

I would not have had a problem if they had chosen Clark for financial reasons. "Grow the Game" is valid in my mind,

I also have no problem with her being excluded because she hasn't earned it. I just wish the new-to-the-game whiners would grow up. Clark will have the opportunity to EARN A SPOT in the future. You can't always get what you want - NOW.
Expand ...

I'd be with your, visitingcock, if this were last season, but Aliyah hasn't been as effective this season.

All this said, I'm not even advocating for Caitlin being on the team. I just was responding to GoUConn7961's statement that Clark isn't even the best rookie statistically...

Enough on this one.
 
GoUconn7961 said:
Well, I'm no expert like you seem to be but according to ESPN:

"
The metrics don’t love Caitlin Clark.

Clark, the No. 1 pick in the 2024 WNBA Draft, is stunningly No. 6 in ESPN’s ranking of rookies based on a variety of advanced statistics.

The former Iowa star falls behind, in order: Cameron Brink (No. 2 pick), Angel Reese (No. 7), former Iowa teammate Kate Martin (No. 18), Rickea Jackson (No. 4) and Julie Vanloo (international signing).

Clark leads WNBA rookies with 15.6 points per game entering Friday, more than four points ahead of the second-highest scorer in Reese, but ESPN’s models are dinging her for her mediocre shooting numbers and poor defense."
Expand ...
;)
 
GoUconn7961 said:
I love this response. And honestly, the person who should be all over the media is A'ja Wilson. I'm just tired of these women who have worked so hard to bring light on the W, and working to make successive Olympic teams being overshadowed by the media's obsession with CC. I haven't even seen one show say congratulations to the women who made the team! It's all about who was snubbed. WAAAAAAHHH is exactly right!!
Expand ...
Lol
They’ve worked so hard to bring light, and had limited success.
Then the tide that raises all boats —Caitlin Clark — comes along, and all anyone can do is complain.
Great, let’s go back to the way things were 2 years with less attendance, lower ratings, but you’ll get your wish: no Caitlin.

And no the media is not obsessed with CC. The public is. Look at the attendance. Look at the TV ratings.
 
.-.
Vowelguy said:
Lol
They’ve worked so hard to bring light, and had limited success.
Then the tide that raises all boats —Caitlin Clark — comes along, and all anyone can do is complain.
Great, let’s go back to the way things were 2 years with less attendance, lower ratings, but you’ll get your wish: no Caitlin.

And no the media is not obsessed with CC. The public is. Look at the attendance. Look at the TV ratings.
Expand ...
This take is so ignorant and short sighted. They’ve worked so hard and their success is what allowed Caitlin Clark to have a platform to become popular. WNBA and WCBB ratings and attendance was rising before CC entered the picture. She surely put napalm on the fire but without Clark WBB would still be on the rise, and honestly probably at a more sustainable rate that would be better for the long term health of the sport. We’ll see though.
 
hoopsnloops32 said:
This take is so ignorant and short sighted. They’ve worked so hard and their success is what allowed Caitlin Clark to have a platform to become popular. WNBA and WCBB ratings and attendance was rising before CC entered the picture. She surely put napalm on the fire but without Clark WBB would still be on the rise, and honestly probably at a more sustainable rate that would be better for the long term health of the sport. We’ll see though.
Expand ...
@hoopsnloops32 , I never thought I’d agree with anything you posted, but I agree with this 100%. The NCAA (and refs in particular) did no one any favors by treating Caitlin Clark as a national treasure to be protected at all costs. I believe that she will be successful and probably a superstar over time. But that time isn’t now and is unfair to the legitimate superstars of the women’s game to act as though it is.
 
Something that I haven't seen being discussed at all: Why was Nneka Ogwumike (once again) snubbed? With her decade-plus record in the WNBA and her current performance when healthy, she is as deserving as Alyssa Thomas (and she is very deserving).
 
JoePgh said:
Something that I haven't seen being discussed at all: Why was Nneka Ogwumike (once again) snubbed? With her decade-plus record in the WNBA and her current performance when healthy, she is as deserving as Alyssa Thomas (and she is very deserving).
Expand ...
There is a much larger history to Nneka and Team USA .....

www.espn.com

What Nneka Ogwumike is saying about USA Basketball decision, FIBA denial

Tuesday morning's USA-Nigeria matchup will offer a glimpse of what might have been for Nneka Ogwumike ... and both teams.
www.espn.com www.espn.com
 
GCKSFN4L said:
And at this time I have yet to see Clark's popularity help elevate anyone else's popularity so far in the WNBA. So I'm not sure how her sitting on the end of the bench at Olympics will elevate any of the other players that some have claimed. What I have seen was Clark's fans attack her teammates and coach since the season started. I have also seen these new fans attack and talk down anyone who plays decent defense on her or happens to foul her.
Expand ...

Chartered flights, improved viewership, more social media followers leading to more money making opportunities. Plus a new negotiation of the CBA contract where players will likely get much larger salaries which is largely due to the viewership and attendance Clark (and others) are bringing to the league.

For whatever reason, Clark is super polarizing. The fact is that she's bringing unprecedented level of exposure to a sport that's long overdue and there is both good and bad that comes with it, but too many people only want to see the angle they support instead of looking at the big picture as a whole.
 
Last edited:
bballnut90 said:
Chartered flights, improved viewership, more social media followers leading to more money making opportunities. Plus a new negotiation of the CBA contract where players will likely get much larger salaries which is largely due to the viewership and attendance Clark (and others) are bringing to the league.

For whatever reason, Clark is super polarizing. The fact is she's bringing unprecedented level of exposure to a sport that's long overdue and there is both good and bad that comes with it, but too many people only want to see the angle they support instead of looking at the big picture as a whole.
Expand ...
This 100% however, in my opinion, those who try to provide a balanced perspective like this are not being heard because their message is getting overpowered by the rest of the noise.
 
.-.
JoePgh said:
Something that I haven't seen being discussed at all: Why was Nneka Ogwumike (once again) snubbed? With her decade-plus record in the WNBA and her current performance when healthy, she is as deserving as Alyssa Thomas (and she is very deserving).
Expand ...
After last time, she removed herself from USA Basketball. Even explored playing for Nigeria I believe.
 
GCKSFN4L said:
I look at first time 5x5 Olympians such as Copper, Plum, Young and Thomas who have all spent anywhere from 5-11 years in the WNBA grinding away for this opportunity. The tears of these players who wasn't sure if this day will ever come despite resumes and accolades that show they earned their spots. To take that away from these players for the sake of one player's popularity is slap in a a face to those who truly earned it.

And at this time I have yet to see Clark's popularity help elevate anyone else's popularity so far in the WNBA. So I'm not sure how her sitting on the end of the bench at Olympics will elevate any of the other players that some have claimed. What I have seen was Clark's fans attack her teammates and coach since the season started. I have also seen these new fans attack and talk down anyone who plays decent defense on her or happens to foul her.

So I'm glad she's not on the team. Having something to work towards is something that could really be motivating for her in the long run. The distraction and negativity that surrounds anything involving lately it isn't worth for Team USA. Also I hate that all of a sudden viewership is more important than merit at the Olympics of all places. The whole thing just feels hypocritical and this discussion would only happen with women's basketball. I haven't heard any cries for Tiger Woods to represent Team USA in golf or if it's really about viewership numbers then a 60 year old Michael Jordan playing with LeBron James and Steph Curry is what the men's team is missing then.
Expand ...
That doesn't really make any sense.
 
.-.
What we are seeing hearing and experiencing is social media hype!!! Caitlin Clark is the unfortunate target of all this stuff. And the "pundits/ experts" are to blame.

The Olympic selection committee has spoken about their process. Popularity and fannies in the seats is not part of their selection process. Clark did not participate in the tryouts/ workouts in March/ April. She had a valid season, the NCAA tournament. She has not played with the members of the Olympic team. Like it or not, her turn will come for the Olympic team. And it is not now.

Clark needs to improve her game. Her defense is suspect as it was in college. Shooting logo 3's is not enough. I believe she will improve.

What I really object to is the press, media and social mavens saying Clark was snubbed. That is a bold faced lie. She didn't get snubbed. She didn't go thru the selection process so she was not elligible. Their articles are putting a lot of pressure on her, the Fever, the Olympic selection committee and the WNBA in general. It's not good and we are seeing the results.
 
Casual fans (aka new to WBB) seem to believe Clark invented the 3 point shot and no one else had ever done it like her. But if you check the 2023-24 NCAA individual stats you will find Clark sitting at 55th in 3 point percentage. Her WNBA 3 point % isn't much to write home about either. Not in top 10.

I like Clark and having her on the team would be fine. I like the new eyes and new fannies in the seats she has brought with her. But the all too common idea she "invented" wbb or the logo 3 is over the top for a WBB fan for 50+ years like myself. No sense of history for with noveau crowd and it is tacky.
 
Floridaduck said:
Casual fans (aka new to WBB) seem to believe Clark invented the 3 point shot and no one else had ever done it like her. But if you check the 2023-24 NCAA individual stats you will find Clark sitting at 55th in 3 point percentage. Her WNBA 3 point % isn't much to write home about either. Not in top 10.

I like Clark and having her on the team would be fine. I like the new eyes and new fannies in the seats she has brought with her. But the all too common idea she "invented" wbb or the logo 3 is over the top for a WBB fan for 50+ years like myself. No sense of history for with noveau crowd and it is tacky.
Expand ...
for the same number of shots attempted, a 33% success rate for 3's gets the same number of points as a 50% success rate from 2. If your team can't shoot better than 33% from 3, maybe they should be concentrating on points in the paint.
 
The W is expected to lose $50M this year. But yeah the problem is that Clark is getting too much attention.

You’ll never go wrong betting on the dumbness of the public.

www.newsweek.com

WNBA Expected to Lose $50 Million Despite Popularity: Report

The WNBA's next television contract, negotiated in tandem with the NBA's next deal, is expected to provide financial windfall to a league long in the red.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
 
Vowelguy said:
The W is expected to lose $50M this year. But yeah the problem is that Clark is getting too much attention.

You’ll never go wrong betting on the dumbness of the public.

www.newsweek.com

WNBA Expected to Lose $50 Million Despite Popularity: Report

The WNBA's next television contract, negotiated in tandem with the NBA's next deal, is expected to provide financial windfall to a league long in the red.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
Expand ...
It’s click bait at best. The loss is largely because of the addition of chartered flights about two years before they were expected. Since the WNBA media deal is currently being renegotiated, it’s pretty much expected that the WNBA will be in the black once that is complete. It gets complicated because the WNBA rates are negotiated as part of the package deal with the NBA rights and there’s a lot of accounting options for how things are allocated.

And no, I’m not that dumb.
 
Puppy Love said:
It’s click bait at best. The loss is largely because of the addition of chartered flights about two years before they were expected. Since the WNBA media deal is currently being renegotiated, it’s pretty much expected that the WNBA will be in the black once that is complete. It gets complicated because the WNBA rates are negotiated as part of the package deal with the NBA rights and there’s a lot of accounting options for how things are allocated.

And no, I’m not that dumb.
Expand ...
I'm also skeptical of the accounting once the new deal is made. It's possible that some of the NBA owners are using Hollywood accounting, meaning all sorts of expenses are being thrown into the WNBA mix to lower income for tax breaks.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,215
Messages
4,557,578
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom