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.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.
It's a way to build up vertical momentum.Why do high jumpers have that weird trot? Timing? Serious question
Yes, timing and to ensure they're speeding up. They want to be accelerating when they get to their jump.Why do high jumpers have that weird trot? Timing? Serious question
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?
Yeah they are. Just having a flashback.They're kind of easy to spotNot exactly digging the thin vertical stripes look for the US track team uniform (this). Pretty sure my mom picked out this same fabric print to make matching Simplicity outfits for me and my brother ... a long time ago.
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.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.
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.
What an ending!They gonna tell us who won this 100m or what?
AlwaysDid we get bronze too?
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.
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!
I’ve seen that replay like 4 times now and I still can’t figure out how he won it.Was it his foot on the line that won it for him?
Edit: I guess it’s the torso. Wild.
I’ve seen that replay like 4 times now and I still can’t figure out how he won it.Was it his foot on the line that won it for him?
Edit: I guess it’s the torso. Wild.
I’ve seen that replay like 4 times now and I still can’t figure out how he won it.Was it his foot on the line that won it for him?
Edit: I guess it’s the torso. Wild.
He's a definite closer
200 should be easier for him
Clavicle, per Tirico.Was it his foot on the line that won it for him?
Edit: I guess it’s the torso. Wild.
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.
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.
Bet they'll roll her out in the Finals at the end, if they're up bigOkay, 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.
Otoh, going to miss watching these ItaliansUSA USA USA!!!!! Go girls! On to the quarterfinals Beach VBall. So intense.
Because it works.Why do high jumpers have that weird trot? Timing? Serious question
USA USA USA!!!!! Go girls! On to the quarterfinals Beach VBall. So intense.
That final was an absolute must see.They spin a virtual wheel to determine which matchup goes for gold in a tie in mixed-team Judo? It's bonkers.
And it's the two BIG guys. Let's go...
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.