← No Offseason: The Athletic Women's Basketball Show
No Offseason: The Athletic Women's Basketball Show
Dynasty building in a new era of women's basketball
00:52:03
Loading summary
Transcript66 lines
- [00:00]
Sponsor Voice
Love looks different for everyone, especially when it comes to all the ways you treat and celebrate yourself. I'm a big hammock head, Sunshine a hammock, a paperback western. That's my kind of everyday indulgence. And you can gift yourself the everyday indulgence of extraordinary Hydration with Liquid IV powered by LIV hydro science. Visit liquidiv.com to fall in love with flavors like the zesty new hydration multiplier, sugar free Raspberry Lemonade and use Code no dunks to save 20% off your first order. Liquid IV is easy and convenient. You just tear, pour and enjoy. It's my go to when I'm getting a pump in or handing out buckets, but it's great for staying hydrated during long days, enjoying the outdoors or any other time you need some hydration in your body. Liquid IV offers so many true to fruit flavors. Whether they be hydration multipliers like acai berry, lemon, lime and pina colada, or sugar free like Raspberry lemonade, white peach and rainbow sherbet, the flavors are always true to fruit, break the mold and your own ritual. Just one stick and 16 ounces of water hydrates better than water alone because Liquid IV is powered by LIV Hydroscience, an optimized ratio of electrolytes, essential vitamins and clinically tested nutrients that turn ordinary water into into extraordinary hydration. You're getting three times the electrolytes of the leading sports drink, plus eight essential vitamins and nutrients. And Liquid IV is always non gmo, vegan, gluten free, dairy free and soy free. So treat yourself to extraordinary hydration from Liquid IV. Get 20% off your first order at Liquid IV when you go to LiquidIB.com and use code no Dunks at checkout. That's 20% off your first order with code no Dunks@liquidiv.com when I started podcasting.
- [02:02]
Chantelle Jennings
It felt like I had to figure everything out myself. Booking guests, figuring out rundowns, editing the show and publishing it. It seemed like the list of to do's got bigger and bigger and when you're starting off with something new, it seems like that just happens. Finding the right tool that not only helps you out, but simplifies everything can be such a game changer. And for millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform but behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e commerce in the US from household names like Mattel and Gymshark to brands just getting started. Get started with your own design studio with hundreds of ready to use templates. Shopify helps you build a beautiful online store to match your brand style, accelerate your content creation. Shopify is packed with helpful AI tools that write product descriptions, page headlines, and even enhance your product photography. Get the word out like you have a marketing team behind you. Easily create email and social media media campaigns wherever your customers are scrolling or strolling. And best yet, Shopify is your commerce expert with world class expertise in everything from managing inventory to international shipping to processing returns and beyond. If you're ready to sell, you're ready for Shopify. Turn your big business idea into a With Shopify on your side, sign up for your $1 per month trial and start selling today at shopify.com TheAthletic go to shopify.com TheAthLetic shopify.com TheAthLETic.
- [03:34]
Zena Keda
Summer is almost here and there's no better place to go for outside furniture than Wayfair. Wayfair's huge selection of outdoor essentials will help you make your outdoor space more comfortable, functional, and most importantly, more you. Get your outdoor space ready today so you can enjoy it all season long. When you have kids, they love to be outside, so you gotta be out.
- [03:56]
Ben Pickman
There to watch them.
- [03:56]
Zena Keda
From Wayfair, you can have outdoor sofas, maybe a set of chairs, a gazebo, some umbrellas because it's really hot down here in the South. No matter the need, Wayfair's huge selection of home items makes it easy to find exactly what's right for you. There's something for every style and every home. No matter your space or budget. Wayfair makes it easy to tackle your summer home goals with endless inspiration for every space and budget, including the outdoors. Free and easy delivery even on the Big Stu. No more huge delivery fees for patio furniture. Get big stuff like patio sets, gazebos, hot tubs, outdoor dining sets, and more shipped free. Find all your outdoor must haves from seating to pool, lounges to trampolines, all in one convenient place. Shop a huge selection of outdoor furniture online this summer. Get outside with wayfair. Head to wayfair.com right now. That's W A Y F A I R.com wayfair every style every Home.
- [05:09]
Ben Pickman
For the Athletic I'm Zena Keda and this is the Athletic Women's Basketball Show. Welcome back to the Athletic Women's Basketball show where we are here to talk all things women's basketball. As always, we want to make sure that you guys know what's going on in the realm of women's hoops and A new portal has reopened. The NCAA first week of action is officially in the books. And I've got Ben Pickman and Chantelle Jennings here to kind of break down some of the games in the context of a larger conversation. But before we get into that, gotta make sure to let you guys know, subscribe to this pod. Wherever you get your pods, you got to stay up to date. There's some really great articles being written by the two lovely people that are here with me, Ben and Chantelle, but also Sabrina and also so many others within our athletic ecosystem. So make sure you subscribe to the pod and to the Athletic online. Okay, so if you're watching last week, you saw so many teams get back into action, of course, kicking it off with the games in Paris. We talked a little bit about that. But then we saw some more big matchups over the course of the weekend and it got us thinking here at the Athletic about dynasties and thinking about what we've known historically to be the dynasties of women's basketball. What does it take to build them, what does it take to sustain them? And who's in the midst of building the next level or the next new dynasty. So let's dive in by talking about some of the games that happen over the weekend. So in this tournament of the ally tip off, not really a tournament, but basically these two back to back games, we got to see South Carolina and North Carolina State, which was a rematch of last year's semifinal game. And then we got to see Iowa and Virginia Tech, two teams that were in the Final Four these past two years. Very interesting to see the growth of some of these teams, the sustainability of their talent across these two teams. But particularly interesting because if you look at some of these teams, South Carolina definitely in the dynasty talk. Absolutely. North Carolina State one year removed from having been in the Final Four. Could they be building something? Virginia Tech two years removed. Thinking about all the changes that they experienced as well as Iowa. And interesting that they went up against each other having changed coaches and also having lost both teams having lost some big stars. So. So let's start off with the first game, South Carolina vs. NC State 71, 57. Similar outcome to the last time they showed up. But let's look at South Carolina specifically. This is their 40th game in a row that they've won. Chantel undefeated season last year goes 38. No, that's surreal for, you know, South Carolina to do that. But then they come into this year and it seems as if they haven't missed a step. Personally When I'm thinking dynasties, I'm thinking South Carolina. Like, would you say they've already established themselves as a dynasty, or what would be kind of like the rubric around that?
