Sally Jenkins Article on the state of the women's game

[UConnCat]

In Nan's clips this morning is a wash post article by Sally Jenkins on the state of women's basketball, both college and the WNBA (link below). It seems that what may have prompted this story is the white paper Val Ackerman wrote at the behest of the NCAA to provide an assessment of the state of intercollegiate women's basketball and to make recommendations on growing/improving the game.

Jenkins starts off identifying some of what she perceives as problems with the women's game, including a recitation of statistics that I mentioned in a thread a while back (scoring, shooting %s, and fouls called at are near all-time lows).

To explain the declining offense, Jenkins puts most of the blame on "poor quality cheaply-paid officiating."

Jenkins also talks about management incompetence that has allowed women's programs and tournaments to lose money (high costs, poor ticket sales). According to Jenkins, Ackerman writes that Title IX has been used as a shield and perhaps stifled innovation in growing the game ("What is our due under Title IX?")

Among Ackerman's recommendations (according to Jenkins):

• Upgrading officiating
• Bring business mind-set to ticket sales and television
• Exploring ("dramatic") rule changes to make the game more exciting and faster-paced (no mention of what those are)
• Explore putting the men's and women's FF in the same city at different arenas

Again, I hope Ackerman's white paper is made public as I'd love to read it.

I'm glad Jenkins wrote this article. Agree with her or not, it needs to be written and we need to continue to talk about ways to grow the game. I do have one minor quibble, however. I realize she's Pat Summitt's favorite ghost writer, but when talking about the state of the game she writes this: "How did a game Pat Summitt strove so hard to elevate to elegance become so bruising and even unsightly, with declining scoring and falling shooting percentages?"

When exactly were the elegant years of Lady Vol basketball? I missed them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...bc8f46-ca0f-11e2-8da7-d274bc611a47_story.html

 

[pinotbear]

Yeah, an offense largely composed of crashing the offensive board and getting to the line isn't exactly "elegance". If you want elegance, watch some vintage UConn clips - early 2000's fast breaks, where the ball never touches the floor, or DT passing, etc.

If Summitt's game was so smooth and pleasing to the eye, why was she looking for offensive advice from Big East coach Harry?

Having done the obligatory mocking of Jenkin's butt-bussing, she has a point about the officiating. In simple terms, officials determine where the advantage lies - strength or speed? If fast, athletic players can be mugged without repricussion (sp?), then speed & athleticism are slightly devalued. The more physical the game allowed, the more value to having players who can bang.

If contact is deemed a foul, then finess, speed, etc., increase in value and size and strenth diminish in value.

This is a gradient, not an absolute - there will always be value in size, strength, speed, athleticism, and shooting. Officiating can determine the balance, where the greatest value lies.

 

[Waquoit]

I realize she's Pat Summitt's favorite ghost writer, but when talking about the state of the game she writes this: "How did a game Pat Summitt strove so hard to elevate to elegance become so bruising and even unsightly, with declining scoring and falling shooting percentages?"

When exactly were the elegant years of Lady Vol basketball? I missed them.

Exactly, in this context, elegance means skill. PHS teams didn't win with skill. They won by, to paraphrase Michelle Marciniak, "jamming it down [the opposition's] throat".

 

[UConnCat]

Exactly, in this context, elegance means skill. PHS teams didn't win with skill. They won by, to paraphrase Michelle Marciniak, "jamming it down [the opposition's] throat".

Or as some were known to say, the Lady Vol's best offense was a missed shot.

 

[Blakeon18]

Not the biggest Sally fan here:

An OT article of hers from several years ago:

Michelle Wie played in a PGA event...played respectably for 36 holes...missed the cut by 3 or 4 shots. Sally was so giddy about this performance that she wrote an opinion piece shortly thereafter. She concluded that this proved there was no need for separate men's and women's golf tournaments. The best golfers [women or men] would play in PGA events. The next best...regardless of gender....would essentially play on a Triple A tour....and the next best at a lower level etc.

There would be no U.S. Women's Open....no LPGA tour...because according to Sally...Wie had shown those events as unnecessary due to her 36 holes of golf.
It was the single dumbest opinion piece by a nationally renowned sportswriter that I have ever read. Made moreso by the fact that she is the daughter of Golf
HOF'er Dan Jenkins....one of the most respected golf writers ever. If adopted, women's pro golf would be destroyed.

OT again: After Michelle looked to be on the move in 2009 and 2010 with a win in both years she had a mediocre 2011 and 2012 [no wins] and was off to a worse start in 2013. She had a nice opening round in Jersey yesterday....maybe the start of something good for her. Her new putting stance [bent over at the waist at least 9o degrees] looks utterly bizarre and must be difficult to maintain in any putting practice session. The tour would get one serious bounce if she regained some of her form.

Solheim Cup in August in Colorado....she has no shot to make it unless she turns it around big time though her name and fame might make a captain's pick
more likely over some players who are playing better.

 

[Scotter]

In using those statistics I hope Val looked at the Men's statistics as well. The same thing has happened on the side in terms of the decline in scoring. It's something that happened on all levels of basketball over the last two decades. The NBA reversed the trend a little bit over the last few years with the help of some rule changes and the WNBA has been helped by adopting those NBA rules, but those rules don't necessarily make sense for college. The refs on any every level haven't shown the stomach to call the number of off-ball fouls needed to clean up the freedom of movement on the court.

 

[UConnCat]

In using those statistics I hope Val looked at the Men's statistics as well. The same thing has happened on the side in terms of the decline in scoring. It's something that happened on all levels of basketball over the last two decades. The NBA reversed the trend a little bit over the last few years with the help of some rule changes and the WNBA has been helped by adopting those NBA rules, but those rules don't necessarily make sense for college. The refs on any every level haven't shown the stomach to call the number of off-ball fouls needed to clean up the freedom of movement on the court.

