www.espn.com
Doesn't Title IX even this out on the spending side?Gender equity review suggests combined Final 4
A law firm hired to investigate gender equity concerns at NCAA championship events said in a review Tuesday that the association has not lived up to its own standards and recommended a combined Final Four for men's and women's basketball at the same site.
Women want to combine the Final Fours and split revenue since they only generate $34M and the men generate $900M.
Actually, what the report says is that the Women's tournament could generate $100M in revenue if marketed properly. Seems like the NCAA has been extremely lazy in how it promotes WBB and non revenue sports. The fact that the NCAA refuses to let the Women's tournament use the "March Madness" moniker speaks volumes for the low regard they have for WBB.Gender equity review suggests combined Final 4
A law firm hired to investigate gender equity concerns at NCAA championship events said in a review Tuesday that the association has not lived up to its own standards and recommended a combined Final Four for men's and women's basketball at the same site.
Women want to combine the Final Fours and split revenue since they only generate $34M and the men generate $900M.
And what do you think? Is women's basketball just waiting to make a bazillion dollars with the right marketing campaign? Could the WNBA playoffs be just as lucrative as their NBA counterpart if only marketed properly?
So much entitlement.
Did you read the article you posted? "Women" didn't do anything. This is an article about a report that the NCAA commissioned. "A law firm hired by the NCAA to investigate equity issues released a 113-page report ....". Where do you see anything in the article about splitting revenue?Gender equity review suggests combined Final 4
A law firm hired to investigate gender equity concerns at NCAA championship events said in a review Tuesday that the association has not lived up to its own standards and recommended a combined Final Four for men's and women's basketball at the same site.
Women want to combine the Final Fours and split revenue since they only generate $34M and the men generate $900M.
I have no opinion on it. I don't think it would affect the men's tournament. It may or may not help the women's tournament. I don't see how changing the timing of the women's tournament is such a flashpoint issue.
I think the best argument against having both Final Fours at the same venue is the fact that the Men play in a dome stadium and sell it out. The reality is, the Women would be lucky to sell even half of the seats and the atmosphere would be dead. Better to keep their Final Four in a real basketball arena.
Another article I saw had the proposal stating that both Final Fours would be held in the same city, not necessarily at the same venue. Plenty of cities (e.g. Indy, Minneapolis, Detroit, Houston, Atlanta, Dallas, etc.) have NBA arenas in addition to the larger domed football stadiums.
Amen.
iirc Indy has about 30,000 hotel rooms, the convention center sits within walking distance of both Lucas Oil Field and Bankers Life Fieldhouse, and there are uncounted (by me) numbers of Air BnBs in the metro area as well. the annual Gencon event brings crowds of 50-60,000 wandering around the convention center area and downtown for four or five days every year without muss or fuss. just fyi.
I don't think anyone is arguing that the men's game isn't played at a higher level or that both sports should receive the same amount of compensation. The WNBA all-star team would probably lose badly to a team of top high school male players.
No one wants to watch women’s basketball...it’s an awful product....and it has zero parity
But that is exactly what they want to do if I understand their position correctly. They want to split the revenue for the Final Four with the men's teams.
I don't think that is at all what anyone has proposed. Where did you read this?
Okay, they already do that in many cases.
That was my interpretation of the first post in this thread where VirginiaWildcat said:
I don't even remember who won the women's title this season. My guess would be UConn, since they always seem to win it, but that's just a guess.
Sure, there's a reason for it, and in my opinion that reason is misguided and shortsighted. Their intention was probably to "protect the brand", but I really don't see why allowing the women's Final Four to use the name "March Madness" dilutes its effectiveness with the men's tournament. Instead, I feel it could help promote both the women's and men's tournaments together.
Do you remember without looking it up who the men's Final Four teams were?
Yes. I took great interest because of the Texas teams, because I wanted UTEP to remain the only champion from Texas.
No, that's not what I'm saying, as that would be a dumb argument. I just don't like determining the value of something based on one person's memory of it. My wife doesn't remember who NU beat in its bowl game on January 1st, but that doesn't mean that NU football isn't important in our family. 🙂
Yeah, I remember it as well for those reasons (and because my father in law is a UCLA alum), but normally that level of detail fades from my memory after awhile. I can't tell you from memory who played in the NBA finals or Super Bowl last year (though I do remember that the Lakers beat someone).
I won't argue with that. No one here is trying to equalize the popularity of the two sports. I'm just saying that the NCAA could take some relatively simple steps to help promote the women's sport without damaging the "brand". Call it synergy if you want. It's not necessarily a zero sum game here.
The recent and less recent scandals (I don't know how recent you consider the Dave Bliss ordeal).
