Kudos to NCAA Women's Tourney for tonight's matchups

[dougthonus]

they have the freedom to turn pro. no one is forcing them to go to college. they are being paid with a free education. they can decide to forego that if they want to earn a wage. most people realize what a privilege it is to get a full-ride college scholarship though.

Why should athletes be denied the opportunity to work for 3rd parties? Non student athletes aren't denied these opportunities. In fact that majority of people who go to school look to apply for paid internships to work while in college, and our company pays our interns the expected amount we would pay them hourly as an entry level employee upon graduation.

some of us prefer our institutions of higher learning to remain as such and not turn into yet another arena for corporations to market their pointless gizmos (or to convince children to become addicts, most of the ads it seems like). there was already way too much money in college sports to begin with (and pro sports but that's a different argument). these guys are students and their first priority is to learn and if they feel differently, they shouldn't be at a university. you sound like those nba players who say they're like slaves for signing nine-figure contracts and not wanting to honor it. they have a choice but there's still rules to follow. there's your freedom.

How does players taking money from 3rd parties change whether the college is an institution of higher learning or not? It is an arena for corporations to market their stuff because the universities have made it so not because a student works for a 3rd party. Players can't use the school logo/name whatever in marketing deals, they can only market themselves. This doesn't impact the university's ability to educate or reflect on the university.

obviously the NCAA doesn't think this way, I think pretty much every university nowadays is interested in generating revenue more than educating students. society is going to hell in a handbasket and this turn in sports is a reflection of that. i'm sorry that you don't see that or don't care.

To the extent you are against these things, how is that relevant to players finding work outside a university while at a university? Again, a thing which the vast majority of students do. Why should athletes be prohibited from that?

All the money in sports and the high stakes nature of it is a result of the schools selling out to make as much money as possible not the individual athletes who want the freedom to market themselves. The individual athletes should be free to make the same decisions as non athletes.

[Dresden]

That was a heck of a game tonight. Great finish. Kudos to UConn for getting so far missing half their team. Should be an interesting final.

[jc23]

Not the all timer people were hoping for but fun and competitive. Personally i would not have called that offensive foul. Seems as if Iowa will be huge underdogs in the final. They will need the LSU game Caitlin to have a shot.

[Ice Man]

South Carolina has 8 McDonald's All-Americans on its roster. It used them to slap Cinderella around the house and send her back to clean out the fireplace. A very impressive performance. As for Iowa-UConn, a wretched first half for both teams, followed by a well played and gritty second half.

South Carolina of course will be a big favorite in the final, justifiably. But they were just as big of a favorite in last year's semi, so who knows?

I rarely care much about coaching tactics but for this game I will make an exception. Iowa is a crappy rebounding team against elite competition. As a result, their opponents usually crash the boards and score put back after put back against them, as South Carolina did last year and LSU did this Monday. But ... if you don't get that board Iowa torches you on the fast break, because it's the Showtime squad of NCAA women's hoops. Consequently, Geno Auriemma made the radical decision last night not to contest the offensive boards at all. He sent the entire UConn team back on defense after a UConn shot, to stop the transition game. A 100% different approach than teams usually take against Iowa.

I thought that overall that worked out well for UConn, despite the loss. I wonder if South Carolina's Dawn Staley agrees with me.

[DuckIII]

That was a weird game for me.

1. I’m a teeny tiny bit ahead of the curve in that a UCONN women’s game came on while I was doing some work during Bueckers’ freshman year. As soon as I saw her playing I watched the whole game and then 3-4 more UCONN games that year. She’s my “Caitlin Clark.” To that point she was the most entertaining woman hooper I had ever scene and I loved her grit as well. Kobe vibes.

2. But I’m a Big Ten guy so was rooting for Iowa. I also wanted the spectacle of the Iowa/SC showdown.

3. The offensive screen foul call at the end of the game was indeed trash. I don’t even think it’s a foul at all, and even if it was in the most strict and technical sense of the rule, “fouls” like that happen on every possession. What a horrible situation in which to blow that whistle.

4. Regardless, UCONN still would have had to get a clean look in 3 seconds and then make the shot. I don’t consider this to be some hugely impactful unforgivable disaster of a call because we can’t say, unlike many we’ve seen over the years, that it definitely changed the outcome. But it was really dumb nonetheless and robbed fans and players of an exciting moment, at minimum.

