It's not just leaving Clark off it…. It's literally not including anyone of importance on the team!
I honestly don't care what statement they make. I just find it bizarre how afraid the commissioner is of saying or doing the wrong thing. A complete coward who is deathly afraid of the players.
@PaulMaul said:
It's not just leaving Clark off it…. It's literally not including anyone of importance on the team!
I honestly don't care what statement they make. I just find it bizarre how afraid the commissioner is of saying or doing the wrong thing. A complete coward who is deathly afraid of the players.
I really don't know the dynamics of the team so I wasn't aware the players on the poster were not ones who would be seen on posters. Is it normal for the stars on the teams to be the ones which are represented always in the WNBA? The Bucks used to do it where they would have just Bobby Portis or Pat Connaughton so I just figured it was a rights issue or something related to the CBA.
I keep asking what statement you want them to make because I don't know what I would say if I'm CEO of the WNBA (Commish.). I am going to want to walk that line as much as possible unless I see real advantage to picking a side. Not my circus... not my monkeys. You're either trying to educate a society which is devoid of interest in learning what biology really tells us or you're picking a side in a social fight which is going on. I think generally you're going to stay quiet. I can't even see the near-term benefit in picking a side here. Just shhh. That's what I would do. Coward? bah. That's ego. Only a moron would take that bait.
@PaulMaul said:
It's not just leaving Clark off it…. It's literally not including anyone of importance on the team!
I honestly don't care what statement they make. I just find it bizarre how afraid the commissioner is of saying or doing the wrong thing. A complete coward who is deathly afraid of the players.
Worst commish in sports and MLB and Manfred so that says a lot
@bgr said:
As I understand it biology determines sex based on a few diagnostic criteria which are related to chromosomes, hormones, and the parts. In nature there are cases which do not fall into distinct male vs. female categories. man/woman are not diagnostic terms as much as they are descriptive. Science is the foundation for understanding things better vs. worse. I'm still not convinced any of this is a problem that deserves the amount of attention it is receiving.
So in your view, can you change what biology is determining? Would Lia Thomas(the former college swimmer) be eligible for the WNBA without any of the current disdain the WNBA is putting toward these two current NBA players wanting to try??
Your question is poorly formed so I’m assuming you mean to ask if I think a person can change their biological sex.
You wouldn’t be able to change your chromosomes so you can’t change your biological sex. Which doesn’t always mean man or woman because nature doesn’t respect those distinctions.
I don’t know anything about Lia Thomas other than it was a trans-woman I suppose and they looked like they had an unfair advantage from a physiological perspective. We’re going to have to wait until there’s a legitimate case where someone who was not born as a biological female will want to join the WNBA. It’s likely to be something more close to reality such as an actual intersex person.
Is the WNBA putting disdain towards those nice boys. They’re so brave.
This is the problem you have in the WNBA…a number of people who can't separate the idea of basic competitive fairness from their emotions surrounding inclusivity, acceptance, love, etc. I can admire those feelings and share them without wanting to let biological men play against women.
This is the head coach of the Golden State Valkyries….
@bgr said:
Your question is poorly formed so I’m assuming you mean to ask if I think a person can change their biological sex.
You wouldn’t be able to change your chromosomes so you can’t change your biological sex. Which doesn’t always mean man or woman because nature doesn’t respect those distinctions.
I don’t know anything about Lia Thomas other than it was a trans-woman I suppose and they looked like they had an unfair advantage from a physiological perspective. We’re going to have to wait until there’s a legitimate case where someone who was not born as a biological female will want to join the WNBA. It’s likely to be something more close to reality such as an actual intersex person.
Is the WNBA putting disdain towards those nice boys. They’re so brave.
That was a poorly worded answer.
Can a biological human male become a human female? The physiological advantage is what the whole thing boils down to in these cases. It has nothing to do with how someone views themselves or how they define man or woman.
I've heard people try to undermine the fairness argument by arguing that even among a single gender there are players with a biological advantage over other players, which is of course true and part of sports.
I would argue that player ability is distributed about a mean for each gender. The problem is that in most sports the male mean is so far above the female mean that a mixed league based purely on merit would be all male. That reality is the source of the fairness issue.
@bgr said:
Your question is poorly formed so I’m assuming you mean to ask if I think a person can change their biological sex.
You wouldn’t be able to change your chromosomes so you can’t change your biological sex. Which doesn’t always mean man or woman because nature doesn’t respect those distinctions.
I don’t know anything about Lia Thomas other than it was a trans-woman I suppose and they looked like they had an unfair advantage from a physiological perspective. We’re going to have to wait until there’s a legitimate case where someone who was not born as a biological female will want to join the WNBA. It’s likely to be something more close to reality such as an actual intersex person.
Is the WNBA putting disdain towards those nice boys. They’re so brave.
That was a poorly worded answer.
Can a biological human male become a human female? The physiological advantage is what the whole thing boils down to in these cases. It has nothing to do with how someone views themselves or how they define man or woman.
There is sex, and there is gender, and there is gender identity. Those, as I understand things, are how we’re supposed to unravel individuals. What that means for sports and society and different sports and their leagues is not a one shoe fits all. The WNBA could allow men to play or only women or only trans women and that would be the rules of the WNBA. Not a rule on sports or a clarification on science because we don’t look to the WNBA to solve social issues or promote general sports policy.
So I guess I don’t understand either the question or how my answer was poorly worded. I can’t take an extreme stance on something which is being very clumsily reasoned. Is there a specific question you want me to answer which would be your ah-ha?
This whole thing doesn’t seem like it requires much higher order thinking.
I think the easiest solution is there should be Mens sports and Woman Sports governed by if you were born a Man you can only play men's sports, if you were born a woman you can only play woman's sports
From what I have seen regarding the unfairness of a trans person in sports is pretty much always a Man changing to a woman and playing against woman
Are there any examples of a Woman changing into a man and competing in men's leagues?
I believe in free will and an adult ( Not Kids ).making their own choices regarding their own bodies however I also believe in rules and fairness in competition
It certainly is hard to balance respect for individuals without imbalance to girls sports. And I say girls because I don’t know that I care about women’s sports. Those leagues can sort their own rules out. I really only care what happens in youth and collegiate levels. If the WNBA wants you to allow trans women then maybe each team should get to have 1 man. That could be interesting. Maybe 3 women, 1 man, and an item you bring with you. Like naked and afraid. But with clothes.
@bgr said:
Your question is poorly formed so I’m assuming you mean to ask if I think a person can change their biological sex.
You wouldn’t be able to change your chromosomes so you can’t change your biological sex. Which doesn’t always mean man or woman because nature doesn’t respect those distinctions.
I don’t know anything about Lia Thomas other than it was a trans-woman I suppose and they looked like they had an unfair advantage from a physiological perspective. We’re going to have to wait until there’s a legitimate case where someone who was not born as a biological female will want to join the WNBA. It’s likely to be something more close to reality such as an actual intersex person.
Is the WNBA putting disdain towards those nice boys. They’re so brave.
That was a poorly worded answer.
Can a biological human male become a human female? The physiological advantage is what the whole thing boils down to in these cases. It has nothing to do with how someone views themselves or how they define man or woman.
There is sex, and there is gender, and there is gender identity. Those, as I understand things, are how we’re supposed to unravel individuals. What that means for sports and society and different sports and their leagues is not a one shoe fits all. The WNBA could allow men to play or only women or only trans women and that would be the rules of the WNBA. Not a rule on sports or a clarification on science because we don’t look to the WNBA to solve social issues or promote general sports policy.
So I guess I don’t understand either the question or how my answer was poorly worded. I can’t take an extreme stance on something which is being very clumsily reasoned. Is there a specific question you want me to answer which would be your ah-ha?
This whole thing doesn’t seem like it requires much higher order thinking.
I already asked, can a biological human male become a human female? Nothing clumsy, nor clarification needed for that question.
Whether someone identifies internally in regard to behavior that is typically associated with being a human male or human female, is a different topic. I'm not discussing that. To each their own.
The physiological advantage is really what it boils down to in regard to the sports topic, as it does affect other humans within the sport.
@perkdog said:
I think the easiest solution is there should be Mens sports and Woman Sports governed by if you were born a Man you can only play men's sports, if you were born a woman you can only play woman's sports
From what I have seen regarding the unfairness of a trans person in sports is pretty much always a Man changing to a woman and playing against woman
Are there any examples of a Woman changing into a man and competing in men's leagues?
I believe in free will and an adult ( Not Kids ).making their own choices regarding their own bodies however I also believe in rules and fairness in competition
The thing no one ever talks about is that they arent banned from sports, they just need to play against men and not steal accolades from actual women.
A 15 and under male soccer team beat the defending gold medalist World Cup champion USA womens team several years ago. Lea Thomas was complete crap swimming against men at Harvard not even rated in the top 200 then becomes number 1 against women, makes them uncomfortable getting boners that the school silenced them (shocking for PSU right lol) and theyre now speaking up about it.
Riley Gaines who did finish second and got robbed by that guy put it best. She married a male swimmer from UK and she swam at UK and was one of the best in the country. What she said was basically I was much more decorated in accolades than he was but he kicks my butt every time head to head.
@bgr said:
Your question is poorly formed so I’m assuming you mean to ask if I think a person can change their biological sex.
You wouldn’t be able to change your chromosomes so you can’t change your biological sex. Which doesn’t always mean man or woman because nature doesn’t respect those distinctions.
I don’t know anything about Lia Thomas other than it was a trans-woman I suppose and they looked like they had an unfair advantage from a physiological perspective. We’re going to have to wait until there’s a legitimate case where someone who was not born as a biological female will want to join the WNBA. It’s likely to be something more close to reality such as an actual intersex person.
Is the WNBA putting disdain towards those nice boys. They’re so brave.
That was a poorly worded answer.
Can a biological human male become a human female? The physiological advantage is what the whole thing boils down to in these cases. It has nothing to do with how someone views themselves or how they define man or woman.
There is sex, and there is gender, and there is gender identity. Those, as I understand things, are how we’re supposed to unravel individuals. What that means for sports and society and different sports and their leagues is not a one shoe fits all. The WNBA could allow men to play or only women or only trans women and that would be the rules of the WNBA. Not a rule on sports or a clarification on science because we don’t look to the WNBA to solve social issues or promote general sports policy.
So I guess I don’t understand either the question or how my answer was poorly worded. I can’t take an extreme stance on something which is being very clumsily reasoned. Is there a specific question you want me to answer which would be your ah-ha?
This whole thing doesn’t seem like it requires much higher order thinking.
I already asked, can a biological human male become a human female? Nothing clumsy, nor clarification needed for that question.
Whether someone identifies internally in regard to behavior that is typically associated with being a human male or human female, is a different topic. I'm not discussing that. To each their own.
The physiological advantage is really what it boils down to in regard to the sports topic, as it does affect other humans within the sport.
Male and Female are evolutionary terms. I would stick with sex as the term for scientific clarity.
Here was your question.
So in your view, can you change what biology is determining? Would Lia Thomas(the former college swimmer) be eligible for the WNBA without any of the current disdain the WNBA is putting toward these two current NBA players wanting to try??
Do you see the difference? Asking me whether a person can change their biology is nebulous at best. So I clarified it and answered the question I assumed you were asking.
Gender has become more of a social construct with deterministic sex being determined by biology. Biology in general is affected by environment and medication and life choices among other things. Are you at war with reason, science, or both? This topic is not about social constructs. That’s twice you’ve pretended your question was clear - can a person change their biology? Yup. Can they change their biological sex? Nope.
@bgr said:
"As I understand it biology determines sex based on a few diagnostic criteria which are related to chromosomes, hormones, and the parts."
Those are your words, so instead of dancing around the question, can a person change that 'sex' that you said biology determines, and change it to the opposite sex??
In your words, you said "Biology determines sex"...and I am asking can a person change their sex that biology has determined?? Either they can or they can't.
Reading this thread has caused me to venture into the world of Science Fiction books.
The four Space Odyssey books by Arthur C. Clarke touched upon intelligent life in the Universe existing millions and billions of years ago. When such intelligent life evolved to the point where it left its home planet to expand to other worlds, it also evolved to the point where their bodies (flesh and blood) were replaced with artificial parts. Eventually the need for bodies of flesh and blood no longer existed and the life form migrated to bodies made completely of artificial parts that never wore out. Consciousness transferred from a biological body (with all of its frailties) to a container that never wore out and that could perform at levels a biological body never could. Eventually the need for a physical body became unnecessary as consciousness transferred into pure energy itself.
