OT Ice Cube offers Caitlin Clark 5 million dollar contract to join BIG 3 League

[dhsilv2]

Yeah, it was so big you don't even remember her name. (It was Sabrina Ionescu)

See that's just rude. I never listened long enough to learn her name! And I won't start now lol. I also haven't watched a minute of allstar weekend in a decade plus. Doesn't mean I don't know that this got huge ratings.

I watched it and I didn't remember her name.

Haha, I did see some segment talking about it. Some CNN person with Chuck and someone else. And by that, I saw they were talking and zoned out in 30 seconds. But clearly this got a lot of attention. I'm also not great with names. So unless I have a reason to remember, not likely I'll do it.

[JonFromVA]

See that's just rude. I never listened long enough to learn her name! And I won't start now lol. I also haven't watched a minute of allstar weekend in a decade plus. Doesn't mean I don't know that this got huge ratings.

I watched it and I didn't remember her name.

Haha, I did see some segment talking about it. Some CNN person with Chuck and someone else. And by that, I saw they were talking and zoned out in 30 seconds. But clearly this got a lot of attention. I'm also not great with names. So unless I have a reason to remember, not likely I'll do it.

Growing old does no favors to the brain cells. At least I can still remember the amount of useless trivia I used to be able to remember.

[bballfan1three3]

Nah I think you are really off on that. CC would look really bad against any level of college plus comp. In a lot of ways she skilled enough and it would show pretty easily. I don’t think she’d be able to handle the ball or finish, let alone defense. Someone like Juju projects to play better with men dude to her handle, burst and body control.

Not really. Realistically none of them could but at least CC has that crazy shooting going for her, so she could msybe provide some valuable spacing. Juju would still be absurdly athletically overwhelmed even by mediocre college guys so the handles and body control wouldn't matter much.

100% agree

[dhsilv2]

I watched it and I didn't remember her name.

Haha, I did see some segment talking about it. Some CNN person with Chuck and someone else. And by that, I saw they were talking and zoned out in 30 seconds. But clearly this got a lot of attention. I'm also not great with names. So unless I have a reason to remember, not likely I'll do it.

Growing old does no favors to the brain cells. At least I can still remember the amount of useless trivia I used to be able to remember.

I wasn't good with names at 10 years old either sadly. Just not my thing.

[picc]

If anything seeing her compete with men and do well or hold her own would push womens basketball further.

[Heat3]

She should take it.

[dhsilv2]

If anything seeing her compete with men and do well or hold her own would push womens basketball further.

and if she could do backflip slam dunks it would be cool too...but in reality...

[Cavsfansince84]

I think it would be good for her to do it for a few reasons: 1. she will get better from playing against men. 2. It will bring way more attention to her than if she was playing against women because the media goes crazy for the whole men v women angle whenever it happens. 3. It gives her a leg up on all the women if she just does it for a year then goes to the wnba because she's now the only woman who's done it. 4. She gets well paid.

[dhsilv2]

I think it would be good for her to do it for a few reasons: 1. she will get better from playing against men. 2. It will bring way more attention to her than if she was playing against women because the media goes crazy for the whole men v women angle whenever it happens. 3. It gives her a leg up on all the women if she just does it for a year then goes to the wnba because she's now the only woman who's done it. 4. She gets well paid.

This is a terrible idea.

1. She's been playing against men her whole life. All the women's college teams play against guys on campus who aren't good enough to make a D3 roster and they get dominated. So there's no benefit here. Obviously those guys aren't going 100% but they don't want to hurt them.
2. It'll bring negative attention in that she'll get dominated in a pretty embarrassingly bad way. This would be horrible for her brand and women's basketball on the whole. There's a reason more women don't do this.
3. Leg up? Because she embarrassed herself and ruined her nike brand deals because it turned into a joke?
4. She's already making about this off endorsements. There's no reason to hurt her brand. This would cost her money long term, likely a lot.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but people need to just accept that men and women are physically too far apart to compete in sports outside of a few really rare exceptions (like those 100+ mile marathons). But because so many people just seemingly refuse to accept it, spelling it out on the court would just be bad for the women's game and marketing of it.

[D.Brasco]

I think it would be good for her to do it for a few reasons: 1. she will get better from playing against men. 2. It will bring way more attention to her than if she was playing against women because the media goes crazy for the whole men v women angle whenever it happens. 3. It gives her a leg up on all the women if she just does it for a year then goes to the wnba because she's now the only woman who's done it. 4. She gets well paid.

This is a terrible idea.

1. She's been playing against men her whole life. All the women's college teams play against guys on campus who aren't good enough to make a D3 roster and they get dominated. So there's no benefit here. Obviously those guys aren't going 100% but they don't want to hurt them.
2. It'll bring negative attention in that she'll get dominated in a pretty embarrassingly bad way. This would be horrible for her brand and women's basketball on the whole. There's a reason more women don't do this.
3. Leg up? Because she embarrassed herself and ruined her nike brand deals because it turned into a joke?
4. She's already making about this off endorsements. There's no reason to hurt her brand. This would cost her money long term, likely a lot.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but people need to just accept that men and women are physically too far apart to compete in sports outside of a few really rare exceptions (like those 100+ mile marathons). But because so many people just seemingly refuse to accept it, spelling it out on the court would just be bad for the women's game and marketing of it.

There are probably a few million people who do believe Clark can hang with NBA players, is shattering that illusion actually a bad thing?

Read on Twitter

As I mentioned in another post, her endorsement window is smaller than many people assume. I can't see that many people following the Indiana Fever for that long after she joins unless they immediately become champion contenders. She's the first female athlete in history being actively told by people to turn down a guaranteed 5 million. 99.9% of WNBA players would pray for an offer like that to fall on their lap.

[xdrta+]

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but people need to just accept that men and women are physically too far apart to compete in sports outside of a few really rare exceptions (like those 100+ mile marathons). But because so many people just seemingly refuse to accept it, spelling it out on the court would just be bad for the women's game and marketing of it.

I'm old enough to remember the exact same arguments being used when Billie Jean King played Bobby Riggs in the most famous "battle of the sexes" ever. 50 million people in the US watched, and 90 million worldwide. Riggs, a former #1 in the world, was no slouch even at 55 years old, having beaten Margaret Court a few months earlier. Most people said King wouldn't have a chance, but her win put women's tennis on the map.

You never know what will happen. She should play, not just for the money though she shouldn't play without it. A big boost for the women's game if she does well, and, since most don't expect her to even compete, little downside if she doesn't. The idea she'll "ruin her brand" is just nonsense.

[dhsilv2]

I think it would be good for her to do it for a few reasons: 1. she will get better from playing against men. 2. It will bring way more attention to her than if she was playing against women because the media goes crazy for the whole men v women angle whenever it happens. 3. It gives her a leg up on all the women if she just does it for a year then goes to the wnba because she's now the only woman who's done it. 4. She gets well paid.

This is a terrible idea.

1. She's been playing against men her whole life. All the women's college teams play against guys on campus who aren't good enough to make a D3 roster and they get dominated. So there's no benefit here. Obviously those guys aren't going 100% but they don't want to hurt them.
2. It'll bring negative attention in that she'll get dominated in a pretty embarrassingly bad way. This would be horrible for her brand and women's basketball on the whole. There's a reason more women don't do this.
3. Leg up? Because she embarrassed herself and ruined her nike brand deals because it turned into a joke?
4. She's already making about this off endorsements. There's no reason to hurt her brand. This would cost her money long term, likely a lot.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but people need to just accept that men and women are physically too far apart to compete in sports outside of a few really rare exceptions (like those 100+ mile marathons). But because so many people just seemingly refuse to accept it, spelling it out on the court would just be bad for the women's game and marketing of it.

There are probably a few million people who do believe Clark can hang with NBA players, is shattering that illusion actually a bad thing?


As I mentioned in another post, her endorsement window is smaller than many people assume. I can't see that many people following the Indiana Fever for that long after she joins unless they immediately become champion contenders. She's the first female athlete in history being actively told by people to turn down a guaranteed 5 million. 99.9% of WNBA players would pray for an offer like that to fall on their lap.

It's bad for marketing. People want to live in delusional worlds.

[dhsilv2]

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but people need to just accept that men and women are physically too far apart to compete in sports outside of a few really rare exceptions (like those 100+ mile marathons). But because so many people just seemingly refuse to accept it, spelling it out on the court would just be bad for the women's game and marketing of it.

I'm old enough to remember the exact same arguments being used when Billie Jean King played Bobby Riggs in the most famous "battle of the sexes" ever. 50 million people in the US watched, and 90 million worldwide. Riggs, a former #1 in the world, was no slouch even at 55 years old, having beaten Margaret Court a few months earlier. Most people said King wouldn't have a chance, but her win put women's tennis on the map.

You never know what will happen. She should play, not just for the money though she shouldn't play without it. A big boost for the women's game if she does well, and, since most don't expect her to even compete, little downside if she doesn't. The idea she'll "ruin her brand" is just nonsense.

This isn't tennis. You can't get a stray elbow in tennis or get dunked on. Screened out of place, etc.

[xdrta+]

That could happen in any game, women or men. Tennis or basketball, the principle is the same. If she does well it's a big boost for the game. In spite of your claim that millions of people think she could play in the NBA, I've never seen evidence of that and seriously doubt it's true. If she does poorly, very few will be surprised and things will go on as they are. The downside is minimal, IMO.

