TechDawgMc
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 401
Location: Temple, TX
Back to top |
 Posted: 04/06/21 8:41 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| undersized_post wrote: |
I think there is sexism involved when people criticize NCAAW for lack of parity and praise NCAAM for having more upsets. If the situation were reversed (that is, if the women's side had more upsets than the men's) I think the same haters would frame it as, "There's not even really elite talent on the women's side because the so-called top teams aren't even that good."
|
History says you're wrong about this. The men's tourney was considered boring in the 70s when UCLA was dominating it. The change started around 79 when Byrd's Indiana St team steamrolled through the brackets. While they were a 1 seed, they were a bit of an upstart and their games were fun to watch. Then the significant upsets started in the early 80s and men's basketball exploded -- and became March Madness.
During all of that time, the women's game would have been largely irrelevant--and people wouldn't have made any decision about what they thought about the women based on the contrast. In fact, most of those early 80s years, the championship game was the only one even televised.
|
|
calbearman76
Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 5155
Location: Carson City
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/21 5:11 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| TechDawgMc wrote: |
| undersized_post wrote: |
I think there is sexism involved when people criticize NCAAW for lack of parity and praise NCAAM for having more upsets. If the situation were reversed (that is, if the women's side had more upsets than the men's) I think the same haters would frame it as, "There's not even really elite talent on the women's side because the so-called top teams aren't even that good."
|
History says you're wrong about this. The men's tourney was considered boring in the 70s when UCLA was dominating it. The change started around 79 when Byrd's Indiana St team steamrolled through the brackets. While they were a 1 seed, they were a bit of an upstart and their games were fun to watch. Then the significant upsets started in the early 80s and men's basketball exploded -- and became March Madness.
During all of that time, the women's game would have been largely irrelevant--and people wouldn't have made any decision about what they thought about the women based on the contrast. In fact, most of those early 80s years, the championship game was the only one even televised. |
I think your history needs some refreshing. I never considered the NCAA tournament boring. The UCLA dominance ran from 1964-1975, but in 1966 they didn't make the tournament. That set the stage for the most important game in history (Texas Western beating Kentucky in the finals). Lew Alcindor vs Elvin Hayes in 1968 ushered in big time college basketball. There was nothing boring about Bill Walton's dominance against Memphis St in 1973, the greatest singular performance in history. And there was nothing boring about David Thompson and North Carolina St beating UCLA in double overtime to finally break UCLA's 7 year run as champion.
As for 1979, Indiana St didn't steamroll through the brackets. They were undefeated coming in, but they struggled in the regional finals against Arkansas, winning on a last second shot. They also struggled in the semis, edging by DePaul 76-74. It was Michigan St that did the "steamrolling," winning every game my double digits, including a 75-64 win over the Sycamores in the final. And they did so as a #2 seed.
|
|
