If you’re a basketball fan, then you are much aware of the Golden State Warriors chase for history this year as they try to break the NBA record for most wins in a single season. The record, 72-10, was set by the Chicago Bulls of the '95-'96 season with the likes of Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, and Steve Kerr (who is now the Warriors Head Coach) making up the starting five.
The Warriors, along with their leader Stephen Curry, have revolutionized the game of basketball within the past two seasons. While they have been winning, they’ve been doing so unconventionally mainly living and dying by the three-point shot. Curry and Klay Thompson, arguably two of the best shooters in the league right now, have wowed fans and non-fans alike, taking what most people would consider “bad shots,” but making those and destroying teams by high margins in the process.
To the younger, easily entertained fan, the Warriors are great for basketball due to the fact that watching them eliminates the “basketball as usual” stereotype. We’re accustomed to seeing a point guard or shooting guard finish a layup or dunk the ball in transition, while Curry and Thompson will decide to pull up from three, a low percentage and frankly stupid shot for any normal basketball player. However, these two are changing the game and making these shots more common.
Another team, revolutionizing basketball through dominance on the college level would be the UConn Women’s Huskies. With Breanna Stewart and Geno Auriemma at the helm, the team has won four consecutive NCAA Championships. This season, UConn would embarrass teams in cold-blooded fashion, obliterating opponents by an average margin of 44 points, capping off their season with the largest victory in championship history when they beat Syracuse 82-51.
When it comes to the Warriors and the Huskies, although different specifics are given, it seems to be the same overarching criticism and that is what they do is bad for the game. From a spectator standpoint, I could understand not wanting to view a blowout game and that’s cool, don’t watch then. However, as a competitor, I don’t understand how these two teams couldn’t be better for their respective leagues. Auriemma, when asked about the criticism of his team’s dominance had one of the greatest responses, “When Tiger was winning every major, nobody said he was bad for golf. Actually, he did a lot for golf. He made everybody have to be a better golfer. And they did. And now there's a lot more great golfers because of Tiger."
While many people may bash these two teams, I think it’s very important that instead of condemning this history, we marvel at it, because we really never know when we will see dominance like this again. On the topic of whether or not their dominance is bad for the game, I believe the answer to the debate becomes quite simple: just be better.
There hasn’t been much greatness in this world that has derived from absolutely nothing. It comes with hard work and a desire to be better. Golden State’s and UConn’s dominance may be disheartening to opponents, old time players and fans alike, although it is definitely good for the sport of basketball. It forces people to not only have a desire or want to be better, they are now required to be better. With that requirement comes harder work and, sooner or later, an overthrow of the best. Work harder, get better, beat them, and the sport as a whole will become better as a result.
