1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

2015 NCAA Tournament thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by RecoveringJournalist, Mar 18, 2015.

  1. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Inside the borders of the state of Connecticut, Geno is not obscure. For reasons a combination sociologist/sportswriter should explore (Jeff Jacobs told me once most of the women's team's fans were senior citizens), UConn basketball is as close to gender equity in terms of public support as there is in the U.S. Geno gets bummed when he passes Greenwich headed west on the Conn Turnpike and realizes that he's living in a bubble, not reality itself.
     
  2. expendable

    expendable Well-Known Member

    It's a start, Starman, and you're more right than wrong, but 13 would match the men's scholarship limit, which would ease a difficult sell. I know some would scream that it's hurting the game at first, but they should look no further than at what trimming roster sizes has done for football.
     
  3. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Where does the money come from for the women to play in Europe?

    Do they draw big crowds? TV money?

    Billionaire owners?

    I don't get it.
     
  4. Big Circus

    Big Circus Well-Known Member

    Billionaire owners, mostly. It's a hobby. I don't think it's any coincidence that the biggest stars wind up in Russia, which might be the best place in the world to amass that kind of disposable income.
     
  5. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    The mentions of Russia was why I wondered if it was just billionaire owners.

    But, women's basketball? I guess all the hockey and men's basketball teams must already be owned by richer billionaires.
     
  6. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Due to the club structure of European sports, a lot of those women's teams are part of a sports conglomerate including men's soccer and basketball teams. Loading up the women's hoop team is thus financially viable and a good way to win SOMETHING if your other teams suck.
     
  7. Jake_Taylor

    Jake_Taylor Well-Known Member

    It can be weird seeing Real Madrid or CSKA as the name of teams in multiple sports. It would be confusing if say, Stan Kroenke, had teams in the NBA, NFL, NHL and MLS all called the Nuggets.
     
  8. Flip Wilson

    Flip Wilson Well-Known Member

    There was a good article in The New York Times last month about Diana Taurasi playing in Russia and talking about why she's skipping the WNBA season this year.
    http://nyti.ms/1Fv9Ela
     
  9. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Well, for many years there were NFL and MLB teams with duplicate names, although it was almost never due to common ownership but (to be brutal) bad copyright protection. (The Pittsburgh Pirates allowed Art Rooney's football team to use the name for one year and then more or less told them to come up with one of their own, hence Steelers.)

    By the time the NBA got rolling in the 1960s the established franchises weren't going to put up with nickname-mooching any more, thus the one-time Rochester and Cincinnati Royals were forced to give up their nickname when they moved to Kansas City.

    You might think somewhere along the line some real successful franchises would have come up with the idea of making the "brand" a year-round athletic enterprise.
     
  10. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    The Steelers were called the Pirates for most, if not all, the 1930s, not just one year. There was also an NHL team called the Pirates in the 1920s.

    Tim Mara named the Giants after the baseball team because he rented the Polo Grounds from them. There was also a Brooklyn Dodgers NFL franchise, and also a minor league Continental League team in the 60s (so much for copyrighting). The Redskins were originally the Boston Braves. There also were brief NFL franchises called the Cleveland Indians, Washington Senators, and Cincinnati Reds.

    Must have been real fun for 1920s fans in the early fall to figure out what sport was being played.
     
  11. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member


    It would be interesting to go back into the history of the old NFL franchises with shared names with baseball teams and see if any of them were partially owned by the baseball owners.

    I do know from reading some things about pro franchises in the early 20th century that keeping the stadium busy on a year-round basis was a big idea for many of the MLB owners. But I believe both the NFL and the major leagues passed rules fairly early on banning ownership in more than one sport.

    OTOH, common ownership between the NHL and NBA was quite common for a fairly long time.
     
  12. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    No, Dick, this year's team was loaded and probably underachieved by losing once.

    That year I'm talking about they had Diana Taurasi and a bunch of nobodies. They weren't the best team in that particular year. That's all I said.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page