 |
|
|
|
This Op-ed appreared in the March 7,
1999, edition of the New York Times.
IT'S HIGH TIME FOR A FAIR SHOT:
THE WNBA SHOULD NOW GET THE RESOURCES IT DESERVES
by Martha Ackmann
The NBA's second chance has begun. Not
the second chance for the Bulls, the Pacers, and the like with their
truncated season and nail-biting anxiety over fan loyalty. The moment
has arrived for the NBA to take a second-look and pump up its less
indulged offspring. For the NBA, an unprecedented opportunity now
exists to use its power and money to give women's basketball the
visibility and respect it has always deserved.
As the owner of the Women's National Basketball Association, the
NBA controls the only game in town. With last December's demise
of the American Basketball League, the number of fledgling women's
professional teams has been cut in half, down to the 12 remaining
teams in the WNBA. Fans of the three-year-old ABL with its longer
season will have their loyalty tested. Should they turn their support
to the rival WNBA or should they wait and see how the Connecticut
Attorney General's inquiry turns out?
Less than a month after the ABL went bankrupt, Attorney General
Richard Blumenthal issued the NBA a subpoena seeking evidence that
the NBA conspired to force the collapse of the ABL. "There's evidence
that the NBA used sharp economic elbows to exclude the ABL, a well-positioned
competitor, from fair play--including access to essential financial
rights like TV and product sponsorship," Blumenthal stated.
The NBA delivered the required documents to Blumenthal last Friday.
Blumenthal is looking for any material that would indicate the NBA
unfairly pressured advertisers, sponsors, and TV networks to sign
with the WNBA. California has joined the investigation, and other
states have expressed interest as well. "It's not against the law
to be big, powerful, and successful," Blumenthal said. "It is against
the law to use that domination to block access to competition."
While some people suspect the NBA squeezed out the ABL in order
to create a monopoly on women's basketball, few believe a smoking
gun will be found. Historians of women's sports say they've seen
it all before.
What's familiar is the takeover by men of women's sports. A similar
move occured in the early 1980s when the NCAA swallowed up the Association
of Intercollegiate Athletics for Women. Once the NCAA assumed control,
women were virtually locked out of administrative positions on NCAA
governing boards and lost substantial power in shaping policy, choosing
personnel, and determining the direction of women's collegiate athletics.
For women of the AIAW who had worked diligently to secure a future
that would not include the problems that tarnished men's sports--recruiting
abuses, creation of stars first and teams second, and academic shortcomings,
to name a few--the takeover had devastating consequences.
Nowhere were the problems more obvious than in coaching statistics.
Before NCAA governance, women coaches lead 90% of all women's teams.
When the NCAA took over, critics claim it used its men's club influence
to tap collegiate athletic directors who in turn hired men coaches.
As a result, the number of women in coaching positions nosedived
to 47%.
Many women's sports advocates fear women coaches and sports administrators
are already being locked out of the WNBA. Instead of women with
long and successful records of collegiate experience, former NBA
coaches have been selected--men often with little insight or commitment
to women's sports who view working in the women's league as a tolerable
transition between "real coaching" and retirement.
Although the WNBA would rightly point out that only 25 percent of
its current coaches are former NBA coaches, one can only imagine
the reaction if 25 percent of NBA coaches were women with no experience
coaching men's teams. Providing women athletes with less than first-rate
resources--coaches with direct experience in the women's game--
is reminiscent of the days before Title IX when the girls' intramural
squad played in the antiquated backup gym in 10-year old uniforms
with equipment the boys didn't want.
Of course, salary is another factor that works against the hiring
of top female coaches. Few outstanding female college coaches would
even think of currently coaching in the WNBA. They wouldn't make
as much money. Nor would they want to trade their full-length season
for the brief WNBA summer one.
Not only do coaches have a right to fair salaries, so also do athletes.
And they deserve to play a longer season during traditional basketball
months. The ABL crowds at New England Blizzard games in Hartford
strongly indicated that fans would support winter games. To be satisfied
with only a short summer season that might be incrementally expanded
tells women to be grateful for what they have and sit patiently
waiting for the "right time" for equality.
In an ideal world, perhaps a women's professional league not controlled
by men could make it. But history tells us the chances of that happening
are slim. Men's and women's collegiate teams at Tennessee and Connecticut
have certainly begun to find a way to share the court. Now it's
time the NBA move from allowing women in the door to giving them
an unblocked shot at success.
Sports are not just fun and games. Jackie Robinson and Billie Jean
King knew that. Our world is a better place because they--and others
who supported their struggle for civil rights--were not eternally
patient and demanded more from the sports they loved.
It's time for fans of professional women's basketball to be impatient.
Actively so. While we wait and see what becomes of the Connecticut
Attorney General's anti-trust inquiry, we can demand that the NBA
step up its commitment to women. We can go to games, call for competitive
salaries, health-care benefits, and retirement plans that attract
top college coaches and athletes. We can petition television networks
to carry games in prime time, and even urge the NBA to shorten its
normally outstretched season so that women can share the winter.
"I welcome everyone's impatience," the WNBA's president, Val Ackerman
said. "It's flattering."
Now many be one time that flattery actually gets women somewhere.
|
|
|
