Merging men's and women's stats

[Bulldog Bruce]

Anyone else have a problem with the current push to say Caitlin Clark is passing Pete Maravich in the NCAA basketball scoring? She is doing amazing things and has made women's college basketball a must watch for many people (men and women). I just don't like the merging of disparate leagues and divisions. I don't like a division 3 football player given credit for a division 1 record. So I also don't like comparing men's and women's divisions. Heck I wonder if she is making the women's version of a sport more relevant than the men's. It is arguable that She is probably the most recognized name in college basketball right now. I sure can name her and Angel Reese before any current male college basketball player.

I personally think it hinders comparing one division to the other. I watch college baseball much more often that professional baseball but I don't compare them because it is obvious which is the "better" baseball. If I watched them in the same way, I obviously would watch the "better" baseball. I don't watch a women's tennis match with comparing the play to a men's tennis match. I watch women's fastpitch softball at times but I am not comparing it to baseball as I watch it. I watch each sport as an entity of it's own.

 

[HumpDawgy]

I'm sure Caitlyn is fantastic, but I'm not watching women's basketball until Shaquita comes out of retirement.***

 

[maroonmania]

Seems pretty nuts to me. Besides a lot of other differentiating factors, Men and Women don't even use the same size basketball when playing the game.

 

[mstateglfr]

I don't have a problem with it because up until just now, I didn't even know there is an effort to merge the stats.
I googled a bit and haven't found this claimed push to merge stats. Admittedly, I only spent 2min looking.

I did find an espn article that references Clark is close to overtaking Maravich for the all-time ncaa scoring record.
I don't view that article as doing what you are saying though.
That article claims Maravich is the current holder of this 'record'...so that means it is already merged, right?


Anyways, nope I don't care.
The game in the 70s is completely different from now. He played in fewer games. Heck, I'm pretty sure he played before the NCAA had a women's tournament.
Comparing then to now is goofy. Comparing now to then is goofy.
I don't get worked up over goofy things like that.

 

[theoriginalSALTYdog]

Anyone else have a problem with the current push to say Caitlin Clark is passing Pete Maravich in the NCAA basketball scoring? She is doing amazing things and has made women's college basketball a must watch for many people (men and women). I just don't like the merging of disparate leagues and divisions. I don't like a division 3 football player given credit for a division 1 record. So I also don't like comparing men's and women's divisions. Heck I wonder if she is making the women's version of a sport more relevant than the men's. It is arguable that She is probably the most recognized name in college basketball right now. I sure can name her and Angel Reese before any current male college basketball player.

I personally think it hinders comparing one division to the other. I watch college baseball much more often that professional baseball but I don't compare them because it is obvious which is the "better" baseball. If I watched them in the same way, I obviously would watch the "better" baseball. I don't watch a women's tennis match with comparing the play to a men's tennis match. I watch women's fastpitch softball at times but I am not comparing it to baseball as I watch it. I watch each sport as an entity of it's own.

If we're going to start going down this road let's just do away with women's sports all the way around. Let's not differentiate between men's and women's teams and just have one team. If women are good enough to play then so be it. If not, oh well. I mean we have to treat everyone equally, right?

 

[Bulldog Bruce]

I don't have a problem with it because up until just now, I didn't even know there is an effort to merge the stats.
I googled a bit and haven't found this claimed push to merge stats. Admittedly, I only spent 2min looking.

I did find an espn article that references Clark is close to overtaking Maravich for the all-time ncaa scoring record.
I don't view that article as doing what you are saying though.
That article claims Maravich is the current holder of this 'record'...so that means it is already merged, right?


Anyways, nope I don't care.
The game in the 70s is completely different from now. He played in fewer games. Heck, I'm pretty sure he played before the NCAA had a women's tournament.
Comparing then to now is goofy. Comparing now to then is goofy.
I don't get worked up over goofy things like that.

It is not officially merging. I am talking about the need for all sports and social media to present it in that fashion. It is not just ESPN. The fact is there is no way for her to break Pete Maravich's record and it shouldn't even be discussed.

