Sabrina Ionescu (merged thread)

[reno tony]

I was watching an NBA game and Harden needed one rebound to get a triple double and his teammates kept boxing him out so he couldn't get number 10. It was absolutely hilarious. Then he got the final shot rebound with less than one second on the clock but it didn't count because the ball didn't hit the rim or board. Teammates were laughing the whole time.

 

[diggerfoot]

Above I read MANY "don't get the coverage they DESERVE" posts.
Please tell me on what basis they DESERVE any coverage.
If people watch, then advertisers will pay to have those eyeballs endure their ad. If people don't watch, advertisers don't pay. And if there is not revenue stream, then exactly who/what is going to pay for the production of the broadcast?
If YOU think money is there to be made, then YOU can start your own network. All YOU have to do is get a few others (with money) to invest in your idea. Then hire people with know-how in the broadcasting industry. Very simple.
Otherwise, quit complaining. Be thankful that you get ANY broadcast.

In a sense I agree with you, but likely for completely different reasons. Advertising responds to the demand that exists. You know people want something and you describe how you satisfy that want. In contrast, marketing creates demand where it otherwise would not exist, most often tapping into emotions to override context in order to do so. Marketing has been shown to create demand for almost anything, given the right emotions engaged and demographics. Rather than a proprietor driven economy that depends on sustainability and advertising, we have a corporate driven economy that depends on growth and marketing. I do not think WCBB "deserves" marketing but, then again, many things don't, including MCBB. Make no mistake, the popularity of some sports is due to marketing, because marketers see the potential in engaging the emotions of their demographics. That does not really speak well for those demographics.

 

[Argonaut]

I do want to listen to a talk show on tv, or even a podcast that would cover UConn women BB in an intelligent way, maybe an hour a couple of nights a week during the season , and once a week the rest of the year..I

I would love if Lobo and Lawson would do a weekly podcast during the season. Bring in P5 and mid-major coaches, past players, other NCAAW enthusiasts (i.e. Kobe) to really break down what's happening on and off the floor...

 

[BobbyJ]

My opinion of Ionescu just took a nosedive.

As for ESPN - They are a business. Whatever your opinion about their coverage of women's sports, it there were money to be made they would cover it. There's just not enough interest. As it is, if it wasn't for ESPN, how much women's sports would be televised?

Good point. What other network is covering women's sports? Even Oprah's not throwing her bottomless pit of money at it.

 

[vtcwbuff]

I suspect that her statement was made with a pretty bright twinkle in her eye. Good lord, the world has real problems to get upset about.

I have a pretty good sarcasm detector. When I read her comment, it never left the no signal peg. My take was that she was pissed because ESPN didn't cover "HER" triple double. She just added the lack of women's coverage thing to make it seem less self centered - it wasn't.

 

[Orangutan]

Not even the NCAA properly promotes the women's tournament



That was posted Monday morning. How hard would it be to instead write "No more men's March Madness games until Thursday, but the women take center stage tonight!"

Granted, the @marchmadness account's bio says it is for the men's tournament, which raises the question - why does the men's tournament get sole custody of the March Madness name?

If you don't act like the women's tournament is equal to the men's, the fans aren't going to see it that way either.

 

[Plebe]

It's interesting that Ionescu just made basically the same point that Stewie did at the ESPYs and yet somehow Ionescu is vilified for it.

 

[TheFarmFan]

It's interesting that obvious why Ionescu just made basically the same point that Stewie did at the ESPYs and yet somehow Ionescu is vilified for it.

Fixed for you. One of those players is the GOAT for Boneyard fans, and the other one is likely to get POY awards (and a number one draft pick) that they feel should go to Pheesa. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

 

[PacoBlaze]

I can assure you this will have no effect on the vote. Much ado about nothing.

Ionescu may or may not win, but it won't be because of this "admission."

Haven't the votes already been cast? I thought that they voted for these before the Tournament began.

 

[Ozimoto]

My post was geared toward the statement that she missed her three point shot so she could grab the rebound to get her triple double, not about her ESPN statements. Merged threads will sometimes do that...

 

[vtcwbuff]

It's interesting that Ionescu just made basically the same point that Stewie did at the ESPYs and yet somehow Ionescu is vilified for it.

Did Stewart dump on ESPN for not covering one of HER accomplishments? Many here are missing the point falling for the "lack of coverage of women's sports" deflection.

 

[Bigboote]

One thing I haven't seen pointed out about ESPN's coverage:

All of the games are available on ESPN3. That means that ESPN IS sending crews out to all the games. What I get, I think, four primary ESPN networks (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNews). During the first round, only one was carrying the games, while the mother ship was paying for coverage of other sports on at least two of the other networks. I believe one was carrying women's lacrosse much of the time.

What I can't get my head around is that they've run the numbers and have concluded that women's lacrosse will draw enough more viewers than women's hoops that it's worth their while to send a crew out to cover a WLAX game.

 

[mbr33ct]

One thing I haven't seen pointed out about ESPN's coverage:

All of the games are available on ESPN3. That means that ESPN IS sending crews out to all the games. What I get, I think, four primary ESPN networks (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNews). During the first round, only one was carrying the games, while the mother ship was paying for coverage of other sports on at least two of the other networks. I believe one was carrying women's lacrosse much of the time.

What I can't get my head around is that they've run the numbers and have concluded that women's lacrosse will draw enough more viewers than women's hoops that it's worth their while to send a crew out to cover a WLAX game.

It's because Adam Amin is not there doing the play by play.

 

[trisailin]

It's because Adam Amin is not there doing the play by play random rambling about anything other than what was happening in the 94' in front of him.

FIFY

 

[ochoopsfan]

Stewie weighs in on the coverage, or lack of it,

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Pretty sure that voting is done after the regular season but before the tournament .

After watching the interview, I honestly thought she was joking.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Some people must. Talk about making mountains. She needs to emulate Foghorn Leghorn and say "That's a joke son, that's a joke."

I resemble that remark.

 

[connie]

It's because Adam Amin is not there doing the play by play.

Reminds me of what Gertrude Stein reputedly wrote of Oakland: "when you get there, there's no there there."

 

[Bama fan]

Reminds me of what Gertrude Stein reputedly wrote of Oakland: "when you get there, there's no there there."

Wonderful wit. Both hers and now , yours!

 

[gipke1]

"I.......can't...........LIE!"

 

[hoopsfan22]

After watching the interview, I honestly thought she was joking.

I did as well.