Nine for IX: Let them wear towels

[Versatile]

It's not a "women only" series. It's a series about women in sports, not for women in sports.

 

[21]

It's not a "women only" series. It's a series about women in sports, not for women in sports.

I agree. And as soon as you classify it that way, it becomes a smaller part of a bigger thing.

This is a vastly different topic, but I never thought about being a woman in sports, I just wanted to be in sports.

 

[Versatile]

It's not a "women only" series. It's a series about women in sports, not for women in sports.

I agree. And as soon as you classify it that way, it becomes a smaller part of a bigger thing.

This is a vastly different topic, but I never thought about being a woman in sports, I just wanted to be in sports.

I don't think it's a different topic. It's all part of the some identity and equality issue.

I've always been bothered by Black History Month (or Women's History Month or LGBT History Month or any other similar concent) because of the singling-out aspect. But I accept them because otherwise those stories simply wouldn't be told. It's a white man's world. Maybe these documentaries should be part of the 30 for 30 series, but they wouldn't have been made had Nine for IX not been conceived.

 

[21]

Agree completely about the special months or whatever for 'minorities;' same reason I don't appreciate ESPNW. 'Okay, let's put the women over HERE, instead of wasting bandwidth on the main site.'

Not going to dwell on it, here's my point: If you say it's for women or about women or however you label it, you just lost the male audience. And in this case, that is a shame and a wasted opportunity.

 

[Versatile]

Agree completely about the special months or whatever for 'minorities;' same reason I don't appreciate ESPNW. 'Okay, let's put the women over HERE, instead of wasting bandwidth on the main site.'

Not going to dwell on it, here's my point: If you say it's for women or about women or however you label it, you just lost the male audience. And in this case, that is a shame and a wasted opportunity.

I don't agree, though. I think the subject on its face is enough to lose the same audience that would refuse to watch a Nine for IX documentary.

 

[Den1983]

Agree completely about the special months or whatever for 'minorities;' same reason I don't appreciate ESPNW. 'Okay, let's put the women over HERE, instead of wasting bandwidth on the main site.'

Not going to dwell on it, here's my point: If you say it's for women or about women or however you label it, you just lost the male audience. And in this case, that is a shame and a wasted opportunity.

Completely agree with the last point. Completely singles it out, and, yes, men would look at something like that as something for women, whereas if it was part of the original 30 for 30, they'd be more likely to watch it. Labeling makes a difference.

 

[Versatile]

If not for this series, these films wouldn't have been made. So what's better?

 

[Alma]

If not for this series, these films wouldn't have been made. So what's better?

Geez, Dad.

The two Nine for IX I saw were only an hour, so that automatically pleased me. They could have been 30 minutes, but at least they weren't two hours.

Funny that the piece that most hail as the best thing ESPN's done in a long time was embedded into SportsCenter, done by OTL's crew, and 20 minutes long.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I've loved the two they've done so far. They really did a great job with the Summit one as well, but absolutely either of these could have stood on their own and perhaps reached more viewers if they were 30 for 30.

 

[Second Thoughts]

I've loved the two they've done so far. They really did a great job with the Summit one as well, but absolutely either of these could have stood on their own and perhaps reached more viewers if they were 30 for 30.

I thought that, too, about why not a "30 For 30." I missed the Summit one because I didn't really know about it, or paid attention. Watched the "Towels" one after DVRing it. Good show. Amazing that it wasn't really that long ago when you think about it.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Well, it was a long time ago, but it doesn't seem like it...

I remember running into Olson early in my career and just being in awe of her because of how big that story was...

 

[Mizzougrad96]

If not for this series, these films wouldn't have been made. So what's better?

Geez, Dad.

The two Nine for IX I saw were only an hour, so that automatically pleased me. They could have been 30 minutes, but at least they weren't two hours.

Funny that the piece that most hail as the best thing ESPN's done in a long time was embedded into SportsCenter, done by OTL's crew, and 20 minutes long.

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I think either of the first two could have easily been two hours. But it's better to leave them wanting more than to have people bored.