FARK.com: (2714375) ESPN to broadcast NCAA women's hoops title game over ESPN HD, ESPN2 HD, ESPNU, ESPN360, ESPN International, ESPNNEWS, ESPN Radio and ESPN.com

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		ESPN to broadcast NCAA women's hoops title game over ESPN HD, ESPN2 HD, ESPNU, ESPN360, ESPN International, ESPNNEWS, ESPN Radio and ESPN.com (sportsbybrooks.com)		35
		More: Stupid

• • •

416 clicks; posted to Sports » on 03 Apr 2007 at 10:13 AM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/2714375

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

35 Comments (+0 »)

Archived thread

murphy_31		2007-04-03 09:17:02 AM

You forgot The Ocho

Postal Penguin		2007-04-03 10:12:48 AM

And all those stations combined will probably garner maybe 50% of the viewer-ship that the men's game had.

firstmattinspace		2007-04-03 10:22:21 AM

Last night they had a countdown to the final. Yeesh.

They just keep beating that dead horse. No one cares, ESPN, no one cares. No matter how hard you try, no one cares.

Someone needs to start another national sports network. A little competition goes a long way.

espiaboricua		2007-04-03 10:24:58 AM

Forgotten.

mr_a		2007-04-03 10:26:38 AM

To be honest, I rather enjoy women's basketball. Much more about the fundamentals, and you actually see a walking call every once in a while.

tom servo bit me		2007-04-03 10:27:12 AM

I'm so sick of ESPN's agendas. Trying to convince us that women's basketball, or arena football or televised poker for that matter, are touchstone cultural events with which we all ought to be in tune isn't just laughable, it's disingenuous. Burying hockey highlights at the very end of the show (and I hate to sound like a hockey whiner, but it's a good point) while trumpeting women's basketball highlights and arena football games is a brazen abuse of the media to strong-arm the public into consuming their product and their product only. For shame, ESPN.

firstmattinspace		2007-04-03 10:29:54 AM

I'm just pissed 'cause they aren't showing any of the Cricket matches.

mr_a

Okay, I agree to an extent. In a lot of ways, it is a purer form of the game. But all that means is that it's really farking boring.

Philip J. Fry		2007-04-03 10:34:25 AM

tom servo bit me,
The hockey players killed their own league. It was a bad move to cause the season to shut down during the World Cup. Most people didn't even notice hockey was missing. Hockey gets lower ratings than poker.

For one thing, I'm glad I can enjoy the game 8 different ways. Go RU!

stebain		2007-04-03 10:46:07 AM

Women's Basketball > NBA

/seriously

babalu87		2007-04-03 10:48:19 AM

I didnt realize the market for tall, ugly lesbian athletes was so large?

firstmattinspace		2007-04-03 10:49:29 AM

stebain

Does that mean you will be watching tonight?

cvinny485		2007-04-03 10:51:42 AM

tom servo bit me: I'm so sick of ESPN's agendas. Trying to convince us that women's basketball, or arena football...

There's nothing wrong with arena football. I would rather watch that than baseball. Definately more than woman's basketball.

/Go Force!!

expobill		2007-04-03 11:03:15 AM

this game will be better than the mens!

tom servo bit me		2007-04-03 11:03:40 AM

Not saying there's anything wrong with those sports. Nor am I stumping for them to start leading with NHL stories. Hey, I know a niche sport when I see one. I just think it's really disingenuous to treat some niche sports like garbage while making others out to be major players on the sports stage.

Static86		2007-04-03 11:11:36 AM

"We no can dunk, but good fundamentals"

"That more fun to watch."

"OH GOD YOU'RE KILLING ME!"
"OH GOD YOU"RE KILLING ME!"