Very far out thinking.
However, if humanity continues to evolve and eventually one's consciousness/mind/spirit/soul migrates from a flesh and blood biological container [we already have moved in that direction with hip replacements, knee replacements, etc.] into a manufactured container [i.e. a robot body that never wears out, never breaks down and has powers and abilities far beyond those of any human (ergo everyone can do the same thing, including physical feats of strength, speed, agility, etc.)], would male sports, female sports, transgender sports and the current debates evidenced by posts to this thread have any purpose or meaning?
As for the current debate, what causes my head to spin and what causes me to chuckle at the same time is the concept that one can:
IDENTIFY
as a male, as a female, or somewhere in between and have the choice be the final say in things.
A segment of society places great emphasis on persons, including children, IDENTIFYING as one gender or another; and insists that persons who choose to so IDENTIFY must have their choice honored/respected; and also those persons must be encouraged to act upon such choice by undergoing medical, surgical and/or counseling to Transition.
Those who disagree with persons being able to and encouraged to identify as one gender or another (including the parents of the children) are viewed with suspicion, and disdain.
Why the segment of society mentioned above is a proponent of persons so identifying is something I fail to understand (What is its motivation?). However its position is one which approves of a person's right to MAKE A CHOICE (to Identify as one gender or another).
If a person who makes a Choice to Identify must have that choice honored and respected, then I fail to understand why the choice of Kanter and White to Identify as women so that they can declare for the WNBA draft is not to be honored and respected. Their motivation in making their Choice simply does not matter and it would be inappropriate to ask them to explain their motivations.
Of course, many will refuse to apply their position regarding Identifying as one gender or another equally to all situations. Any refusal to do so illustrates much.
Carry on with this very important matter and resolve all disputes as our society does need to progress forward to a glorious future.
@bgr said:
"As I understand it biology determines sex based on a few diagnostic criteria which are related to chromosomes, hormones, and the parts."
Those are your words, so instead of dancing around the question, can a person change that 'sex' that you said biology determines, and change it to the opposite sex??
In your words, you said "Biology determines sex"...and I am asking can a person change their sex that biology has determined?? Either they can or they can't.
It’s called biological sex and I’ve answered a few times now. One cannot. This is the way. Please keep asking.
@bgr said:
"As I understand it biology determines sex based on a few diagnostic criteria which are related to chromosomes, hormones, and the parts."
Those are your words, so instead of dancing around the question, can a person change that 'sex' that you said biology determines, and change it to the opposite sex??
In your words, you said "Biology determines sex"...and I am asking can a person change their sex that biology has determined?? Either they can or they can't.
It’s called biological sex and I’ve answered a few times now. One cannot. This is the way. Please keep asking.
Took you several waltz's, tango's, and foxtrot's before you truly did. Or, I may just be a meathead athlete and I missed it within the dance arounds. Carry on.
@bgr said:
"As I understand it biology determines sex based on a few diagnostic criteria which are related to chromosomes, hormones, and the parts."
Those are your words, so instead of dancing around the question, can a person change that 'sex' that you said biology determines, and change it to the opposite sex??
In your words, you said "Biology determines sex"...and I am asking can a person change their sex that biology has determined?? Either they can or they can't.
It’s called biological sex and I’ve answered a few times now. One cannot. This is the way. Please keep asking.
Took you several waltz's, tango's, and foxtrot's before you truly did. Or, I may just be a meathead athlete and I missed it within the dance arounds. Carry on.
@Basebal21 said:
A 15 and under male soccer team beat the defending gold medalist World Cup champion USA womens team several years ago. Lea Thomas was complete crap swimming against men at Harvard not even rated in the top 200 then becomes number 1 against women, makes them uncomfortable getting boners that the school silenced them (shocking for PSU right lol) and theyre now speaking up about it.
You spew a lot of uneducated crap on these boards but confusing Penn State and the University of Pennsylvania (aka Penn) is really inexcusable.
@Basebal21 said:
A 15 and under male soccer team beat the defending gold medalist World Cup champion USA womens team several years ago. Lea Thomas was complete crap swimming against men at Harvard not even rated in the top 200 then becomes number 1 against women, makes them uncomfortable getting boners that the school silenced them (shocking for PSU right lol) and theyre now speaking up about it.
You spew a lot of uneducated crap on these boards but confusing Penn State and the University of Pennsylvania (aka Penn) is really inexcusable.
Guessing you went to PSU from the way you responded. Both schools have done the thing my bad it was the one not that far away
Not sure if this was mentioned before or not, as I haven't been following the thread lately. The checkmate in all this is men and women have different skeletal structures, and of course that is impossible to change.
From a personal standpoint, I have been strongly in favor of women's rights since I can remember. Every spot that some male takes in women's sports, is a job, trophy, award, scholarship, etc, that should have gone to a woman. To me, men in women's sports is unacceptable.
@Basebal21 said:
A 15 and under male soccer team beat the defending gold medalist World Cup champion USA womens team several years ago. Lea Thomas was complete crap swimming against men at Harvard not even rated in the top 200 then becomes number 1 against women, makes them uncomfortable getting boners that the school silenced them (shocking for PSU right lol) and theyre now speaking up about it.
You spew a lot of uneducated crap on these boards but confusing Penn State and the University of Pennsylvania (aka Penn) is really inexcusable.
Guessing you went to PSU from the way you responded. Both schools have done the thing my bad it was the one not that far away
What are you even saying? Yes, I went to Penn St. What happened at Penn St isn’t even comparable to the Lia Thomas situation - the Penn situation is nothing in comparison yet you decided to lump them together because they happened in the same state and you don’t know the difference between the Ivy League school and the state school? And, yes, I fixed the athlete’s name for you - not only are you unable to get the school right, you don’t even know the athlete’s name.
@Basebal21 said:
A 15 and under male soccer team beat the defending gold medalist World Cup champion USA womens team several years ago. Lea Thomas was complete crap swimming against men at Harvard not even rated in the top 200 then becomes number 1 against women, makes them uncomfortable getting boners that the school silenced them (shocking for PSU right lol) and theyre now speaking up about it.
You spew a lot of uneducated crap on these boards but confusing Penn State and the University of Pennsylvania (aka Penn) is really inexcusable.
Guessing you went to PSU from the way you responded. Both schools have done the thing my bad it was the one not that far away
What are you even saying? Yes, I went to Penn St. What happened at Penn St isn’t even comparable to the Lia Thomas situation - the Penn situation is nothing in comparison yet you decided to lump them together because they happened in the same state and you don’t know the difference between the Ivy League school and the state school? And, yes, I fixed the athlete’s name for you - not only are you unable to get the school right, you don’t even know the athlete’s name.
What Im saying is oh no I forgot a school one time. I dont really care which one changes nothing and PSU has its own history thats actually worse
Again, the WNBA is so weird. On Sunday, the Fever beat the Dream in overtime. Caitlin Clark had 26 points and 9 assists and was dominant at the end of the game. Allisha Gray was fantastic for the Dream. Angel Reese was 5 for 16 from the field with about 8 missed layups (one of which would have won the game in regulation). Yet the WNBA posts this on social media. Wild!
@PaulMaul said:
Again, the WNBA is so weird. On Sunday, the Fever beat the Dream in overtime. Caitlin Clark had 26 points and 9 assists and was dominant at the end of the game. Allisha Gray was fantastic for the Dream. Angel Reese was 5 for 16 from the field with about 8 missed layups (one of which would have won the game in regulation). Yet the WNBA posts this on social media. Wild!
That is pretty offensive to omit how Clark was her usual great self. When you stop crying just tweet them back and tell them about your hurt feelings. Express yourself!
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
@PaulMaul said:
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
Clark receives 20% of the WNBA's promotional share. Do you know what that is? I assume you do because you're talking about how the WNBA is conducting themselves with marketing. I'm sure you're keenly aware of fragile concentration risk. Do you see that as an issue for the WNBA at the current commercial attention ratio Clark receives from the WNBA? Does 20% seem low for such a star? No one in the NBA comes close to 10%.
Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them. they need to reduce her exposure and increase the exposure of other relevant players even if that means they appear to ignore some of her better than her average games.
This is why the public education system is so important. We need more systems thinkers in America if we're going to compete successfully with the rest of the world. Loud and Stupid isn't working for us.
@PaulMaul said:
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
Clark receives 20% of the WNBA's promotional share. Do you know what that is? I assume you do because you're talking about how the WNBA is conducting themselves with marketing. I'm sure you're keenly aware of fragile concentration risk. Do you see that as an issue for the WNBA at the current commercial attention ratio Clark receives from the WNBA? Does 20% seem low for such a star? No one in the NBA comes close to 10%.
Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them. they need to reduce her exposure and increase the exposure of other relevant players even if that means they appear to ignore some of her better than her average games.
This is why the public education system is so important. We need more systems thinkers in America if we're going to compete successfully with the rest of the world. Loud and Stupid isn't working for us.
For all of us loud and stupid, we see when someone is trying to promote players that don't deserve that praise. In reality, it ends up doing the opposite and people walk away form that ploy. No matter how much Reese is shoved down people's throats, people see her play is not worthy of that.
@stevek said:
Yes because the Babe received much of the MLB attention back then, and it wound-up killing the league. 🙄
It was a different time, but much easier to source because people have done all the work for me.
Of !223,000 pages within articles (news papers and tabloids) Ruth appeared on 15,201 pages. 6.8%. Next highest was Gehrig at 1.3%. Not only did the percentage not equate, but you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more. Have you heard of "hitching your wagon"?
@PaulMaul said:
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
Clark receives 20% of the WNBA's promotional share. Do you know what that is? I assume you do because you're talking about how the WNBA is conducting themselves with marketing. I'm sure you're keenly aware of fragile concentration risk. Do you see that as an issue for the WNBA at the current commercial attention ratio Clark receives from the WNBA? Does 20% seem low for such a star? No one in the NBA comes close to 10%.
Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them. they need to reduce her exposure and increase the exposure of other relevant players even if that means they appear to ignore some of her better than her average games.
This is why the public education system is so important. We need more systems thinkers in America if we're going to compete successfully with the rest of the world. Loud and Stupid isn't working for us.
For all of us loud and stupid, we see when someone is trying to promote players that don't deserve that praise. In reality, it ends up doing the opposite and people walk away form that ploy. No matter how much Reese is shoved down people's throats, people see her play is not worthy of that.
close your mouth I guess. how the WNBA markets their players isn't a social issue and the only people trying to make it one are those who are attempting to use this as a mechanism to promote their views on society. It's all such thinly veiled nonsense too.
if you're unaware of how much of the world sees us... you should be happy that I'm saving you the trouble... it's Loud and Stupid. If you want to internalize that then you are free to do so. This whole thing makes us look like a bunch of stupid babies who care more than anything about what other people are doing... a bunch of pathetic crybabies.
@PaulMaul said:
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
Clark receives 20% of the WNBA's promotional share. Do you know what that is? I assume you do because you're talking about how the WNBA is conducting themselves with marketing. I'm sure you're keenly aware of fragile concentration risk. Do you see that as an issue for the WNBA at the current commercial attention ratio Clark receives from the WNBA? Does 20% seem low for such a star? No one in the NBA comes close to 10%.
Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them. they need to reduce her exposure and increase the exposure of other relevant players even if that means they appear to ignore some of her better than her average games.
This is why the public education system is so important. We need more systems thinkers in America if we're going to compete successfully with the rest of the world. Loud and Stupid isn't working for us.
For all of us loud and stupid, we see when someone is trying to promote players that don't deserve that praise. In reality, it ends up doing the opposite and people walk away form that ploy. No matter how much Reese is shoved down people's throats, people see her play is not worthy of that.
In my opinion, I think many WNBA executives are figuring that negative attention is better than no attention at all. For sure the WNBA is receiving a lot of negative attention with the continuous fights, etc.
Let's be honest - it's painfully obvious that quite a number of those "fouls" on Caitlin and Sophie were more than just game type fouls. It was done to cause permanent bodily hard, possibly ending their careers. These violent players should have at a minimum, been suspended without pay for the remainder of the season.
@stevek said:
Yes because the Babe received much of the MLB attention back then, and it wound-up killing the league. 🙄
It was a different time, but much easier to source because people have done all the work for me.
Of !223,000 pages within articles (news papers and tabloids) Ruth appeared on 15,201 pages. 6.8%. Next highest was Gehrig at 1.3%. Not only did the percentage not equate, but you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more. Have you heard of "hitching your wagon"?