- [08:37]
E
I mean, I guess that's probably part of our conversation today, is establishing, like, what are the parameters of a dynasty in women's college basketball? I think if you look at the last five years of South Carolina basketball, I think they've won upwards of, like, 94% of their games or something like that.
- [08:54]
Ben Pickman
Like, surreal.
- [08:56]
E
That puts you there. But is five years a dynasty? I don't know. How many national titles do you have to win to be a dynasty? I think that's another thing we can debate. Does it have to be titles? Can it be Final Fours with the rise and parody in the game? I don't know. And so I think what's really cool about right now is that we're sort of in this moment where we're seeing a shift in that definition because of the parody, because of the movement in the game. Like, when you think historically about women's college basketball, I think think so much of this sport has been built on, you know, three programs. And what three coaches did at those programs with Pat Summit at Tennessee, Tara Vandiver at Stanford and Gina, or at UConn, and sort of coaches who coached a really long time at a single school and won championships with those schools, but at a much different time in women's college basketball, right? Like the 80s and 90s and. And early 2000s of. Of women's college basketball are not 2024. And so I think it's interesting then, to sort of look at the different teams we've seen in the Final Four over the last few years and now to be in a time where it's reflecting on, like, okay, you know, what would it take for one of these programs that was recently in the Final Four to elevate themselves into the conversation of, like, maybe not dynasty, but, like, getting up the stairs to what that might be. Coming back to South Carolina, though, like, the last five years? Absolutely. Like, the best team in college basketball. And Dawn Staley doesn't look to be slowing down, so I think, like, she's definitely on that path. Like, this is a team and a program that feels really prime to continue to do this and be this program and elevate the whole sport, I think, you know, but a rising tide lifts all boats. And so, you know, I think where they are right now, they're on that path. But I think, you know, let's see where the next five years go to.
- [10:47]
Ben Pickman
I'm happy you brought up the previous three that you would kind of put in your mind as the markers of Dynasty. UConn, Tennessee and Stanford. Ben, I kind of want to ask you about those teams. Let's get some historical context. What did the makeup of those teams consist of in terms of talent and also structure? Right. Whether it was a big backcourt or a really talented and shifty front court, even though they were bigs, like, you know, what exactly went into the makeups of those teams over the course of their dynasty years?
- [11:24]
F
Great thing about all of those teams is that there is evolution and change over time. Right. I think that is the thing that separates kind of this kind of conversation in a college context versus when people use the word dynasties in a pro context. Right. Because you think about dynasties in the program so often. It is built foundationally on, you know, one player, two players, three players who has been there, you know, five years, 10 years, 15 years, 20 years, whatever. That's a great point. In college, you look at it differently. Tennessee has made every single NCAA women's tournament appearance. It's 42, I believe, right now, Stanford's made 36, right. As their streak, UConn, 35, like, we're talking three, four decades. Over the course of that time, there has been a lot of change. Now, in the case of UConn and Stanford, like, really, those runs have been built by singular coaches. Right. Like Gino Auriemma and Tara Vanderveer. Tennessee, it was Pat Summit for, you know, three of those decades. Basically, though, they've obviously, like, had some more coaching turnover in recent years, they still have made the tournament. So, you know, when I look at South Carolina, like, I think they're on a pretty unequivocally a college basketball dynasty right now. And the reason why I say that is just because they've done had sustained success at the highest level with different cores leading the way. Yeah, right. Like, you know, different stars, different teams, different people. Now, of course, Don Staley is a common denominator. You know, they've had different eras. Right. And I think that's the thing that's so interesting about where they're at right now. You look at their first two games against NC State in Michigan, one of the things that jumped out to me is that in both of those games, like, their top two leading scores in each victory were different in each game, Right. In the opener, it was Chloe Kits and Tessa Johnson who led their scoring. And in, you know, their second game against NC State, it was Tahina, Powpow and My Leisure Full Wiley. That's four players across two games who led them in scoring. Like, that speaks to depth of talent, and it's that kind of depth that so often allows teams to kind of transition from one core to another. Right. Because you have players of different ages, you have players of different experience levels. So, yes, all those programs you mentioned, to get back to your question, Xena, have had hall of Fame players, and we can rattle some of them off, but more than anything, it is that they've kind of. They've had different hall of Fame players throughout with hall of Fame coaches kind of sustaining them.
- [13:49]
Ben Pickman
Right.
- [13:50]
E
Yeah. I wonder if maybe one way to think about this. And Ben, as you were talking about that, I was like, you know, when I look back at, you know, 10, 20 years from now, when we look back at, like the late 2010s, early 2020s, and potentially beyond quite a distance, right? Like, who are we going to think of as the program that defined women's college basketball at that time? And I think, like you said unequivocally, the answer is South Carolina. Like, this is their era, right, where we're going to look back and we're going to say, you know, they won X number of titles and, you know, national titles, SEC titles. You had the Freshies, you had this group that came after the Freshies. You know, the way that coaches evolve in different ways, like, all of that's important. But I think it's like, when we think about these years of women's college basketball, which, again, I think these years are so important because it's such a transformation of the women's game right now, like 20 years from now, we're going to look back at last season, like, as such a turning point, I think, and the team and the program that is defining, like this era, the years around last year is South Carolina.
