She's getting attention to be sure. And played great against Michigan, for sure. She will have to overcome the bias of media to only select the best player from one of the best teams in the country. Iowa's record, fair or not, will work against her. Some pundits will ask why the team doesn't win more if they have the country's best player on it.What do we think? She's got to be the frontrunner right?
More like NATIONAL POY!I think Clark cemented her BIG POY tonight. If it goes to anyone else, it will be criminal.
She is the running. But it's hard with Boston and SC being ranked so high. NPOY tends to go to the best player of the best team. But Clark is definitely deserving.More like NATIONAL POY!
And then someone will have to explain to that reporter who isn't doing their job that Iowa had a two and a half week COVID break disrupt their season then they played like 3 games with only 7 players available.She's getting attention to be sure. And played great against Michigan, for sure. She will have to overcome the bias of media to only select the best player from one of the best teams in the country. Iowa's record, fair or not, will work against her. Some pundits will ask why the team doesn't win more if they have the country's best player on it.
I see earlier this week that ESPNW account tweeted out that ESPN thinks Boston from South Carolina is the player of the year. She's the best player on the best team, which repeatedly is how the NPOY race goes on the women's side, for better or worse.And then someone will have to explain to that reporter who isn't doing their job that Iowa had a two and a half week COVID break disrupt their season then they played like 3 games with only 7 players available.
Everything here is absolutely correct. Part of the issue is the uneven coverage of women's basketball as well. It's tough for reporters to see a wide variety of players except for the ones in their local area. By the same logic, I haven't seen Boston or Paige play either so there's that.I see earlier this week that ESPNW account tweeted out that ESPN thinks Boston from South Carolina is the player of the year. She's the best player on the best team, which repeatedly is how the NPOY race goes on the women's side, for better or worse.
South Carolina's Aliyah Boston should win 2022 women's college basketball national player of the year (espn.com)
To be fair, the story cited the reporters who cover the women's game cite some advanced stats that show Boston is very good (and she is, she averaged 16.8 and 11.2, plus good block and steal numbers). We can't know for sure, but what would Clark's numbers look like from an efficiency standpoint if she were on a South Carolina surrounded by a bunch of other great players instead of being counted on to drop nearly 30 against a good opponent for Iowa to win? It's the un-knowable question.
At the very least, Clark should be on most/all first-team All-america teams this year. Iowa winning the conference will help her, as will her performance against good teams over the past 2 weeks in Indiana (twice) and Michigan. I doubt that puts her over the top in the NPOY race as many of the people voting just refuse to vote for a player who isn't on one of the traditional top teams in the women's game. Hope I'm wrong.
![]()
Love Caitlin but it's not her award this year, at this point. Keep working and the awards will come.
Paige Bueckers?ESPN already gave the award to Boston from USC in their view and said there isn’t another player close to her accomplishments. God how I hate ESPN.
If they gave the award to Kate Beckers last year, then CC can earn it this year.
Yes, but they all do, so?Do the women still play with a smaller ball than the men?
This, and it ain't close.....
Keep working on what? Clark’s numbers are far better than anyone else. Guess she’ll need to average 30 points and 10 rebounds next year along with 10 triple doubles instead of 5. This is just silly.
Keep working on what? Clark’s numbers are far better than anyone else. Guess she’ll need to average 30 points and 10 rebounds next year along with 10 triple doubles instead of 5. This is just silly.