Some days I wonder with you guys.
The product being promoted has to be worthwhile and be enough for when people see it, they want to see it again.
When Charmin advertises their toilet paper as being soft, while they may exaggerate that softness a bit, it is still better than some of the toilet paper that feels like sandpaper. With Reese, you can shove her down my throat, and then when I tune in, i'm not going to tune in again because I know she is more like the sand paper toiletry.
@PaulMaul said:
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
Clark receives 20% of the WNBA's promotional share. Do you know what that is? I assume you do because you're talking about how the WNBA is conducting themselves with marketing. I'm sure you're keenly aware of fragile concentration risk. Do you see that as an issue for the WNBA at the current commercial attention ratio Clark receives from the WNBA? Does 20% seem low for such a star? No one in the NBA comes close to 10%.
Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them. they need to reduce her exposure and increase the exposure of other relevant players even if that means they appear to ignore some of her better than her average games.
This is why the public education system is so important. We need more systems thinkers in America if we're going to compete successfully with the rest of the world. Loud and Stupid isn't working for us.
For all of us loud and stupid, we see when someone is trying to promote players that don't deserve that praise. In reality, it ends up doing the opposite and people walk away form that ploy. No matter how much Reese is shoved down people's throats, people see her play is not worthy of that.
close your mouth I guess. how the WNBA markets their players isn't a social issue and the only people trying to make it one are those who are attempting to use this as a mechanism to promote their views on society. It's all such thinly veiled nonsense too.
if you're unaware of how much of the world sees us... you should be happy that I'm saving you the trouble... it's Loud and Stupid. If you want to internalize that then you are free to do so. This whole thing makes us look like a bunch of stupid babies who care more than anything about what other people are doing... a bunch of pathetic crybabies.
Good for them....and I'm sure they also recognize Reese shouldn't be getting artificial praise over Clark.
This is a sports message board. Its like drinking in a bar with your buddies and being loud and stupid. I'm sure the rest of the world says and does loud and stupid stuff about their soccer teams...and we have all seen it...so double standards apply as usual, lol.
@stevek said:
Yes because the Babe received much of the MLB attention back then, and it wound-up killing the league. 🙄
It was a different time, but much easier to source because people have done all the work for me.
Of !223,000 pages within articles (news papers and tabloids) Ruth appeared on 15,201 pages. 6.8%. Next highest was Gehrig at 1.3%. Not only did the percentage not equate, but you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more. Have you heard of "hitching your wagon"?
@stevek said:
Yes because the Babe received much of the MLB attention back then, and it wound-up killing the league. 🙄
It was a different time, but much easier to source because people have done all the work for me.
Of !223,000 pages within articles (news papers and tabloids) Ruth appeared on 15,201 pages. 6.8%. Next highest was Gehrig at 1.3%. Not only did the percentage not equate, but you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more. Have you heard of "hitching your wagon"?
Some days I wonder with you guys.
"Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them."
"you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more."
Seems like you just refuted your own previous comment.
@stevek said:
Yes because the Babe received much of the MLB attention back then, and it wound-up killing the league. 🙄
It was a different time, but much easier to source because people have done all the work for me.
Of !223,000 pages within articles (news papers and tabloids) Ruth appeared on 15,201 pages. 6.8%. Next highest was Gehrig at 1.3%. Not only did the percentage not equate, but you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more. Have you heard of "hitching your wagon"?
Some days I wonder with you guys.
The product being promoted has to be worthwhile and be enough for when people see it, they want to see it again.
When Charmin advertises their toilet paper as being soft, while they may exaggerate that softness a bit, it is still better than some of the toilet paper that feels like sandpaper. With Reese, you can shove her down my throat, and then when I tune in, i'm not going to tune in again because I know she is more like the sand paper toiletry.
@stevek said:
Yes because the Babe received much of the MLB attention back then, and it wound-up killing the league. 🙄
It was a different time, but much easier to source because people have done all the work for me.
Of !223,000 pages within articles (news papers and tabloids) Ruth appeared on 15,201 pages. 6.8%. Next highest was Gehrig at 1.3%. Not only did the percentage not equate, but you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more. Have you heard of "hitching your wagon"?
Some days I wonder with you guys.
The product being promoted has to be worthwhile and be enough for when people see it, they want to see it again.
When Charmin advertises their toilet paper as being soft, while they may exaggerate that softness a bit, it is still better than some of the toilet paper that feels like sandpaper. With Reese, you can shove her down my throat, and then when I tune in, i'm not going to tune in again because I know she is more like the sand paper toiletry.
second tier players in the NBA are constantly marketed at a lesser frequency compared to first tier players and at a much lower frequency than the stars of the league who command the most attention. the system in the WNBA seems to be heavily titled towards Clark right now so I don't understand the issue. perhaps you're not the target audience or something.
@PaulMaul said:
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
Clark receives 20% of the WNBA's promotional share. Do you know what that is? I assume you do because you're talking about how the WNBA is conducting themselves with marketing. I'm sure you're keenly aware of fragile concentration risk. Do you see that as an issue for the WNBA at the current commercial attention ratio Clark receives from the WNBA? Does 20% seem low for such a star? No one in the NBA comes close to 10%.
Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them. they need to reduce her exposure and increase the exposure of other relevant players even if that means they appear to ignore some of her better than her average games.
This is why the public education system is so important. We need more systems thinkers in America if we're going to compete successfully with the rest of the world. Loud and Stupid isn't working for us.
For all of us loud and stupid, we see when someone is trying to promote players that don't deserve that praise. In reality, it ends up doing the opposite and people walk away form that ploy. No matter how much Reese is shoved down people's throats, people see her play is not worthy of that.
close your mouth I guess. how the WNBA markets their players isn't a social issue and the only people trying to make it one are those who are attempting to use this as a mechanism to promote their views on society. It's all such thinly veiled nonsense too.
if you're unaware of how much of the world sees us... you should be happy that I'm saving you the trouble... it's Loud and Stupid. If you want to internalize that then you are free to do so. This whole thing makes us look like a bunch of stupid babies who care more than anything about what other people are doing... a bunch of pathetic crybabies.
Good for them....and I'm sure they also recognize Reese shouldn't be getting artificial praise over Clark.