- [14:53]
Ben Pickman
Yeah. It's interesting as you guys mention these teams and you think about historically how regardless of personnel, success has been found within these teams. I also still think that there is a theme amongst the personnel that they're getting, right? Like, if I think about Stanford, again, as a fan or someone that's watched them over the years, like, for me, I think Jay Nepel, right. And I think Biggs, I think Tara Van de Vere recruiting great Biggs. And you can go from Jay Nopel, Shanae Aguimiche, Neko Aguimiche, keep going to more recently Cam Brink and Kiki Yuriafin, like, this is what you're seeing as like a theme for Stanford, I think UConn's more in the mix in terms of, you know, being able to provide really great guards, really great shooters, but then also really athletic forwards in terms of like the talent they've brought out. But then, you know, think about Tina Charles. Can't sleep on her, right? But when you think about the way you would create a team across that could create a dynasty today, do you focus on guards? Do you focus on bigs who can shoot? Considering the game has expanded and become this thing where if you can't shoot, that's a problem. Look at Ole Miss. They're still trying to figure out how to utilize KK Deans, who is a shooter. But I think about their offense being an issue because it doesn't have a three point presence. Like, what does it take to create a dynastic team in terms of skill?
- [16:21]
F
For me, I mean, I always would lean to kind of versatile forwards, but I think more than just any skill set. Again, not to like repeat the point. I think what we're going to see is like, and we can talk about this too, the question of depth. Like, I think to really have these dynastic runs, you need to continuously build deep rosters that are loaded with talent across the board. Because I think coaches, and we see this nowadays, you're kind of baking in that some of those players that you recruit are going to leave, like, they're not going to be there three years, they're not going to be there four years. The players that you recruit out of high school are not necessarily going to be the ones who, you know, they're, they're reading out a player's name, comma, your school on WNBA draft night, right? Like, I think one of the things that is so interesting, say about South Carolina's run is like, look at a player like Saniya Rivers for instance, right? She is someone who now fittingly plays on NC State, but she was, I think, you know, a top transfer. And more, more than anything else, she enrolled at South Carolina as the number two guard and number three player in the class of 2021. South Carolina has her for one year and then she leaves to go to NC State. They obviously don't miss a beat. And I think like that speaks to, you know.
- [17:45]
Ben Pickman
Yeah, that's a good point.
- [17:46]
F
Like having this strong foundation that a school like South Carolina can withstand, say having a top recruit transfer out and go somewhere else like that I think is really the key when I think we're going to look at, you know, Teams and eras and what defines it and having sustained success. Like, that's the question that I have with Iowa. And maybe we talk about this in the context, you know, of their victory over the weekend. Like, yeah, it's a great win over Virginia Tech, and I guess we're gonna see Virginia Tech is in a transitional period, too. And I'm not trying to discount Iowa, but I think that is the question still, that everyone has going in that, like, yes, Iowa has made two straight Final Fours, right? They will undoubtedly be a program that defines this era in women's college basketball, right? Because, like, Caitlin Clark will forever have defined these last two years of women's college basketball and professional basketball. But I wouldn't necessarily, like, say they're a dynasty. Like, Iowa is a program that, before the Clark era, they had made just one Elite 8 since 1993, right? So, like, they're not a dynasty. They had an amazing run with Caitlin Clark. We'll see, you know, what success brings. We'll see what the future looks like. You know, can they. If they rattle off multiple Final Four appearances, deep tournament runs, maybe it's a different conversation. But, like, you know, there is some gray area in, like, how we define terms. You can define an era, but you're not necessarily dynasty. I think that's what makes, again, South Carolina so unique in that, like, they are kind of doing both right now in women's college basketball, right?
- [19:14]
E
But I think South Carolina is super unique. Like, you bring up Saniyah Rivers, and she's a good example, but she's the exception, not the rule for South Carolina. Like, Dawn Staley has figured out a way, whatever it is, sort of her secret sauce of, like, these number one, number two, number three recruits that for years, everyone has been telling them that, like, you know, the world is your oyster. And then you come to South Carolina and you're gonna sit on the bench and you're gonna come off the bench, right? And those players stay. Like, we haven't seen that. Elsewhere. Like, you've got players like Leticia and me here, who never started, isn't the W, but, like, never started but didn't transfer. Could have started for, like, dozens of schools across the country, but didn't. Elsewhere, we don't see that. Like, you don't see other programs keeping players of that caliber, you know, coming off the bench. And part of this is, like, you look at who's ahead of those players, and it's like, well, damn, like, there's a lot of talent on the floor. There's a Lot of talent everywhere. But, like, you know, I think what Don has figured out there is that's what works for them. And I think what makes the conversation of dynasties really interesting moving forward is like, Don is also the exception here and not the rule. Like, if every coach in the country could figure out how to keep your number, number 7, 8, 9 player happy, like the transfer portal wouldn't look like it looks every March and April, but it does. And even those players are sometimes like the number one or two players on a team. Like, some coaches can't even figure out how to keep the number one or two players happy. And so I think the question moving forward is like, are we moving beyond, like, once Chino or retires, once Don Staley retires, like, once these coaches are gone, like, where are those other schools that could become the next dynasty? That is not just a five year thing, but like, are we beyond because of parity, because of Nil, because of the transfer portal? Are we beyond the, like Yukon, South Carolina, Tennessee? Like, when you think of those teams that dominated, like year in and year out, are we like Moving beyond that five years from now, 10 years from now, simply because, I guess how women's basketball has been democratized in a lot of ways.
- [21:19]
Ben Pickman
Absolutely. I mean, I think you're beyond it in a way that the path you take to achieve the same success is absolutely different. Right. Like, you're not going to have the same continuity that you would have. Again, I think South Carolina is an exception to that rule in the way that they've been able to keep continuity. But you look at, for example, Iowa being led by Lucy Olson from Villanova. You look at Virginia Tech losing Georgia Amore to Kentucky and Kenny Brooks to Kentucky. There is so much more volatility in this space that you almost look at the next generation of dynasties to be who can recruit and attract the best talent. Right. And then keep that talent. It's no longer just, oh, we're recruiting and we've kept them. Did we do a good job in our freshman class coming in? It's did we do a good job with our freshmen and did we do a good job of wooing other players? Now let's talk about, you know, Iowa and Virginia Tech and NC State as these teams that are on the periphery. They aren't the dynastic team, I would say. And from what we're kind of describing the new dynastic team of South Carolina in that they haven't had the same continuity in wins or talent. You know, they haven't won a Championship recently. I'm interested in, you know, what you mentioned, Ben, about going to the Final Four is not a dynasty. And I agree with you. I absolutely agree with you. Going to the Final Four a ton of times is that in this space, is winning a national championship still required to become a dynasty.