 

[ronpolk]

It is not officially merging. I am talking about the need for all sports and social media to present it in that fashion. It is not just ESPN. The fact is there is no way for her to break Pete Maravich's record and it shouldn't even be discussed.

So you just don’t like people making a comparison to show what she is accomplishing? I think it’s just a way to grab people’s attention when they say she is about to score as many points as Maravich did. For me personally, someone could say she is about to break the women’s all time scoring record and I have no frame of reference as to how many points that is or how good she has really been. I know Maravich was great, so when you say she’s scoring as many or more points than Maravich it’s a good way to illustrate how good she has been.

 

[StillTbonewannabe]

They are already talking about whatever women's basketball coach passing Coach K on the all time wins list. I think it is really dumb.

I bet they don't combine track and field. The all time fastest times would all be men, same with swimming. It would probably be a handful of womens in the top 100 fastest times.

 

[Dawgg]

Anyone else have a problem with the current push to say Caitlin Clark is passing Pete Maravich in the NCAA basketball scoring? She is doing amazing things and has made women's college basketball a must watch for many people (men and women). I just don't like the merging of disparate leagues and divisions. I don't like a division 3 football player given credit for a division 1 record. So I also don't like comparing men's and women's divisions. Heck I wonder if she is making the women's version of a sport more relevant than the men's. It is arguable that She is probably the most recognized name in college basketball right now. I sure can name her and Angel Reese before any current male college basketball player.

I personally think it hinders comparing one division to the other. I watch college baseball much more often that professional baseball but I don't compare them because it is obvious which is the "better" baseball. If I watched them in the same way, I obviously would watch the "better" baseball. I don't watch a women's tennis match with comparing the play to a men's tennis match. I watch women's fastpitch softball at times but I am not comparing it to baseball as I watch it. I watch each sport as an entity of it's own.

No, for a few reasons:
1. It's just being pushed that way to get people to watch more women's basketball now that she has eclipsed Kelsey Plum's women's record. It's not like it's anything 'official'. Same way I go to this page and see nothing about UConn winning 111 straight: https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketbal...st-winning-streaks-college-basketball-history

2. You could make the argument that even within its own division, each 'record' is subject to its own nuances because we've figuratively and literally moved the goal posts multiple times in every league, added shot clocks, shortened shot clocks, added 3 pt lines, moved 3 pt lines, changed block/charges, added pitching clocks, changed the kick off lines, changed the balls, changed the bats, added number of games to a season, changed postseason formats, broke halves into quarters, changed the definition of fouls & penalties, disallowed offensive formations, disallowed defensive formations, etc.. in a way that makes it almost impossible to truly make an apples to apples comparison from one era to another.

3. I've heard literally nobody say she's in anyway better than Pistol Pete and even if they did, I'm pretty sure The Pistol stopped caring about this record about 36 years ago.

4. Life is too damn short. Let the girl have her moment in the sun. It's likely going to be the most media attention she gets in her entire life.

 

[patdog]

It's ridiculous to compare. Men's basketball and women's basketball are two different sports. Not to mention, Maravich played in the days of freshman ineligibility, so he only played 3 years to Clark's 4. He averaged over 44 ppg to Clark's 28.

 

[mstateglfr]

It is not officially merging. I am talking about the need for all sports and social media to present it in that fashion. It is not just ESPN. The fact is there is no way for her to break Pete Maravich's record and it shouldn't even be discussed.

Yeah, this really just isnt something I can find outrage or passion for...on either end of things.
Again though, there already is an 'all time scoring leader regardless of gender' according to ESPN since they wrote an article jus yesterday that said- "...Iowa women's college basketball star Caitlin Clark, who is closing in on passing Maravich for the Division I men's and women's scoring mark."

Whether there is an all time leader or not is quite meaningless since the games are different and the eras are different. But if you are going to get up in arms over Clark being seen as the soon to be all time scoring leader regardless of gender, then shouldnt you also be just as up in arms over Maravich being the current all time scoring leader regardless of gender?
^ that isnt a rhetorical question, I really would be interested to hear your view since you need to either be just as upset or you are simply inconsistent.

