On BTN now; 8:00 left.
UM up by 5 and trying for their first win (Seniors) against Li'l Sis.
Go Lady Wolverines.
This feels like the one that'll break the streak............
PLEASE get this win. Nothing would be sweeter. Seeing their arrogant players on twitter after the last meeting saying "that was easy, duh it's Michigan".
The perception of this program is changing though. Michigan needs this win for the tide to starting turning.
Don't let up ladies!!
It is gonna be a classic finish
Negged for thread title. Not for content.
Thanks for letting us know.
The title has been changed.
Anyone for posting info on M sports, but I really can't stand use of the term "lady" Wolverines. They're just wolverines. "Let's go ladies".... Fine. But putting "lady" in front of them is just one of those things that makes me cringe. I'm sure it's no big deal to any of you, and I refrained from negging the post...it's just a buggy thing for me.
...how invested I am in our University.
If we had a checkers team I would watch it on ESPN9.
Gotta make the free throws late
The women's basketball standings are weird. Penn State and Nebraska are the top two in women's basketball but they're the worst at men's. IU and Wisconsin are both at the bottom.
Just beat Sparty.
Fuck yeah! Streak over!!!!
Ice it Jenny!
Very nice win. Moves them to 19-6 overall and 9-4 in the conference. 2.5 games behind Penn State.
I am just wondering what proportion of the MGoBlog/Michigan fan base (or indeed any similar sportsfan group) really cares about women's basketball.
The only reason I ask, is from the perspective of whether the University's Athletic Department ought to devote resources there (setting aside Title IX concerns). Naturally, it is nice that women are acitve, that they participate in sports, etc. I am not in any way opposing women's sports. I'm no mysogynist. For instance, I'd rather watch women's golf than about half the men's sports on television, if forced to choose. I'd happily and eagerly choose women's golf, over extreme fighting, or poker, or any of the other variety of garbage that passes for sports on tv.
But women's basketball is just so deadly boring to me. It's like watching a team of very good 7th grade boys. I'd much rather watch the boys from Detroit Southeastern play Pershing, than watch the women of Michigan versus the women of Ohio State. I'd be much more interested to watch 9th grade AAU boys play, than watch a women's NCAA game.
I know that this is politically incorrect; but that is precisely why I am saying it. I am not judging anyone's worth, I am just asking other sports fans what they will choose to watch, if given the choice. I'd watch C-SPAN before I'd watch women's basketball.
Normally no I don't watch women's basketball.
Here is the solution: DON'T WATCH!!
Seriously. What kind of Michigan fan is talking about this just after the team has ended that damn streak.
If this were a sport that I cared about, it would have been a much bigger deal, to me and probably to many others. I like the general idea of Michigan beating MSU and/or OSU in horseshoes, tiddly winks or cribbage.
And no, I don't watch women's basketball. All I aksed is whether anybody else did. And that was an honest question. What was the paid attendance at the game?
Here's the really funny thing; my comments in this thread won't draw much attention, for the very reason that they are buried in a thread on Womens Basketball. Which few care about.
And let's be clear; I am just asking about people's preferences. Again, I'm not judging.
Dave Brandon concerns himself with the broader market for sports. He openly admits that sales, marketing, ticket prices and such in the revenue-generating sports are all things that he considers in the wider market that includes professional sports in southeast Michigan.
How dare you have a question about the attendance at Women's Basketball or the viewership! Clearly, you hate Michigan, and want all women's sports to be shut down!
No don't care. I agree with you and have said many times that a decent (not great...just decent) 9th grade boys AAU team would crush the women's national champions. Because the ladies play about a foot under the rim and boys in 9th grade can dunk.
The game sold out, which means the entire lower bowl was full. I was there and I think I must have got the last three tickets. My boys and I had to sit next to a smelly fat guy who wouldn't move to let us past his seat.
It was fun despite Chubs McGee. However, most women's games bring half the attendance if that.
I put it in another post. "5800" was the claimed attendance by the Athletic Department.
FSU's women's team play several times a year.
I'd rather watch MY Almer Mater "play checkers" than answer a benign question asking why I choose to do so.
BTW: I upvoted everyone in this thread for their interest and support of our women student athletes.
that I followed your lead and did the same. There's absolutely no reason, if we're MICHIGAN FANS here, to not show some support for the Michigan Student-Athletes that play in so-called non-revenue sports. Sure, I love me some Michigan Football, Basketball, and Hockey too, but I've also taken in a few Michigan Baseball, Softball, and WBB games, plus a Men's Track & Field meet and even a Volleyball match over the years. Had fun at all of them ---not at the same level, to be sure, as at The Big House, but This Is Michigan FerGodSake!
