Question: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, did
it really make a sound?
Another question: If the Detroit Shock wins the WNBA
championship and nobody knows it, did it really happen?
Okay, so maybe some of you knew it. I knew because it was in The
Los Angeles Times. The Los Angeles Sparks were in the finals, too
““ and they were going for a three-peat.
But the vast majority of sports fans didn’t care. And
still don’t. And that’s the way it will always be.
Unless some amazing things happen, women’s professional team
sports will never succeed on a prolonged level of commercial
profitability.
Let’s face it. The vast majority of sports fans are guys.
And they don’t think women’s sports provide compelling
entertainment. Though it’s a pity, they might just have a
point.
The point is, professional female athletes are not as
athletically talented as their male counterparts. Argue all you
want about the great fundamentals of women, or the camaraderie or
the fantastic examples they set for young girls. That’s all
well and good.
But we live in the days of SportsCenter, days where highlights
provide dinnertime talking points. It’s a lot more common to
hear, “Did you see Kobe’s sick 360 dunk?” than,
“Did you see Lisa Leslie’s perfectly executed jump stop
and bounce pass to set up that layup?”
Let’s see, layup or dunk? Layup or dunk?
I don’t mean to bash women. I love women. And I
don’t mean to bash women’s sports, because those are
good too. I just mean to point out that there is little future
commercial viability for women’s sports in an already crowded
American market.
Men’s sports take us through the seasons. Football,
baseball, basketball, golf, hockey. Even auto racing. It’s
very difficult to find a niche in this crowded sports environment.
And the niche isn’t going to be found competing with the men,
because it’s natural to compare two similar things and choose
one over the other. And on a spectator level, it’s generally
more fun to watch the better athletes.
Notice I say “generally.” Women’s tennis has
found a niche, and it has found it for a few reasons.
Women don’t hit the ball quite as hard as the men do. This
lack of power, which tends to make other sports boring, translates
into longer, more exciting points in tennis. Longer, exciting
points are more fun to watch than overpowering serves and
volleys.
Women’s tennis also includes just a few marquee events
““ the four Grand Slams ““ that make a lot of money and
draw thousands of spectators and millions of television
viewers.
Much like the Women’s World Cup did in 1999 and will
probably do this year.
Which brings up an interesting question. How did the
Women’s World Cup have such tremendous success while the
Women’s United Soccer Association folded for financial
reasons after just three seasons?
Well, the World Cup is a marquee event. It happens once every
four years. It was in America. We won. The players are compelling
women and talented athletes. As Americans, we all had something to
latch onto.
The WUSA, while it featured the same American players and many
talented foreigners as well, wasn’t able to establish a solid
fan base.
And look at the WNBA. The regular season is 34 games. Eight
teams make the playoffs and they play best-of-three series. Even
with such a short season, it’s still difficult to generate
interest. Last Tuesday’s championship set a WNBA attendance
record, which is great, but the game was on ESPN2. More people
watched “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.”
Women’s sports are not a bad thing. On the contrary, they
are great for everyone involved. But unless sports fans change
their minds about what’s exciting, or unless women really get
out there to support their fellow women, female sports leagues
never really stand a chance at financial success in today’s
America.
“Queer Eye for the Straight Guy” is
Regan’s favorite show. He likes Ted, the cooking guy. E-mail
him at dregan@media.ucla.edu.