I genuinely do believe that if a men's player ever comes along and breaks Maravich's and Clark's scoring records, there will be articles that point out that he has scored more points than anyone else ever has in college basketball, regardless of gender.

GAS level is on E with regard to your initial question.

 

[mstateglfr]

They are already talking about whatever women's basketball coach passing Coach K on the all time wins list. I think it is really dumb.

Yall need to consume some other 'news' because life goes on and you can still be really informed on sports and life without knowing this. I had no idea that Auriemma and Vanderveer both recently passed Coach K for total wins.
Me not knowing before just now has not hurt me in life at all. And me now knowing doesnt help me in life at all.

So many seem to get worked up over what ultimately amounts to noise and filler that is passed off as news.
Or if you see a headline or article about this, just go 'thats dumb' and move on.

 

[aTotal360]

It's ridiculous to compare. Men's basketball and women's basketball are two different sports. Not to mention, Maravich played in the days of freshman ineligibility, so he only played 3 years to Clark's 4. He averaged over 44 ppg to Clark's 28.

Maravich played 83 games. Clark is going to play around 40% more games than him. It’s comparing apples to oranges.

 

[FormerBully]

It's ridiculous to compare. Men's basketball and women's basketball are two different sports. Not to mention, Maravich played in the days of freshman ineligibility, so he only played 3 years to Clark's 4. He averaged over 44 ppg to Clark's 28.

He also played before there was a three-point line.

 

[DesotoCountyDawg]

It's ridiculous to compare. Men's basketball and women's basketball are two different sports. Not to mention, Maravich played in the days of freshman ineligibility, so he only played 3 years to Clark's 4. He averaged over 44 ppg to Clark's 28.

He also had no three point line. Imagine his scoring if he had it because he took some deep shots.

ETA: I see the post above about the 3 point line.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

Yeah, this really just isnt something I can find outrage or passion for...on either end of things.
Again though, there already is an 'all time scoring leader regardless of gender' according to ESPN since they wrote an article jus yesterday that said- "...Iowa women's college basketball star Caitlin Clark, who is closing in on passing Maravich for the Division I men's and women's scoring mark."

Whether there is an all time leader or not is quite meaningless since the games are different and the eras are different. But if you are going to get up in arms over Clark being seen as the soon to be all time scoring leader regardless of gender, then shouldnt you also be just as up in arms over Maravich being the current all time scoring leader regardless of gender?
^ that isnt a rhetorical question, I really would be interested to hear your view since you need to either be just as upset or you are simply inconsistent.

I genuinely do believe that if a men's player ever comes along and breaks Maravich's and Clark's scoring records, there will be articles that point out that he has scored more points than anyone else ever has in college basketball, regardless of gender.

GAS level is on E with regard to your initial question.

Amazing that for someone who doesn't care, you've still managed to spend 470 words across three separate posts to tell us how little you care.

@DesotoCountyDawg Add him to the list.

 

[DesotoCountyDawg]

Amazing that for someone who doesn't care, you've still managed to spend 470 words across three separate posts to tell us how little you care.

@DesotoCountyDawg Add him to the list.

I need to start a spreadsheet with the topics people say they don’t care about. Would be kinda fascinating**

 

[mstateglfr]

Amazing that for someone who doesn't care, you've still managed to spend 470 words across three separate posts to tell us how little you care.

@DesotoCountyDawg Add him to the list.

Ha, yeah I recognize the humor in it.
I dont care if some news outlets call it an all time record regardless of gender or not. But apparently I do care that people get worked up over it.

 

[SanfordRJones]

If this is what is keeping you up at night, I'd like to change lives with you.

 

[BulldogBlitz]

So.....how will the records, or how they are looked at be changed, in weightlifting so women don't get their feelings hurt because they won't sniff a record in a weight class.

 

[Bulldog Bruce]

Yeah, this really just isnt something I can find outrage or passion for...on either end of things.
Again though, there already is an 'all time scoring leader regardless of gender' according to ESPN since they wrote an article jus yesterday that said- "...Iowa women's college basketball star Caitlin Clark, who is closing in on passing Maravich for the Division I men's and women's scoring mark."

