Conference 7.286::sports_90

    USA Today's Sheridan 's Odds Against Winning:
    
    2:1	      		Tennessee
    3:1			Stanford
    			La. Tech
    4:1			Auburn
    5:1			Gerogia
    7:1			Washington
    			N.C. State
    8:1			Texas
    			Virginia
    10:1		UNLV
    			Purdue
    12:1		Stephen F. Austin
    			Long Beach State
    15:1		Iowa
    			Northwestern
    			La. State
    			N. Illinois
    			S. Carolina
    18:1		Mississippi
    			Hawaii
    20:1		Providence
    			Connecticut
    			So. Miss.
    			Tenn. Tech
    25:1		Penn State
    			St. Joseph
    30:1		Old Dominion
    35:1		Arkansas
    40:1		Clemson
    50:1		Maryland
    100:1		Richmond
    200:1		Vanderbilt
    250:1		Bowling Green
    500:1		Utah
    750:1		Ohio St.
    			Illinois
    1000:1		Fla. St.
    2500:1		Michigan
    3000:1		Montana
    4000:1		Okla. St.
    5000:1		Texas Tech
    7500:1		Rutgers
    10000:1		DePaul
    15000:1		W. Kentucky
    20000:1 		UCLA
    25000:1		California
    750000:1		Appalachian St.
    1000000:1		Manhattan
    

    Congratulations to the National Championship Stanford Women's
    Basketball Team! A perfect ending to a very fine season, in which
    they only lost one game, on the road, by 3 points. The final was
    one of the best basketball games I've seen in a long time. They
    got behind twice, once by 9 points, before coming back to win. They
    had never been as much as 9 points behind all season. They made
    the shots, they got the rebounds when they needed it! Yow!
    

    Yes, it was a good  game. 
    
    I was impressed by the quality of the womens' play. I kept trying to
    compare it to mens' play of about the early '60s because the women now
    are about the same height and size of the men for that period, but the
    comparison breaks down becausze modern players -- men and women -- are
    so much more skilled at ball-handling and positioning themselves on the
    court than the men of that period.
    
    Both the semis and the final were very enjoyable to watch.
    
    ...mike
    

    Women's basketball is a joy to watch, because they exhibit selflessness
    and teamwork much more than men, at least by an order of magnitude.
    
    I started watching it a few years ago when I went to Rice. The women
    played better ball than the men during my soph. and junior years,
    and I liked it ! Great passing, defense, and pick setting. And I
    think a lot of it is due to the fact that most women can't slam
    one home.
    
    I remember a game where UT came in and blew Rice away (no real shame
    in that - UT was #1 in the nation, and had a streak of 170+ straight
    conference wins), and there was one possession in particular that
    has stuck with me. Rice was playing great D, and UT beat it with
    4 straight rifle passes that you could hardly follow, which ended
    in a short jumper hitting nothing but net.
    
    And UT was up by 25 points late in the game .....
                                                 
    Whew ! See how many times any men's team, at any time, will show
    that kind of discipline ....
    
    Doc

    re .4:
    Kareem Abdul-Jabbar said in an interview on PBS yesterday that when the
    NCAA banned the dunk in college hoop it improved his game, for much the
    same reasons you give. So I agree with your statement about "i think a 
    lot of it is due to the fact that women can't slam it home".
    
    ...mike
    

    
    	I like the women's game too.  
    
    	As for dunking, don't ban it.  Instead, why don't the coaches
    prohibit it.  If I were coaching, I'd simply tell my kids, no dunking
    or you sit.  Players are not allowed to dunk in warmups, so it really
    wouldn't be a big deal to stop it in games.
    	Basically, it's the coaches responsibility to develope the kids
    fundamental-wise.  I would also teach the kids to use the backboard.
    I believe this is a lost art and yet it can greatly improve a players
    shooting average.
    
    							bill..g.

