What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Paris 2024 Summer Olympics: July 26-August 11*** USA dominates medal count; Finish tied w/ China for most golds - See ya in Milan 2026! (1 Viewer)

Best chances for medals are women's individual Foil (obviously), women's team Foil, and maybe sneak an individual medal in either men's individual Foil or women's individual Sabre.
And the US fencing team finishes their Olympics with a disappointing showing in the bronze medal match in men's team foil, losing big to France. They finish the Olympics with a respectable 4 medals - 2 golds (women's individual foil, women's team foil), 1 silver (women's individual foil), and 1 bronze (men's individual foil). France, Italy, and Japan will take home more medals but all in all a decent result for the Americans.

Thanks for listening to my ramblings for the week.
 
Not exactly digging the thin vertical stripes look for the US track team uniform. Pretty sure my mom picked out this same fabric print to make matching Simplicity outfits for me and my brother ... a long time ago.
 
Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.
 
Last edited:
Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.
She was a legacy pick, and IMO, a worthy one. I supported her being on the team, and I support Reeves giving her very limited minutes going forward. I've said both before.

It would have been nice for Diana to tap out, and give up her spot to a younger player. But the great one's don't often do that. In male sports, we celebrate assholes that hang on too long and don't want to concede to the next generation.

For the US, I think Reeves has given her a couple of courtesy starts, but she's not ****ing around anymore. Outside of the Stewie/A'ja advantage, the US is loaded with amazing athletes that can run, shoot, and defend. It's nut-cuttin' time and I don't think Taurasi will see many more minutes. She's ready to let the young horses run.

On this game, GB Germany. Satou is going to be an MVP candidate one day. The Wings have the worst record in the league without her after being in the semi's last year. We're seeing why. Fiebich is so awesome. I really hope Alexis Peterson makes her way back to the W one day. She's fantastic, and the league needs more pure PG's with her energy.

For the US, yeah just keep getting Jackie, AT, Kah, Sabrina, and Plum out there. Outside of the amazingness of Stewie/A'ja/Phee, our advantage is insanely athletic players that can run, shoot, and defend.

There's no reason Diana should be getting minutes over those players.
 
Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.


It would have been nice for Diana to tap out, and give up her spot to a younger player. But the great one's don't often do that. In male sports, we celebrate assholes that hang on too long and don't want to concede to the next generation.

NOT ME!
 
Japan beats Italy in the men's team foil gold medal match, and for the first time in Olympic history, the men's team foil gold medal is won by a country outside of Europe. Crazy stat.
 
\
Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.


It would have been nice for Diana to tap out, and give up her spot to a younger player. But the great one's don't often do that. In male sports, we celebrate assholes that hang on too long and don't want to concede to the next generation.

NOT ME!
Thank you brother. I needed that laugh.
 
Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.
 
Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three games. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.
 
Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three matches. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.
Bet they'll roll her out in the Finals at the end, if they're up big
 
Maybe this is the US Basketball's attempt and letting Diana say goodbye to the world and for her fans to celebrate her accomplishments one final time on the biggest stage? The team is going to win either way and I would have enjoyed seeing Clark but she will have her day. I think we ALL need a moment to appreciate what Tsurasi has meant to women's hoops. She's one of the best to ever play and has done it for a long long time. She's owed a proper goodbye.
 
USA USA USA!!!!! Go girls! On to the quarterfinals Beach VBall. So intense.

Sadly the seedings are such that the two US teams will meet in the Semis if they both win out. An all US final would be cool. In qualification Hughes/Cheng were #1 in the world and Nuss/Kloth were #3. In the most recent FIVB rankings, Duda/Ana Patricia (Brazil) are #1 with Nuss/Kloth #2 and Hughes/Cheng third.
 
Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three games. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.

The process is definitely "political" as they say and open to criticism. There's a feeling of an old-girls club, which is the only reason that Ogunbowale will likely never play for the US team which is a terrible shame. I think that comes in part with hubris that results from near-unchallenged success over the past 30 years. The US women have won the past 7 gold medals and 9 of the last 10 going back to 1984.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top