Whether there is an all time leader or not is quite meaningless since the games are different and the eras are different. But if you are going to get up in arms over Clark being seen as the soon to be all time scoring leader regardless of gender, then shouldnt you also be just as up in arms over Maravich being the current all time scoring leader regardless of gender?
^ that isnt a rhetorical question, I really would be interested to hear your view since you need to either be just as upset or you are simply inconsistent.

I genuinely do believe that if a men's player ever comes along and breaks Maravich's and Clark's scoring records, there will be articles that point out that he has scored more points than anyone else ever has in college basketball, regardless of gender.

GAS level is on E with regard to your initial question.

It's not hard. Maravich holds the all time men's NCAA scoring record. He can't hold the women's. There is no such thing as an overall record since men's and women's basketball are different games. Just as there should not be an overall NCAA Home Run record or a overall touchdown record. There is a Division 1 record and separate Division 2 and Division 3 records. Girl's softball Home Runs are also separate.

Matter of fact when that kid from Delta State hit 31 HRs and they said he set the Mississippi State record for collegiate HRs over me and Rafael. That was total BS. He was not playing division 1 and therefore it is something else.

 

[RocketDawg]

It's ridiculous to compare. Men's basketball and women's basketball are two different sports. Not to mention, Maravich played in the days of freshman ineligibility, so he only played 3 years to Clark's 4. He averaged over 44 ppg to Clark's 28.

And, there was no 3-point shot in those days.

I saw Pistol Pete play once when LSU came to State. They guy was fantastic. I've never seen anybody, college or NBA, that could handle and shoot the ball like he did. He was literally dribbling the ball through our players' legs. The only thing remotely comparable are members of the Harlem Globetrotters, except Pete was playing for real.

 

[NukeDogg]

It's not hard. Maravich holds the all time men's NCAA scoring record. He can't hold the women's. There is no such thing as an overall record since men's and women's basketball are different games. Just as there should not be an overall NCAA Home Run record or a overall touchdown record. There is a Division 1 record and separate Division 2 and Division 3 records. Girl's softball Home Runs are also separate.

Matter of fact when that kid from Delta State hit 31 HRs and they said he set the Mississippi State record for collegiate HRs over me and Rafael. That was total BS. He was not playing division 1 and therefore it is something else.

I thought the same thing a couple years ago when our own Mia Davidson was chasing the MSU career home run record - softball and baseball are different sports, so should absolutley be different records...

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Statistics are nothing but a talking point in college sports. The main thing is winning and losing, and then the extraordinary part of it, like say a Johnny Manziel or Caitlyn Clark or whatever. That's what builds the brand, that's what drives NIL.

Does anybody remember Johnny Football's stats? Cam Newton's? Tim Tebow's? Even Steve McNair's? Nope. The only stats that' truly matter are the ones that project how a team will do, like advanced metrics, again - winning and losing.

Stats, especially individual stats, become much more useful in pro sports, schedules are much more equal, more games, etc.

I don't need Josh Hubbard's statistics to tell me he played a great college game. Your eyeballs tell you that.

So do I care about Caitlyn Clark's stats? Nope. All I know is LSU beat them last year, and that Clark is now used by the guys who want to appear to be smart fans to show how much they appreciate things like women basketball. Get back to me when she's in the final four again Mulkey again. That's what matters.

And to get back down to earth - I don't even care about Raffy's or Rooker's conference Triple Crowns. I don't care about Mangum's conference hit record. I care that those guys were incredible players who pounded the baseball - I don't need a number to tell me that. Don't get wrong, they exist, so I'm glad an MSU player got them, but I care much more about the results those things gave us on the field.

 

[jdbulldog]

Anyone else have a problem with the current push to say Caitlin Clark is passing Pete Maravich in the NCAA basketball scoring? She is doing amazing things and has made women's college basketball a must watch for many people (men and women). I just don't like the merging of disparate leagues and divisions. I don't like a division 3 football player given credit for a division 1 record. So I also don't like comparing men's and women's divisions. Heck I wonder if she is making the women's version of a sport more relevant than the men's. It is arguable that She is probably the most recognized name in college basketball right now. I sure can name her and Angel Reese before any current male college basketball player.