    

    Hawk, What the diff if a guy (or girl) puts the ball over the rim,
    and drops it. Not a dunk, but in reality its the same thing. If you
    want the dunk outlawed, raise the rim to 11'. Before I broke both
    ankles I could dunk, and sometimes with great authority. Granted,
    I still caint hit a 20' J to save my a**, but I spent more time working
    on my J than I did on dunks. Why?? Cause there's not much use for
    a 6'0" white guy who cain dunk but caint hit the J. Its coaching, dude,
    and thats where the problem comes from. A lot of these kids are
    undisciplined and uncoachable. No matter what the coach says, their
    going to do what they want after practice and on the playgrounds.
    BTW, all the playgrounds in my area have raised the rims to about
    10'10" to save money on rims.
    				Rich
    

    Why would the coaches ban it voluntarily if they know the crowd and
    hence the customers loves it, and Dick V. hypes it, and so on.

    Ban the dunk ? NEVER ! The dunk is a shot that combines power and
    artisry, and if used right can have a big psychological effect on
    the opponent. I think it has added a lot to the game, just like
    the three point shot. An dlike the three point shot, it can be abused.
    but don't blame the players - blame the coaches if players are slam
    happy.
    
    If a player spends all of his time dunking, and none on his free
    throws, and bricks 1-1's all day, then you bench his behind until
    he puts forth a sincere effort to improve his FT %, because *anybody*
    can do it if they're willing to put the time in.
    
    Micheal Jordan is one of the most fundamentally sound players alive.
    Yet we all know about his dunking ability. I remmeber a SI article
    that called Elgin Baylor, Connie Hawkins, and Dr J the Father, Son,
    and Holy Ghost of Hang - and they were. But if you look at each
    man, they were all well skilled in the fundamentals, esp. The Doc. 
    
    It's all a mindset, and in the women's game, they have a better
    mindset. Part of it comes from the inablity of most women to dunk,
    ALONG with the fact that they have almost always been schooled to
    be in a team mind-set. I believe that boys play a lot more one-on-one
    early on, and a lot of coaches encourage one-on-one play, they
    overemphasize the scorer, they shun the role player, ect.
    
    But believe me, legislation is not the way to do it. True, Kareem
    became a more complete player because of anti-duke rule (his Skyhook
    was virtually completely refined by the time he entered the NBA),
    but the NCAA's motives weren't that pure. 
    
    To many people, the anti-dunk rule was more of a anti-black rule,
    a sort of eastblishment backlash against 'street ball' ... thank
    God the rule is gone ....
    
    DrM

    What the heck would Kenny Walker do if they banned dunking in
    the pros?  He'd be selling insurance in a Connecticut suburb...
    
    But, I can't buy into the ban dunking and the kids will use their
    free time wisely theory either.  If you ban dunking in the games then
    it will be a taboo that will be continued outside of regulation
    games.
    
    The dunk has never been the rage in Boston because we don't have
    players who are stylish dunkers.  But if Jordan were a Celtic...
    
    ;-)

    
    	dunks are natural... dunks are fun... dunks are best when they're
    one.. on.. one.
    
    sean

    
    
     Ask Chris Laetner if dunks should be banned.
    
    
    
    Steven
    
    

Laettner should be dunked.

    re: dunking anti-black:
    Kareem addressed that in his interview too.He believes that it wasn't
    anti-Black so much as anti-UCLA (and anti-Alcindor). In fact he
    specifically said that the rule, while placed in retaliation of him,
    actually hurt the smaller players more since he, the opposing team, and
    everybody in the audience KNEW he could dunk, and thus was prepared to
    do other things, but that other players weren't prepared to make the
    effort and discipline themselves to improve their game.
    
    At New Mexico State during this time we had two players, Willie Ford
    and Charley Criss, who were both 5'6" and who could dunk. Criss later
    played with the Atlanta Hawks as a prototype Muggsy Bogues.
    
