Poll: NIT men or NCAA women?

You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.
You determine coverage by readership interest.

It's not about reinforcing traditional gender roles or flying the flag for women's sports. You have a readership, you respond to its desires. If you believe your readers care more about women's NCAA than men's NIT, that's where you put the focus. If it's men's NIT over women's NCAA, ditto. Hell, if it's women's NIT over men's NCAA, so be it.

You determine coverage by readership interest.

 

Really, Meat?

Aren't there some things that should be covered whether the public is interested or not? Like Darfur, for instance? I'm just throwing this out there....

I was surprised by the post that said NC State wasn't drawing. The Yow story is pretty compelling. I'd give that one space whether the readers are "interested" or not.

 

Obviously you follow the rules and then throw them out the window when applicable. But there's no sports equivalent to Darfur in terms of societal significance.

As for Yow, every paper with the space should have run a story on her by now. But is it enough to lift coverage of the entire tournament? Not enough, I don't think.

 

Not only that, Lugs, but this is a big problem with our business today anyway. We, the journalists, think we know what the public needs better than the public does itself. We are so self-important sometimes, it blinds us.

The list of things which should get coverage in spite of reader disinterest is a very short list indeed.

You determine coverage by readership interest.

If it was meant to read the other way around, it would have been written that way.

 

I agree with that, but I think the Yow story is on that short list. So, if you're in Raleigh, and you're trying to figure out whether the women's team deserves space over NIT coverage... you can't rely ONLY on attendance figures and TV ratings for the answer.

 

I'd say so, particularly in the N.C. Triangle. But the interest is specific to Yow. Are people outside Raleigh/Durham going to go any further than that? I don't think so. You can still cover Yow in some form without covering the team past its ceiling of reader interest, which probably doesn't extend much past a 40-mile radius of the campus as well as the other big cities on 85 and 40.

 

I find it amazing that when it comes to every other decision about coverage -- interest, ratings, attendance -- those things matter to the brass. We're told we don't cover soccer because nobody really cares. We're told we won't cover college wrestling because nobody cares. We're told we don't cover some of the smaller D-I teams in the area because nobody cares.

These rules always apply -- until it comes to coverage of women's basketball (or the women's world cup, which we're still waiting for the landmark changes that event was going to provide for soccer) -- then the political correctness factor goes way up.

Never mind that our local team, which made the NCAA Tournament, draws about 500 fans per game -- if they count the band -- and never mind that the first four rounds of the NCAA Women's Tournament play to more empty seats than full ones -- we must cover it equally because that's the right thing to do.

Is it? If nobody cares enough to show up or watch it until the Final Four, why should we invest resources into it?

All I need to say is this -- compare the attendance figures of the NIT games and those of the First and Second Round of the NCAA's and if you still believe the women's tournament warrants more coverage you are silly.

 

I covered the NCAA first round in Chicago last year. When Kentucky played Chattanooga, there were MAYBE 800 people there. In a 12,000-seat arena. It was pathetic.

 

We've pretty much ignored those sports you asked about, because there's no interest on the NCAA level. Lack of success by the schools we cover dictate that.

As for women's hoops, we've had women's roundups all season. No reason to drop it now, simply because the men have some consolation tournament going on. People here do care about basketball, but not so much about the NIT.

 

You're forgetting that both Duke and North Carolina also earned No. 1 regional seeds. So between those schools being legitimate national championship contenders and Kay Yow's story at NCSU, the Triangle has about a perfect a women's basketball storm as one area can get.

I'm not implying it's suddenly a better traditional women's market than Knoxville or Storrs or perhaps Ruston, La., when Louisiana Tech was a powerhouse. But none of those areas have three major Division I women's storylines right now. It's why the Raleigh N&O ran a women's NCAA special section ... smaller than the men's section - the latter was chock with more ads, prompting a few extra pages - but still, interest is there.

 

My humble take:

If a school you regularly cover is playing for a national championship in any sport -- swimming, golf, track, lacrosse or whatever -- your paper should be there.

Addendum: This includes individuals. This assumes, however, the people you are covering have a legitimate chance to win (if not, don't bother). And I'd say making it to the Sweet 16 covers that.

 

I don't think anyone's saying drop NCAA women's roundups for the men's NIT. I think the debate is "who gets the better coverage?", whether that means determining travel or what goes on the front and how much.

Again, know your readership. If you're in Connecticut, you're going to play the women's NCAA above everything else. If you're in Tennessee, the women's tournament lead in the eastern part of the state, the men's in the west. If you have an NIT but no NCAA women's team, you go with the NIT. If you have nothing left, go with what you think people care about, which means inside roundups for both NIT men and NCAA women, the latter going out front for the Final Four. That's my rule of thumb, leastaways.