What I'm saying and maybe you can't get a grip on it, is that athletics are being grossly overemphasized over academics. And besides that the Pete Maravich/Clark discussion is inane; even Lisa Bluder said so.
Should Clark's record have an *?
- Thread starter stickman80
- Start date
No asterisk. She competed against women. Pete competed against men. She plays with a ball that's an inch smaller. She plays with a 3 point line. Different eras. Everone understands all of that. She scored all of those points, and nobody can take that away from her.
Agreed. But there is no point in endless comparisons. That is all.
An asterisk for what purpose? She's the all-time scoring leader for NCAA D1 basketball for both men and women, that's indisputable. She has scored the most points in her NCAA career regardless of career length, games played, level of competition, the rules in place, gender, etc.
Are the men's and women's NCAA scoring records comparable? No, obviously not.
Everyone debating this and every minute aspect of it with a bunch of "what ifs" are just looking to argue their position. It's an exercise in futility and it is based purely on opinion, not facts. I suggest fans just enjoy the moment and the feat, at the end of the day, her point total is the highest (for now), and there's no arguing that.
Are the men's and women's NCAA scoring records comparable? No, obviously not.
Everyone debating this and every minute aspect of it with a bunch of "what ifs" are just looking to argue their position. It's an exercise in futility and it is based purely on opinion, not facts. I suggest fans just enjoy the moment and the feat, at the end of the day, her point total is the highest (for now), and there's no arguing that.
They should also use shooting % to see who did it more efficiently. True apples to apples
The ball is about 1/4" smaller in diameter. Not all that relevant, particularly for players with smaller hands.
You give an opinion someone does not agree with and the other person is too dumb to understand your opinion, even though you are just giving an opinion based on the bubble you live in. Got it. Whether the conversation is inane doesn’t mean people don’t want to participate in some part of it. Look at you.
I don't have a horse in this race but it is asinine to compare 2 eras and 2 genders that have 0 overlap. That's like saying the 100m times in the 30's should be compared to times now, or white sprinters should be compared to black sprinters. It's funny and also stupid but keep doing it.
For me it is more nuanced. I agree they are different games from different eras with different rules with different genders. I am not trying to make Clark’s record more legitimate, I am simply poking holes in people’s arguments saying her record is illegitimate, compared to pete’s.
why wouldn’t we compare sprint times? 100 meters is 100 meters regardless of race.
Because athletes are different now than the 32 skidoo times. Just like any other sport, shit evolves.
Actually your example brings up something very debatable. Ichiro Suzuki is the career hits leader according to some. He got over 3000 here but combined with his Japan stats he actually has more than Pete Rose. To me the top Japan league is still completely secondary to the Major League here, but his exceptional numbers there carried quite well when he came here.
Because I think some races are better at some sports. When did the last white guy win a marathon?
These are just facts. Indians, mostly, suck at sports too. We don't have the bodies for it.
I've never heard this said about any basketball player ever. That's not something you can just do.
She's not the all time scorer for men's basketball because she hasn't competed against any men, as far as we know. She's the all time scorer for women's D1 basketball.
That's why I used baseball as an example. Sadaharu Oh also comes into the equation, with his 868 home runs. Yes, he has more professional career home runs than Hank Aaron. But it's a conversation point, not an official statistic that is kept anywhere.
I didn't say she was, but no one has scored more career points in NCAA D1 basketball, regardless of gender, than Caitlin Clark. Period.
I believe his should have an asterisk. His record is so distinguished and incredible, but it needs to be pointed out that it was done in only 3 years and without a 3 point line.
I used to think that until I saw the pics of Angel Reece's mustache she grew out during her down time.
I'm not crapping on her. Just got tired of the media making it a big deal of her breaking Pistol Pete's all time D1 scoring record.
It is a farce though to even try to make a comparison between mens and womens sports or the 2 pt vs 3pt shot.
Caitlin Clark now holds the record for most points scored in an NCAA Division 1 basketball career. Fact.
Pistol Pete is now number 2 on the list. Fact.
Pistol Pete is now number 2 on the list. Fact.
I thinks it’s silly to try and compare men to women. The men’s game is at a higher level. There is a reason there are different divisions in class and sex….because they are not the same. Therefore should not be compared.
The most meaningful record a player gets is in their own division of play. She got that. The record as it relates to different divisions of competition over time isn't too meaningful.
Before this season I couldn't have told you whether it was a men's or women's scorer that had the highest point total in NCAA history.
Fact. Your statement is seriously impaired trying to compare apples to watermelon.
How was he to know it was going to change? Also, why do you fail to acknowledge that none of Maravich's points scored in his freshman year are counted in his total?
I wasn't insinuating you were. There are certainly a group of people in the media taking a similar position that have a much bigger voice than all of us.
I hear all this about 3 years instead of 4. 2 point shot and no 3s. No shot clock. No automatic 2 fts after 5 fouls in a quarter. I get all that...
It is also true that Pete played against mostly White guys as many parts of the SEC were segregated. Pete also took 35 shots a game to CC's 20. The difference in competition from top to bottom was wider then than it is now. Again, this record stood for 54 years with hundreds of thousands of D1 basketball players having a shot to break the record and didn't.
As others point out, this thing cuts both ways.
My frustration is nobody seems to be talking about records in college football that will never be touched. Unless the NCAA does away with years of eligibility, Bo Nix physically can't have the number of starts as a QB taken away.
What is lost in all this stuff is I am sure thousands of kids have been looking up who Pistol Pete is and understanding he was a phenomenal player. That was a cool video, thanks.
You also forgot that Marvich's Dad was his coach and continuously ran the offense through him.Maravich's long-standing collegiate scoring record is particularly notable when three factors are taken into account:
On the other hand, the Southeastern Conference's universities remained almost entirely segregated during Maravich's time on the LSU basketball team, significantly reducing the talent pool against which Maravich's record was earned. During this period, for example, Kentucky and Tennessee dominated SEC basketball, and their basketball teams remained all-white through the 1969-70 season.
- First, because of the NCAA rules that prohibited him from taking part in varsity competition during his first year as a student, Maravich was prevented from adding to his career record for a full quarter of his time at LSU. During this first year, Maravich scored 741 points in freshman competition.[7]
- Second, Maravich played before the advent of the three-point line. This significant difference has raised speculation regarding just how much higher his records would be, given his long-range shooting ability and how such a component might have altered his play. Writing for ESPN.com, Bob Carter stated, "Though Maravich played before [...] the 3-point shot was established, he loved gunning from long range."[10] It has been reported that former LSU coach Dale Brown charted every shot Maravich scored and concluded that, if his shots from three-point range had been counted as three points, Maravich's average would have totaled 57 points per game[11][12] and 12 three-pointers per game.
- Third, the shot clock had also not yet been instituted in NCAA play during Maravich's college career. (A time limit on ball possession speeds up play, mandates an additional number of field goal attempts, eliminates stalling, and increases the number of possessions throughout the game, all resulting in higher overall scoring.)[13]
Pete Maravich - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Similar threads
