March Madness is high season for basketball spectators. The weekslong college basketball tournament draws millions of TV viewers, and is a cash cow for the NCAA. But some fans, and critics, have found it between the men鈥檚 and women鈥檚 sides of the tournament.
Photos of in the tournament, with a few dumbbells and yoga mats, have circulated in social media. They鈥檙e in stark contrast to more fully equipped men鈥檚 facilities. But there are other differences. Women get prepackaged food, while men鈥檚 teams have access to a large buffet. Perhaps most importantly, women鈥檚 teams can鈥檛 use the March Madness brand.
Wall Street Journal reporter told Texas Standard that all of these differences are rooted in money.
鈥淭he men鈥檚 tournament is incredibly lucrative for the NCAA. It accounts for about 80% of their $1.6 billion in revenue in any given year,鈥� Higgins said.
That revenue comes from mega-TV broadcasting deals for the men鈥檚 games. Women鈥檚 games, on the other hand, are broadcast as part of a bundled contract that includes 24 other sports championships. Higgins says the women鈥檚 games bring in about about $35 million per year 鈥� 鈥渙rders of magnitude鈥� less than the men鈥檚 contract. And that鈥檚 the money women鈥檚 teams have to reinvest back into their programs.
鈥淵ou kind of have this chicken-and-egg situation where success and investment begets success and investment,鈥� Higgins said. 鈥淧eople argue that there鈥檚 not much parity in women鈥檚 basketball and that there鈥檚 a pretty big dropoff between the top end of teams and the bottom end. Well, that鈥檚 also because there is a huge drop off in investment of those teams on the women鈥檚 side.鈥�
Higgins argues that women鈥檚 teams could generate more revenue if schools invested more in them up front.
The NCAA could also help by giving women鈥檚 teams access to the March Madness brand. Higgins says the the blue, black and white logo and the phrase 鈥淢arch Madness,鈥� among other things, are important drivers of revenue for the tournament and they could give the women鈥檚 side a jump-start. She also says a former leader of the women鈥檚 tournament told her it鈥檚 not true that they wanted to go it alone, without using the March Madness brand.
鈥淚f you look at the games, the games are pretty great basketball games. So it鈥檚 hard to argue that adding women to that term would dilute the product,鈥� Higgins said.
But making such charges isn鈥檛 simple. Higgins says giving women access to the brand is up to the 1,000-member NCAA, not just the association鈥檚 president.
And while athletic departments across the country are working to improve diversity, Higgins says money still drives decision-making.
鈥淏ased on the current structure, you could really ask a question of how many athletic departments really are on that level of wanting that equity,鈥� she said. 鈥淛ust based on the financial reality, football makes so much more money that it鈥檚 easier for an athletic department to justify spending its money there because the return on investment is, as it currently stands, higher.鈥�
If you found the reporting above valuable, please consider making a donation to support it . Your gift helps pay for everything you find on and . Thanks for donating today.
Copyright 2021 KUT 90.5. To see more, visit . 9(MDAxODQzOTgwMDEyMTcyNjI4MTAxYWQyMw004))