    ...mike
    

    Hawk, I never said that I needed a dunk to be useful. I said that 
    I needed MORE than a dunk to be useful. I also said that I didnt 
    spend time working on flashy dunks because there isnt much need
    for a 6' guy who couldnt hit a jumper if the hoop was 4' in diameter.
    Since high school I've developed a decent outside shot and I can
    still get up high enough to grab the rim and jump over taller guys.
    So if you ever want to do a little 1-on-1 I'm ready for ya. :-)8^
    

    re .18
    
    Nice note Mike, I find Kareem to be a fantastic person to listen
    to in interviews and articles - it's a shame that many pea-brained
    sportswriters were too busy trying to score points off of him in
    his first few years to ask real questions.
    
    Anyhow, I can see where you and Kareem are coming from. After all,
    UCLA had already won 3 or 4 titles in a row when Alcindor showed
    up, and the NCAA could see UCLA going undefeated for another three
    years (they damn near did anyway). And basketball has always believed
    in the theory "If ya can't beat 'em, enjoin them !" Witness the
    expansion of the lane, anti-dunk, et al.
    
    But there was defintely a cultural aspect involved in the rule as
    well. It was enacted during the social upheavels of the Sixties,
    and was not revoked after Alcindor left - I think it wasn't repealed
    until 1975. There is a difference between shall we call it, suburban
    and urban basketball, and the signature difference is the dunk.
    In suburban b-ball it's a mere high-percentage shot. On the streets
    it's an art form/intimidation device/momentum changer. Back in the
    late 60's, (especially in light of Texas Western's win over Kentucky)
    that last thing WASP America wanted to see was these black giants
    dunking on 'lil Johnny's crewcut 50 times a game .... :-)   
    
    Alcindor and UCLA gave the NCAA the perfect excuse.
    
    BTW, interesting comment about Kareem being prepared to do other
    things. John Wooden always maintained that Kareem would have been
    an All-American even if he was 6'2", becaus of his fantastic array
    of skills (and work ethic). Lew's post-dunk-ban performance proves
    it.                                         
    
    DrM
       

    re .13
    
    Hawk, I never accused you of being anti-black, becaue you want the
    dunk banned ! *That* never crossed my mind ! I'm just speaking to
    the NCAA's motivation. I've heard a few black fans call for the
    banning of the dunk and more emphasis on the basics as well. I was
    speaking to a different subject ....

    re: 21: We've got to quit meeting like this! 
    
    The only thing I'll dispute is your insinuation that Texas Western
    lived/died by the dunk. While I admit I'm taking what you said out of
    context, I still need to say that, for the record, Don Haskins has been
    -- forever -- a major opponent of the dunk. He believes it's
    undisciplined. 
    
    He's also been one of the best coaches in America forever, and I'm
    proud to say that he is one of three Coaches (with a capital C) that 
    I know personally (and have, for many years).
    
    The other two are Norm Ellenberger and Lou Henson.
    
    (I'm also not so proud to say that this was the year I got bigger than the
    Bear.)
    
    ...mike the Aggie

    
    
    	Growing up in the late 60's, I always through that the dunk
    was banned becasue of one man..Lew Alcindor.  I never heard anything
    about anyone else.  It was simply an attempt to stop the unstopable.
    
    	Doc, you're still a little young to remember those days, but
    Lew/Kareem and UCLA were just to much.
    
    							bill..g.
    

    Indeed I am, although I've seen quite a lot of film of those days,
    and there wasn't many college teams that could have touched UCLA
    back in the good 'ole days. Nevertheless, there was indeed a racial
    element to the anti-dunking rule. And it was still in effect nearly
    10 years later when I was a little less young (ie. older) .... :-)
    
    re .24 
    
    Sorry that I implied that about Texas Western. I juxtaposed the
    two (perhaps wrongly), because of the impact that game had. Adolph
    Rupp was one of the biggest practicing racists coaching college
    basketball. He swore he'd never have a black play under him, and
    his Neanderthal attitudes were a matter of public record. TW's (now
    UTEP) all-black starting 5 was a well-disciplined squad, not know
    for dunking displays, but they definitely brought some of "The City
    Game" to the floor with them. Wasn't it Louie Dampier (I might have
    the wrong guy) who found out the hard way, when he got his pocket 
    picked 3 or 4 times running ?   
    
