Great article by Pat's buddy Sally Jenkins

#4

unfrozencvmanvol

High on Heupel.
Joined
Jul 3, 2018
Messages
5,191
Likes
8,107
#4
Not as many people want to watch it. It's just a fact. That's what drives the separate treatment. There are no male beauty contests either, there just isn't as much of an audience for it. I love the Lady Vols, always have, but Tennessee is a special place in that regard because of our history. Nationwide, the audience of people who are passionate about the outcome of the women's tournament is much, much lower than the men's.
 
#5

VA_VOLFAN

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
4,948
Likes
8,353
#5
The men’s tourney is called the crown jewel of the NCAA because it will bring in $850 mil of tv rights money alone.

However, I thought the women’s tourney would be like a couple million but it’s 42 mil it will bring in. A drop in the bucket compared to the men’s tourney but seems like it deserves more than one dumbbell rack and some yoga mats.

They could of probably done what they ended up
doing orginally for a couple mill and avoided the whole thing or worked a deal with Dick’s or some other company to begin with. But that would have required their give a damn button not to be broken and some actual progressive thinking lol.

I can’t imagine how much a money the likes of running ads or promos with Candace Parker or Diana Taurasi made the NCAA over the years. Or when Sabrina Ionescu was capturing the world by storm or Brittany Griner. Maybe not to the degree of what a man would make but it drew interest from sponsors to make them money.

We all know the money they bring in isn’t equal it the NCAA should of done better hands down.
 
Likes: orangealways
#6

JohnTN

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
125
Likes
158
#6
Is it really true that the women's teams or their schools receive no money from participating in the tournament?? The schools shoulder all expenses out of their pockets??
 
#10

BruceInLouisville

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2012
Messages
227
Likes
389
#10
Not as many people want to watch it. It's just a fact. That's what drives the separate treatment. There are no male beauty contests either, there just isn't as much of an audience for it. I love the Lady Vols, always have, but Tennessee is a special place in that regard because of our history. Nationwide, the audience of people who are passionate about the outcome of the women's tournament is much, much lower than the men's.
Even if I grant your point, it doesn't justify what was shown in those pictures. Take a look at the "weight room" for the women (one set of dumbbells and two yoga mats) compared to the men's (bigger than a Planet Fitness). Look at the swag bags. And look at the food: giant buffet laid out for the men, while the women get mystery meat that looks like someone walked on it with cleats.

Frankly, I hope the women form a union and sue the NCAA -- or refuse to play till it's fixed. This is not a market-driven problem; this is plain old misogyny.
 
Likes: Lucy
#11

unfrozencvmanvol

High on Heupel.
Joined
Jul 3, 2018
Messages
5,191
Likes
8,107
#11
Even if I grant your point, it doesn't justify what was shown in those pictures. Take a look at the "weight room" for the women (one set of dumbbells and two yoga mats) compared to the men's (bigger than a Planet Fitness). Look at the swag bags. And look at the food: giant buffet laid out for the men, while the women get mystery meat that looks like someone walked on it with cleats.

Frankly, I hope the women form a union and sue the NCAA -- or refuse to play till it's fixed. This is not a market-driven problem; this is plain old misogyny.
The Men's Tournament brings in almost 800 million dollars per year. The women's about 40 million. That's 20 to 1. You show me similar disparities in amenities at a tournament in a sport like swimming or something and I'll buy the misogyny argument, otherwise this looks like it's pretty simply the fact that one brings in vastly more money than the other and thus has a much larger operating budget, it's like being butthurt that a Mercedes is nicer than a Kia.
 
Last edited:
#12

BruceInLouisville

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2012
Messages
227
Likes
389
#12
The Men's Tournament brings in almost 800 million dollars per year. The women's about 40 million. That's 20 to 1. You show me similar disparities in amenities at a tournament in a sport like swimming or something and I'll buy the misogyny argument, otherwise this looks like it's pretty simply the fact that one brings in vastly more money than the other and thus has a much larger operating budget, it's like being butthurt that a Mercedes is nicer than a Kia.
I think the NCAA can afford more than one rack of dumbbells for an entire tournament to use.
 