Looking forward to Iowa/SC.

Iowa having to go through LSU, UCONN and SC in three straight games is a dream come true for women’s hoops. Could not have worked out better.

[jc23]

does the wnba have the same set of rules as the nba? with all this incoming talent and attention they might want to allow for more freedom of movement; if they havent already.

[Wingy]

3. The offensive screen foul call at the end of the game was indeed trash. I don’t even think it’s a foul at all, and even if it was in the most strict and technical sense of the rule, “fouls” like that happen every game on every possession. What a horrible situation in which to blow that whistle.

Paige is great, I hope they get healthy and she can win the trophy next year. Too bad Nika is a senior…she showed the country why she’s a 2x conference DPOY last night. Loved her focus and tenacity.

CC is an all time story and player, but I gotta imagine SC is going to drub them. Sure they’re sick of the headlines, and being a completely ignored undefeated team. They’ll have plenty of motivation to show the world. I’ll be surprised if it’s not a blowout.

On the call, I originally agreed, but the more I look at it today, it was very much a clear, moving screen. The quick replay at the point of contact looks bad for the call. But go back and watch the whole play. Moving, dragging the right leg the whole way, hip out, arm went from 100% north/south early to complete horizontal (i.e. - elbow out). Also helped Iowa that it was the largest player on the smallest to make it stand out.

[DuckIII]

3. The offensive screen foul call at the end of the game was indeed trash. I don’t even think it’s a foul at all, and even if it was in the most strict and technical sense of the rule, “fouls” like that happen every game on every possession. What a horrible situation in which to blow that whistle.

Paige is great, I hope they get healthy and she can win the trophy next year.

CC is an all time story and player, but I gotta imagine SC is going to drub them. Sure they’re sick of the headlines, and being a completely ignored undefeated team. They’ll have plenty of motivation to show the world. I’ll be surprised if it’s not a blowout.

On the call, I originally agreed, but the more I look at it today, it was very much a clear, moving screen. The quick replay at the point of contact looks bad for the call. But go back and watch the whole play. Moving, dragging the right leg the whole way, hip out, arm went from 100% north/south early to complete horizontal (i.e. - elbow out). Also helped Iowa that it was the largest player on the smallest to make it stand out.

I do think you can say it was an offensive foul. But it’s the type of “moving screen” that almost every screen is to some extent. She was not perfectly still and did make an early hedge towards the defender.

But there is technically a foul and practically a foul. Technically, probably a foul sitting at a desk reading the rules. Practically speaking in the reality of how basketball is played and called, still a terrible call.

But, as I said, not one that you can say clearly changed the result. Just took away an opportunity and not even an opportunity very likely to matter.

As for SC, I’m with you. Looking forward to the spectacle and you can’t call it David v Goliath because they are both #1 seeds. But I expect SC to win by double digits. They are just loaded up and down the roster and in a different class than Iowa. Clark would need to go off for an efficient 40+ to keep it tight in my opinion.

[Chicago-Bull-E]

I mean it’s definitely a foul. ESPN in their lust
for controversy continually showed awful angles. Another reason to despise them.

Read on Twitter

There really isn’t anything she does right on the screen. Legs far beyond her frame, right leg is clearly dragging, if not both, and she forearm shivers the defender.

I’ve never been a big proponent of not calling fouls at the end of the game, as if someone does something that’s a foul that helps them win a game, why is that a better outcome?

[ThreeMileAllan]

I'm surprised you all think that was a terrible call at the end. Maybe I'm just absolutely sick of moving screens in basketball but I loved the call. I think we would see more individual dribblingbrilliance if we would call moving screens like it used to be called.

Sent from my SM-S918U1 using Tapatalk

[ThreeMileAllan]

I mean it’s definitely a foul. ESPN in their lust
for controversy continually showed awful angles. Another reason to despise them.

Read on Twitter

There really isn’t anything she does right on the screen. Legs far beyond her frame, right leg is clearly dragging, if not both, and she forearm shivers the defender.

I’ve never been a big proponent of not calling fouls at the end of the game, as if someone does something that’s a foul that helps them win a game, why is that a better outcome?

Not only was it a foul, it wasn't even borderline, imo. It was a pretty egregious foul. And I have no dog I'm the fight. I like Paige and Caitlin equally and would haveuch preferred a highlight ending.