I have a little higher interest right now in WBB for one particular reason, though--- I am acquainted with the Sheffer family, as Rachel's dad coached my oldest daughter several years ago in girls (13- and 14-yr old) fastpitch softball. Nice family. I remember seeing Rachel playing a couple times on adjoining diamonds while watching my own daughter play on a team that included Rachel's older sister Sara. It was obvious even back then that both Sheffer girls were very good athletes. It's been a bit of a bonus for me to see a local kid do well for Michigan.
Congratulations to Michigan's Women on beating the Spartans today. Well Done!!
I will watch anything Michigan. Not as enjoyable as the guys team but today was a pretty entertaining game. I went to a high school boys game this week that featured two kids committed to Bethune Cookman, one to EMU, and another to South Florida. It went into OT and was an ok game for the average viewer. But if anybody cares about the fundamentals and strategy, it was a tire fire compared to the top women's college games. The girls know what they are doing despite not being able to dunk or run the court in less than 4 seconds. As long as your expectations are not crazy, it can be very enjoyable.
As for how much resources we should put towards the program, I think that is an idiotic question. The resources you have for the men's team are going to benefit the women's program as well. It is also one of the few sports outside of football and men's bb that you can make a profit from. Unconn and Tenn make a killing off women's bball. Obviously we probably can't make that much, but we can still make some money off the program. I think it is important to help your programs outside of fball and bball b/c Michigan is a big enough brand that we can finish outside the red in more sports than just the big two, which is something not many athletic departments can boast of.
Your first paragraph is a good one. Certainly, nobody needs to apologize for liking women's basketball. Not to me, not to anyone. Your own comment on the qualities of play is pretty astute.
Your second paragraph is not so bad, but it really speaks to part of what bothers me. If Tennessee and UConn can "make a killing" off of women's basketball, I say more power to them. I'd like to know exactly how they make a killing. Attendance? Does any sport in the world "make a killing" off in-person attendance? Do they make a killing off TV revenue? Is there a single television contract anywhere in the world for "Womens Basketball?" The NCAA forces CBS to take women's NCAA Final Four basketball along with the billion-dollar men's contract. The Big Ten Network wouldn't be able to live, off of women's basketball. No network could. Even the WNBA was subsumed into the real NBA. WNBA couldn't make it on its own. Almost everywhere (including, I'd argue, Tennessee and Connecticut), women's basketball lives off of, and in the shadows of, men's basketball.
Michigan's WBB program is a money-loser, I'm confident. I just don't know how big of a loser it is. Although we'd also want to be quick to point out that we've got a student-athlete study center, training facilities, medical staff, ticket office staff, prmotional staff, and a major basketball arena, and, uh, a large research + undergraduate university, all of which can be repurposed for "women's" basketball as easily as "men's" basketball.
It just gnaws at me; Brandon's matter-of-fact pronouncements that the football program, and all of its pricing and promotions, etc., need to compete in the sports marketplace of the larger commercial market. Meanwhile, a bunch of Title IX-protected sports do not. They do not support themselves. Ask the Detroit Lions; they don't need to support eleven women's sports teams. [In fairness, I suppose one difference is that the Lions pay property taxes and payroll taxes. So, okay. But for a long time, their stadium was pretty much as publicly (bond) funded as was Michigan Stadium. I digress.]
There are only two programs that are capable of supporting themselves. Maaaybe men's hockey too. So should we not support any of the other programs? If it really bugs you that much, stop going to football games. Don't know what else to tell you. Title IX is a fact of life so we might as well try to make some money, however minuscule, off of women's bball and every other typically non revenue sports. Your complaint isn't just inherent of women's bball but of 90% of our athletic programs. Don't single out just the women.
And I am pretty certain Uconn girls bball makes money outside of just attendance. I do not see them giving him 1.5 mil a year otherwise.
Complaining about funding the women's program is still silly b/c the support staffs (training, marketing, event staff etc) are largely the same for men. Facilities are the same. Outside of coaching staff, travel and scholarships for women I do not see much other funding specifically for the girls team. Complain about field hockey or other stand alone women's sports.
Actually, ESPN does the women's tournament. CBS does the Men's one.
Unless I have some sort of connection, then I don't watch it.
However, my high school has a bigger student section for the girls team than the guys team, partly because our girls team is state champion caliber and our guys are bad though. But I would watch them because when you know someone on the team or have some sort of school connection, it becomes much more enjoyable, and that goes for a lot of other things.
We watch. My kids watch. I love that any womens sports are available for my kids, because my kids are female and I appreciate the role models for athleticism, teamwork, competition, etc. they watch football and don't get why they can't play. I know it's just how things are, and they will learn that too, but they love sports and can be empowered and learn so much from being a part of it. Obviously the same numbers aren't watching, but there is a cultural thing that is gradual, so while it will never rival the bigger sports, I personally feel very strongly that its important to include these sports in the mix of programming.
I also enjoy watching the sport, even with the obvious differences (above vs below the rim). Frankly, its just an entirely different game. Most people I know who also enjoy it are not on sports blogs responding. So my guess is that many of the people on MGoBlog will not feel this way...but then again, those reading this thread clicked on a WBB thread, so there's that...
