Geno Auriemma: Lower the rims in women's basketball to make it more exciting

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,728
Reaction score
16,037
Points
113
"What makes fans not want to watch women's basketball is that some of the players can't shoot and they miss layups and that forces the game to slow down," Auriemma said, according to the Hartford Courant.

"How do help improve that? Lower the rim (from 10 feet). Do you think the average fan knows that the net is lower in women's volleyball than men's volleyball? It's about seven inches shorter, so the women have the chance for the same kind of success at the net (as the men)."

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-b...es-coach-thinks-rims-lowered-women-basketball

Go Gophers!!
 

Haha I JUST read this article on ESPN, came here and boom!

The idea is not feasible at all but it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing for the women's game I think. You aren't going to have every high school/middle school/college in the country install hoops that can change between the two settings realistically. Funnily enough I think that would be a bigger hurdle than the outrage I'm sure would ensure from a lot of those involved with women's basketball.
 

I think it would be pretty cool if they lowered the rims to seven feet in womens basketball. Especially if they would allow goaltending to be legal.
 

ECreppinUofM said:
I think it would be pretty cool if they lowered the rims to seven feet in womens basketball. Especially if they would allow goaltending to be legal.
Click to expand...

Seven feet seems like lowering it a little too much. At that height, some post players at the college level and beyond would likely be able to dunk without jumping.
 

Missing layups shouldn't be happening even at ten feet. However, it is interesting to try to think of what the women's game would look like if it were a little shorter and there were some more rim play.
 


It appears that Geno is losing his mind. If a player can't shoot, they are just as likely to miss shots at a 9' basket as a 10' basket.
 

Not every day that you see one of the most recognizable people in his sport publicly state that the sport is inferior than another.
 

I have been in favor of this for years. There's nothing wrong with the idea of lowering the baskets, women on average are shorter than men. They already use a smaller ball. And Geno's example of net height in volleyball is spot on.
 

CDH27 said:
It appears that Geno is losing his mind. If a player can't shoot, they are just as likely to miss shots at a 9' basket as a 10' basket.
Click to expand...

Not really, it's a lot easier to score a basket on something that is closer to you than a foot further away. It would most definitely make it easier for them to score in the paint. Of course, shooting would be all weird and stuff now that everyone's used to a 10' basket, but for layups and close shots, you'd notice a tick up in shot %.

I actually never realized the women's VB nets are seven inches shorter. Logically it makes sense, but never once even considered it or questioned it. So that analogy is interesting to say the least.
 



MadtownGopher said:
I have been in favor of this for years. There's nothing wrong with the idea of lowering the baskets, women on average are shorter than men. They already use a smaller ball. And Geno's example of net height in volleyball is spot on.
Click to expand...

But what will the women do after throwing down some thunderous dunks? Pounding their chests like the men is going to get somebody injured.
 

maybe women are not as good at basketball as men. Maybe they should make the ball smaller to help them out. oh they already have. Maybe they should lower the hoop, make it bigger and shrink the size of the court by 25%. That would make things more fair.
 


THE SCOUT! said:
maybe women are not as good at basketball as men. Maybe they should make the ball smaller to help them out. oh they already have. Maybe they should lower the hoop, make it bigger and shrink the size of the court by 25%. That would make things more fair.
Click to expand...

Seriously??????
 



I wonder if this idea stems from the fact that women can't dunk the ball. When I watch women's basketball, it seems to me they shoot better than the men do- especially free throws. Leave the baskets where they are. There is plenty of scoring already, and anyone who feels that basketball isn't exciting without slam dunks doesn't really appreciate what the game is all about.
 

figi said:
I wonder if this idea stems from the fact that women can't dunk the ball. When I watch women's basketball, it seems to me they shoot better than the men do- especially free throws. Leave the baskets where they are. There is plenty of scoring already, and anyone who feels that basketball isn't exciting without slam dunks doesn't really appreciate what the game is all about.
Click to expand...

Just taking a quick glance it appears women shoot a little bit better at the free throw line. 3-pointers are a different story. Men shoot a much higher % from beyond the arch. I'm a little surprised by that.
 

If they want to increase attendance at the college/pro level, change the uniforms to lingerae and draft players strictly based on looks/body. That will gain more attention than anything else mentioned in this thread.
 

NCAA hires Ackerman to look at women's basketball

Val Ackerman has been involved with women's basketball at many levels. Now she will serve as a consultant and adviser for the NCAA.

Ackerman, who served as president of the WNBA for eight years after helping get the league started, will work with NCAA vice president of women's basketball championships Anucha Browne Sanders, who was hired over the summer.

"The purpose of having me involved is to bring outside perspective," Ackerman said. "I've had the chance to see women's basketball at the pro, international and college levels and can help them assess where women's college basketball is today. What could stand to be changed or improved and what shouldn't be messed with. Try to figure out how best to maintain the student-athlete experience."

One topic Ackerman was already well versed in since it was discussed by FIBA in 2010 and brought up recently by UConn coach Geno Auriemma was lowering the rims.

"This isn't a new topic. I saw Geno's comments on this a few weeks ago," she said. "We'll look at it, but that's among the harder things to do. Women's teams are sharing gyms with the men's teams. It has to have some serious conversation. It might warrant some testing. I'm sure that's never happened."

Ackerman went on to say that if the idea was advanced she couldn't see dramatic changes like lowering the rims to 8-feet.

"The working idea is it would be a tweak 4 or 6 inches - nothing visible to the average fan," she said, "But maybe enough to make a difference in shooting percentages."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...hires-val-ackerman.ap/index.html?sct=cb_t2_a9

Go Gophers!!
 

More exciting?

One word. Bikinis

Anything short of that is unlikely to make it more 'exciting'.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
More exciting?

One word. Bikinis

Anything short of that is unlikely to make it more 'exciting'.
Click to expand...

Sports are exciting because the athletes are doing things I can't do. Lowering the rims so women can dunk isn't going to make it any more exciting, at least to me, but it will make it entertaining.

I'm a large man(6'7 and 300 pounds) and was recruited in football by a number of D2 schools way back when, so I was blessed with some combination of size and athleticism, far less of the latter. I'm in my 30's now and I quit basketball in high school, but I still feel like when I watch womens basketball I could be in the rotation at center for all but the best teams. It's delusional because running is my arch enemy, but it's not like I watch college football and feel like I could do what they do. It's the same reason I don't watch guys shoot 130 on municipal courses on the golf channel. It's not interesting.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom