Organizers hype the annual NCAA Division 1 Basketball Tournament as “March Madness.” They do so to exploit “the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat” inherent in low-seeded (aka Cinderella) teams upsetting top-seeded ones – often with buzzer-beating, three-point hail marys.
This year’s tournament has lived up to that hype – as millions who picked top-seeded teams (to at least win their respective divisions) know all too well. In fact, of the four top-seeded teams in the men’s bracket, only one (North Carolina) has made it to the Final Four; of those in the women’s, only UConn did.
Hence, the matchups for this weekend’s semifinal games to make it to next week’s final are as follows:
Men’s Bracket
2 Villanova Wildcats vs. 2 Oklahoma
1 North Carolina vs. 10 Syracuse
Women’s Bracket
1 UConn vs. 2 Oregon State
4 Syracuse vs. 7 Washington
In the interest of full disclosure, I decided years ago to forego the cheap thrill of filling out brackets and feigning agony as my picks get knocked off like ducks at a carnival shooting gallery.
Mind you, if I were still an indentured servant at a big law firm, I would’ve welcomed the respite from drudgery, which bracketology for office pools provide. The aim was clearly not to guess the result of each game; it was to see whose bracket sustained the least number of casualties throughout the tournament.
But I no longer buy into the hype because it’s just so brazenly sexist. I’m on record duly decrying this in “UConn Routs Louisville to Win NCAA (Women’s) Championship,” April 8, 2009.
___________________
One can be forgiven for thinking that North Carolina winning the NCAA (men’s) championship on Monday is the biggest story in Basketball this year…
[But] the biggest story … is the way UConn crowned a perfect season by winning the NCAA (women’s) championship in a rout over Louisville 76-54 last night. Because UConn not only ended its season 39-0, its players were so dominant, they won each game by double digits with unprecedented ease.
Now just imagine the hoopla if North Carolina had won the NCAA (men’s) championship in such convincing fashion…
[Meanwhile], instead of commanding network coverage in primetime, like the men’s championship, the women’s was relegated to cable last night, which guaranteed only a fraction of the viewership. TV executives wonder why they can’t get better ratings for the fledgling women’s professional league – the WNBA. Well, it might have something to do with the way they keep dissing women’s college Basketball in this fashion.
Moreover, what does this disparate coverage say to female college athletes, as well as to young girls, who we encourage to have the same interest in sports as young boys…? Frankly, it says that male chauvinism, sexism, and discrimination against women in sports not only still exist but are blithely tolerated.
___________________
This sexism explains why you’d never know the biggest story in Basketball this year is the UConn women’s quest for yet another perfect season. If they succeed, they will have accomplished the astounding feat of winning back-to-back-to-back-to-back national titles.
To put this prospect into perspective, here is how ESPN’s Sports Center hailed the championship they won last year:
Back-to-back is hard, but back-to-back-to-back is harder – no matter how good a team is.
UConn has been SO dominant this year, [the Huskies] could lose by 192 tonight & still set D-I record for largest single-season scoring margin…
[UConn women’s coach] Geno Auriemma joins John Wooden & Phil Jackson as only coaches in major college or pro sports to win 10 titles.
(April 7, 2015)
This brings me to another example of the brazenly sexist regard so many have for women’s Basketball.
Boston Globe columnist [Dan Shaughnessy] said the Huskies ‘are killing the women’s game’ by being too dominant…
[He] was referring to the 98-38 win over Mississippi State and ended with ‘Watch? No thanks.’
(FOX Sports, March 28, 2016)
Even worse, the very sports columnists (invariably men) decrying UConn’s dominance would be hailing it if UConn’s men were the ones dominating in this fashion. Indeed, you’d be hard-pressed to find a single columnist who decried UCLA’s dominance when it was racking up 10 titles under legendary coach John Wooden.
But here is how Coach Auriemma pooh-poohed this criticism in his own inimitable way:
So don’t watch, and don’t write about it…
When Tiger was winning every major, nobody said he was bad for golf… And now there’s a lot more great golfers because of Tiger.
(Los Angeles Time, March 28, 2016)
Of course, I appreciate that most people (men and women) think there’s no way women’s Basketball can match the excitement of men’s. But I used to think there’s no way women’s Tennis can match the excitement of men’s. I still watch a lot of Tennis, but I haven’t watched men play in years.
Incidentally, I feel the same way about the juxtaposition of men’s and women’s Soccer. Which is why I was so heartened yesterday when the top players on the women’s national team sued U.S. Soccer.
The men’s team has historically been mediocre. The women’s team has been a quadrennial phenomenon, winning world and Olympic championships and bringing much of the country to a standstill in the process…
Citing this disparity, as well as rising revenue numbers, five players on the women’s team filed a federal complaint Wednesday, accusing U.S. Soccer of wage discrimination because, they said, they earned as little as 40 percent of what players on the United States men’s national team earned even as they marched to the team’s third World Cup championship last year.
(New York Times, March 31, 2016)
In fact, the women’s team earned $2 million for winning the World Cup final last year. The men’s team earned $9 million for losing in the quarterfinals.
I have championed the cause for fair pay in Soccer in such commentaries as “Belated, Fickle Interest in Women’s World Cup,” July 15, 2011, and “Sexism Explains Media Disinterest in Women’s World Cup,” June 12, 2015.
In any event, I hope my testimony disabuses you of any sexist thinking you may have in this regard. Give women’s Basketball a try.
For the record, I’m pulling for UConn to complete their fourpeat feat!
As for the men’s bracket, I’m pulling for Oklahoma. You probably know that its star player, Buddy Hield, is thrilling NCAA fans the way Steph Curry is thrilling NBA fans.
In fact:
Hield is the Steph Curry of this NCAA tournament, and with two more wins, he’ll surpass Curry’s breakout 2008 tournament run…
In case you weren’t into college basketball back in 2008, a little-known, babyfaced guard for No. 10 seed Davidson grabbed the NCAA tournament spotlight. Curry’s 2008 run was everything we love about March Madness. With scoring games of 40, 30, 33 and 25, he led the Wildcats to the Elite Eight.
(USA Today Sports, March 27, 2016)
But, truth be told, the only reason I’m pulling for Oklahoma is that Hield hails from the same backwater in The Bahamas where I grew up (i.e., Pine Dale, Grand Bahama). Nothing brings out national pride quite like seeing a poor local kid make it big like this.
He’s already bound to be among the top-five players drafted into the NBA this year, which means that he’ll be guaranteed a multi-million dollar contract.
Hail, Buddy!