|
|
Post by macpahl on Jan 8, 2004 13:39:37 GMT -5
I don't think they would be swept by any men's team. A top men's team, yes. An average men's team, no. Better ball control translates into better control when hitting/serving as well, which I think women have. It's much more rare to see a man pursuing a roll shot or a well-placed hit than a woman...
|
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Jan 8, 2004 13:58:45 GMT -5
Better ball control translates into better control when hitting/serving as well, which I think women have. It's much more rare to see a man pursuing a roll shot or a well-placed hit than a woman... True but again you have to consider the competition. What works against other Women teams will not necessarily work against the men. Average collegiate men teams are still bigger, stronger, and more ahtletic than the Women of Troy. It would be a sweep. |
|
|
|
Post by macpahl on Jan 8, 2004 14:05:29 GMT -5
IMO, bigger and stronger does not equal "better at volleyball" and does not automatically guarantee a win.
We can agree to disagree on this--maybe next year USC's schedule will include a men's team and the question will be answered.
|
|
|
|
Post by aloha on Jan 8, 2004 21:32:45 GMT -5
Women can so play sports. How many guys can run a 4.5 sec 40 meter dash?(ie Nohea tano).
|
|
|
|
Post by FemalesAreWimps on Jan 8, 2004 21:45:27 GMT -5
No but when you add that along with superior speed, height and all around better technical effeciency and you got a male victory every time quickly and easily.
I saw the women's NCAA final four and it was extremely boring. They have the rally system but the women are still slow and the serving is erratic. The fans at women's matches should wear helmets cuz there's no tellin where those uncoordinated girls are gonna send it. They sure as hell don't know how to keep it in bounds.
How can anyone get excited about a sport played on an inferior level? Volleyball is no diffrent than baseball(softball). The major diffrence is in playing speed. For instance, If a girl had to deal with a man's pitch(in volleyball's case a man's serve) she'd be driven into the ground.
Like the name says FemalesAreWimps
|
|
|
|
Post by Overlycheerful on Jan 8, 2004 22:23:39 GMT -5
I already explained it to you: women fit the dimensions of the game.
Like the name says, Perkythrice.
|
|
|
|
Post by planetasia01 on Jan 9, 2004 2:08:56 GMT -5
watch a girl jump 35-in off the ground and pound the ball, not as high as some mens' 40-in, but still 1 foot higher than most people. and that's not athletic? gimme a break
sports are much more than physical ability. emotion and will to win make any sport what it is. i would rather watch 2 mediocre teams, but emotional as hell, battle the hell outta each other than 2 "physically gifted" teams play with no feeling or emotion. this will to win exists on both men and women sides, so why try to knock one side?
it sounds to me you're trying to scapegoat women's volleyball as the cause of men's volleyball being unpopular, while you should be looking elsewhere (Title IX, scholarship distribution)
p.s. go try to dig danielle scott, kim willoughby, or april ross without crappin in ur pants
|
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Jan 9, 2004 3:55:59 GMT -5
No but when you add that along with superior speed, height and all around better technical effeciency and you got a male victory every time quickly and easily. I saw the women's NCAA final four and it was extremely boring. They have the rally system but the women are still slow and the serving is erratic. The fans at women's matches should wear helmets cuz there's no tellin where those uncoordinated girls are gonna send it. They sure as hell don't know how to keep it in bounds. How can anyone get excited about a sport played on an inferior level? Volleyball is no diffrent than baseball(softball). The major diffrence is in playing speed. For instance, If a girl had to deal with a man's pitch(in volleyball's case a man's serve) she'd be driven into the ground. Like the name says FemalesAreWimps Have you seen the number of male professional baseball players that get stuck out in demonstrations against most of the better women's softball pitchers? IMHO: Men's volleyball is what is totally boring. They make just as many errors (frankly more on their serving) in the matches I've seen as the women's teams. The men's teams are predominantly side out after side out after side out with relatively little in terms of defense and long rallies. Like your name says, you are a troll. |
|
|
|
