WBB vs. [Michigan State]

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. 

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 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.

http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/w-baskbl/mich-w-baskbl-body.html