I hope the NCAA releases Val's white paper.

 

[HuskyNan]

Exactly, in this context, elegance means skill. PHS teams didn't win with skill. They won by, to paraphrase Michelle Marciniak, "jamming it down [the opposition's] throat".

I'm impressed with your depth of knowledge of the women's game, Waquoit.

 

[CL82]

This is an interesting topic, notwithstanding some bias in the article.

A question from the article:

It’s baffling. There is no reason why the game shouldn’t attract large sponsors and grow.

An answer from the comments:

jdsipe27
5/31/2013 5:05 PM EDT


because woman's basketball is awful

I do think the problem is that some fans and supporters want to make the case that that, it is "just as good as the men's game." I'd suggest that that's a false comparison. The woman's game is just different, based upon the reach and athleticism of its competitors. The day people stop comparing it to men's game is the day it stands on it's own. I think that that was the best point of the article.

 

[UConnCat]

I do think the problem is that some fans and supporters want to make the case that that, it is "just as good as the men's game." I'd suggest that that's a false comparison. The woman's game is just different, based upon the reach and athleticism of its competitors. The day people stop comparing it to men's game is the day it stands on it's own. I think that that was the best point of the article.

Will hosting the in the same city -- an idea Ackerman and Jenkins suggest is worth exploring -- reenforce the comparisons between the men's and women's game?

 

[Tonyc]

Well for me I have always had a problem with the phase "GO Lady Vols" It makes me think someone took an overdose of Exlax. LOL

 

[Waquoit]

I'm impressed with your depth of knowledge of the women's game, Waquoit.

Thanks, Nan. I appreciate that.

 

[ThisJustIn]

Will hosting the in the same city -- an idea Ackerman and Jenkins suggest is worth exploring -- reenforce the comparisons between the men's and women's game?

Hosting the FF in the same city would be a disaster, me thinks, on a various levels.

It will reduce the number of writers covering the game, because media outlets will cut costs and say, Mechelle, you have to cover the men's tournament as well. And you know what happens when women's writers are forced to cover the men's game....

It's not the same fan base. I, as a women's fan, have no desire to tromp the same streets as a bunk of over imbibed Louisville or Kentucky fans.

Am I remembering correctly that CBS covers the men's tournament? So, does that mean they'll have to fight with ESPN for the good broadcasting spots, or will they share equipment (hah)?

 

[Waquoit]

Will hosting the in the same city -- an idea Ackerman and Jenkins suggest is worth exploring -- reenforce the comparisons between the men's and women's game?

Of course it would. If they decide a change is necessary, I would prefer the Jason Whitlock suggestion of moving the WBB FF up a month. That would put it in the dead zone between the Super Bowl and March Madness, giving it it's own niche.

 

[Husky68]

Officials call the game in front of them (well or not); it's the coaches that instruct the players how to play. If holding, body bumping and "get away with all you can" is coached - that's what you get. You think officials will get gigs if they call lot of fouls?

If some team fouls 30 times in 1st half, call them all until they either stop of run out of players.

Take a look at the WNBA, they can't find 132 reasonably ok players. The Seattle team had five players on the court that looked like they were auditioning for Biggest Losers.

 

[ThisJustIn]

Take a look at the WNBA, they can't find 132 reasonably ok players. The Seattle team had five players on the court that looked like they were auditioning for Biggest Losers.

Justs shows you how high the talent is in the WNBA... and how big the disparity is between the top of the top in wbball and the rest of the teams. Perhaps creating a little empathy and sympathy for programs who "underachieve."

 

[EricLA]

I'm glad Jenkins wrote this article. Agree with her or not, it needs to be written and we need to continue to talk about ways to grow the game. I do have one minor quibble, however. I realize she's Pat Summitt's favorite ghost writer, but when talking about the state of the game she writes this: "How did a game Pat Summitt strove so hard to elevate to elegance become so bruising and even unsightly, with declining scoring and falling shooting percentages?"

When exactly were the elegant years of Lady Vol basketball? I missed them.

She actually wrote that? In all the years Pat coached, and for all the successes she had, you NEVER heard the words "elevated to elegance" associated with her teams. Because she didn't teach much offense, her teams were based on bruising, physical defense, and crashing the offensive boards. You'd think Jenkins never watched a Pat-coached Tennessee team... ever...

 

[Phil]

After seeing the Jenkins quote, I happened to run across a Jeré Longman article, in which she said "What was expected to be an elegant, high-scoring national semifinal game between Tennessee and North Carolina quickly became an artless grind Sunday night at the women’s Final Four...Eventually, Tennessee proved more adept at disorder, or slightly less ragged...Perhaps it is more accurate to say that Tennessee did not so much win as North Carolina (34-4) lost, in the most excruciating way imaginable."

I was struck by the juxtaposition, but didn't mention anything about it.

Then I came across another article today, in which she said, "It was one of the ugliest games played this or any season, and Tennessee did not so much as win against Louisiana State in the national semifinals Sunday as it did survive." and I had to say something.

Look like Jeré does not worship at the church of Jenkins (a metaphor, in the case the mods are reading).

 

[Phil]

Will hosting the in the same city -- an idea Ackerman and Jenkins suggest is worth exploring -- reenforce the comparisons between the men's and women's game?

Very possibly, and other problems as mentioned by ThisJustin. The rationale, as may be obvious, is the reduction of costs. The NCAA has to staff two conventions, and while a single city wouldn't cut the cots in half, they could eliminate some duplication.

 

[Phil]

In using those statistics I hope Val looked at the Men's statistics as well.

She did.