In Comparison…
By Michael Codrington 4/15/24
9:22 AM CT
Women’s college basketball discourse has been purged by comparison. Absolutely gutted by the notion that to exist as its own modern juggernaut, it must first be compared to the mens’ game in a way that establishes validity. If the comparison was simply about level of play, it should be across leagues. Is the OTE league as competitive as the NBL, or men’s college basketball? That is the conversation often had on that side of the docket. But as far as the women’s game is concerned, it is discussed as if it exists as some sort of otherworldly alternative to the mens’ game only when it is convenient for analysts, viewers or both.
When I watch Juju Watkins’ execution on the court, her offensive game reminds me of Elena Della Donne’s game in college with significantly more athleticism and even more skill. She weaves her way through screens and can get downhill at will initiating her contact. She is efficient in the low post and has a prolific outside game, especially for her size. She flashes defensive potential. The way that Watkins can get to her spot and shoot over the nearest outstretched arm is reminiscent of Angel McCoughtry. I have yet to see a major sports outlet, or even a minor one at that, provide a fair and accurate female comparison for Watkins…
And that hurts her marketability at the end of the day. What good does it do for an older Maya Moore fan to think that they are watching “The female Kevin Durant”? Their idea of whatever that is supposed to be or look like will undoubtedly fall short because it is baseless and disrespects the nuances in their respective leagues. How about “The next Maya Moore”, “The next Tamika Catchings” or “Sylvia Fowles with longer range” as comparisons for players. Ideally, there is no comparison at all, but the fact remains that that fan may lose out on the next generation of prospects because they do not see the generation they grew up watching within them. The media is the biggest culprit here. This practice also keeps these names fresh in the mouths of newer fans. Even as the game grows and changes, the average 13 year old male basketball fan can name more players from before their time than the average 13 women’s basketball fan. Obviously the male game has been supported with resources for much longer, but actively talking about these female athletes in empowering, larger than life ways will encourage stability for the game.
Get Michael Codrington’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Perhaps the most infuriating and lazy statement that has been parroted on and off for the past few weeks is ,“The women’s tournament is better than the men’s this year”. Not only is this not a profound statement in any way shape or form, it positions itself to assume that the mens’ tournament is inherently “better”, always has been, and always should be. As if one is not allowed to be a fan of both, exclusive from one another. This also allows the analysts being paid handsomely to discuss sports the leeway to be unprepared to discuss women’s college basketball. The product has always been the product. This is surely not to take away from the record-breaking numbers that the sport has produced as of late. But, this also comes just one year after the NCAA struck a deal for the media rights to the womens’ tournament, which ESPN will be taking full advantage of over the next 8 years. The deal and its details can be found in the sources linked below, and though it is certainly a step in the right direction, it does not shrink the economic disparity between the sports. Women’s athletes and their respective conferences are still not awarded performance units. And, if the women’s tournament continues to produce eye-popping ratings in the next 2–3 years, as it is slated to, then the ‘price’ should continue to rise. The tournament will be unable to see its true potential on the market in the near future because the ESPN deal is bundled along with 39 other championships. Just imagine if they could make that splash on their own, which would blow the top on WNBA expansion.
The argument behind the lack of structural support for the WNBA and women’s basketball in general, has been that it does not provide enough entertainment on a nightly basis(and therefore revenue blah blah). Were the 18.9 million viewers that tuned in for the final this year entertained? I know that I was. Caitlin Clark became the media spark plug necessary for a select number of other players to have enough temporary spotlight to gain new viewers and for them to shine. A completely different conversation in its own right, there’s no denying that it is Clark’s story, game and team that garnered the majority of headlines about women’s basketball in general. But insert anything here of all time found itself tossed around too lightly. The GOAT concept, in 2024 at least, is an arbitrary measuring stick through which people pay other people homage. The simplicity of broadcasting more games, at more opportune times etc. has just as much to do with the ratings ballooning as the players. The pure story involved with the final four teams was rich, but no richer than Mississippi State ripping the hearts out of UCONN in 2017, ending a 111 game win streak. There were less stories run that year on Victoria Vivians, Napheesa Collier, Katie Lou Samuleson, Gabby Williams, and Morgan William, some of the marquee players from both respective teams, than Clark this past year alone. CNN was recently under fire for posting an article about South Carolina’s championship victory and using Clark and her team as the thumbnail. More eyes on the sports statistically than ever before, and what are the news outlets doing? Selling these players and coaches short.
In essence, comparison has not allowed the discourse around the sport to open its arms to accept new blood. There can be one player, if that, that garners that spotlight. Where has the coverage been for Dawn Staley’s players who completed an undefeated season? How many fans were able to watch Cameron Brink play basketball this season? Dyaisha Fair may be the best scorer in college and some fans have never heard her name. What about Audi Crooks? Hidalgo? Pili? The tournament was clearly standing room only, so it’s lazy to say it’s not ‘cool’ to watch women’s basketball. And untrue.
The league is long overdue for expansion, and I’m optimistic that support is on the way in whatever form. But there is simply too much talent that has been wasted over the years, and will continue to be wasted, if the discourse and the bottom line lose to comparison. Let them all be great. Let us all be fans. Let it be. Happy Draft Day :).
Sources:
https://apnews.com/article/ncaa-espn-womens-basketball-3a749734984eabde52ea5ec8a7dfe34e