The foul was partially on Paige for not going slow enough and close enough to give Edward's a chance at being set.

Paige might have a better career than Caitlin when all is said and done. But as far as butts in the seats, for those first 5 years it's gunna be Caitlin.

Sent from my SM-S918U1 using Tapatalk

[Ice Man]

I initially thought the moving screen call was bad, but not after seeing that USA Today video. Not only does Edwards stick out her leg and hip to body Marshall, which was bad enough, but she forearms her, too. That is a foul at any level of basketball, at any time.

Granted, it didn't appear that way with the telecast replay. It shows how camera angles can sometimes fool.

[Dresden]

I agree it was a good call. It's always tough to blow the whistle in such a crucial situation, instead of "letting them play", but I commend the ref who had the courage to make the correct call. Situations should not matter- a foul is a foul. And as has been mentioned, the fact that it was UConn's biggest player against Iowa's smallest helped make the call a little easier. It really was more like an offensive tackle taking out a thin corner back than a basketball play.

I'm glad Iowa won for the sake of Suelke (?), who would have been the goat for committing that bad turnover on the prior possession. For a #1 seed, Iowa players really made a lot of poor decisions with the ball last night.

Kudos to Martin, too, who made some tough shots in the last few minutes to keep Iowa ahead.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

It was a foul. I hate that they called it though. Not just because it was a crucial moment but because it was totally inconsistent with the level of physicality the officials have been allowing all tournament.

The refs have to pick a mode and stick to it.

[Ice Man]

I'm glad Iowa won for the sake of Suelke (?), who would have been the goat for committing that bad turnover on the prior possession. For a #1 seed, Iowa players really made a lot of poor decisions with the ball last night.

I would have goated Martin, for throwing the ball to UConn with 45 seconds left and a 4 point lead, because she forgot that if an opponent pokes away the ball past the halfcourt line, it's not a violation to retrieve it. That was a little-kid level of panic and it permitted UConn to turn an almost certainly lost game (down 4, 45 seconds left, the other team has the ball) to a game that it had a real chance of winning (down 1, 39 seconds left, the the other team has the ball).

But such is fate. Martin's mistake would been long remembered in Iowa had the team lost. By now, though, all is forgotten.

Stuelke with a "t." A proper German name that.

[DuckIII]

I mean it’s definitely a foul. ESPN in their lust
for controversy continually showed awful angles. Another reason to despise them.

Read on Twitter

There really isn’t anything she does right on the screen. Legs far beyond her frame, right leg is clearly dragging, if not both, and she forearm shivers the defender.

I’ve never been a big proponent of not calling fouls at the end of the game, as if someone does something that’s a foul that helps them win a game, why is that a better outcome?

I just came back in here because I saw that exact same angle in slo-mo for the first time today, and its clearly a more significant foul than I thought it was last night.

[Ice Man]

I just came back in here because I saw that exact same angle in slo-mo for the first time today, and its clearly a more significant foul than I thought it was last night.

Yep. The commentators done us wrong. I don't exactly blame then because it's their job to explain what they see, but unfortunately they were working off incomplete information.

[DuckIII]

I just came back in here because I saw that exact same angle in slo-mo for the first time today, and its clearly a more significant foul than I thought it was last night.

Yep. The commentators done us wrong. I don't exactly blame then because it's their job to explain what they see, but unfortunately they were working off incomplete information.

They showed a couple of angles during the broadcast, and in one of them you could see her shift her lower body before the contact but it appeared minimal at most. This angle and speed though, very obviously a call-worthy foul at any point of a game. Gripe withdrawn.

[Chi town]

It will take an epic 3pt shooting performance for Iowa to win the title.

I’m here for it. Hope it happens.

What makes Clark special is her competitive spirit, passing, then shooting. So fun to watch.

[stillgotgame]

I mean it’s definitely a foul. ESPN in their lust
for controversy continually showed awful angles. Another reason to despise them.

Read on Twitter

There really isn’t anything she does right on the screen. Legs far beyond her frame, right leg is clearly dragging, if not both, and she forearm shivers the defender.

I’ve never been a big proponent of not calling fouls at the end of the game, as if someone does something that’s a foul that helps them win a game, why is that a better outcome?

Bam would be proud of this screen.