Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
WNBA is boring - it doesn't take a "sexist" to make that statement, it's just a lower level of basketball. I mean, are you glued to your tv watching DIII college basketball? Because those teams would smoke the WNBA teams.
However, I agree that TCs have more sporting options overall.
and the NBA isn't boring? Also, are you saying a D-III women's team can smoke a WNBA team or are you saying a D-III men's team can smoke a WNBA team? That's what I thought.
I already know about the timberwolves, NHL, etc. Your wording made it sound like you didn't know about Sporting KC. Kansas city is closer to better college sports with mizzou, ku and ksu
These sexist clowns literally trying to say the St. Olaf Oles could beat the Lynx what the hell
The previous comments are examples of socially acceptable chauvinism. The catch-all excuse as to why one thinks the WNBA is a joke was even used. It's a boring game played by inferior athletes - so inferior that a D-III men's team could destroy them.
and the NBA isn't boring? Also, are you saying a D-III women's team can smoke a WNBA team or are you saying a D-III men's team can smoke a WNBA team? That's what I thought.
I love the NBA - are you saying the WNBA is more exciting than the NBA? If so, why does the NBA have about 10 times the fans, even though the league itself pushes the WNBA hard?
A low-level men's college team would kill a WNBA team - it wouldn't even be close. Stronger, taller, faster, more athletic, you name it.
A friend of mine and I in college played against 2 college basketball players (women - he was dating one of them). He had never played organized basketball, though he could jump out a gym and was a good athlete, he had rock hands and couldn't shoot from any distance. I played a little in early high school and some intramurals in college. One gal was the star player on her team, and a couple inches over 6 ft; the other was a forward who was all-conference and a great shooter. We beat them every time we played them, and I mean we held them scoreless most of the games we played that summer. They were so mad! But the musculature of men and women is entirely different, as is the center of gravity. We were much stronger, we were faster (with more quick-twitch muscles), we had better balance and were dominant even though we would have been picked low at the local gym.
I'm sorry, but there just isn't any comparison between the two. You have been brainwashed somehow, and now you're relagated to having to justify watching the "exciting" WNBA instead of the "boring" NBA. Hey, it's your funeral!
And I've never once been called "sexist," probably because I'm clearly not. I just can see the reality where millions of years of evolution gave men more physical size and strength. If you don't believe that, I'm not sure what I can tell you - look at people next time you see them?
I love the NBA - are you saying the WNBA is more exciting than the NBA? If so, why does the NBA have about 10 times the fans, even though the league itself pushes the WNBA hard?
A low-level men's college team would kill a WNBA team - it wouldn't even be close. Stronger, taller, faster, more athletic, you name it.
A friend of mine and I in college played against 2 college basketball players (women - he was dating one of them). He had never played organized basketball, though he could jump out a gym and was a good athlete, he had rock hands and couldn't shoot from any distance. I played a little in early high school and some intramurals in college. One gal was the star player on her team, and a couple inches over 6 ft; the other was a forward who was all-conference and a great shooter. We beat them every time we played them, and I mean we held them scoreless most of the games we played that summer. They were so mad! But the musculature of men and women is entirely different, as is the center of gravity. We were much stronger, we were faster (with more quick-twitch muscles), we had better balance and were dominant even though we would have been picked low at the local gym.
I'm sorry, but there just isn't any comparison between the two. You have been brainwashed somehow, and now you're relagated to having to justify watching the "exciting" WNBA instead of the "boring" NBA. Hey, it's your funeral!
And I've never once been called "sexist," probably because I'm clearly not. I just can see the reality where millions of years of evolution gave men more physical size and strength. If you don't believe that, I'm not sure what I can tell you - look at people next time you see them?
Well, of course a low-level men's collegiate team would beat a WNBA team. Good God, a decent male high school team could beat a WNBA squad--largely because they've pretty much grown up, and because they're MALE.
Sure you can compare them. Not saying either city is better than the other, it really depends on your circumstances. The biggest drawback to Minneapolis for me are the extremely cold and long winters. For the most part, KC has much milder winters, although the summers are more miserable due to the humidity. Sports, yeah Minneapolis offers more. KC does have hockey, just not NHL. I'm not a hockey fan, so for me, it's a mute point. I do wish we had an NBA team, but I haven't completely given up hope yet for a team here in KC again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.