Let’s compare: Girls basketball vs. boys
April 3, 2008 @ 9:11 a.m. by Joannaby joanna
A recent poster got on the girls basketball haters — rightfully so. I’ve never understood the vitriol that some people spew when it comes to girls sports. If you don’t want to watch, don’t. But don’t be downright evil when you talk about girls athletics.
But this poster made a great point about the success of girls basketball. So how about we compare for a minute.
We have 25 area teams that we put most of our attention on, including the nine City League schools.
On the boys side in the past 10 seasons, here’s what it looks like at the state level: Six City League champs, three area champs; two CL second places, one area second; four CL thirds, three area thirds; four CL fourths, three area fourths.
On the girls side in the past 10 seasons at the state level: Five CL champs, four area champs (including two undefeated teams, Andover Central and Collegiate); three CL seconds, four area seconds; four CL thirds, four area thirds; three CL fourths, two area fourths.
That’s pretty good. The championships are equal, the total placers are equal boys to girls.
OK, so you think it’s just a few girls teams winning? Yeah, that’s true. Heights and Carroll have won all five of the City League’s state girls titles, while Andale won two of the area girls titles.
But on the boys side, East and Southeast have five of the six state titles for the City League. Northwest has the other. In the area, no team has more than one title in the past 10 seasons.
Sounds the same to me.
Where it changes is in the teams that have placed — In the City League, eight of the nine schools have placed in the top four for boy in the past 10 seasons. In the girls, four of the nine schools have placed. In the area, eight of the 16 schools had boys teams place in the span, while seven of the 16 girls teams did.
Now, I understand if you prefer the boys game. The boys game is probably better across the board in the area, while in girls there tends to be a bigger disparity. Nothing worse than seeing Heights play West. But in boys, Southeast playing the worst team in the CL could still be an interesting game. Not always, but at least there’s a chance.
The boys game is faster. True. But Carroll and Heights and Goddard and Andover Central sure like to push the ball. When Circle was a dominant girls team, the T-Birds did the same.
My point is, if you don’t like the girls game, fine. You have a right to your opinion, but at least be rational about it. Fact is, there is talent in the area.
OK, so now you need proof of that? The City League, the state’s best boys basketball league, has two players going Division I (Jordan Cyphers and Adonis Gantt).
This year South has Christine Elliott and the Heights girls have Jennifer Lane and last year the Falcons had two, Savannah Ellis and Shekeira Copeland. In the area, who’s going D-I for boys? For girls it’s Andover Central’s Bailey Gee. Dery junior Joanna McFarland has already committed to Oklahoma, Goddard junior Lindsey Keller to Oklahoma State. Andover Central sophomore Tiffany Bias is a sure Division I player, so is Heights’ Mary Sims.
On the boys side, the future D-I players include 8th grader Perry Ellis. Who else?
This is off the top of my head, this is not meant to be completely comprehensive, but rather to make a point. If I left off a player, please, by all means, add it down below.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:33 am
I find with girls playing, especially when it comes to the sport of basketball, there tends to be more of an emotional connection with the team they are playing on. I sometimes feel as if I’m watching individuals play basketball on the boys side.
Girls will never be on par of fan interest on the boys’ side. So be it. For those of us who have learned to love the game, it’s a hoot, as long as the teams are competitive. That’s the key.
Bad girls basketball is quite simply the work of the devil or a well-orchestrated conspiracy toward repealing women’s suffrage.
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:08 am
Thank you Joanna for helping me prove my point. There are a lot of girls in the City League who will go D-1 or have the potential to go D-1 and are already receiving interest along with Bias and Sims. At Heights Bowen, Chisom, and Pope have already received interest from D-1 schools, so has Kamisha Richard from Southeast, Nicole Walden at Carroll, Cooper at Andover, Woods at Collegiate. All of these girls are underclassmen right now and are just examples of the upcoming talent. They were recognized originally from their performances in AAU over the summer but that is carrying over to their respective High School teams. I have another interesting question. Why do you think that more girls go D-1 than boys? Thanks for the backup!
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
“We have 25 area teams that we put most of our attention on, including the nine City League schools.
On the boys side in the past 10 seasons, here’s what it looks like: Six City League champs, three area champs; two CL second places, one area second; four CL thirds, three area thirds; four CL fourths, three area fourths.”
Can you explain this to me please, I’m having some trouble understanding it. Isn’t there a first, second, third, and fourth in the city league every year? So there would be 10 City League champs in the past 10 years right? or not?
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:41 pm
OK, a little misunderstanding here, Night. Sorry I wasn’t clearer. When I say champs, I mean state champs. So read it as Six City League state champs, three area state champs. Same with the girls — 5 City League state champs.
