Anyone besides me

#26
#26
I have been reading all the articles this week about how UConn's excellence is bad for women's basketball. Apparently a lot of WCBB fans would rather see two crappy teams shoot in the 30% range, turn the ball over 25 time each, commit 25 fouls each, and have 5 or 6 assists for the entire game with a final score of 43-42 as long as one team scores the winning basket at the buzzer. I would rather watch athletes pursue perfection and watch for the beauty of the sport instead of the competitive nature of the game or the score.

I never liked golf, but I watched Tiger Woods on Sundays when he was doing things no other golfer could do (before the world knew he was a pig). I also enjoyed watching Steffi Graf in her prime, the Spanish National Soccer team with their passing skills, and Torvill and Dean when they were destroying all takers on the ice. I have respect for anyone who makes it their mission to be the best they can be, whether it be in sports or any other aspect of their life.

But for those who worship mediocrity, here are two options:

1. Rather than have an NCAA tournament, why not just give everyone a participation trophy at the end of the regular season so there are no losers and no one suffers low self-esteem.

2. Have a tournament but do not keep score in the game. Each team is required to give every player on the bench equal playing time. At the end of the game, flip a coin to determine which team moves on to the next round. This way everyone has an equal opportunity at being a national champion.

Are we really becoming a society where we resent and punish success, and we reward and compensate people for their failures?

Still it will take an upset of UConn to get more people interested again -- If the WNBA paid better some of these UConn players would be one and dones every season
 
#27
#27
If the WNBA paid better some of these UConn players would be one and dones every season

Underclassmen across the country do not leave early for the WNBA because WNBA rules prohibit them from doing so. The salary levels have nothing to do with the decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#30
#30
To qualify for the WNBA draft, a player has to have (1) received her degree (which is tough for a freshman or sophomore), or (2) turn 22 in the calendar year of the draft. Most women turn 19 as freshmen and 20 as sophomores. Zahui B. turned 22 as a sophomore because she was a foreign player who played club ball in Europe before playing WCBB in the U.S. She was the exception because of her age. Jewell Loyd left after her junior year because she was also turning 22 in 2015. Most WCBB players enter college straight out of high school as 18-year-olds.

It is very different on the men's side. If you watch a men's game, the announcers will talk about a 22-year old freshman, because the men's players are more likely to have failed school and been held back a couple of times and then they do a post-graduate year at a prep school in order to get bigger and stronger or because they need another year to get their SAT scores up to meet the ridiculously low NCAA clearinghouse requirements for eligibility.

So even if the WNBA were to offer $500,000/year starting salaries, 99% of WCBB freshmen and sophomores would still be ineligible for the draft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#31
#31
+++++++++++

The medai doesn't fall under the title IX constraints... Thats all.

+++++++

Ratings rise for NCAA women's tournament 46% from last year reports: ...The NCAA women’s basketball tournament has been working out well so far for ESPN, with first and second-round regional and national coverage from last weekend drawing an average of 343,000 viewers. That’s a rise of 46 percent from last year

though under the men's numbers, there is a definite rise in viewership

Not sure where you're reading any of that, because the numbers reported by CBS for the men are way way down by 39% this year, for Sweet 16 and the majority of the conference tournaments. Sure, that's still way more viewers for the men on a public channel than the women on cable, but no need to push wrong info about the men.

ESPN has WCBB and reported a 46% rise in viewership in its first report for the early rounds. I do get that the sites will tailor their sites for the viewers' main interests, but for March and early April you would think that ESPN as host of the women's Tournament could add an NCAAW to the quick link sports categories brackets at top instead of having to choose the ". . ." I mean, it's their product, and don't they want to promote it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#32
#32
Not sure where you're reading any of that, because the numbers reported by CBS for the men are way way down by 39% this year, for Sweet 16 and the majority of the conference tournaments. Sure, that's still way more viewers for the men on a public channel than the women on cable, but no need to push wrong info about the men.

ESPN has WCBB and reported a 46% rise in viewership in its first report for the early rounds. I do get that the sites will tailor their sites for the viewers' main interests, but for March and early April you would think that ESPN as host of the women's Tournament could add an NCAAW to the quick link sports categories brackets at top instead of having to choose the ". . ." I mean, it's their product, and don't they want to promote it?

Am I missing something here? I go to the B]ESPNW[/B] site and the NCAA link is there at the top of the page.
 
#33
#33
+++++++++++

The medai doesn't fall under the title IX constraints... Thats all.

+++++++

Ratings rise for NCAA women's tournament 46% from last year reports: ...The NCAA women’s basketball tournament has been working out well so far for ESPN, with first and second-round regional and national coverage from last weekend drawing an average of 343,000 viewers. That’s a rise of 46 percent from last year

though under the men's numbers, there is a definite rise in viewership

Those are worse than msnbc or cnn numbers.
 
#34
#34
It's like professional women's soccer. Nobody watches professional women's soccer but they want equal pay to the men. Somebody needs to explain economics to these women.
 
#35
#35
Bet the F4 and championship game viewership will be down. Big names out, three 1 seeds gone, UConn in a cakewalk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#36
#36
It's like professional women's soccer. Nobody watches professional women's soccer but they want equal pay to the men. Somebody needs to explain economics to these women.

Actually, these women understand the economics pretty well and are not in need of the mansplaining.

It is the US Women's national soccer team (you know, the ones who won the 2014 World Cup and the 2012 Olympics) who are suing the US Soccer Federation. No suit is being brought against the fledgling women's professional league (the NWSL) nor are the players bringing the suit complaining about the pay scales in the NWSL. Two different organizations and two very different economic contexts.

And guess what, the women's national teams draw higher television ratings than the men for World cup matches. Also, in Olympic years and World Cup years, the women bring in more revenue than the men's team. The complexity is that in off years, the men bring in more $. But all this talk about revenue streams remains a bit of a guesstimate because there is no transparency in the U.S. Soccer Federation's financial reporting (or lack thereof). One motivation for the lawsuit is to force the federation to open its accounting books so that the full revenue picture can be known with clarity.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#38
#38
Bet the F4 and championship game viewership will be down. Big names out, three 1 seeds gone, UConn in a cakewalk.

I might watch until UConn gets a 20 point lead and then turn it off (probably 4 minutes into the game)- I cant stand watching Guido celebrating what is already known to happen -
 

VN Store



Back
Top