- [22:59]
F
I think Final Four appearances qualifies you as, like, you know, I regard those in high regard, and I think, like, having that on the resume can be super meaningful. Not, you know, a championship is a championship or a loss in the final, you know, is more meaningful than just making the national semis. But I do think there's a big difference in how people look at, you know, Elite Eight appearance versus a Final Four. I mean, the two schools that I think are kind of most interesting to talk about, and I'm curious maybe your reaction to the two I throw out. Chantelle is NC State in my mind, and Louisville, actually, because I think, going back to your point at the top of this show, Chantelle, like, there's levels to this, right? Like, South Carolina is a perennial national title contender. UConn, a perennial national title and Final Four contender. I think Louisville, of recent memory and NC State are really interesting examples of programs that have had sustained success. Now, not necessarily perennial Final Four success, but sustained success compared to almost everyone else across the country, and have done it with different players leading them throughout. Right. Louisville, they've made, you know, 13 straight NCAA tournament appearances, and until last year, they had made six straight Sweet 16s. North Carolina State has made the Sweet 16 in five of the last six years. Now, they had only just made their first Final Four last year. And I think that was why, you know, it was so meaningful for them. And I'm not trying to compare them with South Carolina or UConn by any means.
- [24:32]
Ben Pickman
Sure.
- [24:33]
F
But, like, if we're looking at kind of tier below, they stand out to me as examples of programs that have. In this era of ever changing player transfers and as the sport changes, like, they've done a really good job, I think, objectively, of staying above the competition to a point. Right. Again, like, they have made Final Fours, but they are not making it every year. Like, Louisville's made 28 and 2022. I don't know, like, what do you think about those two programs? And when I toss that out, like, you're, you know, you were just kind of making a. You were making a face. I'm just curious, like, what you think when I, you know, talk about their sustained success in this context.
- [25:14]
E
No, I think it's a fair Point. And I think it's interesting because for. For so long, like, all of our sort of consciousnesses of women's basketball, like, it's been such a top heavy sport. So you bring up the Sweet 16 point, and in my head I'm going like, but is the sweet 16 dynastic?
- [25:34]
F
Like, no, and it is not.
- [25:35]
Ben Pickman
And it's not right.
- [25:36]
F
It's not right.
- [25:38]
E
But that's. I think that was, you know, I was just sitting there, but I was like, however, in the broad scheme of things, if you think about the 300 college basketball programs and we're talking about 16 or eight, right? Like, this moment in women's basketball is about, like, broadening the conversation beyond sort of those. That small group of teams that has sort of run things for so long, like, because there is so much more parity. And I actually wanted to go back to one note that Zena made earlier when you were saying that, you know, these. These programs that are recruiting and then retaining. And I almost feel like because of, you know, we've talked about a lot of the upheaval in women's college basketball sort of on the floor, but in terms of, like, nil and the transfer portal, I almost wonder if the next generation of dynasties, whatever they look like, we can, you know, have our proper definition by the end of the show. But like, it's almost more about retaining and recruiting out of the portal, right? Because it's like, in the world of college sports, 10 years ago, like, your freshman class mattered so much, right? Right now, your transfer portal class matters so much more. Like, who are you bringing in? And so it's like it's kind of flipped it on its head a little bit. Who are you able to retain? And then who are you able to snag out of the portal? And so much of that comes down to sort of re recruiting, but it also comes down to nil, like, who has the money in terms of retaining and recruiting players and making your school attractive. And, you know, Xena, you went on recruiting visits. We've talked to recruits forever in this job. And it's like, what are you looking for in a school? And it's academics, a place that feels like home. And, you know, a coach that can do this, someone who can help me get to the next level. And I'm not discounting that for sort of the next 10, 20 years of women's college basketball. But now sort of the no longer an elephant in the room is nil. Like, where is there a financial opportunity for me at the college level? And these top recruits, you know, that's a part of the conversation. And I think how that changes, how dynasties become over the next 10 years will be really interesting.
- [27:42]
F
I like that. In that kind of list of things you just rattled off, Chantel, one of the things you omitted, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and my guess is unintentionally is like winning a championship, like actually having success.
- [27:54]
E
That was unintentional, right?
- [27:56]
Ben Pickman
Which goes back to my original question of like, if you're. Are you winning championships, if you're a dynasty? Because I think, Ben, when you mentioned Louisville and NC State, I also thought about Duke, I thought about Maryland. I think those schools you're talking about that have had sustained success are more so powerhouses as opposed to dynasties. They're just schools that, you know, especially when I was playing, you know, if you're being recruited, if a letter comes in the mail with those logos on it, it's a big deal, right? Versus a ton of other mid majors or whatever it is. That's to me how I look at it from a perspective of like, okay, I can go to this school. I could play. I could also. We could do really well. Is a championship promised? Ooh, that's where it gets a little bit iffy. If we play really well, if my recruiting class with me is really good, I'm looking at who's already on the roster, how have they developed like those type of things? I feel like that's like powerhouse trying to grow into a dynasty. But there's been a ton of really good schools that have made the Sweet 16s, that have made the tournament in general, that have been great, but they haven't won championships consistently, we should say.
