Seeing value in a league of their own

To the Editor:

Robert Huelin, in "Here, women-have a ball" [9/19, YH], states that the WNBA is a "sham designed not to promote the women's game or to provide a true professional league but to give women something to do so they will stop pestering men for equal billing." Fifteen million dollars is a lot to spend on a sham. NBA owners and entrepreneurs of the WNBA have spent that amount on advertising alone. This alliance has been established for the long haul; two expansion teams and both a lengthened season and playoffs are are under consideration.

Women's hoops in the summer time: the strategists could not have made a better decision. Due to minimal competition from other sports the league was able to accomplish two important and necessary goals: elicit incredible levels of attendance throughout the league, and land major television contracts with three sports-eager networks: NBC, ESPN, and Lifetime. This coverage brought women's basketball into the American household. "We got next" became a household phrase. Children watched WNBA games without the threat of having school the next day.

Huelin criticizes the WNBA for the coverage given Rebecca Lobo because he does not understand the reasoning behind it. Granted, Lobo is nowhere near the best player in the WNBA (and that is not how she was marketed), but she is well known. Does the name Gheorghe Muresan ring a bell? The women who play professionally in Europe are extremely talented with pro experience surpassing that of a college grad like Lobo. However, due to the exposure gained from the Olympics and a successful college career, Lobo serves as a big draw for the casual fan.

While criticizing the quality of WNBA play, Huelin overlooked several facts including their three-week preseason. Three weeks of preseason is not enough time for a pro team to prepare; the men have two months for preseason. In addition to the short preseason, the talent pool is diluted due to the competing women's league, the ABL. The talent is divided between two leagues, just as it was for the men in the '70s. However, in the long run this situation will benefit women's basketball by driving up salaries.

Huelin warns the reader, "Don't be surprised if 90 percent of the WNBA fans are not new to the game." For some reason Huelin does not value the experienced fan despite the fact that he claims to be one. If one were to apply this logic to the fans in attendance at any professional sports arena, stadium, or rink one would find that the majority of ticket holders would also be "old" fans of the game.

The WNBA will be good for women's basketball at every level--from youth leagues to college campuses. Huelin: the WNBA is not a sham. The NBA has put its money, marketing, and muscle where its mouth is. The WNBA represents an enterprise in the making. Open your eyes; you'll thank me in a few years when your children ask you to demonstrate the Cynthia Cooper drive to the hoop.

--Tori Hammond, CC '00

Back to Opinion...