|
Post by hchoops on Apr 11, 2024 11:35:31 GMT -5
And that $13. price is exactly why the women’s tourney will never go the men’s route to mostly neutral sites
|
|
|
Post by rf1 on Apr 11, 2024 11:45:28 GMT -5
The higher ratings for the women's game is very much tied into the network, day, and time. It was on ABC/ESPN on a Sunday at 3pm. The men's game was on TBS/TNT/Trutv on a Monday at 9:20pm. Traditional free network platforms always get more viewers. The time-slot of the men's game at 9:20pm also hurts ratings in the east.
These same factors are why the A-10 Men's Championship on CBS on a Sunday afternoon always far outperforms the viewership for the Big East Men's Championship the previous Saturday on ESPN at 6:30pm.
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Apr 11, 2024 11:57:51 GMT -5
And that $13. price is exactly why the women’s tourney will never go the men’s route to mostly neutral sites Not sure about never but they shouldn’t do it anytime soon. The Clark hysteria definitely drove up demand in a huge way for Iowa games but not for the women’s game overall. They are slowly getting better and better crowds with at least the top 10 teams consistently drawing pretty good crowds for their home games and many of their away games. UConn sells out most of their home games or at least comes very close.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Apr 11, 2024 14:34:05 GMT -5
Also, not to be a cynic, but I think the attention and interest for WBB takes a step back to where it was in pre-Caitlin Clark days. Definitely. Iowa's not setting attendance and viewing records next year. Since the WNBA rarely misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity they won't make the shift to a more mainstream message and catch and ride the CC wave. The comments of a few WNBA vets and alums smack of jealousy regarding CC's current popularity and achievements. That won't help either.
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Apr 11, 2024 14:51:33 GMT -5
The women’s tourney was weird this year. They had two regionals at one site so the Iowa-Oregon State region played Sat-Mon and the SC-ND region played Fri and Sun in the same arena. Iowa tickets were definitely more expensive. Cheapest I saw for either Iowa session was like $100. Most tickets were $150 and up which is a lot. But if you wanted to go see UConn men in Boston, the cheapest tickets were $300-$400. If you wanted to see UConn Women in Portland, it was $13 and up. The women's tournament wasn't weird as that is how they are doing it now. In 2025, they are in Spokane and Birmingham, Alabama. In 2026, they are in Fort Worth and Sacramento. Interesting enough the WBB doesn't give out units like MBB amp.awfulannouncing.com/college-basketball/ncaa-womens-tournament-unit-distribution-march-madness-2025.html
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Apr 20, 2024 7:52:44 GMT -5
Politicians are outraged at Caitlin Clark's low $76K starting salary in the WNBA. I don't feel any outrage as it's a collectively bargained union contract.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Apr 20, 2024 8:52:45 GMT -5
Politicians are outraged at Caitlin Clark's low $76K starting salary in the WNBA. I don't feel any outrage as it's a collectively bargained union contract. ... and she is getting big payday from Nike, it's been reported. No question she'll increase the bargaining power of their players' association next time around.
|
|
|
Post by 78purple on Apr 20, 2024 8:57:55 GMT -5
Politicians are outraged at Caitlin Clark's low $76K starting salary in the WNBA. I don't feel any outrage as it's a collectively bargained union contract. That tells you everything you need to know about our politicians these days...
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Apr 20, 2024 9:23:45 GMT -5
Politicians are outraged at Caitlin Clark's low $76K starting salary in the WNBA. I don't feel any outrage as it's a collectively bargained union contract. ... and she is getting big payday from Nike, it's been reported. No question she'll increase the bargaining power of their players' association next time around. Perhaps, but they will need to generate a whole lot more eyeballs to see a significant increase in pay. It's unlikely, but CC could be a bust or get an injury. I'm not convinced that the burst of NCAA interest translates into interest in the WNBA. I'm not ure that it has ever made a profit in it's 27 year history.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Apr 20, 2024 9:54:31 GMT -5
... and she is getting big payday from Nike, it's been reported. No question she'll increase the bargaining power of their players' association next time around. Perhaps, but they will need to generate a whole lot more eyeballs to see a significant increase in pay. It's unlikely, but CC could be a bust or get an injury. I'm not convinced that the burst of NCAA interest translates into interest in the WNBA. I'm not ure that it has ever made a profit in it's 27 year history. I was assuming it would generate more revenue; however, that might be assuming facts not yet in evidence (which is also true about the complaining politicians).