I personally think it hinders comparing one division to the other. I watch college baseball much more often that professional baseball but I don't compare them because it is obvious which is the "better" baseball. If I watched them in the same way, I obviously would watch the "better" baseball. I don't watch a women's tennis match with comparing the play to a men's tennis match. I watch women's fastpitch softball at times but I am not comparing it to baseball as I watch it. I watch each sport as an entity of it's own.

Caitlin is an awesome women’s basketball player. Her play is phenomenal and her spirit is unwavering. That said, Caitlin is not Pete Maravich.

 

[Dawgg]

I thought the same thing a couple years ago when our own Mia Davidson was chasing the MSU career home run record - softball and baseball are different sports, so should absolutley be different records...

Right, but wasn't it kind of fun to see Mia Davidson hit home runs when she played for us? Don't arbitrary markers kind of make any chase for a record a little more interesting by putting into a fun context? Was anybody on here or in the local media that, in earnest, in anyway saying Mia Davidson was somehow better than Rafael Palmeiro?

Do you think Rafael Palmeiro was in any way disrespected by Mississippi State's marketing team by making those comparisons? We literally built a statue of him and he was at the goddam game and was tweeting at her to break his record.

I feel like these things just make the games a little more fun and interesting and I don't understand why so many grown аss men get butthurt about them.

Also, I've never turned on a Mississippi State baseball game or heard a Mississippi State radio broadcast and had the announce team remind us how many home runs the player needs to catch Mia Davidson.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

I don't have a problem with it because up until just now, I didn't even know there is an effort to merge the stats.
I googled a bit and haven't found this claimed push to merge stats. Admittedly, I only spent 2min looking.

I did find an espn article that references Clark is close to overtaking Maravich for the all-time ncaa scoring record.
I don't view that article as doing what you are saying though.
That article claims Maravich is the current holder of this 'record'...so that means it is already merged, right?


Anyways, nope I don't care.
The game in the 70s is completely different from now. He played in fewer games. Heck, I'm pretty sure he played before the NCAA had a women's tournament.
Comparing then to now is goofy. Comparing now to then is goofy.
I don't get worked up over goofy things like that.

delete - the three-point question has already been made.

 

[60sdog]

I don't have a problem with it because up until just now, I didn't even know there is an effort to merge the stats.
I googled a bit and haven't found this claimed push to merge stats. Admittedly, I only spent 2min looking.

I did find an espn article that references Clark is close to overtaking Maravich for the all-time ncaa scoring record.
I don't view that article as doing what you are saying though.
That article claims Maravich is the current holder of this 'record'...so that means it is already merged, right?


Anyways, nope I don't care.
The game in the 70s is completely different from now. He played in fewer games. Heck, I'm pretty sure he played before the NCAA had a women's tournament.
Comparing then to now is goofy. Comparing now to then is goofy.
I don't get worked up over goofy things like that.

Maravich also did not have the benefit of the three-point shot. If he had, his lifetime average per game would have been well above 50 points.

 

[TXDawg.sixpack]

Men's & women's records should absolutely be kept separate; as well as different divisions and levels of college (DI, DII, NAIA, Junior College, etc).

If we're combining, let's combine them all. By that standard, Clark isn't close to holding the women's career scoring title. That crown belongs to Pearl Moore of Francis Marion (AIAW) with 4,061. Clark's at 3,650 and likely won't make it above 4,000.

 

[mstateglfr]

Maravich also did not have the benefit of the three-point shot. If he had, his lifetime average per game would have been well above 50 points.

Yes, the lack of 3pt line is part of what I was speaking to when I said the game in the 70s was completely different from now.
But if I missed the first 15 posts that pointed out the lack of 3pt line when Maravich played at LSU, rest assured I saw your comment.

 

[RocketDawg]

Maravich also did not have the benefit of the three-point shot. If he had, his lifetime average per game would have been well above 50 points.

