Losing the Championship, Gaining Interest

Am I going to watch the NCAA Men's Final? Probably not. There is nothing joyous about seeing UConn win by twenty or more. It's a school night as well. If Purdue wins- good for them.

I watched the Women's Final today. Caitlin Clark was on fire until she wasn't. There were runs all game from both teams. In the final five minutes Iowa couldn't make a shot from anywhere.

So it goes. South Carolina was and remains undefeated. Not only is the University of South Carolina called USC (as is The University of Southern California) their nickname is the Gamecocks.

They sell hats with the word "Cocks" on the brim. They probably don't wear that at women's games. Before mentioning the cock crowing three times; Caitlin Clark did not invent women's college basketball.

Too many "Greatest of all time" conversations are ahistorical. When Pat Summitt started coaching at Tennessee she held a bake sale to pay for the team's uniforms. Could you imagine any men's coach having to go grass roots to afford team uniforms?

Women's basketball is something I have admired and rarely watched. I still have not attended a WNBA game. It is less expensive. Watching today's game- there are less fouls and more calls. No woman could get away with LeBron James's "Crab Step"

There were three second violations and many traveling calls. The fundamentals are more apparent in the women's game. No one tries to dunk. Caitlin Clark held my interest. I was hoping she would follow through.

It's a team game and South Carolina had the top ranked defense. This was an entertaining game; not a novelty. If Connecticut wins 85-45 tomorrow night there will be no reason to watch the game.

Will basketball reach the level of other sports where it doesn't matter the gender of the players? Thanks to Billie Jean King, women's tennis is as good if not better than men's tennis.

I am old enough to remember when American men won Majors. There have been American women who won tennis tournaments. The WNBA is not comparable to the NBA. Doesn't mean they cannot coexist.

The NBA has funded the WNBA since 1997. If they can pay John Wall forty three million dollars to not play basketball they can support certain franchises that may not do as well as others. James Harden is paid that much to give up in the playoffs and don't get me started on the Milwaukee Bucks.

None of which has to do with Caitlin Clark. She should raise all boats. There are many great female players. Twenty years of Diana Taurasi proves that. There should be renewed interest.

The NCAA Tournament can lead fans to the NBA next year to see the great players as professionals. Only time will tell if the WNBA grows from the high ratings of Iowa games. There will be interest and they should improve. The women's game will never be better than the men's.

They are different. I don't know why women's games are in quarters while men play two halves. Both are forty minutes long. Six of one, half dozen of the other. The ads in the women's game are not limited to feminine products. That makes games a little more inclusive.

Certain sports are the same whether men or women play them. Volleyball, figure skating, and swimming (everyone looks the same in the pool). Certain sports can be interesting with male or female participants. They are different and stand on their own.

The legacy of Caitlin Clark is you cannot say women's basketball is inferior to men's. Many came before her who proved that correct. Succeed from where you are.