NCAA's Treatment of Women

[LibertyTurns]

Right on cue GT Alumni Association announces April is Leadership Month. GT’s Senior VP of Strategic Initiatives & Chief of Staff will be discussing leading in a crisis.

 

[LongforDodd]

Is any of this lack of equitable "facilities" at this year's tournament merely a result of the effects of covid and the haste and lack of flexibility in carrying out the tourney? Has it been this way at previous year's tournaments?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Is any of this lack of equitable "facilities" at this year's tournament merely a result of the effects of covid and the haste and lack of flexibility in carrying out the tourney? Has it been this way at previous year's tournaments?

My guess is 0.0000%. You don't have to put people in a Motel 6 and their 'weight room' is an empty ballroom with 2 yoga mats. When someone complained, within 24 hours they had an entire weight room built...which further supports the idea they just didn't give 2 ****s at first.

 

[GTpdm]

I always chuckle when I see people fighting for women's equality and passionately arguing that gender should not be the basis for judging people use the term 'man-splaining.'

Pot, meet Kettle.

I don’t care for the term either. That won’t stop other people from characterizing a “leadership” statement from Carbrera in that way. Right now is absolutely the wrong time to make such a statement, because there are people out there poised and ready to take it the wrong way. Why give them ammunition? Why draw any attention to Tech’s gender-equity situation at this point in time?

Go back and read my whole post...past the word that offended your sensibilities. I wasn’t “fighting for women’s equality”, I was pointing out that we do not want to tie ourselves to an NCAA blunder, in the court of public opinion. My concern was (and is) the perception that would be created by an ill-timed statement from Cabrera.

 

[LongforDodd]

Ironic that in the business world we assume the better product is worth more money but US soccer clearly refutes that, if judged by the Olympics. People are far more interested in the women’s team
( consistent winners ) than the men’s team (pretty consistent losers ) yet the pay is so different.

I don't think you can use the Olympics as an overall measuring stick. That occurs every four years and the excitement is built over those years.

If you had a choice on any given Saturday during the time of the year that the Premier League is playing would you rather watch Messi, Bale, and others or Rapinoe, Lloyd, and....(who else)?

 

[LongforDodd]

My guess is 0.0000%. You don't have to put people in a Motel 6 and their 'weight room' is an empty ballroom with 2 yoga mats. When someone complained, within 24 hours they had an entire weight room built...which further supports the idea they just didn't give 2 ****s at first.

I don't deny that their complaints were real at this year's tournament but what were their accomodations/facilities at previous tournaments?

 

[Techster]

Ironic that in the business world we assume the better product is worth more money but US soccer clearly refutes that, if judged by the Olympics. People are far more interested in the women’s team
( consistent winners ) than the men’s team (pretty consistent losers ) yet the pay is so different.

The US women's soccer team is FAR more successful than the US men's soccer team. It's not even close. Women are usually always the favorites to win big tournaments like the Olympics, World Cup, Gold Cup, etc. Men have been struggling to even qualify for the Olympics and World Cup recently. That said, I wouldn't say the men's team are "pretty consistent losers", nor would I say people are "far more interested in the women's team". The US Men's team is still considered one of the "giants" of CONCACAF, and men's group stage games in the World Cup and Gold Cup finals are consistently one of the highest rated events in sports during that year.

Unfortunately, on field success does not always equate into business success when it comes to women's sports. There's a LOT of fanfare during big tournaments for the women, but there's less so during qualifying rounds or exhibitions. To take it further, look at the men's and women's domestic soccer leagues. The women's pro league is hanging on by a thread and have even contracted while the men's pro league is now thriving and commanding northwards of $300 million franchise fees. Men's players can now earn generational wealth like in other big American sports. The women that represent our national team are forced to go overseas and play for other clubs to supplement their incomes. The NWSL (women's pro league) is actually supplemented by US Soccer federation (that's partly why the women earn less than the men).

Rounding back to the thread topic, from a business perspective it makes sense for the NCAA to save some money for the women's tournament because it only pulls in a fraction of the revenue the men's tournament does. From a political standpoint, given social media and the ability of coaches and players to control the narrative, it's just dumb. From a moral standpoint, given the objective of the NCAA (a "nonprofit" organizations that give equal opportunities to all student athletes) it's equally as dumb. The NCAA is clueless when it comes to reading the room and doing what's right.

 

[LibertyTurns]

@GTpdm You got a good point about GT not getting tied to the NCAA booger.