Post by kolohekeiki on Jan 9, 2004 3:56:22 GMT -5
No but when you add that along with superior speed, height and all around better technical effeciency and you got a male victory every time quickly and easily. I saw the women's NCAA final four and it was extremely boring. They have the rally system but the women are still slow and the serving is erratic. The fans at women's matches should wear helmets cuz there's no tellin where those uncoordinated girls are gonna send it. They sure as hell don't know how to keep it in bounds. How can anyone get excited about a sport played on an inferior level? Volleyball is no diffrent than baseball(softball). The major diffrence is in playing speed. For instance, If a girl had to deal with a man's pitch(in volleyball's case a man's serve) she'd be driven into the ground. Like the name says FemalesAreWimps Well you must have been watching a different final four because I'm probably not just speaking for myself but that was great volleyball. Yeah maybe a few of Kim Willoughby's balls were out of control, but what other balls even came close to the stands? You have to be pretty bad to hit the ball into the stands and you must have been watching a totally different game because that just doesn't happen. The women's game is very entertaining because there are longer rallies. It's more then bump, set, spike in the women's game. There are a lot of digs in the women's game allowing a lot more transitions. In the men's game lots of the plays are just bing bang boom. There aren't as much rallies and it can get boring after a while. "Femalesarewimps" just get over yourself because women are just as athletic as men. Just because they are generally smaller and not as strong they can do pretty much the same things. Like I've mentioned before I bet you would get rocked off the court by the premier volleyball players in the world such as Logan Tom, Danielle Scott, Kim Willoughby, Ogonna Nnamani. I bet you wouldn't be able to hang with any of them. So before you start putting down women lets see you get on the court with these women and see if you can hang with them. |
|
|
|
Post by hrhsam on Jan 9, 2004 14:13:55 GMT -5
It's funny, but I was watching the game right before the UH men's game yesterday, and Willoughby's serve could definitely hang with the men.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mumsie on Jan 9, 2004 14:16:02 GMT -5
Does anyone think that "Femalesarewimps" is just "Wolfgang" trying to get reactions out of people on a slow women's volleyball month?
Only Roger knows...
|
|
|
|
Post by Overlycheerful on Jan 9, 2004 16:25:33 GMT -5
I do! I do!
Nah. I take it back. Wolfgang is more subtle than this...
|
|
GWBu%*$#
Freshman
Does this mean you could be a Pinhead?
Posts: 54
|
Post by GWBu%*$# on Jan 9, 2004 19:14:42 GMT -5
Females for the most parts are weak in sports. They aren't fast, strong nor do they have anywhere near the physical talent that fellas have. So why are there guys in here concentrating so hard on what these girls are doing? Are you guys that desperate for some booty? Females aren't fast as men are? If this is the case, then why is it that some females beat some men in marathons races? Or is it, you think it is a fluke that some females reach the finish line before some men do? Females not as srtong as men are too? I know this female that bench presses 250lbs (and she is still adding on to that weight as well). How much can you bench press? Another thing, I guess when you concentrate on the men's volleyball matches, you are actually being desperate for those men's booties and not the art of the sport itself, right? |
|
hud
Freshman
Posts: 87
|
Post by hud on Jan 9, 2004 19:35:24 GMT -5
I don't think they would be swept by any men's team. A top men's team, yes. An average men's team, no. Better ball control translates into better control when hitting/serving as well, which I think women have. It's much more rare to see a man pursuing a roll shot or a well-placed hit than a woman... Even though I think this thread is ridiculous I can't help myself. Good volleyball is good volleyball...it doesn't matter which gender. While the USC womens team is fantastic you can't really argue that they would beat an average men's team. For example UCLA's (mens) record was 15-14...average at best. Would USC beat UCLA? NO. |
|
|
|
Post by macpahl on Jan 10, 2004 16:37:18 GMT -5
My argument was not that they would definitely beat any men's team.
It was that I think it would be a good match--the men wouldn't sweep merely because of their "physical dominance."
|
|