    Anyhow, TW's win send a more powerful message than Rupp could have
    ever sent.
    
    BTW, there was a reunion of that championship team (I think it was
    really notable because one of the stars had undergone a stroke,
    and the others had railled for him), and many of the players said
    that they really didn't view the game as a race or culture war,
    but they were aware of the signifigance of the game, and were able
    to focus strictly on the game. For that, they gave a lot of credit
    to Haskins.
    
    Anyhow, I mentioned it for social/historical context, that's all.
    
    Doc

    I understand that, and did when I entered it. I agree with your opinion
    of Rupp as well.
    
    I was at New Mexico State U. (40 miles north of El Paso) as a student 
    that year, and we were almost as proud as the folks in El Paso when the 
    boyz pulled it off. David Lattin, Orsten Artis, Neville Shed, Louis 
    (Flip) Badouin (a white sub who later became a good friend of mine 
    and a HS coach in Albuquerque) and what HAS to be the best name EVER 
    for a basketball player... Willie Cager! (Sports Illustrated pointed 
    that out in a sidebar in their "College Basketball" issue in 1965.) 
    (They picked TWC to get to the tournament but not to go very far.)
    
    Yes, they had a reunion recently. The Denver Post carried a story
    about it last week during the Final Four hoopla. (To my shame I can't
    remember which team member had the stroke but I believe it was Willie.)
    
    BTW, Nolan Richardson played at TWC for The Bear two years earlier than
    this. 

    Back to the women's play...:-) I couldn't help but notice all the 3
    pointers being made. They showed a stat about the GA Tech's mens team 
    (lethal weapon 3) and compared Stanford (lethal weapon 4). GA Tech shot 40%
    Stanford women 42%. I think they were 11 for 23. 
    
    Also there are 3 differnces in the rules, two of which I don't
    understand why.  First the woman have a 30 second shot clock versus 45
    for the men, and the second is that there is no 10 second line for the
    women. The basketball for women is 1" diameter smaller (I can
    understand this and appreciate it). But why not have all the other
    rules the same?
    
    Thought it was a good game, and resembles the kind of play you can see
    in the DEC women's league. In fact lots of college players come to work 
    for DEC just for this opportunity, we are trying to draft Azzi 
    now.......many :-)'s here!!!
    
    Dee
    
    BTW: Last year in the 3 point finals, Carleen scored 10, and Wess had 14 
    (his last round, I think he had 18 in his second round). Be interesting to 
    see the difference this year since the mens finalist will only have to 
    shoot 2 rounds. 
    

    
    re: women's rules
    
    	I can say that the women led the way when they adopted the 30
    second clock.  This rule was adopted because the women's game was
    turning into one massive 4 corners bore.  A lot of womens teams
    would simply hold the ball for entire periods preventing the other
    team from even touching it.  So, in came the 30 second clock to
    simply prevent one team from stalling an entire half.
    
    	As for no 10 second count in the backcourt, I suspect that this
    rule was adopted way back when women didn't have the same ball handling
    skills.  Now though, I think they should go to a ten second count.
    They also might of done away with the backcourt count because of
    the 30 second clock.  "Hey, they have 30 seconds with the ball. 
    If they want to use it all in the backcourt, that's their choice."
    
    							bill..g.
    

    Question -- is the 3-point line the same distance in women's college
    basketball as it is in men's college basketball?
    
    
    py

    Same 3 point line for men and women. In the contest it will be the
    college line....I do not know of any gyms that have an NBA line except those
    that have NBA teams play at them....Boston Garden was not available and 
    I could not promise that I would be able to sell it out.........:-) You
    can stand as far behind the line as you want though, just not in front
    of it!!!!
    
    We use the 10 second line when we play but no shot clock, because we don't 
    have a clock!!!! Wish we did though. Our scores our usually in the
    40-50 range for this reason.
    
    Dee
    
    

    What a mess...half court shots will only count for one point in the
    contest, unless it is the money ball, than you get 2!