Aunt Bea is very unhappy over the lack of interest in the UConn women

[PCLoadLetter]

God, that was awful from top to bottom. This is the part that gets me most:

"Having been involved in the issue of equity for women in sports, I think too many people take it for granted that because they see women playing sports, they think everything is equitable, when we're not close to it at all. This might be the biggest sign there is yet that it's not close to equitable coverage."

Sorry, Title IX does not require equal treatment from the media, nor is there one single compelling reason why any media outlet should treat them equally.

UConn is very impressive. They play a sport where there are very few players who are really very good, so realistically, they play maybe two teams in a season that have any prayer to beat them. Whoopee.

 

[DanOregon]

Equity is a two-way street. What she is advocating is pandering. If women's sports were treated like any other sport, by the broadcast networks, cable and print, they would probably receive even less coverage. The WNBA deal is a throw-in on the NBA contract, and most of the other events covered are sponsor-driven programs.
I respect Brennan's work, but I'm certain she's read the same marketing surveys and studies the networks have showing that the audience is what the audience is. The increasing coverage of women's sports hasn't led to increasing viewership or readership.

 

[KYSportsWriter]

Can I have my 5 minutes back, please?

 

[Jesus_Muscatel]

Don't tell me what to like or be interested in. Make me interested in it. Brennan never does. One-trickiest pony in the damn country.

Bill Rhoden says, whew, that was close.

 

[Gonna Buy me a Dog]

Don't tell me what to like or be interested in. Make me interested in it. Brennan never does. One-trickiest pony in the damn country.

Bill Rhoden says, whew, that was close.

I was thinking that. He would be a fairly close second.

 

[playthrough]

It is an impressive streak. I read the recent UConn story in SI. I'd consider reading another well-done piece. Brennan could have had one if she had talked to former players, coaches, media executives ... anyone but Lapchick, who is Lapdog for these things.

 

[hondo]

God, that was awful from top to bottom. This is the part that gets me most:

"Having been involved in the issue of equity for women in sports, I think too many people take it for granted that because they see women playing sports, they think everything is equitable, when we're not close to it at all. This might be the biggest sign there is yet that it's not close to equitable coverage."

Sorry, Title IX does not require equal treatment from the media, nor is there one single compelling reason why any media outlet should treat them equally.

UConn is very impressive. They play a sport where there are very few players who are really very good, so realistically, they play maybe two teams in a season that have any prayer to beat them. Whoopee.

Superb point. The media does not belong to the NCAA. The media has no obligation to boost UConn female basketball. If anything, Geno being the world-class dickhead he is is a detriment.

 

[steveu]

Never interviewed Geno, but I have seen him at his best after a loss. (Emphasis on sarcasm when I say best.)

 

[BYH]

It's why I hate soccer-loving or soccer-hating columns. Tell me a story, not what grinds your gears.

This guy has something to say to you.

Hahahaha that is fantastic.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

What the UConn women are doing is impressive. But how many truly good women's teams are out there? I doubt it's even 10. How many times each season is there a realistic chance they could lose? I'm guessing it's about 3-4 times a year, including the tournament.

Even the best men's team this year will play 12-15 games not counting the tournament where there is a very real chance they could lose.

Brennan sucks. I'll bet USA Today would love to cut her loose, but doesn't feel like dealing with a lawsuit or the bad publicity that would come with it.

"They let me go because nobody cares about the sports I write about!!!!"

 

[BTExpress]

Come up with all the excuses and differences you'd like, but in the end, this should be a conversation about the game of basketball. A college team once won 88 in a row. If another college team wins 89 in a row, isn't that better?

The fatal flaw in her argument: We MUST equate the two because it's "college" and "basketball", but we can ignore the fact that it's "men" and "women."


If I beat Stephen Hawking in 89 consecutive tennis matches, I sure don't consider my run to be "better" than Rafael Nadal winning 88 consecutive matches. "Same sport" doesn't mean **** when you ignore all other variables.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

There is simply no comparison of the level of competition UCLA faced in its 88 wins and that faced by UConn in its streak. The latter is an amazing record by itself, but it's not as much of an accomplishment. In terms of competition (not overall level of play, as who's to judge), women's ball just does not (and never has) match up. The sport is a history of dynasties who weren't much bothered by peasant uprisings, from Immaculata College until today.
It is, or should be, possible to admire an accomplishment for itself without making ridiculous claims for it which simply don't stand up to objective scrutiny.

 

[cranberry]

God, that was awful from top to bottom. This is the part that gets me most:

"Having been involved in the issue of equity for women in sports, I think too many people take it for granted that because they see women playing sports, they think everything is equitable, when we're not close to it at all. This might be the biggest sign there is yet that it's not close to equitable coverage."

Sorry, Title IX does not require equal treatment from the media, nor is there one single compelling reason why any media outlet should treat them equally.

UConn is very impressive. They play a sport where there are very few players who are really very good, so realistically, they play maybe two teams in a season that have any prayer to beat them. Whoopee.

Brennan is even dumber than I thought. Equitable coverage? Wait until the swimming team hears this.

Meanwhile, UConn football is playing Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl ...

 

[BTExpress]

If a Division III men's team was on the verge of winning its 89th game in a row, does Christine Brennan write anything about it? Of course not.

 

[DietCoke]

It bothers me a great deal that she cites a series of typical reactions, but does not attribute these to anyone in particular, then tells us that if we haven't hear them, we just aren't paying enough attention:

It'll always be a women's record, not the real record.

UConn and UCLA are apples and oranges. You can't compare them.

They don't play the same game.

I'm not saying those thoughts are not out there. But she needs to attribute them, or else it's a straw man.

I also have a major issue with the first sentence: "It'll always be a women's record, not the real record." In my view, it is the real women's record.

Isn't that OK?

As far as the substance of the piece, women's sports just seem to be a niche entertainment industry at this point, appealing mostly to young girls, older girls who play basketball, and - I'm sorry if this is politically incorrect, but I think that market research would bear it out - lesbians.

I am not sure if it is the job of ESPN and the rest of the mainstream media to engage in boosterism.

 

[Azrael]

I'm not saying those thoughts are not out there. But she needs to attribute them, or else it's a straw man.

Maybe next year she can just link to this thread.

 

[DietCoke]

I'm not saying those thoughts are not out there. But she needs to attribute them, or else it's a straw man.

Maybe next year she can just link to this thread.

But I think that proves my point.

It would have been easy to find those opinions and attributed them, no?

Why ask us to take on faith what would be easily verifiable?

 

[Mizzougrad96]

"It should get top sports billing on a NFL Sunday."

What a total dunce.

 

[Azrael]

Why ask us to take on faith what would be easily verifiable?

Why must an opinion piece corroborate the obvious?

 

[kingcreole]

Here's my problem - Brennan wants equal coverage, yes? Yet, it seems frowned upon to write/say anything remotely negative about any female sports team. The USA women's soccer team should have been blasted for losing to Mexico last month, which nearly cost them a World Cup berth. Instead, I heard crap like, "The rest of the world has closed the gap" and "They are tired from a long season" and other excuses. The women losing to Mexico is like the USA men's team losing to Cuba. Julie Foudy was the only one I heard that was remotely critical.

That column was a waste of time. I'd like to offer her: