Here's hoping the WNBA goes under!

Ryanwb · April 8th, 2003, 09:45 PM

*Warning, insensitive comments below*

Okay, it is not that I am sexist...okay that is a lie I am but that is not the sole reason I am against the WNBA

I will openly admit at this point in my life that I was a Phoenix Mercury season ticket holder for one season...my wife loves women's basketball. I hated it, I would rather have gone through a root canal than to sit through another one of those games. The action was boring and what drove me the most nuts...the sound of an entire areana full of women cheering. I swear I can understand how people can go insane and go on 3 state killing sprees because I was at that point at about game 2 of our season tickets. One of the selling points my wife gave me was the understanding that lesbians like women's basketball. I was expecting an orgy to break out or something at halftime, but these lesbians were gross. They were all manly, and this chick who sat in our row chewed tobacco all game.

By the end of the season my wife now hated the WNBA, primarily because of me pointing out every fault of the players, fans, etc. Most of all, women are not fun to watch. I am sorry to say but I have more enjoyment watching bass fishing on ESPN than I do watching women shoot hoops.

elindholm · April 8th, 2003, 09:53 PM

Your wife sounds like a lucky woman. I bet mine wishes I could ruin some of her pleasures for her.

Ryanwb · April 8th, 2003, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by elindholm
Your wife sounds like a lucky woman. I bet mine wishes I could ruin some of her pleasures for her.

I consider it payback for her ruining football season for me every year

Besides...show me a husband that would go to a WNBA game with their wife? I took one for the team! I didn't start complaining until she brought up her annoyances...then the flood gates unleashed

Brian in Mesa · April 8th, 2003, 09:58 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they use a smaller basketball, play 2 halves rather than 4 quarters, and shoot closer 3-pointers than the men?

Then they come out in the media and in commercials and talk about playing a man's game.

If they want to play a man's game...use a real basketball, play 4 quarters, and shoot NBA 3's.

Yuma · April 9th, 2003, 08:35 AM

I for one love the WNBA. I even was on the Michael Reagan show defending it, and had the guest host talked into watching a game when he said he would never watch it ever. I may be a homer for the home team, but the ladies game is not as bad as you guys make it out. I bet right now even the Mercury could beat your guy's weekend teams. I would love to see Sheryl Swoopes blow right by you guys in a New York minute. I have had the opportunity to play with female pro basketball players and it was a blast. Nothing beats a sweaty gal backing you down on the low post!!

SirStefan32 · April 9th, 2003, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yuma
I for one love the WNBA.

Me too. Well, I don't love it, but I watch it.

Stefan

Brian in Mesa · April 9th, 2003, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yuma
I for one love the WNBA.

It's fine as long as you don't hold to the theory that they're on the same level as the men. It's an entirely different ballgame.

My Mom went to a game...once. She was turned off because she had never seen so many "women with wallets."

Mike Olbinski · April 9th, 2003, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by elindholm
Your wife sounds like a lucky woman. I bet mine wishes I could ruin some of her pleasures for her.

lol, nice dig.

Mike

SECTION 11 · April 9th, 2003, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brian in Mesa
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they use a smaller basketball, play 2 halves rather than 4 quarters, and shoot closer 3-pointers than the men?

Then they come out in the media and in commercials and talk about playing a man's game.

If they want to play a man's game...use a real basketball, play 4 quarters, and shoot NBA 3's.

When the league first started, I suggested to a female reporter at McDuffy's that they lower the rim so they could dunk. She got way offended. They I recapped all the differences already in place (smaller ball, shorter game, 3 point line, isn't there a longer shot clock?) and she backed off a bit.
I still got on tv though. So, I'm famous. Yep. Yesiree Bob. Yepper...

Dback Jon · April 9th, 2003, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SECTION 11
When the league first started, I suggested to a female reporter at McDuffy's that they lower the rim so they could dunk. She got way offended. They I recapped all the differences already in place (smaller ball, shorter game, 3 point line, isn't there a longer shot clock?) and she backed off a bit.
I still got on tv though. So, I'm famous. Yep. Yesiree Bob. Yepper...

That was you?? Wow, I'm impressed.......

sly fly · April 9th, 2003, 02:50 PM

I bet right now even the Mercury could beat your guy's weekend teams.

Uh, I don't think so. Not from our league/team, anyways.

But, they could probably beat most "B" league teams.

The one thing that annoys me most about the WNBA is that they are flailing like a fish on the ground most of the game. Get the hell up! Quit falling down and quit screaming!

I've never seen so many ground 'bounds in my life.

justAndy · April 10th, 2003, 07:40 AM

... that men would be more graceful than women @ hoops?

jf-08 · April 10th, 2003, 07:54 AM

I have no problem with the WNBA. My daughter is 3 and in a couple of years, I hope it is still around so she can watch it.

However, I agree that they shouldn't be bellyaching about pay and tv coverage etc. They are in a League that LOSES money. Give me a freaking break about the pay structure! I think the pay is adequate for them. If it were a cash cow, sure the pay should be increased but don't ask for handouts from the NBA.

BTW - on their website WNBA.com they have a petition to sign to uphold Title IX

. If it weren't for men's football and basketball, the women's sports wouldn't probably have any funding.

Interesting comments from the Stern meeting with WNBA Board of Governors:

http://www.wnba.com/news/stern_comments_030408.html

Stern Addresses Status of WNBA Negotiations

Following is the transcript from NBA Commissioner David Stern's press conference following the April 8, 2003 meeting of the NBA Board of Governors.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Opening Remarks

David Stern: There are two items that we are going to talk to you about today. The first is the decision by the Board of Governors to put the Charlotte expansion team into the East and move New Orleans into the West for the 2004-2005 season.
NBA Commissioner David Stern
NBAE/Getty Images
The second was a vote by the Board to set a deadline of April 18 for the WNBA negotiations to successfully conclude or if not the season will not be able to move forward. The NBA owners have been asked to subsidize the league to a number, which will probably be $12 million this year. Unlike the situation in soccer where the women were asked to take very significant cuts in pay -- and did -- the owners authorized the negotiation committee to make proposals for cost-of-living increase in player costs for the WNBA, so that we could get a deal and then work with the players to build the league as we were prepared to in our seventh season. But if that is not to be, then we’ll know in the next 10 days or so whether there will be a WNBA season.

Other than that, we reviewed collective bargaining issues, as we prepare to sit down with the National Basketball Players Association in May; and marketing issues, as we come out of our San Antonio meetings.

WNBA Question and Answer Session

Question: Is the $12 million figure annually for the WNBA?
Stern: That’s what in light of certain shifting of expenses and the like this year to the teams, and the subsidy that the NBA was giving to the WNBA, that’s the number that we project for this coming season. It would be our hope, indeed our anticipation given my assurances to the owners over the years, that that number would decline in future years, as the business of the WNBA begins to grow. But if we can’t get the ability to sit down and get to the deal that we have to get to, which I said would represent an increase as opposed to a reduction, I’ll be more disappointed than the most ardent WNBA fans, of which I consider myself one.
Question: What was their most recent offer?
Stern: We’re not in the same ballpark. And frankly, I understand the individual players’ perspective. They are playing the sport at the highest level, they are playing … the television audiences that get to see them, and they see the men getting astounding numbers by comparison. The same could be said with respect to coming out of the World Cup the way the women soccer players captivated the nation, but the commercial realities are there that required them to take cuts. We’re the NBA, we are backing this league and we are not asking our women to take cuts. But we are asking them to make a deal that we can demonstrate once and for all that the WNBA has a strong future. It’s up to the women of the WNBA.

Question: Is there a lack of an understanding that you want the WNBA to support itself?
Stern: I’m not sure. The numbers … we’ve made available all the numbers, had a certain retrenchment by four teams that had foregone operation. We were fortunate to find in San Antonio and Connecticut willing operators and owners of teams. We’ve sweetened the pot so to speak for all of our teams to subsidize them so that they could make the transition to the owner model that we think is essential for the long-term success of the league. And now we want to roll up our sleeves with the players and make this a permanent landmark on the American sports scene. We’ll see whether the players want to do it with us or not. I think there is some sense that the NBA can afford it and we will … I have gotten authorization from the owners on a budget that allows us to subsidize it for $12 million this year. But in these financial realities, I’ve done my job. But I can’t do more.

SirStefan32 · April 11th, 2003, 11:06 AM

From Seattle Times (a few days ago):

"A hard salary cap of $616,000 would be placed on all teams, with the player maximum topping off at $63,000. Last season, top players made $79,000."

This is terrible. There will be very little difference between max and min. players.

Stefan

cheesebeef · April 11th, 2003, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yuma
I for one love the WNBA. I even was on the Michael Reagan show defending it, and had the guest host talked into watching a game when he said he would never watch it ever. I may be a homer for the home team, but the ladies game is not as bad as you guys make it out. I bet right now even the Mercury could beat your guy's weekend teams. I would love to see Sheryl Swoopes blow right by you guys in a New York minute.

Yeah but our guys team don't get ESPN spots nor get paid 50,000 to play for four months. That crap they call the WNBA is just that - crap - unwatchable crap. Girls who can't dribble, shoot and mug for the Camera every chance they get - I can watch that on Playboy - but at least there they would be naked!

Here's hoping the WNBA goes under!

who would think...