U coach Sherri Coale on women's basketball: "It’s a mistake to try to be like the men"
Brooke Pryor by Brooke Pryor Published: April 2, 2018 1:30 PM CDT Updated: April 2, 2018 1:35 PM CDT
A couple days before the women’s basketball Final Four, The Oklahoman sat down with Oklahoma coach Sherri Coale for a season wrap-up interview.
After discussing the state of the Sooners with the 22-year coaching veteran, the conversation turned to the state of women’s basketball, particularly about the string of opinion pieces claiming that Connecticut’s dominance was bad for the sport. UConn’s surprising loss to eventual champion Notre Dame made the discussion a moot point, but Coale's thoughts are still worth a read.
A quick glance at the women’s Final Four teams suggest that there’s not much parity in the women’s game. All No. 1 seeds made it to Columbus, meanwhile, there were only two No. 1 seeds at the men's Final Four in San Antonio, and the other two teams were seeded 11th and third.
But Coale said the comparisons to the men’s game are unfair and that, despite Connecticut’s regular-season dominance, there’s more parity in women’s basketball than in the past.
A lot of last week’s interview for the Sunday story was left on the cutting room floor, so here are some highlights that didn’t make it into print.
On parity in women’s college basketball:
“In terms of parity in our sport, I think we’re getting closer. … What’s happened this year is there were more upsets and better games. Central Michigan going as far as they did. Buffalo going as far as they did. That’s been basically unheard of. There might be an early upset, but it’s maybe a 6-seed wins, not an 11. Not a mid-major. We’re cutting off our nose to spite our face if we don’t acknowledge those as huge milestones in the road toward parity because there is a lessening of the gap. It’s getting better.”
On the notion the Connecticut is bad for women’s basketball:
“Oh, the question that just keeps reinventing itself. As Connecticut went on their streak and that conversation seemed to be at every coffee shop and every talk radio in the world, my staunch stance was ‘No.’ Because Joe Smith who has no relation to women’s basketball and no desire to every watch women’s basketball is going to pay attention to this because it’s a streak that’s unheard of. So you get all of these, our sport gets a window, an opening into a world of people who otherwise would not even hear a conversation about it. There’s just enough ‘Oh, let me see what’s going on here’ And then what we do with that moment when they say, ‘Let me see what’s going on here’ is up to us.
“But they gave us an opening as a sport. And I still think excellence is magnetic. I don’t buy the argument that it’s bad for the game. Watch them play. They play in a better, more efficient than a number of the best men’s teams in the country. Excellence is hard not to watch. We’re all drawn to it. Whether it’s a great singer on American Idol, or a great movie, great actors. You’re drawn to great stuff. Excellence is a magnet, so I don’t think it’s bad for women’s basketball.”
On how women’s basketball can capture a national audience:
“For women’s basketball, I think it’s a mistake to try to be like the men. I think there have been times in the evolution of our game where we have tilted toward that. We have tried to be men’s basketball. We will never be men’s basketball. I don’t care how many players are able to dunk, it’s not going to be the same. And I think it’s a mistake for us to try be in their image. The game as it was created for men, however long ago (James) Naismith put the peach basket up, it’s about spacing and movement and passing and this very artistic, intelligent game, skilled game, played below the rim. And women can do that in a beautiful way. Connecticut is a perfect example of that.
“That is, in my opinion, the only way we get our own market, our own platform. Otherwise, we will always, ESPN is going to talk about the men before they talk about the women. They have the selection show of the men on Sunday and our show is on Monday and most of everything that’s going on is conversation going on about the men’s bracket that occurred on Sunday and not the lead-up to the women’s on Monday. It’s just how it is. There are some things that we, as stakeholders in the game, can control and some things that we can’t. Our product is the thing most under our control, and I think that’s where the renovation or evolution or whatever you want to call it begins.”
http://newsok.com/ou-coach-sherri-c...ake-to-try-to-be-like-the-men/article/5589292
I got the lead from Raoul.