This is a sports message board. Its like drinking in a bar with your buddies and being loud and stupid. I'm sure the rest of the world says and does loud and stupid stuff about their soccer teams...and we have all seen it...so double standards apply as usual, lol.
When I said Loud and Stupid I was not referring to this place in any specific way. I'm sorry that Reese is stealing fame from Clark. That's terrible. I still don't care and Clark shouldn't either because she's promoted at a rather absurd level. This gives some credibility to BB21's argument actually that the league is rather Clark-dependent as it stands. Imagine if she vanished - your throat would be trash.
Reeses team wasnt on the court for the National Anthem. Cunningham was the only player with her hand over her heart even Clark didnt do it. I swear this league is a social experiment to see how much one entity can do to make them unlikeable and make sure they destroy their popularity every time they start to get it
@PaulMaul said:
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
Clark receives 20% of the WNBA's promotional share. Do you know what that is? I assume you do because you're talking about how the WNBA is conducting themselves with marketing. I'm sure you're keenly aware of fragile concentration risk. Do you see that as an issue for the WNBA at the current commercial attention ratio Clark receives from the WNBA? Does 20% seem low for such a star? No one in the NBA comes close to 10%.
Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them. they need to reduce her exposure and increase the exposure of other relevant players even if that means they appear to ignore some of her better than her average games.
This is why the public education system is so important. We need more systems thinkers in America if we're going to compete successfully with the rest of the world. Loud and Stupid isn't working for us.
For all of us loud and stupid, we see when someone is trying to promote players that don't deserve that praise. In reality, it ends up doing the opposite and people walk away form that ploy. No matter how much Reese is shoved down people's throats, people see her play is not worthy of that.
close your mouth I guess. how the WNBA markets their players isn't a social issue and the only people trying to make it one are those who are attempting to use this as a mechanism to promote their views on society. It's all such thinly veiled nonsense too.
if you're unaware of how much of the world sees us... you should be happy that I'm saving you the trouble... it's Loud and Stupid. If you want to internalize that then you are free to do so. This whole thing makes us look like a bunch of stupid babies who care more than anything about what other people are doing... a bunch of pathetic crybabies.
Good for them....and I'm sure they also recognize Reese shouldn't be getting artificial praise over Clark.
This is a sports message board. Its like drinking in a bar with your buddies and being loud and stupid. I'm sure the rest of the world says and does loud and stupid stuff about their soccer teams...and we have all seen it...so double standards apply as usual, lol.
When I said Loud and Stupid I was not referring to this place in any specific way. I'm sorry that Reese is stealing fame from Clark. That's terrible. I still don't care and Clark shouldn't either because she's promoted at a rather absurd level. This gives some credibility to BB21's argument actually that the league is rather Clark-dependent as it stands. Imagine if she vanished - your throat would be trash.
And as the legion of Clark fans watch how she is treated on the court and by the league brass....do you think those fans are going to stick around when Clark retires and then start buying tickets to watch Reese or other players (other players who may actually be good....but not as entertaining)?
Nope.
I don't really care either...but it is fun discussing it lol.
I don't take my hat off for the national anthem, I don't put my hand over my heart, I don't sing or mouth the words. stupid song, don't care. while how this country treats its veterans isn't my only complaint I'll reconsider if it starts to treat them with the respect they deserve. It's still a stupid song tho.
Comments
It's not just leaving Clark off it…. It's literally not including anyone of importance on the team!
I honestly don't care what statement they make. I just find it bizarre how afraid the commissioner is of saying or doing the wrong thing. A complete coward who is deathly afraid of the players.
I really don't know the dynamics of the team so I wasn't aware the players on the poster were not ones who would be seen on posters. Is it normal for the stars on the teams to be the ones which are represented always in the WNBA? The Bucks used to do it where they would have just Bobby Portis or Pat Connaughton so I just figured it was a rights issue or something related to the CBA.
I keep asking what statement you want them to make because I don't know what I would say if I'm CEO of the WNBA (Commish.). I am going to want to walk that line as much as possible unless I see real advantage to picking a side. Not my circus... not my monkeys. You're either trying to educate a society which is devoid of interest in learning what biology really tells us or you're picking a side in a social fight which is going on. I think generally you're going to stay quiet. I can't even see the near-term benefit in picking a side here. Just shhh. That's what I would do. Coward? bah. That's ego. Only a moron would take that bait.
Worst commish in sports and MLB and Manfred so that says a lot
Fire AJ Preller
So in your view, can you change what biology is determining? Would Lia Thomas(the former college swimmer) be eligible for the WNBA without any of the current disdain the WNBA is putting toward these two current NBA players wanting to try??
Your question is poorly formed so I’m assuming you mean to ask if I think a person can change their biological sex.
You wouldn’t be able to change your chromosomes so you can’t change your biological sex. Which doesn’t always mean man or woman because nature doesn’t respect those distinctions.
I don’t know anything about Lia Thomas other than it was a trans-woman I suppose and they looked like they had an unfair advantage from a physiological perspective. We’re going to have to wait until there’s a legitimate case where someone who was not born as a biological female will want to join the WNBA. It’s likely to be something more close to reality such as an actual intersex person.
Is the WNBA putting disdain towards those nice boys. They’re so brave.
This is what we have over in a French league….
I don’t know the details. Haven’t gotten into the French women’s basketball yet.
I don't know the details either, except for the fact that this is clearly a 6’3” muscular man playing against women. 🤷♂️
This is the problem you have in the WNBA…a number of people who can't separate the idea of basic competitive fairness from their emotions surrounding inclusivity, acceptance, love, etc. I can admire those feelings and share them without wanting to let biological men play against women.
This is the head coach of the Golden State Valkyries….
—
https://youtube.com/shorts/56_eEfs___M?si=ciuMkXG5fMUIbxvG
That was a poorly worded answer.
Can a biological human male become a human female? The physiological advantage is what the whole thing boils down to in these cases. It has nothing to do with how someone views themselves or how they define man or woman.
I've heard people try to undermine the fairness argument by arguing that even among a single gender there are players with a biological advantage over other players, which is of course true and part of sports.
I would argue that player ability is distributed about a mean for each gender. The problem is that in most sports the male mean is so far above the female mean that a mixed league based purely on merit would be all male. That reality is the source of the fairness issue.
