There is an article in USA Today by Christene Brennan (Psst, women have hoops tourney, too - USATODAY.com) that covers the recent, yet annual discussion about the relevance of the women's national tournament. As we seem to hear on an annual basis, there are those that want to separate it (by time) from the men's tournament. These are much the same arguments that are being made to separate the men and women's Big 12 tournaments by location. Somehow these moves would give the women's side legitimacy and increase viewership. It would create equality.
I'm writing this in hope that it stirs good discussion - not name calling. What do you believe? I'll share my thoughts and leave it out there for you to respond.
Personally, I think Brennan's article is short sighted. Let's just talk about the impact on the women's game by moving it's tournament up by three weeks.
1. The season - the women would either have to cut games or move the beginning of the season up by three weeks. Guess what that does? It would now either compete with football in the fall or lose much of the non-conference season. Neither of these options is good. Football is the bread and butter of nearly every (if not every) Div I program in the country. How many people will attend a Saturday game for the women when football is being played? What? Don't play Saturday games you say? That means either more Sunday games or weeknight games which are harder for the non-locals to travel for. The other half of this equation would be an even further loss of interest in the women - losing the key non-conference games that either get teams ready for grueling conference seasons or give them a name via the upset of a nationally recognized team. You might also begin to lose the traditional non-conference matchups that are so critical for the fans (i.e. the rivalries).
2. Separating the men and the women. This isn't just about the big dance. It's about the sport itself. If the women's teams are starting earlier, that also means they begin conference play earlier. All of the discussion that takes place because both teams are in the midst of conference battles goes away. The women would be wrapping things up when the men were just getting to the middle of their conference races. There would be no critical mass of people who follow both teams. If you don't think crowds follow women now, just wait. The crowds will get smaller. First step - separating conference tournaments. In the Big 12 the women draw two groups of people - the true women's fans and those that are there for the men and choose to come support the women. Separating the tournaments would eliminate the later group. It could also impact the former group if some of those fans (and i am one of them) support both teams. Economic times dictate having to choose which team you will travel to support. The crowds continue to shrink. Move to the NCAA tourney and you have the same effect happening only you get to add one more aspect - loss of recognition. The women would lose the "March Madness" moniker. The value of latching onto this cannot be undersold. What will we call those tournaments that now start in February? The February Fanaticism? Don't think so. Now we get to throw marketing out the window as well.
I think they need to leave it just as it currently is. The hopes of getting something better by separating the two sports are wishful thinking. I believe this separation would increase the "second class" perception of women's basketball rather than decrease it. What do you think?
I'm writing this in hope that it stirs good discussion - not name calling. What do you believe? I'll share my thoughts and leave it out there for you to respond.
Personally, I think Brennan's article is short sighted. Let's just talk about the impact on the women's game by moving it's tournament up by three weeks.
1. The season - the women would either have to cut games or move the beginning of the season up by three weeks. Guess what that does? It would now either compete with football in the fall or lose much of the non-conference season. Neither of these options is good. Football is the bread and butter of nearly every (if not every) Div I program in the country. How many people will attend a Saturday game for the women when football is being played? What? Don't play Saturday games you say? That means either more Sunday games or weeknight games which are harder for the non-locals to travel for. The other half of this equation would be an even further loss of interest in the women - losing the key non-conference games that either get teams ready for grueling conference seasons or give them a name via the upset of a nationally recognized team. You might also begin to lose the traditional non-conference matchups that are so critical for the fans (i.e. the rivalries).
2. Separating the men and the women. This isn't just about the big dance. It's about the sport itself. If the women's teams are starting earlier, that also means they begin conference play earlier. All of the discussion that takes place because both teams are in the midst of conference battles goes away. The women would be wrapping things up when the men were just getting to the middle of their conference races. There would be no critical mass of people who follow both teams. If you don't think crowds follow women now, just wait. The crowds will get smaller. First step - separating conference tournaments. In the Big 12 the women draw two groups of people - the true women's fans and those that are there for the men and choose to come support the women. Separating the tournaments would eliminate the later group. It could also impact the former group if some of those fans (and i am one of them) support both teams. Economic times dictate having to choose which team you will travel to support. The crowds continue to shrink. Move to the NCAA tourney and you have the same effect happening only you get to add one more aspect - loss of recognition. The women would lose the "March Madness" moniker. The value of latching onto this cannot be undersold. What will we call those tournaments that now start in February? The February Fanaticism? Don't think so. Now we get to throw marketing out the window as well.
I think they need to leave it just as it currently is. The hopes of getting something better by separating the two sports are wishful thinking. I believe this separation would increase the "second class" perception of women's basketball rather than decrease it. What do you think?