[Tor_Raps]

I think it would be good for her to do it for a few reasons: 1. she will get better from playing against men. 2. It will bring way more attention to her than if she was playing against women because the media goes crazy for the whole men v women angle whenever it happens. 3. It gives her a leg up on all the women if she just does it for a year then goes to the wnba because she's now the only woman who's done it. 4. She gets well paid.

This is a terrible idea.

1. She's been playing against men her whole life. All the women's college teams play against guys on campus who aren't good enough to make a D3 roster and they get dominated. So there's no benefit here. Obviously those guys aren't going 100% but they don't want to hurt them.
2. It'll bring negative attention in that she'll get dominated in a pretty embarrassingly bad way. This would be horrible for her brand and women's basketball on the whole. There's a reason more women don't do this.
3. Leg up? Because she embarrassed herself and ruined her nike brand deals because it turned into a joke?
4. She's already making about this off endorsements. There's no reason to hurt her brand. This would cost her money long term, likely a lot.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but people need to just accept that men and women are physically too far apart to compete in sports outside of a few really rare exceptions (like those 100+ mile marathons). But because so many people just seemingly refuse to accept it, spelling it out on the court would just be bad for the women's game and marketing of it.

There are probably a few million people who do believe Clark can hang with NBA players, is shattering that illusion actually a bad thing?

Read on Twitter

As I mentioned in another post, her endorsement window is smaller than many people assume. I can't see that many people following the Indiana Fever for that long after she joins unless they immediately become champion contenders. She's the first female athlete in history being actively told by people to turn down a guaranteed 5 million. 99.9% of WNBA players would pray for an offer like that to fall on their lap.

LOL... she couldn't even last in the G League, let alone the NBA or many of the other professional men's leagues around the world.

Why is it hard for so many idiots to understand that biological differences are real and it's ok that there are. Just enjoy what she's doing without going full stupid lol.

[Movics]

Dhsilv, women’s basketball teams don’t get dominated by men practice squad players at universities who are usually the walk on rejects. Saw it for four years with my own eyes on a ranked program

[dhsilv2]

Dhsilv, women’s basketball teams don’t get dominated by men practice squad players at universities who are usually the walk on rejects. Saw it for four years with my own eyes on a ranked program

well uconn and tennesse's teams are pretty open about that. And that's with the guys holding back massively!

I'm gonna question eyes bro.

[Optms]

Spoiler:

There are probably a few million people who do believe Clark can hang with NBA players, is shattering that illusion actually a bad thing?

Read on Twitter

As I mentioned in another post, her endorsement window is smaller than many people assume. I can't see that many people following the Indiana Fever for that long after she joins unless they immediately become champion contenders. She's the first female athlete in history being actively told by people to turn down a guaranteed 5 million. 99.9% of WNBA players would pray for an offer like that to fall on their lap.

The majority of the world basically understands the differences between men and women. So even if a few million in the US foolishly believe otherwise, I'm of the mind that they can't be helped.

On the flip side, I want to see Clark in the Big 3 just for the entertainment reasons. Its a gimmick league. She's also getting paid way more than what she can earn elsewhere which is great for her. Now if you put her in actual established men's basketball teams, than yeah, no. I wouldn't care how much she earns. That is doing a diservice to her and women in general and making a mockery of mens basketball.

[heatwillbeback]

Sucks that the seasons overlap. I would love to see it, good or bad.

[Cavsfansince84]

This is a terrible idea.

1. She's been playing against men her whole life. All the women's college teams play against guys on campus who aren't good enough to make a D3 roster and they get dominated. So there's no benefit here. Obviously those guys aren't going 100% but they don't want to hurt them.
2. It'll bring negative attention in that she'll get dominated in a pretty embarrassingly bad way. This would be horrible for her brand and women's basketball on the whole. There's a reason more women don't do this.
3. Leg up? Because she embarrassed herself and ruined her nike brand deals because it turned into a joke?
4. She's already making about this off endorsements. There's no reason to hurt her brand. This would cost her money long term, likely a lot.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but people need to just accept that men and women are physically too far apart to compete in sports outside of a few really rare exceptions (like those 100+ mile marathons). But because so many people just seemingly refuse to accept it, spelling it out on the court would just be bad for the women's game and marketing of it.

I don't agree. Even if she isn't able to legitimately compete on the court she'll still be known as the woman who tried and as they say in marketing 'there's no such as bad publicity'. Plus she'll make 10-20x what she would in the wnba. So for her personally I think its the right move to make. Don't agree it would cost her anything in the long term either. Much more so if she can actually sort of compete in Ice Cube's league. Then when she does go to the wnba she'll bring that much more attention to her games there.