There is sex, and there is gender, and there is gender identity. Those, as I understand things, are how we’re supposed to unravel individuals. What that means for sports and society and different sports and their leagues is not a one shoe fits all. The WNBA could allow men to play or only women or only trans women and that would be the rules of the WNBA. Not a rule on sports or a clarification on science because we don’t look to the WNBA to solve social issues or promote general sports policy.
So I guess I don’t understand either the question or how my answer was poorly worded. I can’t take an extreme stance on something which is being very clumsily reasoned. Is there a specific question you want me to answer which would be your ah-ha?
This whole thing doesn’t seem like it requires much higher order thinking.
I think the easiest solution is there should be Mens sports and Woman Sports governed by if you were born a Man you can only play men's sports, if you were born a woman you can only play woman's sports
From what I have seen regarding the unfairness of a trans person in sports is pretty much always a Man changing to a woman and playing against woman
Are there any examples of a Woman changing into a man and competing in men's leagues?
I believe in free will and an adult ( Not Kids ).making their own choices regarding their own bodies however I also believe in rules and fairness in competition
It certainly is hard to balance respect for individuals without imbalance to girls sports. And I say girls because I don’t know that I care about women’s sports. Those leagues can sort their own rules out. I really only care what happens in youth and collegiate levels. If the WNBA wants you to allow trans women then maybe each team should get to have 1 man. That could be interesting. Maybe 3 women, 1 man, and an item you bring with you. Like naked and afraid. But with clothes.
I already asked, can a biological human male become a human female? Nothing clumsy, nor clarification needed for that question.
Whether someone identifies internally in regard to behavior that is typically associated with being a human male or human female, is a different topic. I'm not discussing that. To each their own.
The physiological advantage is really what it boils down to in regard to the sports topic, as it does affect other humans within the sport.
The thing no one ever talks about is that they arent banned from sports, they just need to play against men and not steal accolades from actual women.
A 15 and under male soccer team beat the defending gold medalist World Cup champion USA womens team several years ago. Lea Thomas was complete crap swimming against men at Harvard not even rated in the top 200 then becomes number 1 against women, makes them uncomfortable getting boners that the school silenced them (shocking for PSU right lol) and theyre now speaking up about it.
Riley Gaines who did finish second and got robbed by that guy put it best. She married a male swimmer from UK and she swam at UK and was one of the best in the country. What she said was basically I was much more decorated in accolades than he was but he kicks my butt every time head to head.
Fire AJ Preller
Male and Female are evolutionary terms. I would stick with sex as the term for scientific clarity.
Here was your question.
Do you see the difference? Asking me whether a person can change their biology is nebulous at best. So I clarified it and answered the question I assumed you were asking.
Gender has become more of a social construct with deterministic sex being determined by biology. Biology in general is affected by environment and medication and life choices among other things. Are you at war with reason, science, or both? This topic is not about social constructs. That’s twice you’ve pretended your question was clear - can a person change their biology? Yup. Can they change their biological sex? Nope.
How does this relate to the WNBA?
@bgr
@bgr said:
"As I understand it biology determines sex based on a few diagnostic criteria which are related to chromosomes, hormones, and the parts."
Those are your words, so instead of dancing around the question, can a person change that 'sex' that you said biology determines, and change it to the opposite sex??
In your words, you said "Biology determines sex"...and I am asking can a person change their sex that biology has determined?? Either they can or they can't.
Reading this thread has caused me to venture into the world of Science Fiction books.
The four Space Odyssey books by Arthur C. Clarke touched upon intelligent life in the Universe existing millions and billions of years ago. When such intelligent life evolved to the point where it left its home planet to expand to other worlds, it also evolved to the point where their bodies (flesh and blood) were replaced with artificial parts. Eventually the need for bodies of flesh and blood no longer existed and the life form migrated to bodies made completely of artificial parts that never wore out. Consciousness transferred from a biological body (with all of its frailties) to a container that never wore out and that could perform at levels a biological body never could. Eventually the need for a physical body became unnecessary as consciousness transferred into pure energy itself.
Very far out thinking.
However, if humanity continues to evolve and eventually one's consciousness/mind/spirit/soul migrates from a flesh and blood biological container [we already have moved in that direction with hip replacements, knee replacements, etc.] into a manufactured container [i.e. a robot body that never wears out, never breaks down and has powers and abilities far beyond those of any human (ergo everyone can do the same thing, including physical feats of strength, speed, agility, etc.)], would male sports, female sports, transgender sports and the current debates evidenced by posts to this thread have any purpose or meaning?
As for the current debate, what causes my head to spin and what causes me to chuckle at the same time is the concept that one can:
IDENTIFY
as a male, as a female, or somewhere in between and have the choice be the final say in things.
A segment of society places great emphasis on persons, including children, IDENTIFYING as one gender or another; and insists that persons who choose to so IDENTIFY must have their choice honored/respected; and also those persons must be encouraged to act upon such choice by undergoing medical, surgical and/or counseling to Transition.
Those who disagree with persons being able to and encouraged to identify as one gender or another (including the parents of the children) are viewed with suspicion, and disdain.
Why the segment of society mentioned above is a proponent of persons so identifying is something I fail to understand (What is its motivation?). However its position is one which approves of a person's right to MAKE A CHOICE (to Identify as one gender or another).
If a person who makes a Choice to Identify must have that choice honored and respected, then I fail to understand why the choice of Kanter and White to Identify as women so that they can declare for the WNBA draft is not to be honored and respected. Their motivation in making their Choice simply does not matter and it would be inappropriate to ask them to explain their motivations.
Of course, many will refuse to apply their position regarding Identifying as one gender or another equally to all situations. Any refusal to do so illustrates much.
Carry on with this very important matter and resolve all disputes as our society does need to progress forward to a glorious future.
It’s called biological sex and I’ve answered a few times now. One cannot. This is the way. Please keep asking.
Took you several waltz's, tango's, and foxtrot's before you truly did. Or, I may just be a meathead athlete and I missed it within the dance arounds. Carry on.
Nope. Check again.
You spew a lot of uneducated crap on these boards but confusing Penn State and the University of Pennsylvania (aka Penn) is really inexcusable.
Jim
Guessing you went to PSU from the way you responded. Both schools have done the thing my bad it was the one not that far away
Fire AJ Preller
Not sure if this was mentioned before or not, as I haven't been following the thread lately. The checkmate in all this is men and women have different skeletal structures, and of course that is impossible to change.