Glad the area champs part was more clear.
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
None of it was really clear, i figured if you cleared up one it would clear up the others also. And personally I would rather watch a decent high school boys game rather then a WNBA game.
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:32 pm
show mw a girl that can do this:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=282qlYibN84
And all the haters will shut up
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:58 am
I think Joanna hits the nail on the head. The main problem with girls basketball in this area is the large number of mismatches. There are so many games, in the City League at least, where you know going in that it can’t be competitive for even a quarter. See a few 80-20 games and you lose interest in a hurry. It’s not even much fun if you’re a fan of the winning team in such a game. I’m sure the coaches at the weaker programs want to do better, but it seems the same ones are down year after year. Do you have any solutions, Joanna?
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 4th, 2008 at 7:55 am
There could be more D-1 boys in Wichita if there grades were more important to them. I heard that Adonis Gantt is now going to Cowley County instead of Georgia Southern. Anyone else hear this?
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 4th, 2008 at 9:33 am
Onlooker has identified what, to me, is the core of the discussion about why there aren’t many male athletes from Wichita going “D-1″; it is, as I observe, not so much about their talent and athletic abilities,the existence or nonexistence of appropriate facilities, as it is about their failure to qualify academically under NCAA Proposition 42 (is that the current one, I recall its progenitor was labeled “Prop 48″).
Unless and until it is learned by the alleged “student athletes” that academic performance is important to be considered by a D-1 (or D-2, for that matter) NCAA college/university, there will I believe be a continuing wailing and gnashing of the teeth among the local high school sports fans/boosters about the perceived failure of the ATHLETIC programs to properly prepare these students for D-1 competition, ignoring what appears to me to be the 800 pound gorilla in the room; the academic requirements for eligibility for an athletic scholarship as a Freshman.
Yes, standardized test scores are also involved in this qualification, as this is a criterion to be sure; the higher the grades in the courses that the NCAA deems appropriate, the lower the test scores need to be. It is, after all, a combination of the two.
I would further suggest that the laughable KSHSAA eligibility standards are partially to blame. To my knowledge, USD 259 has no independent requirements greater than those required by KSHSAA. I will immodestly suggest that the district consider a minimum 2.0 GPA on a 4.0 scale in the requisite courses (namely those deemed needed under the NCAA rules, for athletes; for nonathletes involved in KSHSAA sanctioned activities, the Regents Recommended Curriculum) to be determined weekly as a condition for the student to be eligible.
Perhaps it would be better for these young folks to spend as much time on the academic skills as is spent on the athletic skills, rather than to concentrate on the latter to the almost exclusion of the former.
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 4th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Excellent point VT, I also believe that along with the KSHAA and School Districts that parents have to make sure their children are succeeding academically. I have a kid in High School and I approve every class schedule before they sign up for a class. I also believe that if you are not making the grades you need to succeed then you don’t need a lot of extra activities. That extra time can be spent learning so that their grades are in order. I think that girls by nature tend to be more academic minded than boys anyway. Another factor may be that the oppourtunities for girls to play professionally are a little less attractive than for boys as far as potential paydays are concerned.
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 4th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
To “up” the GPA requirements for the “student athlete” would most assuredly be construed as “racist” or at least “racially biased”
Remember when the Georgetown Coach fought the “decrease” in basketball scholarhips on the basis that it was “racially” unfair?
He won.
So if you would really like to see more D1 players from the City or Kansas for that matter, you probably stand a better chance at getting the NCAA to lower it’s standard…..
But until then, coaches in the city will keep crankin’ out juco players or worse.
My opinion? Alot of wasted jerseys.
Ahhh, but to a USD 259 administrator?
Another graduation!
Don’t forget sports greatest claim to fame in the city…
“It keeps them off the streets and connected to their school.”
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Why would that be considered racist? Grades are grades. Last time I checked the numerical grade scale wasn’t different from one race to the next.
I believe that the process is simple. You can have all the athletic talent in the world, but if you don’t have the grades you don’t get the free ride. There’s no conspiracy to it.
Are the standardized tests culturally biased…maybe so. But as Vaughn said the higher the GPA the lower you have to score.
As an outsider coming in I’ll say that this issue isn’t one specific to Wichita. The same problem looms in almost every city in every state.
College is an institution of higher learning. If you haven’t proven you can do college work then you stuck playing at the Y or elsewhere. That’s LIFE.
[REPORT A VIOLATION]
April 7th, 2008 at 11:21 am
<>
Because of the 35 city league players (boys) that started this year, 3 were white.
Let’s say 30% of the players couldn’t make the grade.
Statistically you loose 10 non white players and 1 white player.
[REPORT A VIOLATION]