Pretty sure there wasn't a shot clock when Pete played either, so the game was much slower paced. LSU was known for "freezing" the ball in those days, so with faster action Pete likely would have scored much more.

 

[dorndawg]

I bet they don't combine track and field. The all time fastest times would all be men, same with swimming. It would probably be a handful of womens in the top 100 fastest times.

I was just curious how these 100m dash records compare - and honestly, they don't at all. The women's all-time record is 10.49, set by Flo-Jo in 1988. I'm not sure that would rank in the top 25,000 in the men's record book. The second site has the top 3,700+ all-time times for men, which stops at 10.09. Testosterone is a helluva drug.

100 metres - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Men's 100m

100m, 100 meter, 100 metres, statistics

www.alltime-athletics.com

 

[mstateglfr]

Well she did it...or didn't do it.

In related news, a tree fell in the woods.

 

[She Mate Me]

They are already talking about whatever women's basketball coach passing Coach K on the all time wins list. I think it is really dumb.

I bet they don't combine track and field. The all time fastest times would all be men, same with swimming. It would probably be a handful of womens in the top 100 fastest times.

There wouldn't be any women in the Top 1,000+ fastest times.

 

[She Mate Me]

Maravich played 83 games. Clark is going to play around 40% more games than him. It’s comparing apples to oranges.

Well, he did take like twice as many shots a game as she did. And this is not to argue any point, just information.

 

[eckie1]

Well, he did take like twice as many shots a game as she did. And this is not to argue any point, just information.

And he did it with a regulation-sized ball in only 3 seasons. Nobody will ever come close to what the Pistol did on the court. No man, and no woman. It’s shameful that the NCAA is trivializing his accomplishments with this, tbh.

I’ve said it before, adjust the damn diameter of the rim for women. The ball is a full inch smaller and the rim should be, too. I get the size and strength limitations, but this would make it much more of an apples to apples comparison. You’re basically telling women that they couldn’t dream of shooting like the men do, and giving them a crutch.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

Well, he did take like twice as many shots a game as she did. And this is not to argue any point, just information.

Yeah, they tried to use this to justify it today. They said Kaitlyn shot 19 times a game versus 38 for pistol Pete, like it really 17ing matters. Is a totally different game already. Why try to dig down into the numbers when you're just trying to use them for your advantage. She's a great player and she has done a great things I feel at least it cheapens the whole scoring records just to try to one is better than the other. It really doesn't matter. They're both great.

 

[She Mate Me]

And he did it with a regulation-sized ball in only 3 seasons. Nobody will ever come close to what the Pistol did on the court. No man, and no woman. It’s shameful that the NCAA is trivializing his accomplishments with this, tbh.

I’ve said it before, adjust the damn diameter of the rim for women. The ball is a full inch smaller and the rim should be, too. I get the size and strength limitations, but this would make it much more of an apples to apples comparison. You’re basically telling women that they couldn’t dream of shooting like the men do, and giving them a crutch.

They're both incredible players. I don't think any of this attention on Clark is taking anything from the players she has passed in points.

 

[mstateglfr]

It’s shameful that the NCAA is trivializing his accomplishments with this, tbh.

Shameful? Ha, what is the NCAA actually doing that has trivialized this?
The scoring record was mentioned on their site, but that's no different from the 5,438 other sites that also released an article about the record.

And if she now holds this supposed record, then that means Maravich held it for the last 40+ years. So it was either a record he held, or it is not a record because the games are too different. It can't be both, yet poutraged folk seem to currently argue it as both.
I dont remember anyone losing their poop these last 4 decades while a man held the 'record'.


Anyways, really now- what specifically is the NCAA doing that is shameful and trivializing? It better be a lot, for those charged accusations to be applicable.

 

[leeinator]

Cam Matthews should declare trans and enter the WNBA draft. Caitlin Clark would not even get a shot off with Cam guarding her. Plus, Cam could make the millions instead of her. I'm sure Cam's roughly 10 ppg average would go up to about 50 ppg in the WNBA. Let's see........."Camelotta Matthews" sounds good.