It’s just a personal thing for me. Seen all kinds of Equal Opportunity programs come and go in my lifetime, Diversity initiatives, etc. They all fail for the same reason- leadership is not committed to change just making sure the booger doesn’t stick to them.

 

[Vespidae]

She asked in what other endeavor would it be acceptable to give women inferior resources because of their perceived cash value? Well, compared to the men, she's paid significantly less, so is her staff, her recruiting budget is smaller too, and their other resources are inferior. So I'd say that's her answer.

Welcome to America. I sat on an executive team with 5 VP's .. one made $1 million a year and had a private jet and at the other extreme, the guy made $45,000. It has nothing to do with gender, it's an issue of the complexity of the business and the responsibility.

She's worried about things she has little control over and is destined to be frustrated. Better to write a paper and submit to TStan and let him do the fighting. That's HIS job, not hers.

 

[4shotB]

Welcome to America. I sat on an executive team with 5 VP's .. one made $1 million a year and had a private jet and at the other extreme, the guy made $45,000. It has nothing to do with gender, it's an issue of the complexity of the business and the responsibility.

She's worried about things she has little control over and is destined to be frustrated. Better to write a paper and submit to TStan and let him do the fighting. That's HIS job, not hers.

She loses the PR aspect if she does that. Making public statements on social media in today's world carries a certain cache with the younger people (read "recruits") that a paper to the boss simply does not. In some (most?) cases it IS not about effectiveness, it is about creating a brand or image if social media is the method of distribution for your message. You may call me cynical if you wish.

 

[85Escape]

I don’t care for the term either. That won’t stop other people from characterizing a “leadership” statement from Carbrera in that way. Right now is absolutely the wrong time to make such a statement, because there are people out there poised and ready to take it the wrong way. Why give them ammunition? Why draw any attention to Tech’s gender-equity situation at this point in time?

Go back and read my whole post...past the word that offended your sensibilities. I wasn’t “fighting for women’s equality”, I was pointing out that we do not want to tie ourselves to an NCAA blunder, in the court of public opinion. My concern was (and is) the perception that would be created by an ill-timed statement from Cabrera.

I wasn't trying to start a fight Like I said, it always makes me chuckle. I wasn't even really pointing to you with the "Pot, meet Kettle" statement...just saying that's what I think. There's a great YT clip of an Australian MP argument in which the female MP tries to dismiss the male colleagues arguments as 'man-splaining'.

I agree that I don't think it was wise for Cabrera to jump into this fight. Way more down-side than up-side given the current environment and legal situation. Best to say less and do more.

 

[85Escape]

She loses the PR aspect if she does that. Making public statements on social media in today's world carries a certain cache with the younger people (read "recruits") that a paper to the boss simply does not. In some (most?) cases it IS not about effectiveness, it is about creating a brand or image if social media is the method of distribution for your message. You may call me cynical if you wish.

That was my first thought when I saw her statement. Not that she doesn't mean it, I'm sure she does, but using that medium feels like a recruiting effort to me.

 

[ncjacket79]

I don't think you can use the Olympics as an overall measuring stick. That occurs every four years and the excitement is built over those years.

If you had a choice on any given Saturday during the time of the year that the Premier League is playing would you rather watch Messi, Bale, and others or Rapinoe, Lloyd, and....(who else)?

But I would rather watch the US women than MLS or the US men

 

[gtie73]

But I would rather watch the US women than MLS or the US men

So would I.

 

[85Escape]

The US women's soccer team is FAR more successful than the US men's soccer team. It's not even close. Women are usually always the favorites to win big tournaments like the Olympics, World Cup, Gold Cup, etc. Men have been struggling to even qualify for the Olympics and World Cup recently. That said, I wouldn't say the men's team are "pretty consistent losers", nor would I say people are "far more interested in the women's team". The US Men's team is still considered one of the "giants" of CONCACAF, and men's group stage games in the World Cup and Gold Cup finals are consistently one of the highest rated events in sports during that year.

Unfortunately, on field success does not always equate into business success when it comes to women's sports. There's a LOT of fanfare during big tournaments for the women, but there's less so during qualifying rounds or exhibitions. To take it further, look at the men's and women's domestic soccer leagues. The women's pro league is hanging on by a thread and have even contracted while the men's pro league is now thriving and commanding northwards of $300 million franchise fees. Men's players can now earn generational wealth like in other big American sports. The women that represent our national team are forced to go overseas and play for other clubs to supplement their incomes. The NWSL (women's pro league) is actually supplemented by US Soccer federation (that's partly why the women earn less than the men).

