Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="JoePgh, post: 3709753, member: 1131"] You make two different points in your last paragraph: one about the "watchability" of the WNBA product, and another about the inclination of adult women to be paying spectators for women's sports. I think the WNBA has proven that it more than satisfies the "watchability" requirement. Anyone who watched the recent finals between Seattle and Las Vegas saw one of the best teams, playing some of the best basketball, that has ever been seen in women's basketball. The preceding series between Las Vegas and the Connecticut Sun was only slightly below that level. Your second (bolded) point is the more significant one. As I've said here several times, I think there is a basic difference between young adult men and young adult women regarding their propensity to be sports watchers, even for women's sports. Women in their 30's and 40's, even if they were high school or college athletes, do not spend time being sports spectators unless their own child is on the team. Men in the same age range, on the other hand, can spend hours upon hours watching the NFL and the NBA. If Rebecca Lobo or Sue Bird were in some profession that had nothing to do with basketball, how much time do you think they would spend watching the WNBA? A small fraction of what their male family members (if any) spent, or so I would guess. But none of this has anything to do with explaining why one women's sport (soccer) is more popular (if it really is) than another one (basketball). I suspect that while soccer may have larger in-person attendance, the WNBA (through ESPN) has a larger TV audience. But who really knows? [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,480

Messages: 4,397,774

Members: 10,213

Latest member: MurrDog