Anyhow...my 2 cents.
Intellectually I agree with virually everything you wrote but my issue is simply the quality of play, even at the highest level, is generally average at best and can be quite poor and that drives me insane. I don't think making a simple lay-up should be difficult for any basketball player from the age of about 12 on and yet if you watch any women's game (and I do many any) you'll see multiple layups missed and missed badly. You'll see shots that would get a 7th grade boy parked on the bench made with some frequency (I especially love the blind fling it up shot that Kobe would struggle to hit with regularity) that hits nothing but air.
Why? Why are the simple fundimentals of the game so challenging? I truly dont understand it because when I watch other womens sports like tennis or golf or swimming or softball I see elite athletes playing at a level that most men would find impossible to achieve but when it comes to basketball the quality of play is candidly awful.
And that's what keeps me from caring. I guess I feel that if the athletes cant be even average why should it interest me and judging from the number of emply seats watching the games I'd say that feeling is pretty widespread.
There will always be that argument; it "empowers" women as role models, participants, etc. Eh. Whatever.
Eating broccoli is good for me, too. But I don't order it at Mr. Joe's Bar when I am there to watch the game. And the game I will be watching at Mr. Joe's Bar won't be a women's basketball game.
btw; at MGoBlue.com the report is a "season-best crowd of 5800" saw the Michigan-MSU game today. Go there, click on the Women's Basketball homepage link, and look at the picture of the Michigan-Slippery Rock game. #11, "Sam" Arnold is at the free throw line. See if you can count more than 50 spectators in the photo. No fair including the band. But I'm not sure if there are fifty, even with the band.
"Eh whatever". I sincerely hope you don't have daughters. You don't need to order broccoli. People with these attitudes should order lots of fatty red meat and French fries.
Singlehandedly, I might just make this the most-read and most-commented women's basketball thread on MGoBlog.
Rich Rod posts are scant these days so maybe you found something else to bitch about.
Really; just go fuck yourself.
In the past, I've refrained from this sort of reply. Instead, I'd report assholes like you to the Moderator-sticky. But that didn't seem to work.
I'll bet that this gets your post, and this reply, taken down. Which will be a good, simple outcome.
There's nothing above that would need to be taken down; this, on the other hand, got closer.
Leave them both up, or take them both down. Either way it's fine.
was your post any type of equivalent to his. Let me be 100% clear on this: if any moderating action needed to happen in this thread it would be directed at you.
The personal attack posts need to stop, now. While we're at it with the moderation stuff, so does coming into a thread to ask who "really cares" about the sport it's intended for, going on to call said sport "deadly boring" and then gloating that you got people to reply to your attempt to stir up controversy.
One of the reasons MGoBlog isn't a good place to post about women's basketball, women's gymnastics, etc. is because all too often someone feels it necessary to make the "who cares" type of comment you're talking about or some other type of condescending remark. Collectively, those posters have made this a unwelcoming environment for fans of those sports. Setting up sub-blogs for the other sports, which is apparently what Brian eventually plans to do, seems to be the only solution to this, as one would assume these yahoos would never venture into an area dedicated to a sport they despise. Then again, they're yahoos, so I wouldn't put it past them...
I believe it was a guy with fourteen points, seven of which he got from posting drivel in a softball thread. We're supposed to email Brian when a ban comes up and I was unsure (read: nervous) what he would have to say about deleting a three year old account over that thread, but he was more than supportive. Since then I've tried to make sure to get out in front of the truly dumb comments in non-revenue posts and do what I can to keep the board a good place for non-football, basketball and hockey discussions.
I don't want to overstep my role and I think the posters did a good job handling the mini-controversy above; that's a good example of the current system working, I think. I wouldn't have said anything about it unless I needed to post anyway, but unfortunately a lot of threads need a bit more than the user moderation system allows for.
I disagree to a degree about how well the user moderation system worked here or generally works in cases like this one. In the end, a thread that should have been about celebrating a major achievement for a Michigan team has turned into a thread dominated by a "mini-controversy" incited by someone who had no business posting in the thread in the first place.
Let me put it this way: Imagine a Michigan women's basketball fan stumbling into MGoBlog for the first time and landing in this thread. Do you think that person would ever return?
By the way, kudos for the job you've done as a mod so far. From what I've seen, you're handling that thankless duty very well.
I think this was very borderline up until the first post I replied to. It's a balance between allowing a reasonable range of discussion (which I see as the users job to vote on) and stopping the stuff that's just there to troll people (my problem). That line is pretty much all opinion, and I'll readily admit I can be mistaken or flat out wrong, so I can understand not agreeing there.
I do appreciate the compliment, especially from someone I have a lot of respect for on here. Using the last clause to segue a bit, your second paragraph will stick with me. I think that's an interesting way to look at things, and isn't something I would have come by on my own.