[triangle2]

I also really roll my eyes whenever I read a post about player safety, the refs better get control or someone's gonna get hurt, etc. when it comes to physical play. No one ever says that about a men's game where players are constantly being helped off the court. What would people think if the women's players and coaches whined about the game being "dangerous" at press conferences? "Oh, it's just the sissy women". These players are athletes and competitors and basketball is a contact sport. They aren't scared. They aren't whining. So why do some folks feel like they need to be protected?

I think it's possible you missed men's basketball as played in the 90s.  That type of bully ball was rejected by many players and led to the rule changes that ALLOWED for Steph and the more free-wheeling basketball we see now.  Far from allowing laissez-faire officiating, the sport ruling bodies stepped in hard to preserve the beauty of the game.  In fact, a lot of players/coaches think the NBA in particular may have cracked down TOO hard on defense.  

I don't think we support women's advancement in sport by allowing the modern equivalent of the Pat Riley coached 90s Heat.

Hah! My wife only wishes you were correct. I doubt there's anyone on this board who watched more basketball in the 90's than yours truly :>
Sure, the rule changes helped make the men's game more open, but I don't understand what that has to do with anything I posted. 

We all see things differently, and that's OK. But from my perspective, the defenses that Stanford saw this year were "physical" and "packed in", but they were not "bully ball". That term has been thrown around on this board, but I don't agree at all that's what we're seeing in the evolution of the women's sport. I'd really appreciate if someone could show me some clips of what they mean by "bully ball". There aren't players getting clotheslined out there for goodness sake. Colorado is the team that comes up in this discussion a lot. That intimidating lineup of Jaylynn Sherod, Frieda Forman,  Kyndall Wetta, Quay Miller, and Aaronette Vonleh. Really? 

"Physical", in my book, is part of the game, and can be used strategically to take away advantages from other teams. And while it can be very frustrating to all of us to see our players not be able to overcome it, I don't think it's ruining the sport to see physical, packed in defenses. It's an age old strategy. I just wish we would have made more layups through the contact and we would have easily advanced in the tourney.

Exhibit A: Hollingshed vs. Brink last year in the Pac-12 tournament. And, since we’re on the Colorado topic, Wetta did pick up a post-game technical this season for tossing the ball at an opposing player after the game had ended.

If you watched a lot of 90’s ball, then you remember the old ASU swiping hands to the face defense that Charli Turner-Thorne implemented with success until…the technique was essentially banned. There was a fair amount of aggressive 1v1 defending, particularly by guards on top. 

I see something different now. The inside play has gotten considerably more physical, the post players are bigger/taller, and the wings are also bigger but with the same skill sets that the smaller wings used to have. We also have a return of the swiping guards, but instead of hands to the face, there is a lot of chopping at the ball, arm grabbing, and bodying up. I don’t like the way the game is heading, because teams are essentially challenging the referees to make the calls, and we all know that the average quality of a college women’s ref is honestly bad. So, teams are operating on the assumption that they’ll get away with a lot of physical play and so, you end up with teams that just play very roughly.

If you want to look at teams that play consistently over the line, Colorado is a fair example in the conference. They lost Hollingshed inside, but Sherrod is a grabber/swiper who seems to be constantly daring the refs to blow the whistle. Outside of the conference, Texas is a repeat offender. If you saw last years Texas games, there was a fair amount of bully ball going on, including several instances of a Texas post player throwing a Stanford player to the floor (Lauren Ebo was a prime offender). That team has the added demerit for also playing unfairly on the offensive end. Schaefer teaches the posts to bring the off elbow high and swing it into the body of the defender when the post player is trying to turn. Taylor Jones (transferred to Texas from Oregon State) has also adopted the same high elbow technique.

[triangle2]

I also really roll my eyes whenever I read a post about player safety, the refs better get control or someone's gonna get hurt, etc. when it comes to physical play. No one ever says that about a men's game where players are constantly being helped off the court. What would people think if the women's players and coaches whined about the game being "dangerous" at press conferences? "Oh, it's just the sissy women". These players are athletes and competitors and basketball is a contact sport. They aren't scared. They aren't whining. So why do some folks feel like they need to be protected?

I think it's possible you missed men's basketball as played in the 90s.  That type of bully ball was rejected by many players and led to the rule changes that ALLOWED for Steph and the more free-wheeling basketball we see now.  Far from allowing laissez-faire officiating, the sport ruling bodies stepped in hard to preserve the beauty of the game.  In fact, a lot of players/coaches think the NBA in particular may have cracked down TOO hard on defense.  

I don't think we support women's advancement in sport by allowing the modern equivalent of the Pat Riley coached 90s Heat.

Hah! My wife only wishes you were correct. I doubt there's anyone on this board who watched more basketball in the 90's than yours truly :>
Sure, the rule changes helped make the men's game more open, but I don't understand what that has to do with anything I posted. 

We all see things differently, and that's OK. But from my perspective, the defenses that Stanford saw this year were "physical" and "packed in", but they were not "bully ball". That term has been thrown around on this board, but I don't agree at all that's what we're seeing in the evolution of the women's sport. I'd really appreciate if someone could show me some clips of what they mean by "bully ball". There aren't players getting clotheslined out there for goodness sake. Colorado is the team that comes up in this discussion a lot. That intimidating lineup of Jaylynn Sherod, Frieda Forman,  Kyndall Wetta, Quay Miller, and Aaronette Vonleh. Really? 

"Physical", in my book, is part of the game, and can be used strategically to take away advantages from other teams. And while it can be very frustrating to all of us to see our players not be able to overcome it, I don't think it's ruining the sport to see physical, packed in defenses. It's an age old strategy. I just wish we would have made more layups through the contact and we would have easily advanced in the tourney.

Exhibit A: Hollingshed vs. Brink last year in the Pac-12 tournament. And, since we’re on the Colorado topic, Wetta did pick up a post-game technical this season for tossing the ball at an opposing player after the game had ended.

If you watched a lot of 90’s ball, then you remember the old ASU swiping hands to the face defense that Charli Turner-Thorne implemented with success until…the technique was essentially banned. There was a fair amount of aggressive 1v1 defending, particularly by guards on top. 

I see something different now. The inside play has gotten considerably more physical, the post players are bigger/taller, and the wings are also bigger but with the same skill sets that the smaller wings used to have. We also have a return of the swiping guards, but instead of hands to the face, there is a lot of chopping at the ball, arm grabbing, and bodying up. I don’t like the way the game is heading, because teams are essentially challenging the referees to make the calls, and we all know that the average quality of a college women’s ref is honestly bad. So, teams are operating on the assumption that they’ll get away with a lot of physical play and so, you end up with teams that just play very roughly.

If you want to look at teams that play consistently over the line, Colorado is a fair example in the conference. They lost Hollingshed inside, but Sherrod is a grabber/swiper who seems to be constantly daring the refs to blow the whistle. Outside of the conference, Texas is a repeat offender. If you saw last years Texas games, there was a fair amount of bully ball going on, including several instances of a Texas post player throwing a Stanford player to the floor (Lauren Ebo was a prime offender). That team has the added demerit for also playing unfairly on the offensive end. Schaefer teaches the posts to bring the off elbow high and swing it into the body of the defender when the post player is trying to turn. Taylor Jones (transferred to Texas from Oregon State) has also adopted the same high elbow technique.