|
|
|
Post by gks on Apr 20, 2024 15:58:24 GMT -5
Politicians are outraged at Caitlin Clark's low $76K starting salary in the WNBA. I don't feel any outrage as it's a collectively bargained union contract. Politicians are stupid and have no idea how actual business works.
|
|
|
Post by hc1998 on Apr 22, 2024 14:44:29 GMT -5
This debate is so tired, especially when the WNBA gets injected into as nobody cares about it. Also worth noting that the season is less than 1/2 of the games and 1/2 of the time commitment, enabling many of the players to play for another team overseas. Their housing is also paid for. Now doubling the salary and adding in housing still doesn't approach NBA salary...but doubling the WNBA's popularity or ad revenue also doesn't approach the NBA's
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Apr 22, 2024 14:48:16 GMT -5
This debate is so tired, especially when the WNBA gets injected into as nobody cares about it. Also worth noting that the season is less than 1/2 of the games and 1/2 of the time commitment, enabling many of the players to play for another team overseas. Their housing is also paid for. Now doubling the salary and adding in housing still doesn't approach NBA salary...but doubling the WNBA's popularity or ad revenue also doesn't approach the NBA's Playing overseas and that is the reason Brittany Griner was in Russia.
|
|
|
Post by hc1998 on Apr 22, 2024 15:16:00 GMT -5
This debate is so tired, especially when the WNBA gets injected into as nobody cares about it. Also worth noting that the season is less than 1/2 of the games and 1/2 of the time commitment, enabling many of the players to play for another team overseas. Their housing is also paid for. Now doubling the salary and adding in housing still doesn't approach NBA salary...but doubling the WNBA's popularity or ad revenue also doesn't approach the NBA's Playing overseas and that is the reason Brittany Griner was in Russia. Probably also the reason the new CBA has the WNBA finding placements for their players with their corporate partners in the offseason...they can either get a job here or take their chances overseas.
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Apr 22, 2024 21:44:27 GMT -5
Playing overseas and that is the reason Brittany Griner was in Russia. Probably also the reason the new CBA has the WNBA finding placements for their players with their corporate partners in the offseason...they can either get a job here or take their chances overseas. Russia historically paid the highest salaries for women's players. Becky Hammond actually became a Russian Olympian at a time after playing so long in Russia.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Apr 23, 2024 7:33:35 GMT -5
My question would be: what's the incentive to fudge the #'s? Like every other story where someone lies or misleads, to promote some desired narrative. In this case that women’s basketball is as popular or more popular than men’s basketball. That buzz creates more demand for the product. Every time I read a story about ticket prices for some women’s game this year (usually Iowa), I would check and the prices would always be significantly overstated. No idea if the same is true of the ratings but I really don’t trust anything I read anymore. Everyone has an agenda. I told my HC roommate I was going to Albany for the regionals. He replied about spending $1500 per ticket. I sent him a screen shot of Ticketmaster that day and there were $10 tickets two hours before the game. That wasn’t Iowa but it was South Carolina and ND in a doubleheader. Is it possible that both are true? Maybe you have to pay $1500 for a front row seat, but can get a balcony seat for $10
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Apr 23, 2024 12:52:31 GMT -5
Like every other story where someone lies or misleads, to promote some desired narrative. In this case that women’s basketball is as popular or more popular than men’s basketball. That buzz creates more demand for the product. Every time I read a story about ticket prices for some women’s game this year (usually Iowa), I would check and the prices would always be significantly overstated. No idea if the same is true of the ratings but I really don’t trust anything I read anymore. Everyone has an agenda. I told my HC roommate I was going to Albany for the regionals. He replied about spending $1500 per ticket. I sent him a screen shot of Ticketmaster that day and there were $10 tickets two hours before the game. That wasn’t Iowa but it was South Carolina and ND in a doubleheader. Is it possible that both are true? Maybe you have to pay $1500 for a front row seat, but can get a balcony seat for $10 There have been plenty of articles that lie about ticket prices and some that just mislead.
|
|