My general take on the accolades announcers make during a broadcast is whether consciously or unconsciously, they are going to play up with enthusiasm the skills/records/accomplishments of the teams that are playing, and point out flaws/problems with a more factual tone.
Why? First, I think there is a tendency in the women’s game to be affirming, perhaps because the majority of the broadcast crew are former players and coaches. They’ve invested most of their careers in WBB - affirming the sport is affirming themselves.
Second, the majority of the folks who are watching the game are going to be fans of the two teams involved, especially if the only way to get to the game is via streaming. Think how prickly we as UConn fans can get at what we perceive as any slight, and then imagine how’s Gamecock fans would have reacted if the announcers were equally passionate in letting us know that SC’s ball handling was terrible as they were in admiring their star player.
And then scope out point 2 to casual viewers who chanced upon the game. “Say Gail, have you noticed how lazy the Gamecock’s passing is tonight, matched only by Russell’s apparent lack of energy?” To which the casual viewer might say to himself: “Hey, this IS really bad basketball for two supposedly elite teams. Maybe I should tune into that Norwegian slow-television channel and watch a fire log burning instead.”
