WNBA?

Why can't a WNBA game be developed?

Probably because there isn't much demand for one and it would sell rather poorly.

How many people even watch that?

There were WNBA All-Star teams in Live 09 on the Wii.

and they were dunking in NBA Homecourt 2 years ago.

Just reduce everyones ratings by 50.

Why not a HS game? WNBA plays on the level of men's HS basketball.

How about Jesus in a game, he can ball.

no, he's a known cheater

phpBB [video]

I think the popularity of parodies like that demonstrates the lack of a market for a WNBA game.

I personally like the WNBA, even managed to keep in touch via e-mail with a couple of players.

I guess people just want WNBA to be more like NBA lite, and that will never be the case. The game is played differently. WNBA is way more old school, with players more focused in teamwork, passing and finding the open girl than looking for one-on-one situations, isolations or flashy plays. I couldn't care less about dunking - dunking is an element of the game, but it's not essential. I think the average WNBA player is more fundamentally sound than the average NBA guy, even though I have to admit that the NBA stars are quite better than the WNBA ones.

The thing is, the league started as NBA's sister, and people always compared it to the big brother. The co-ownership of teams (Sting-Hornets, Comets-Rockets, Sparks-Lakers) didn't help either. And the fact that many teams have folded over the years is not promising, probably as a consequence of expanding too fast too soon. But the league is more solid now than 4 years ago, even financially. The squads are more competitive than those from 2000 or 1997.

The other problem is the inability to attract every great foreign player to the league. European salaries are way better (sometimes, they triplicate the WNBA ones), and the European season is 8 months long, between local and international matches. The WNBA is played during the off-season, and some girls want to rest, or to prepare for the Olympics/World Championships.

And of course, any women's sport is usually bashed when compared to men. It happens with tennis, it happens with soccer, it happens with basketball. Probably field hockey is an exception, at least here in Argentina, where our national squad is quite often among the best, surpassing by far the men's achievements and trophies.

I digress, but I would buy a WNBA game. I understand it would sell rather poorly, and it's not financially advisable to develop such a product. But I would buy it.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mean to be sexist or suggest that absolutely nobody watches and enjoys women's sports (but as far as that video is concerned, when it comes to comedy pretty much everything is fair game; the NBA included). I'm sure the market is there, but it's likely not big enough to justify the time and cost required to produce it. I think you'd need to include a couple of WNBA teams in NBA Live first and gauge interest in a WNBA title.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mean to be sexist or suggest that absolutely nobody watches and enjoys women's sports (but as far as that video is concerned, when it comes to comedy pretty much everything is fair game; the NBA included). I'm sure the market is there, but it's likely not big enough to justify the time and cost required to produce it. I think you'd need to include a couple of WNBA teams in NBA Live first and gauge interest in a WNBA title.

Please, don't misunderstand me. I wasn't talking specifically at you or about you. In fact, I think you just pointed out the truth: the game is not marketable. And you weren't sexist or offensive at all.

I was just expressing my opinion, and my experience tells me that, in general, people consider the WNBA as a joke. I disagree, but I think it has to do with excessive expectations. A woman isn't built like a man, and there are things that a girl simply cannot do. Once you get that straight, you may be able to enjoy their game a little more.

Again, my post was targeted to those who bash the WNBA, and usually don't have many arguments ("they don't dunk", "they suck" or "they are lesbos" aside). I don't know, I enjoy NBA, and I like the WNBA too. Besides, when the NBA offseason starts, the WNBA begins, and vice versa, so everything's fine and dandy.

Not at all, I didn't feel you were coming after me specifically but I felt like clarifying my position all the same. I think you're spot on in your assertion that most people consider the WNBA a joke when it is a legitimate sport, albeit one I don't watch myself. If I had to disagree on one point however, I don't think NBA players get quite enough credit for their fundamentals. There are certainly players who aren't fundamentally sound but I think with the flashiness that some players show, their strong fundamentals tend to get overlooked.

If I had to disagree on one point however, I don't think NBA players get quite enough credit for their fundamentals. There are certainly players who aren't fundamentally sound but I think with the flashiness that some players show, their strong fundamentals tend to get overlooked.

I do not think that NBA players aren't fundamentally sound. I especially love those players, and they tend to be my favorites, from talents like Duncan or Stockton to blue collar guys like Nick Collison, who aren't stars, who are not physically gifted, but compensate with fundamentals and great basketball HQ.

I'm talking about:

1) Those guys that are so interested in their flashiness and the SportsCenter highlights, that they just don't care about the game. This defines the careers of Harold Miner, Gerald Green, or (even though he was more successful) Isaiah Rider. Just a waste of talent.

2) The average NBA guy. The Jason Kaponos of the league. Those players have fundamentals, but their WNBA counterparts are more fundamentally sound. They tend to be specialists (three point shooter, shot blocker, man-to-man defender), and not much else. And sometimes they are lacking in some aspect of their game. Of course, there are many exceptions, but you don't have WNBA players with glaring holes in their games, except maybe PGs who can't shoot.

I agree in regards to the Harold Miners of the world, the NBA certainly leaves the door open for raw athletes who can jump out of the gym but aren't particularly polished in other areas. I'm not sure that I'd call a specialist like Kapono the average NBA player though, but even if we go that way I think players like that can pass and defend well enough to be called fairly fundamentally sound.

I agree in regards to the Harold Miners of the world, the NBA certainly leaves the door open for raw athletes who can jump out of the gym but aren't particularly polished in other areas. I'm not sure that I'd call a specialist like Kapono the average NBA player though, but even if we go that way I think players like that can pass and defend well enough to be called fairly fundamentally sound.

Fair enough. Kapono is a specialist. I use the term "Average" as in "good enough to be an important part of the rotation, but not good enough to lead or be a star". Not a benchwarmer or towel waver. And I like having players like Kapono in my squad. They are useful and they understand how to play as a team and what a role player must do.

I don't want to digress even more (this is a WNBA topic after all), so I'll just tell a story and leave it at that. Carlos Morales, a Puerto Rican coach, is the play-by-play analyst in ESPN Latin America. It's great to listen to the guy, he actually takes time to explain tactics and to provide in-depth analysis. And he may criticize a player without being malicious. In a Timberwolves game, he suddenly stated that Wally Szczerbiak (then in Minnesota) simply cannot dribble with his left hand. And it was absolutely true, as even the play-by-play announcer started to pay attention to that detail. Szczerbiak would bounce the ball once, at best. And this is more than the average NBA player. He was a top three player in his squad, and he even played an All-Star Game.

Again, I agree the NBA players are fundamentally sound, even more than they get credit for. I just think that the WNBA, as a whole, is a little bit better. A little bit. But better nevertheless.

even though I have to admit that the NBA stars are quite better than the WNBA ones.

Lol really going out on a limb there.

I think a few years ago EA had women college basketball teams in their March Madness game. They had like 8 schools included and i played a few times with those teams and didn't see any crazy stuff happening. The game was built on fundementals when you used those teams.

even though I have to admit that the NBA stars are quite better than the WNBA ones.

Lol really going out on a limb there.

I don't mean to compare men with women. I mean that the difference between a very good player and a star in the NBA is huge, because LeBron, Kobe and Duncan dramatically improve a team. In the WNBA, you have stars (Taurasi, Parker, Augustus, Hammon, Douglas), but there aren't dominant forces that cannot be stopped, because the gap between a very good player and the stars is shorter.

Playmakers, MM 2001 on PS1. I had that

Playmakers, MM 2001 on PS1. I had that

wow 8 years ago....

Damn i'm getting old

I always thought because of the tity balls