Rounding back to the thread topic, from a business perspective it makes sense for the NCAA to save some money for the women's tournament because it only pulls in a fraction of the revenue the men's tournament does. From a political standpoint, given social media and the ability of coaches and players to control the narrative, it's just dumb. From a moral standpoint, given the objective of the NCAA (a "nonprofit" organizations that give equal opportunities to all student athletes) it's equally as dumb. The NCAA is clueless when it comes to reading the room and doing what's right.

When I hear complaints about the fact that men's sports generate more revenue than women's sports, I always encourage the complainer to stop it with the victim mentality. The truth is, for now at least, the numbers clearly show that men are more devoted to sports and will spend more of their time and energy (and money) to be observers. That fact that men enjoy men's sports more is pretty evident, and I don't think it is sexist behavior at all. That would be like complaining that women enjoy women as the stars on morning talk shows.

So given that, women in sports need to find a way to connect more with their audience and create a compelling reason to watch. If they want to target men, what is it they need to do to get their attention (Beach Volleyball seems to have figured it out ). If they want to have more women willing to waste three hours to watch a soccer match, what do they need to do to get their eyeballs on the screen? Maybe make it more of a social event...

You do that and the money will follow. It isn't really that complicated and all the blame-shifting is really destructive as it prevents us from overcoming the reality that is driving the situation.

Now, the NCAA should not be so stupid with the clear bias towards the revenue sports. But also the non-revenue sports need to understand how much of their opportunity comes from those evil *tards who get all the glory.

EDIT: Because I'm an engineer and can't grammar./

 

[Vespidae]

She loses the PR aspect if she does that. Making public statements on social media in today's world carries a certain cache with the younger people (read "recruits") that a paper to the boss simply does not. In some (most?) cases it IS not about effectiveness, it is about creating a brand or image if social media is the method of distribution for your message. You may call me cynical if you wish.

It’s a reality that football and men’s basketball pays the lion‘s share of athletic expenses. I don’t know what message she’s sending other than “I’m peeved.”

 

[RonJohn]

Rounding back to the thread topic, from a business perspective it makes sense for the NCAA to save some money for the women's tournament because it only pulls in a fraction of the revenue the men's tournament does. From a political standpoint, given social media and the ability of coaches and players to control the narrative, it's just dumb. From a moral standpoint, given the objective of the NCAA (a "nonprofit" organizations that give equal opportunities to all student athletes) it's equally as dumb. The NCAA is clueless when it comes to reading the room and doing what's right.

Is the NCAA a business? If so, then making decisions on which gender to support based on revenue generated makes sense. If the NCAA is a non-profit that supports amateur athletics for college students, then they can't legally treat the genders differently regardless of revenue generated by one or the other. The NCAA could drop their non-profit status, but that would cost a lot more than renting a few weight machines, decorating the facilities similarly, and doing COVID tests similarly.

I don't understand why people take everything and make it 100% one way or 100% the opposite. There are multiple issues that have different answers. Each issue should be looked at individually. Should a non-profit sports organization (the NCAA) treat a women's tournament the same as they treat a men's tournament? Yes. Should women's basketball coaches be paid the same as the men's basketball coaches at every school? No. The men's and women's coaches get contracts at market rates for their services. If they were on a government pay rate schedule, then the men's and women's coaches would have to be paid on the same schedules. That could mean that a women's coach with more seniority would be paid more. However, I seriously doubt that any major conference head coach (men's or women's) would want to be placed on a government pay schedule instead of being able to negotiate their best salary on their own.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Is the NCAA a business?

Yes. Non-profits are still businesses. Sometimes billion dollar businesses.

Should a non-profit sports organization (the NCAA) treat a women's tournament the same as they treat a men's tournament?

They don't have to, and they don't. There should be acceptable minimums, but to demand that an organization lose money in any endeavor (whether they are a for-profit business or not) borders on silliness. We've all pretty much been unanimous on what those minimums look like and that the NCAA failed in that regard on the women's basketball tournament. But they spend a lot less money on the women's tournament in a lot other areas too.

 

[LongforDodd]

But I would rather watch the US women than MLS or the US men

IMO Premiere League is the only soccer worth watching unless one of my kids were playing.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I went out for lunch, and there was an NCAA womens' basketball tournament game on. I assume it was a replay from past years, because there was a big NCAA tournament logo on the floor