- [29:10]
F
Also, just as a point of historical clarification, you mentioned Duke. You know, there was an era from the late 90s to the, you know, 20, early 2000 and tens in which they basically, you could write them into the sweet 16 every single year. They made it almost every year. That is not the case currently. We should mention they made just two sweet 16 since 2015 for those, you know, keeping score at home here. So I think Duke is trying to regain that era of success. But, you know, I think the thing. And there's so many ways you could take this point too. Not all situations in college sports are equal. Right. And there are a ton of reasons for that. And so often right now, I think you kind of touched on this Chantel, and what you were talking about, like, money really is one of the differentiators. It is not the Only differentiator. But like money plays a big role in being able to differentiate programs and in turn kind of create levels, right? Like create levels of just how good can you get to. And we have certainly seen that like you can be a program that makes a final four, I would argue without having huge nil dollars or without hitting it big in the transfer portal, like you can have these one off runs. But I do think the question is like going forward, you know, there will just be levels like I think and coaches like we talk to. And Chantel, you've talked to so many of them about this topic. Like is your ceiling capped? Does it impact how you think about your future? Does it impact just like what you are trying to build? I'm trying to build a championship caliber team or one that can compete like, or win. Like there are all these different things and so often it is about money and investment that fuels like just how high you can reach at this point. And I think again that is why South Carolina continues to be an outlier in this conversation. Especially like, you know, again I throw out the Louisville and NC State examples of modern times. Like they're not making Final fours every year, but like if you're those schools, maybe it's good enough to just be Sweet 16 Elite 8s and like have the one final four every five years. Like that's still pretty good. Like a lot of coaches would take that, right? A lot of schools would take that. But it's just very different than, you know, the uconns and the South Carolinas.
- [31:17]
Ben Pickman
Well, let's shift the conversation to the thing I've been, I wanted to put it at the end, but it's the thing that is so loudly in our face and it impacts all of what we're talking about. And it's, you know, what you mentioned, Chantel, it's the money. When you think about two schools that are contenders for becoming dynasties, it's interesting enough that both of these schools have been known nationally to do a great job at nil. They've been known nationally to do a great job at building brands for players. And this is not just in women's basketball. This is across the sports that they offer. And interestingly enough, in basketball, you're seeing these two teams come up as of recent years, one being LSU under Kim Mulkey and the other being USC under Lindsey Gottlieb. But I feel like the two as similar as they are in terms of brand, having a nice brand, like a great brand as a school in general, having a community, having Boosters and the support and all the things. They also have name brand recognition to their existing rosters. So whether you're recruiting freshmen or you're recruiting from the transfer portal, there's already that enticement of, oh, people know this school, people know these players, and they happen to be really good at basketball. It's all coming together and I feel like that's the perfect mix right now in order to build the next dynasty. So let's start with usc. USC has a ton of freshmen and also significant transfer portal names in Kiki Iriafen and Talia Van Olhofen. When you think about where USC could end up in terms of a dynasty run, are they in the perfect storm of having the name brand recognition of usc, having the name brand recognition of a player like juju Watkins, and also having the ecosystem support of building your own personal brand? So when you leave usc, you're set up.
- [33:24]
E
Yeah, I think USC is a really interesting test case for right now. You know, I'm fascinated by this freshman class at usc specifically, like we were saying with Dawn Staley, what she has been able to do in terms of keeping players 8, 9, 10 happy and keeping them in Columbia. You know, maybe one of the most impressive things she's been able to do, like their depth is their separator. And that comes down to players, you know, six through 10. Right. And you look at a team like USC where last year we saw what juju Watkins could do, sort of her ability on the floor and her star power in terms of bringing people, fans, celebrities, money into the program, attention into the program. But now you have a situation where Lindsey Gottlieb has a freshman class that has six top 100 players, three top 20 players. Like, these are players who were recruited, like you were saying, they got those letters. I don't know. Do they do letters still? Probably not.
- [34:16]
Ben Pickman
No, they probably do not. No, no, no.
- [34:18]
E
They got TE messages and dms, probably.
- [34:20]
F
In Snapchat form, you know, Tik Tok sent to them.
- [34:24]
E
We're all the olds here, but, you know, they. They were those players that got that kind of communication, right? Like, they were told all of these things by all of these coaches. And now they're in a situation where at usc, the minutes again, transfer portal comes into this with Kiki and Talia, like they're not maybe going to be as significant as they might have been at another school that they were being recruited by. And so I'm really curious to see, you know, how Lindsay Gottlieb uses the next few years where she has juju, where she has this freshman class to build a foundation for what could become a dynasty. I think you have to win. It's, you know, sort of that cycle, like, you have to win to keep the nil money and attention coming in. And the nil and money attention helps you recruit and retain players, which helps you win. And so it's like a constant cycle, and you have to feed that beast daily. But, like, I think they're a school that's really intriguing to me because of, you know, the inherent brand of usc, the money behind it, the fact that they're in a major market like la, they're in the Big Ten now, five years from now, who the heck knows if that even matters anymore? Like, but they're playing all over the country. They have an opportunity to be seen in every major market, basically. But I think USC is a super interesting test case for sort of the future of dynasties in women's college basketball. Like, how a coach sort of propels a dynasty forward. But we think about these programs and we'll talk about lsu. Kim Mulkey, sort of this interesting coach who's coached at multiple places and won titles at multiple places, which is not very common in women's college hoops. But, like, Lindsey Gottlieb is a younger coach. She could have, you know, a few decades here at usc, where she really builds this program into the destination. Right. I see Ben's eyebrows just went up. I don't know if he's saying that he thinks she might get poached somewhere else or that. That, you know, she'll retire sooner than I think she will. But, yeah, I think usc, they're going to be one of my favorite programs to watch over the next decade, just to sort of see how in this new era of college basketball, which Gottlieb has fully embraced, like, she has referred to herself as the CEO of a program. Like, she is looking at this holistically, whereas, you know, some other coaches that might have pushed back on it initially, like, she came from the NBA, she was ready for this. She hit the ground running in every way. And so what the next 10 years looks like and maybe how sort of the balance of women's basketball power exists and what that means for la.
