April 6, 2006
Continued rejoicing for Maryland's NCAA victory
Take a look at the picture at the right, from the Washington Post.
This may be the shot that changed a sport.
I'm not kidding, either. Look at Kristi Toliver's ice-water in the veins three-pointer over a 6-foot-7 Duke player, with 6 seconds left, to send the Maryland-Duke game into overtime.
She's got game.
This beats anything in the men's NCAA Final Four this year.
What wonderful aesthetics -- Toliver elevated, brave and fearless, sunk the shot with perfect mechanics, and not by lucky accident, but by will and determination to avoid losing. This was not second best, some pale imitation of the men's game, but the real deal for sports fans.
Fortunately, ratings were way up for the women's final this year, and what a game viewers saw.
At right, see a picture of the reaction to Toliver's shot. People watching around the country shared similar amazement to that of Toliver and her euphoric teammates. "Unbelievable!" my soccer buddy Deb C. e-mailed me.
The Baltimore Sun's David Steele writes, in "Once barely relevant, UM women now inspire revelry from students" (April 6, 2006), of how far the women's game has come in a generation:
If you do see the games from then, it's like watching black-and-white film of the NBA of Bob Cousy's era. The quantum leap in athleticism, skill and depth of the talent pool in the past 20 years or so, is astonishing. Debate the legitimacy of the dunks Tennessee's Candace Parker pulled off earlier in the tournament if you like. But the play, from beginning to end, that Kristi Toliver made to send the final into overtime was phenomenal by any standards, and should silence at least a few more doubts about how good the sport is.Both Toliver and Parker are freshmen, by the way. There's more of this to come.
NOTE: The game will be repeated tonight at 9 p.m. on ESPN Classic (Baltimore cable channel 6).
People are still digesting the implications. For one, Maryland's men's program suddenly looks exposed for what it is: Truly failed recruiting after the 2002 national championship. See my earlier blog entry, A Maryland fan watches the NCAAs, as well as the Baltimore Sun's Rick Maese, "To avoid men's blueprint, Frese will build off title" (April 6, 2006):
[Maryland men's Coach Gary] Williams didn't capitalize on two great basketball teams because of troubles recruiting, an area which happens to be [Maryland women's Coach Brenda] Frese's forte. You can't win a title and wait by the telephone.Last week in Boston, each of Frese's players was asked at some point the main reason she chose Maryland. None said the teammates. None mentioned Comcast Center. None pointed to the school's academics. The personal relationship established with Frese, each told reporters.
My husband Lamont cautions against turning too quickly on Gary Williams, who after all, bought a championship four years ago.
He also provided the viewpoint of a once-skeptical male in a comment on my blog yesterday. It's such a good comment that I am pulling into my own blog here for better visibility. From Lamont:
I'm not ready to declare a 180 degree turn on my view of women's basketball. After torturing myself on WNBA for 3 years and giving up on it I'll need more to start watching the sport. Maryland's NCAA win was what I call "A good game."At first I sat there because after playing midfield for 90 minutes with no sub I was too exhausted to move. I groaned at first, only consoling myself that if I could sit through the 40-year old Virgin I could handle this. But as Maryland fought back and Toliver put in numerous 3-pointers, I was impressed.
As they closed the gap in spite of Duke responding with their own 3-pointers there was no way I was going to move. From watching, I could tell it was going to come down to one shot, and with the ball in Toliver's hands I was thinking she could be the best female ball player I've ever seen. The over-time was just as interesting.
I am still a bit reserved about women's basketball, most of them still shoot from the hip instead of over the head, making it easy to block their shots, and though I find the preoccupation with dunking in the men's game annoying, I still like the power game at the right moments.
I also liked the Maryland coach, looked like a cross between Gates McFadden and Lisa Kudrow, excited and into the game would wander onto the court cheering and coaching. Good passion.
I was pleased that they called a foul when Wilson used her shoulder to floor a Maryland player (I wish they'd call that on Shaq istead of making bogus rules to contain him) But I think that basketball refs are among the worst in the world, so there are always calls that revolt me.
Amazingly the women can make their free-throws.
Women's basketball still has a way to go, but that was a good start for me.
WOMEN'S SPORTS I WILL WATCH:
-Women's soccer: Credit Jeannette for twisting my arm, I like it about 90% as much as the men's game overall. The WUSA was better visually than the MLS at times (except when keepers in the 3rd season had trouble reaching midfield with goal kicks).
The team work was more enjoyable than some World Cup teams who fall back too much on showing off individual skills at times.
Do NOT, however, watch the women's game AFTER watching Barcelona, Madrid or Arsenal. You need to watch it first.
-Womens Tennis: I loved it in the late 1990s when Monica, Gabriel and Steffi were playing. Serena and Hingis are very exciting now. More rallies or returns in the women's game. The courts are almost too small for the men's game.
-Beach Volleyball: Whatever... its not just about the outfits and attractive women, I can look at sports illustrated to see that, they are fantastic athletes... who happen to be really attractive in skimpy outfits. I had to laugh during the last Olympics when the networks tried to bury it in the early programming. By the quarter finals they were delaying the broadcasts till 10:30 pm to keep you watching.
-Boxing: In spite of myself, I've been transfixed every time I've seen it. They don't show enough of it.
Remember personal info?