From a personal standpoint, I have been strongly in favor of women's rights since I can remember. Every spot that some male takes in women's sports, is a job, trophy, award, scholarship, etc, that should have gone to a woman. To me, men in women's sports is unacceptable.
What are you even saying? Yes, I went to Penn St. What happened at Penn St isn’t even comparable to the Lia Thomas situation - the Penn situation is nothing in comparison yet you decided to lump them together because they happened in the same state and you don’t know the difference between the Ivy League school and the state school? And, yes, I fixed the athlete’s name for you - not only are you unable to get the school right, you don’t even know the athlete’s name.
Jim
What Im saying is oh no I forgot a school one time. I dont really care which one changes nothing and PSU has its own history thats actually worse
Fire AJ Preller
Bold predictions, bad science, and loose facts. You’re a legend bro. Never change.
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
Again, the WNBA is so weird. On Sunday, the Fever beat the Dream in overtime. Caitlin Clark had 26 points and 9 assists and was dominant at the end of the game. Allisha Gray was fantastic for the Dream. Angel Reese was 5 for 16 from the field with about 8 missed layups (one of which would have won the game in regulation). Yet the WNBA posts this on social media. Wild!
That is pretty offensive to omit how Clark was her usual great self. When you stop crying just tweet them back and tell them about your hurt feelings. Express yourself!
I wouldn’t call it offensive, just odd. Posts like this tend to highlight the players who played the best. Two of the three players mentioned here didn’t play particularly well but the WNBA does seem consumed with making sure everyone non-Clark gets attention. 🤷♂️
Clark receives 20% of the WNBA's promotional share. Do you know what that is? I assume you do because you're talking about how the WNBA is conducting themselves with marketing. I'm sure you're keenly aware of fragile concentration risk. Do you see that as an issue for the WNBA at the current commercial attention ratio Clark receives from the WNBA? Does 20% seem low for such a star? No one in the NBA comes close to 10%.
Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them. they need to reduce her exposure and increase the exposure of other relevant players even if that means they appear to ignore some of her better than her average games.
This is why the public education system is so important. We need more systems thinkers in America if we're going to compete successfully with the rest of the world. Loud and Stupid isn't working for us.
"Angel Reese was 5 for 16 from the field with about 8 missed layups (one of which would have won the game in regulation)."
Maybe the writer is new to the game, and thought that missed layups are worth 3 points each. 😂
Yes because the Babe received much of the MLB attention back then, and it wound-up killing the league. 🙄
For all of us loud and stupid, we see when someone is trying to promote players that don't deserve that praise. In reality, it ends up doing the opposite and people walk away form that ploy. No matter how much Reese is shoved down people's throats, people see her play is not worthy of that.
It was a different time, but much easier to source because people have done all the work for me.
Of !223,000 pages within articles (news papers and tabloids) Ruth appeared on 15,201 pages. 6.8%. Next highest was Gehrig at 1.3%. Not only did the percentage not equate, but you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more. Have you heard of "hitching your wagon"?
Some days I wonder with you guys.
close your mouth I guess. how the WNBA markets their players isn't a social issue and the only people trying to make it one are those who are attempting to use this as a mechanism to promote their views on society. It's all such thinly veiled nonsense too.
if you're unaware of how much of the world sees us... you should be happy that I'm saving you the trouble... it's Loud and Stupid. If you want to internalize that then you are free to do so. This whole thing makes us look like a bunch of stupid babies who care more than anything about what other people are doing... a bunch of pathetic crybabies.
In my opinion, I think many WNBA executives are figuring that negative attention is better than no attention at all. For sure the WNBA is receiving a lot of negative attention with the continuous fights, etc.
Let's be honest - it's painfully obvious that quite a number of those "fouls" on Caitlin and Sophie were more than just game type fouls. It was done to cause permanent bodily hard, possibly ending their careers. These violent players should have at a minimum, been suspended without pay for the remainder of the season.
The product being promoted has to be worthwhile and be enough for when people see it, they want to see it again.
When Charmin advertises their toilet paper as being soft, while they may exaggerate that softness a bit, it is still better than some of the toilet paper that feels like sandpaper. With Reese, you can shove her down my throat, and then when I tune in, i'm not going to tune in again because I know she is more like the sand paper toiletry.
Good for them....and I'm sure they also recognize Reese shouldn't be getting artificial praise over Clark.
This is a sports message board. Its like drinking in a bar with your buddies and being loud and stupid. I'm sure the rest of the world says and does loud and stupid stuff about their soccer teams...and we have all seen it...so double standards apply as usual, lol.
"Clark's attention share in the WNBA marketing is a wild number that shouldn't exist in a stable league and it's a huge commercial liability for them."
"you're missing my point if you think I'm saying Clark would inherently hurt the league if she was promoted even more."
Seems like you just refuted your own previous comment.
Best analogy I've ever read. LOL
second tier players in the NBA are constantly marketed at a lesser frequency compared to first tier players and at a much lower frequency than the stars of the league who command the most attention. the system in the WNBA seems to be heavily titled towards Clark right now so I don't understand the issue. perhaps you're not the target audience or something.
I only get loud and stupid after a bad beat on a big bet. 😂
When I said Loud and Stupid I was not referring to this place in any specific way. I'm sorry that Reese is stealing fame from Clark. That's terrible. I still don't care and Clark shouldn't either because she's promoted at a rather absurd level. This gives some credibility to BB21's argument actually that the league is rather Clark-dependent as it stands. Imagine if she vanished - your throat would be trash.
Reeses team wasnt on the court for the National Anthem. Cunningham was the only player with her hand over her heart even Clark didnt do it. I swear this league is a social experiment to see how much one entity can do to make them unlikeable and make sure they destroy their popularity every time they start to get it
Fire AJ Preller
And as the legion of Clark fans watch how she is treated on the court and by the league brass....do you think those fans are going to stick around when Clark retires and then start buying tickets to watch Reese or other players (other players who may actually be good....but not as entertaining)?
Nope.
I don't really care either...but it is fun discussing it lol.
I don't take my hat off for the national anthem, I don't put my hand over my heart, I don't sing or mouth the words. stupid song, don't care. while how this country treats its veterans isn't my only complaint I'll reconsider if it starts to treat them with the respect they deserve. It's still a stupid song tho.