#13

Majors

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2020
Messages
536
Likes
807
#13
We've come a long ways for women's sports but it was shows how far we have to go. The weight room picture was small but effective representation to show the reality of how women's sports are viewed. NCAA brings in enough money and has the opportunity on many levels to help change the problem, not be part of it. Will sports even be equal in the NCAA or professionally, no. Candace Parker will never have the opportunity to reap the benefits of what Lebron has by being a man. Monica Abbott was the first woman to reach a 1 million dollar deal in softball, Trevor Bauer will make 30 million this year alone.
 
#14

Amb3096

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
8,108
Likes
12,147
#14
We've come a long ways for women's sports but it was shows how far we have to go. The weight room picture was small but effective representation to show the reality of how women's sports are viewed. NCAA brings in enough money and has the opportunity on many levels to help change the problem, not be part of it. Will sports even be equal in the NCAA or professionally, no. Candace Parker will never have the opportunity to reap the benefits of what Lebron has by being a man. Monica Abbott was the first woman to reach a 1 million dollar deal in softball, Trevor Bauer will make 30 million this year alone.
I agree with the general theme here, but want to call out the highlighted part. Being a "man" is not what gets LeBron or Trevor their money; it's being a star for a highly lucrative sports league that has a massive worldwide following. Look at female tennis players. Their lack of a "Y" chromosome doesn't stop them from getting equal checks at the co-ed tournaments and million dollar purses in the WTA events because they've demonstrated their ability to sell tickets and fill the stadiums at the same level as the men's players. It has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with how lucrative their sport is.

If the WNBA reaches the level of popularity as the NBA, then the salary discrepancy will shrink. Until then, I think the women are making more than their fair amount when you consider that the league isn't financially viable without the NBA putting money into it with a negative ROI.
 
#15

Majors

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2020
Messages
536
Likes
807
#15
Lebron never had to leave the country to play professionally. I get the star factor and market value of Lebron, just pointing out the women’s version. I get what you’re saying and understand the markets but when a WNBA player in the same city as NBA leave and make better money overseas there is a sweep it under the rug issue. Either by sponsors, ownership, city, endorsements or society.

You never hear NBA players fighting for WNBA players increase in pay. 100K avg vs 7 million. Is this a pick and choose the social justices to endorse. I’m a capitalist for the record and support Baurer and Lebron getting their value. Abbots value is more than her earnings.
 
#16

Amb3096

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
8,108
Likes
12,147
#16
Lebron never had to leave the country to play professionally. I get the star factor and market value of Lebron, just pointing out the women’s version. I get what you’re saying and understand the markets but when a WNBA player in the same city as NBA leave and make better money overseas there is a sweep it under the rug issue. Either by sponsors, ownership, city, endorsements or society.

You never hear NBA players fighting for WNBA players increase in pay. 100K avg vs 7 million. Is this a pick and choose the social justices to endorse. I’m a capitalist for the record and support Baurer and Lebron getting their value. Abbots value is more than her earnings.
My understanding of the international women's market is that the team owners don't particularly care if they make or lose money, and much of the team ownership is for bragging rights...at least in Russia. There's also probably a ginormous gap between what the star American players make vs. the local players. Unfortunately, the USA can't support million dollar salaries for women's basketball players, unless the team owners are also willing to just essentially give the money away with no expectation of recouping it...so basically, a charity.

The WNBA was smart to tie their teams to the NBA counterparts to help with brand visibility and to leverage the NBA contracts and infrastructure, but at the end of the day they weren't packing the stadium the same way, ticket/concession sales probably didn't cover the overhead, and merchandising/endorsements was miniscule compared to the NBA. I don't think that's sweeping it under the rug. That is what happens when you have a product that doesn't appeal to a broad market. Probably the same reason that the NBA G League doesn't have better attendance; it's viewed as an inferior product to not only the NBA but also probably college basketball.
 

VN Store


Sponsors
 

Top