- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 6,651
- Reaction Score
- 14,696
Yep, many would still feel the same because most of didn't like it before Parker because it adds nothing to the game itself. This board had a significant number who were against dunking long before Parker or even Snow.
Griner being able to dunk is largely irrelevant specifically because there is about one or two women at any point in the college game who can even sniff the possibility of dunking. None to date has been able to do so like Griner. It is not healthy for a sport to be dominated by a set of outlier physical characteristics based on a set of one. Therefore is can have no enduring impact on how the game is played and therefore is not a game changer. In the end the game is still about putting the ball in the basket by the masses not one or two.
If one wants the women's game to emulate the men's game then lower the rim to 9' and then there would be numerous players who could dunk and not a dog and pony show. A situation where Griner or Parker would likely still be the best but not the oddity or crio their efforts are today.
We used to do that on the adjustable baskets of the playground or the fixed 8 foot rims of the grade school courts and soon tired of it. But then we used to play lots of odd games for fun and skill development like "bank ball," a version of hoops where every shot had to be off the backboard, lay up or jumper. And then there was "swish" where the only hoops that counted touched nothing but net.
For many the men's college game was better in the era of Alcindor and Walton when the dunk was banned. It forced different skills to be developed.
I still think it should be called goaltending because the hand is on the ball within the cone of the rim. But that's just me.
Yep, many would still feel the same because most of didn't like it before Parker because it adds nothing to the game itself. This board had a significant number who were against dunking long before Parker or even Snow.
Griner being able to dunk is largely irrelevant specifically because there is about one or two women at any point in the college game who can even sniff the possibility of dunking. None to date has been able to do so like Griner. It is not healthy for a sport to be dominated by a set of outlier physical characteristics based on a set of one. Therefore is can have no enduring impact on how the game is played and therefore is not a game changer. In the end the game is still about putting the ball in the basket by the masses not one or two.
Not so Icebear; I'm with you.
If one wants the women's game to emulate the men's game then lower the rim to 9' and then there would be numerous players who could dunk and not a dog and pony show. A situation where Griner or Parker would likely still be the best but not the oddity or crio their efforts are today.
We used to do that on the adjustable baskets of the playground or the fixed 8 foot rims of the grade school courts and soon tired of it. But then we used to play lots of odd games for fun and skill development like "bank ball," a version of hoops where every shot had to be off the backboard, lay up or jumper. And then there was "swish" where the only hoops that counted touched nothing but net.
For many the men's college game was better in the era of Alcindor and Walton when the dunk was banned. It forced different skills to be developed.
I still think it should be called goaltending because the hand is on the ball within the cone of the rim. But that's just me.