USA Today's Aunt Bea: Combine the two NCAA basketball tournaments

97% of this added media coverage will consist of blistering columns by pissed-off writers taking every opportunity to point out how inferior women's basketball is in physical skills and actual game action. "They can't dunk, they can't shoot, it looks like an 8th-grade boys' game."

And I say this as someone who usually boosts women's sports.

Forcing the women onto the big stage, into the big spotlight, will only maximize the fact that physically, they simply don't -- simply cannot -- match up.

 

So let it. If putting the women on the same weekend as the men kills any and all interest in the sport (which I don't think would happen), so be it.

I don't think it would hurt the sport at all. I think it might marginally help it. At best. If they want to try it, I don't think there's much of a downside.

 

The thing is, the women's Final Four usually is a huge draw anyways, so there wouldn't be much benefit.

Women's basketball is a niche sport, either you like it or you don't. Like a lot of other niche sports (Arena football, WNBA, X-Games), women's basketball doesn't have the long history that male-dominated sports have (MLB, NFL, NBA). It took the big Three among pro sports years to develop their places in American culture (take a look at the list of defunct franchises). The fact that the women's Final Four has become a huge draw is a testament to the sport's growth. The sport will continue to grow, but it may take another generation to be seen as on-par with men's basketball. If you try to force-feed it onto a population (like soccer), people tend to turn away.

 

The women's final eight and on is pretty good, but before that you just don't see the upsets that you do in the men's. Brennan is a champion for women's sports, and I respect that, but I wish she would quit acting like there is a big conspiracy against women in sports and all they would need is a chance to show their stuff and they would be just as popular as men's. They just don't get the numbers. And figure skating has leveled off as well. Seems people don't care as much unless the opponents are putting out hits on each other.
But perhaps Hillary was inspired by the Women's soccer team's world cup win and decided to run for president then.

 

Allow me to clarify: I meant that the most athletic women's basketball players - big-time Division I (Tennessee, North Carolina, UConn, etc.) - have a skill set and talent level that meets the minimum accepted standard of a Division I men's basketball player. O.J. Mayo, Tyler Hansbrough, even Drew Lavender would run circles around the teams at Minnesota, BYU, South Carolina, and any other non-elite Division I program. But players like Candace Parker, Candice Wiggins, Maya Moore, etc. would probably be able to hold their own against the D.J. Augustins and Chris Loftons.

 

Uh, not only no but hell no.

 

You won't find a bigger Candace Parker fan on the board than me, but no she wouldn't. Augustin and Lofton are way too quick for her. I do, however, believe she could hold her own against the average college player, and could be a decent mid-rotation player at a mid-major.

 

That's more reasonable, but still a stretch, I think. Division I men would be too strong and too quick for even the elite women's players. What is Candace Parker, 6'4"? A 6'4" guy at even a mid-major would overpower her.

 

Uh, not only no, not only hell no, but fuck no.

I have no issues with women's basketball, but that's a flat-out ridiculous statement.

 

Perhaps this isn't the proper thread, but I've always wondered about women's basketball conditioning. Women's hoops players usually seem to be less "cut" or lean than volleyball players, even women's tennis players. I know they put in a lot of time in the weight room and I'm not saying they're out of shape, I know they are. But I was curious about why they don't appear that way.

 

Absolutely not ... and this is coming from a rather ardent women's basketball follower.

The women's NCAA tournament needs to stop trying to tinker to play a "notice me" game and simply play. It's a different game. Quit trying to overshadow the men, or trying to play politics, or trying to think Title IX requires people to attend (and cover) your games too, and simply realize you're a niche sport and deal with it. You're going to get niche coverage and niche attendance. There's nothing wrong with that.

Wrestling, track & field and soccer people don't run around complaining that their sport doesn't get covered or isn't as well-attended.

The current tournament format owes itself to these self-serving political "notice us please" whiners who haven't understood that women's basketball fans are going to follow women's basketball, and that's it.

The women's people cried and screamed about not having predetermined subregionals for a long time, because it made their game seem inferior. Now, it's set up where if you can get into the tournament and host, you'll get to host ... a crappy team like Purdue gets to play two home games in the tourney as the lower seed this year, and Tennessee has to play a true road game. They first went to 16 sites, and now they're at eight, and the attendance is terrible unless the host team is playing, so they're likely back to 16 sites.

The women had it right a few years ago ... the top 4 seeds in each region earned the right to host the 1st & 2nd rounds. There were 16 sites, and attendance was pretty good. If you're going to allow teams to host, let them earn it, rather than giving a 9 or an 10 seed "home court" and therefore forcing a 1 or a 2 seed to play a true road game in the second round. But howling about Title IX screwed that up.

Complaining about attendance and TV ratings brought the tinkering with dates -- the Final Four used to be Saturday/Sunday (semis before the men's on Saturday, then title game Sunday afternoon) for CBS. When ESPN got the rights, it went to a Friday/Sunday -- but the games were overshadowed by the men's tournament. So now, the Final Four is a Sunday/Tuesday, which is intended to allow the women to steal the spotlight by letting them play their title game *after* the men (so they won't be buried under preview stories for the men's game) ... and the title game is now just another random midweek game, rather than one televised in prime time Sunday night.

Sunday/Tuesday regionals also *kill* attendance. Who is going to travel anywhere when you have to take -- at minimum -- three consecutive days off work to go? A Friday/Sunday regional (with the games Sunday afternoon) might require you to take only one day off. But it's all to be noticed -- by people who don't want to notice you.

You can't force people to watch women's basketball. You can't force people to watch any sport. Deal with it, and put out a good product for the people who do, and quit tinkering to try to force people to watch.

 

All very solid points, Crimson.

Now sell it to Aunt Bee, who continues her drumbeat of 'Look at MEEEEE, Look at MEEEEE"