Brooke Pryor by Brooke Pryor Published: April 2, 2018 1:30 PM CDT Updated: April 2, 2018 1:35 PM CDT
A couple days before the women’s basketball Final Four, The Oklahoman sat down with Oklahoma coach Sherri Coale for a season wrap-up interview.
After discussing the state of the Sooners with the 22-year coaching veteran, the conversation turned to the state of women’s basketball, particularly about the string of opinion pieces claiming that Connecticut’s dominance was bad for the sport. UConn’s surprising loss to eventual champion Notre Dame made the discussion a moot point, but Coale's thoughts are still worth a read.
A quick glance at the women’s Final Four teams suggest that there’s not much parity in the women’s game. All No. 1 seeds made it to Columbus, meanwhile, there were only two No. 1 seeds at the men's Final Four in San Antonio, and the other two teams were seeded 11th and third.
But Coale said the comparisons to the men’s game are unfair and that, despite Connecticut’s regular-season dominance, there’s more parity in women’s basketball than in the past.
A lot of last week’s interview for the Sunday story was left on the cutting room floor, so here are some highlights that didn’t make it into print.
On parity in women’s college basketball:
“In terms of parity in our sport, I think we’re getting closer. … What’s happened this year is there were more upsets and better games. Central Michigan going as far as they did. Buffalo going as far as they did. That’s been basically unheard of. There might be an early upset, but it’s maybe a 6-seed wins, not an 11. Not a mid-major. We’re cutting off our nose to spite our face if we don’t acknowledge those as huge milestones in the road toward parity because there is a lessening of the gap. It’s getting better.”
On the notion the Connecticut is bad for women’s basketball:
“Oh, the question that just keeps reinventing itself. As Connecticut went on their streak and that conversation seemed to be at every coffee shop and every talk radio in the world, my staunch stance was ‘No.’ Because Joe Smith who has no relation to women’s basketball and no desire to every watch women’s basketball is going to pay attention to this because it’s a streak that’s unheard of. So you get all of these, our sport gets a window, an opening into a world of people who otherwise would not even hear a conversation about it. There’s just enough ‘Oh, let me see what’s going on here’ And then what we do with that moment when they say, ‘Let me see what’s going on here’ is up to us.
“But they gave us an opening as a sport. And I still think excellence is magnetic. I don’t buy the argument that it’s bad for the game. Watch them play. They play in a better, more efficient than a number of the best men’s teams in the country. Excellence is hard not to watch. We’re all drawn to it. Whether it’s a great singer on American Idol, or a great movie, great actors. You’re drawn to great stuff. Excellence is a magnet, so I don’t think it’s bad for women’s basketball.”
On how women’s basketball can capture a national audience:
“For women’s basketball, I think it’s a mistake to try to be like the men. I think there have been times in the evolution of our game where we have tilted toward that. We have tried to be men’s basketball. We will never be men’s basketball. I don’t care how many players are able to dunk, it’s not going to be the same. And I think it’s a mistake for us to try be in their image. The game as it was created for men, however long ago (James) Naismith put the peach basket up, it’s about spacing and movement and passing and this very artistic, intelligent game, skilled game, played below the rim. And women can do that in a beautiful way. Connecticut is a perfect example of that.
“That is, in my opinion, the only way we get our own market, our own platform. Otherwise, we will always, ESPN is going to talk about the men before they talk about the women. They have the selection show of the men on Sunday and our show is on Monday and most of everything that’s going on is conversation going on about the men’s bracket that occurred on Sunday and not the lead-up to the women’s on Monday. It’s just how it is. There are some things that we, as stakeholders in the game, can control and some things that we can’t. Our product is the thing most under our control, and I think that’s where the renovation or evolution or whatever you want to call it begins.”
http://newsok.com/ou-coach-sherri-c...ake-to-try-to-be-like-the-men/article/5589292
I got the lead from Raoul.
