• Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Five-ring circus: The Thread of the XXXIII Olympiad

Right wing outrage is a constant. Caitlin Clark is just the Mad Lib of the moment to fill in the blank with. If it weren't her, it would be something else, like woke beer or tight ends dating pop singers.
Topless Griner will be all the rage target next.
 
The argument in favor of her is basically that she's not one of the 12 best now, but she's good enough and will draw eyeballs. I see it, but the fact that her exclusion has immediately become a right wing talking point tells you everything that you need to know about our culture of perceived grievance. It allows a certain segment to root against 2 US women's teams at the Olympics.

It's never really been the 12 best players, though.

In 2016, fresh out of college, Breanna Stewart made it over Candace Parker. There was zero justification for that; Stewart was a rookie; Parker, on the all-WNBA team the previous three years, belonged.

Starting at the 2:50ish mark of this clip, Andraya Carter - who's really good, better than ESPN allows her to be - decides to explain why that may have happened. Look at the body language of Chiney - the analyst sitting next to her - and how quickly the topic changes

x.com

Carter, who played at Tennessee, knew what she was saying in that moment.
 
There always are "coach's picks". Steve Alford wasn't one of the best 12 players in 1984 but he played for Bobby Knight. If Clark were chosen, it would have not been on merit, even though she's an excellent player. It would have been defensible, but the media narrative would have been why she wasn't starting or playing more. It just amazing how this has become the instant talking point of right wing grievance.
 
There always are "coach's picks". Steve Alford wasn't one of the best 12 players in 1984 but he played for Bobby Knight. If Clark were chosen, it would have not been on merit, even though she's an excellent player. It would have been defensible, but the media narrative would have been why she wasn't starting or playing more. It just amazing how this has become the instant talking point of right wing grievance.

There isn't any way to control what Clay Travis thinks or says.
 
It strikes me that there are a lot of laymen who equate this with a rookie who moves into the NBA. And this is a different landscape.

For example, Trae Young became the face of Atlanta's franchise upon entering the league. But he was never going to be picked to the U.S. Olympic team at that point. He wasn't one of the league's top 12-15 players.

The argument for Clark is that she is one of the 12 best players available. And, red-state talking point or not, I have to see 12 better WNBA players. I saw a lot of Alyssa Thomas over the years, from high school to now. She does not change games like Clark. And that's just one example.

I still contend Clark was one of the 12 best players available before she walked onto the court with the Indiana Fever.
 
Last edited:
It's never really been the 12 best players, though.

In 2016, fresh out of college, Breanna Stewart made it over Candace Parker. There was zero justification for that; Stewart was a rookie; Parker, on the all-WNBA team the previous three years, belonged.

Starting at the 2:50ish mark of this clip, Andraya Carter - who's really good, better than ESPN allows her to be - decides to explain why that may have happened. Look at the body language of Chiney - the analyst sitting next to her - and how quickly the topic changes

x.com

Carter, who played at Tennessee, knew what she was saying in that moment.

Some really good points here about the physicality element in particular.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top