- [36:45]
F
I mean, I guess my reactions are, I like the case that you're making, and I think you are right in that, like, USC really does have a lot of ingredients baked in and also, like, set up going forward to allow them to have this run of success. The things I would say first though, is one. Let's have them make one Final Four before we talk about them, like, being a dynasty, right? Like, they have not made a final four since 1986. They've made the NCAA tournament five times since 2000. Like, this is not a program. Like, they are looking to get back to having past success, which they had like in the 80s and the 90s. But like, before we start talking about like five years, 10 years of success, like, let's have them reach, you know, this conversation, the highest stage, the most important moments in the sport. Like, once before they do it, like, we write them in for four straight years. I do think, though, like, juju Watkins, you know, has the potential and she was pretty open about this when she committed to usc of like, wanting to leave a legacy, right? Like, she talked about that of like, again, wanting to leave a legacy for generations and classes behind her. And like, she is the kind of player, as Chantelle was saying that, like, if they have a lot of sustained success over these next, you know, three years now and they're able to continue to build and continue to get high level talent in and maybe Lindsey Gottlieb stays, you know, four years, five years, six years, seven years, eight years. And I do think, like, fair to wonder, like, what her future holds too. Like, then I think you can start to look at, like, she's really left a legacy, right, juju in that, like, they will become perennial powers. I'm glad we called them out first as like, teams that can do that. But I guess I'm just like, again, there's levels to it. Like, I just don't want to discount South Carolina and I also don't think we should discount UConn either in this conversation about, like, what it actually, like, what we are talking about, right? Because, like, are we talking about Louisville level of success or are we talking about South Carolina level of success? Because as we've talked about, like, those two things are not the same and they're both commendable and what a lot of programs strive for. But, like, there's just differences, like, and it's just hard to get over that.
- [38:51]
E
And that's what I wonder, like, moving forward. And you know, I haven't painted USC into like, the, the Dynasty conversation yet. I think there's a Runway there if things go right.
- [39:01]
Ben Pickman
Yeah.
- [39:02]
E
But I do wonder if sort of this moment in women's college basketball and how it's changing and how there's more parody and how there's, you know, nil. The transfer portal xyz, like, I wonder if, you know, as we look back at women's college basketball, the Dynasties have been UConn, Stanford, Tennessee, South Carolina of late. But moving forward, maybe dynasties are the Louisvilles. Like, maybe dynasties are the programs that make it to the sweet 16 perennially, because that becomes so much more difficult than in years past. Like, maybe it is teams. Like, if you look back, like, thinking, you know, and I hate to use, like, men's college basketball as an absolute, like, you know, sort of comparison point here, but you think of, like, UCLA's run under John Wooden when, you know, the 60s and the 70s, they won under seven national titles in a row. Like, absolute insane amount of dominance. And then we think of sort of the more modern day, I guess, dynasties in men's college basketball, where it's like Kentucky and Duke and they're making Final Fours, like, three times in a decade. And we think of them as sort of like, that is the. The peak of, like, wow, that is sustained success is like, three times in a decade. And I wonder if that is the natural evolution of a sport and of parody and of the growth of the game that, you know, maybe what Louisville has done now is sort of going to be the mark of success moving forward.
- [40:25]
Ben Pickman
I'm so happy that you brought up. And I know, again, I agree with you. I don't like to use men's basketball as a direct comparison, but there is a really great point being made between this evolution of UConn, Stanford, Tennessee being the dynasties shifting to South Carolina and who else, whoever else can fit into that, and it being based on who can recruit and retain that being the marker of, like, the next dynasties, like, who can do that really well. Because men's college basketball had a similar change for the longest. Men's college basketball, you wanted to be a blue blood. You wanted to go to Duke, you wanted to go to unc, you wanted to go to Kentucky. Right around the time I was graduating from high school and like, a few years after that, actually, there was actually a shift. Like, I remember my male basketball friend saying, talking about this. The top players in the country were going to these camps, and they were all being like, forget Duke, forget unc, forget all of these big programs. Let's go to Memphis and tear some stuff up. Let's go to Louisville together and tear some stuff up. Like, they changed how recruitment happened because they started recruiting amongst themselves and started pairing up and getting together to go to these schools together. And then you started seeing all these other schools being in the NCAA tournament that were chock Full of talent and also chock full of friends playing together. So I feel like there's a similar change that is happening in women's basketball. It's not necessarily, you know, these young women are coming together and being like, let's forget these big schools and let's come together and go somewhere else. But it does involve nil. It does involve the money aspect and it also involves, like, where do we think we could come together and find success? Where? I think that feels very different than the recruitment of past.
- [42:21]
F
What I would say there in the comparison, though, like men's and women's, like the NBA draft rules really do dictate a lot of the sustained success in college. Right. The fact that, you know, male players can just one year and go one and done and head right to the NBA, and that is not the case in the women's game. Like, pretty much everyone is going four years like that, I think allows some of these college programs to have sustained success in a way that like, you know, it looks different than on the men's side. A question I would ask, though, and maybe you've asked this Chantel, to some coaches, like, I don't know if I've ever really had like an in depth conversation about it is like, when does a coach start to really think about the next era, like, beyond, you know, the one that they're like, they are currently coaching with their star player, right? Like, like, when does Lindsey Gottlieb really start to think about usc beyond juju Watkins? How much is she thinking about that right now? In 2024, 2025 with JuJu as a sophomore? Or is that something she'll like, you know, think more about next year or the year after? Or did Gino, like, when did he start to think about, you know, life after Brianna Stewart or life after Maya Moore? Like, when did you really start to weigh those conversations? Because I think Iowa, you know, getting back to some of the games we've seen so far, like, they've gotten off to a good start. They look good. Like, Lucy Olson looks like she's acclimating herself pretty well. We saw, you know, a 9 of 9 performance from Addison O'Grady. Like, Hannah Stokke looks pretty good. You know, they look like they're going to be a solid team yet again. But I do wonder if looking back, like, did they start to think about life after Caitlin Clark almost like too late, right, to like, become a next college basketball dynasty? And there's a lot of pressure on them this year because new head coach and Jan Jensen, though, she's someone who's been there for decades, but, like, still is. Is new to the role. And like, if they say they, you know, are 20 and 10 and they bounce out in the first round of the tournament, like, what does that mean for future generations? Do people start to look like from the outside that Iowa is just, you know, Iowa that it has always been, or is it looked upon more like the Iowa of the past two years? And so, like, you know, should Iowa, I guess, have been, like, more forward looking in thinking about life after Caitlin Clark? With Caitlin Clark to try and build a dynasty? Like, again, there's no right or wrong answer and every coach would answer it differently. But I think, like, that that's another big question in this day and age, when you think about building sustained success is like, how do you look forward and when? Because what you don't want if you're Iowa right now is to have a 500 year and everyone just says, oh, Caitlin Clark's gone. Like, I don't want to come to Iowa because, like, it was all about Clark and it's not about the program. Like, that's what you don't want if you're looking obviously to build a dynasty or any kind of sustained success.
- [45:07]
E
Yeah. I mean, I think the caveat here is that like, any conversation we have, like, it's never truly apples to apples. Like Lindsey Gottlieb's situation at us and Jan Jensen situation at Iowa are not the same situation. Right. And I think even looking at like, you know, when did Gino start thinking post Maya or post Stewie or when did you know all of these? You know, when did Don start thinking, like, post Aaliyah? Like, in general, I would say most coaches are like, focused on that day's practice plan. Like, sometimes, especially like right now, if, you know, I'm trying to like, write a big picture, 30,000 foot look at at women's college basketball and I ask a coach a big question, they're like, I know what the first 15 minutes of practice look like today. I can't tell you what the next 10 years look like in women's basketball is probably the thing that most would say. But I do think, like, in terms of looking at the future for these programs, it is important, like, Iowa has started looking at the future. Right. Like, they got a commitment from a player in the 2025 class named Addie Deal who, you know, to get a player from Southern California to consider Iowa, like, that's a big deal. Right. But that's different than, you Know, a program that's in Southern California and sort of like has that natural appeal in a much different way to players because of, you know, even if it's a, a further back history that doesn't exist during any of these players lifetimes, like USC is so recognizable, what their athletic program has done. You're in Los Angeles. Like, Los Angeles as a city is a lot more attractive than Iowa City, Iowa, in a lot of ways. Like, you're gonna be able to sort of, you know, when you think about the pool of players you'll be able to attract. And so I think everyone is looking at the future of their program in different ways. But, like, most coaches are just trying to win this year and make sure that they can get as far as they can this year with the pieces they have. And I think the transfer portal heightens that even more because no coach is certain what their roster will look like next year. It used to be, you know, you could sit down and say, this is what our, our scholarship projections look like. We're gonna have two scholarships available for classes from now. Like, some programs might have eight scholarships available next year when they thought they had none. Like, that's just sort of how, you know how women's college basketball is now. And so I don't know how much, you know, we probably talk way more about like, legacy and dynasty even in this conversation. More than any of the people we've mentioned so far, I'm guessing, which is part of our jobs. Right? But like, yeah, I think just this moment sort of allows us to talk about it in a different way than we really have in the past.
- [47:49]
Ben Pickman
It's funny just thinking about, like, how does a team start to think about past juju Walk ins. I'm laughing because I'm like, I feel like when you were talking about, like, how do you look past juju Watkins? I'm seeing that already in like Kennedy Smith being the next version of juju Watkins. Or you look at South Carolina and how Dawn Staley went from Asia Wilson to Aaliyah Boston to Camila Cardoso, now Chloe Kits and Joyce Edwards. Like, it seems like there's successions within these coaches if you're recruiting well, but also, as you mentioned, like, also keeping an eye on the transfer portal. These are ways that you can continue to keep those, those themes of your system alive. And I think that's the only sustainability to dynasties that are going to be possible in this day and age. We're closing up at the end of this podcast and I still don't know if we have a clear definition of what a dynasty in this era would be, what do you guys think?
- [48:46]
E
I think, honestly, and maybe, you know, this conversation, like, we are building the plane as we're taking off because, like, we're still in this moment, right? And we believe that this is sort of a huge turning point in women's college basketball. But I think Ben is right that, like, the level of sustained success that the NC States and the Louisvilles of the world have had, like, I think moving forward, that's the natural evolution. When you have more parody, when you have more movement, you know, the more money that comes into women's basketball, which happens with bigger media deals and higher viewership, which is what we're seeing, like. Like, it democratizes basketball. And so you're going to have more programs that are able to compete at the highest level. And so dynasty, the definition expands. And it's not just the programs that win every year or are at the Final Four every year, which is, you know, for so long we've had a top heavy sport. Now it is broadening in a way that I think is really healthy for the game. Like, you know, very soon, you know, I think we're going to see those first and second round upsets. Maybe not this year, not next year, but, like, at some point that is going to happen because the parody of the game and the quality of basketball being played everywhere is going to raise. And so I think Ben is right that sort of what we've seen elsewhere will become the standard moving forward in terms of Sweet sixteen's a Final Four, you know, every few years, and throw a national title into that as well.
- [50:15]
F
What I would just say is, like, I don't think, like, the definition, say, of dynasty has changed as much as, like, what defines success has changed, right? And like, what programs define success? Because I still believe that, like, dynasties at its core are about Final Four appearances over time, and it's about national championships over time. And I think that is true today. And like, doing it through eras much as it was true five years ago, much as it was true 10 years ago, much as it was True 20 years ago. That's why UConn is a dynasty. It's why I think South Carolina is a dynasty. And it's like, why, if they continue to have success the way they are, like, they'll still be there. But I think, like, for a lot of programs, when we talk about democratization of the sport, like, what is defining success, successful seasons, like expectations, all that is changing, I think a little bit in this modern era, like, you know, one of the other schools that I think is interesting is lsu, right? And maybe we hit on them real quick and how they've looked like, like, you know, LSU in this post Angel Reese era, like, they still clearly have a lot of talent on their roster, a lot of, you know, highly tied to recruits. Someone like Flash Johnson looks really, really good to start the year. And Kim Olke is someone who has built perennial winners. But, like, for LSU to be a dynasty, I mean, they're, they're ways away from that. Like, let's just call it what it is, right? Like, they've made two Elite Eight appearances in consecutive years, which is the foundation of kind of what you want to build upon. But, like, that's still the question for them. Like, what are they look going to look like in the post Reece era? And if they end up in the elite eight or sweet 16, like, I'm not putting them in a dynasty, but that still might be a successful season with, like, where they're at and like, there are more teams in error who can knock off some of these teams. So, you know, I think that's what makes the programs to the South Carolina and UConn examples. Like, that is what has made them so impressive and stand out in recent historical times.
- [52:12]
Ben Pickman
Agreed with all of that. Lsu, I think about Kim Mulkey and I think about her as a system, as the leader of teams that have been able to find themselves in national championship situations. Of course, Baylor, I would not consider a dynasty, but has had some success and it was a short period of success. And maybe people will look at the personnel that was on those teams, like, like Brittney Griner and Odyssey Sims, et cetera. Like, is that more relevant towards defining if a school was successful, like, the particular people that helped them there? I think I was in that conversation with Caitlin Clark. Right. Versus There's a system in place at this school that regardless of the personnel, if they're all talented, if they're all top recruits, there's going to be success. And I think that is true for UConn. That is true for Stanford in recent years, in past years and up until recently, true for Tennessee over the past Summit years, and absolutely true for South Carolina. So it'll be very interesting to see who as a team, as a leader, as a head coach and as organizations can create places in which players feel like they can come and find success and want to stay in order to find it. And it comes with all of the things we talked about today. The NIL aspect, the money aspect, who am I playing with? Are we going to be able to find success? You know, what kind of system am I playing in? Does it work for my game? All of these things were important to me as a player trying to find my school. And hell, I made a terrible decision because I chose a school that was not set up for my game. And I think a lot of my teammates would agree with me that people in the mid majors, sometimes you just go where you can get a place, right? You're not going to schools that are quote crafted for your game. You're going to schools that you can get a scholarship at and it's the best academic choice, etc. For the dynasties, it's a little bit different. You can actually look at a roster and be like, okay, I fit in here and it makes sense and I want to stay here to try and build something.
- [54:23]
F
Zena, can you just remind the listening audience if they're new to this show where you played college basketball?
- [54:27]
Ben Pickman
I played at Yale University.
- [54:29]
E
Yeah, you got a degree from there, so I think you're right.
- [54:31]
Ben Pickman
That's what I'm saying. That's what I'm saying. It's like for. It's so different in the mid majors before nil. Right. Like when you were getting recruited, if you weren't getting recruited to the big schools, like I got recruited to big schools absolutely for the 1000% reason to get someone else into the school because I could balance them out academically. That coaches told me that I had no shame in that. Like that was a real reason. But for mid major schools that I was recruited to, like, I wasn't really thinking about, like how does my basketball game fit into this? I feel like nowadays if you are a big time recruit, you have the space to think about that and it is on the coaches. It's their responsibility to be able to dictate that. So really, if I could close out what could go into the next dynasties, I think a lot of onus is on the coaches. How do you create a space in which players feel like they're going to thrive not only as basketball players, but also in their personal brand building in their personal game growing so that they can get to the next level. Because nowadays, remember back in the day, the WNBA was reserved for a select few lot more people thinking they can make it to the next level and wanting to make it to the next level. So that's incorporated in that too. Well, Chantelle, Ben, this has been a really great conversation. I would love to hear all of you guys listening to this. I know there's tons of schools we didn't mention in the potential powerhouse, dynasty, successful school, however you want to kind of put it. I would love to hear you guys thoughts on this because this is super interesting and as Chantel said, we are literally in the moment as it's happening, so it'd be cool to make some predictions. All right, let's close out today's show. As always, we appreciate you guys listening in. Please hit that subscribe button not only in the show, but on the Athletic so you can hear all of the amazing and read all of the amazing content on the site throughout this NCAA season. As I mentioned, leave us comments, send us emails. We appreciate that we had someone recently Sabrina sent us content around pay parody. If we get a chance next show, we're definitely going to talk a little bit about that because it was not what we thought. Do some research around pay parody. We appreciate our listeners sending that in. Always grateful for your ear and we're going to just keep encouraging you. Ben, Chantelle, me, Sabrina, all of us, we're going to keep encouraging you, keep listening, keep watching, keep learning the game and keep loving it because that's the only way we're going to keep growing it. All right folks, until next time.
- [57:11]
Chantelle Jennings
As we head into the playoffs, it's safe to assume there will be a few calls made by the refs that will be hard to accept. But you know what isn't hard to accept? Discover. Believe it or not, Discover is accepted at 99% of places that take credit cards nationwide. You heard that right, 99%. So make a good call for your wallet and get discovered. Based on the February 2024 Nielsen report. Learn more at discover.com creditcard this podcast.
- [57:37]
Sponsor Voice
Is brought to you by Aura. By the time you hear about a data breach, your information has already been exposed for months. On average, companies take 277 days to report a breach. That's nine months where hackers have access to your personal data. That's why we're thrilled to partner with Aura. Aura is an all in one digital safety solution that monitors the dark web for your phone number, email and Social Security number, sending real time alerts if your info is found. It also includes a vpn, password manager and data broker removal. To help keep you safe for a limited time. Aura is offering a 14 day free trial plus a dark web scan to check if your personal information has been leaked, all for free at aura.comsafety that's aura.comsafety to sign up and protect your loved ones. That's a U R a.comsafety terms apply. Check the site for details.
- [58:31]
Ben Pickman
Acast powers the World's best Podcasts. Here's a show that we recommend hey.
- [58:39]
Chantelle Jennings
Guys, we have an exciting announcement about our podcast.
- [58:42]
E
For the past seven years, the Holderness Family Podcast has been the most favorite thing we do.
- [58:46]
Ben Pickman
We love getting to talk to experts. We love having meaningful conversations just the two of us.
- [58:50]
F
And we also love hearing from you.
- [58:52]
E
But the thing we love most is being a place where you can laugh.
- [58:56]
Ben Pickman
A lot has changed in the last seven years and we feel very lucky that our audience is growing older.
- [59:02]
E
So in the spirit of that, we are relaunching our podcast. We are excited to introduce Laugh Lines with Kim and Penn Holderness.
- [59:09]
Ben Pickman
The Laugh Lines podcast will be all about aging together better and also being.
- [59:14]
F
Able to laugh about getting older.
- [59:16]
E
We hope you'll join us. Search Laugh Lines with Kim and Penn Holderness New episodes every Tuesday. ACAST helps creators launch, grow and monetize their podcasts everywhere.
- [59:29]
F
Acast.com.