Enuratique		2007-04-03 11:17:46 AM

tom servo bit me: I'm so sick of ESPN's agendas. Trying to convince us that women's basketball, or arena football or televised poker for that matter, are touchstone cultural events with which we all ought to be in tune isn't just laughable, it's disingenuous. Burying hockey highlights at the very end of the show (and I hate to sound like a hockey whiner, but it's a good point) while trumpeting women's basketball highlights and arena football games is a brazen abuse of the media to strong-arm the public into consuming their product and their product only. For shame, ESPN.

QFT!

/And I'm not that much of a hockey fan
//Grew up in the South, but will watch a good hockey game
///And I loathe that ESPN has decided to pick up NASCAR as another sport I could give 2 giant shiats about
////More NASCAR means even less Hockey, Soccer, etc coverage

Superdude26		2007-04-03 11:19:04 AM

FreeFromGreen		2007-04-03 11:23:37 AM

there's a women's tournament too?

/boring
//don't care
///never seen so many missed layups in my life...oh yeah, once at a 6th grade boys game, yawn

Marshmallow Jones		2007-04-03 11:44:51 AM

Well as someone who loathes basketball and loves hockey, ESPN doesnt get much air time in my house outside of football season. And from January to April since 'Sportscenter' is basically a basketball highlight show with a few previews of the baseball season, I avoid it completely. I know the NHL (aka Gary Bettman) has painted itself into an obscure corner but ESPN ticks me off with their endless devotion to hoops. So in a meaningless gesture I do what I can to avoid their sponsors.

dettigersnw22		2007-04-03 11:48:25 AM

The biggest problem:

"boo-yah" doesn't go well with a lay-up.

tomlcollins		2007-04-03 11:50:05 AM

Are they talking about "underwater" basketball?.....as my Mom calls it because it so much slower than the men's game.

Women's b-ball sucks the big one, even though any girl who attends a "big time" program can probably kill me in one on one.

madden101		2007-04-03 11:58:25 AM

hmmm.... i thought college sports pretty much ended after last night.

Sitruc		2007-04-03 12:29:59 PM

I had planned on watching some of the game regardless of the hype and coverage on every channel, but then the final became Tennessee and Rutgers. I might watch some of it. I'll be watching DC United at CD Guadalajara.

maddogdelta		2007-04-03 12:43:12 PM

While it is a little bit much that almost every ESPN outlet is showing this one event, I also am beginning to wonder about Brooks...

"Guys don't want to watch women being athletes. Guys only want to watch heavily muscled men in spandex BVD's groping one another!"

Brooks, are you catching teh ghey?

korovaorange		2007-04-03 02:01:37 PM

But where can I watch the Women's NIT???

LSUMJ		2007-04-03 02:03:35 PM

"Much more about the fundamentals"

i dont buy this at all. any womens game you watch will have more missed layups than a 10 year old CYO game. i would bet that the womens FG% is equal or lower to the mens, then you have to take into account the smaller ball

IAmRight		2007-04-03 02:51:09 PM

"Women's b-ball sucks the big one, even though any girl who attends a "big time" program can probably kill me in one on one."

but no one is promoting your pickup basketball games and trying to cram them down the entire nation's throat.

"Much more about the fundamentals"

This is a lie perpetuated by the women's basketball people to try to convince others that there is ONE way women's basketball is superior to men's. There is not. A top women's basketball team in college would get killed by a top HS boys basketball team. All the WNBA teams would probably lose to every team that made the NCAA tournament (at least they'd lose to 50 or so of the teams). They turn the ball over, despite having much more space because everyone is so much smaller, the ball is smaller, etc. They just shoot a lower percentage from the field, a lower percentage from the line, can't dunk, etc. I'm sure the best ones would beat me in a game of one-on-one...but I'm also sure I could at least keep the game close. In a game against the top men I would get killed.

whoistj33		2007-04-03 04:28:04 PM

ESPN is perfect for the women. It's all style with no substance. At least Fox Sports has fun with frivolity. ESPN doesn't understand it.

I still find it just as upsetting that they supply girls teams with so much cash through women's sports foundation. You would think a sports channel would want to get EVERYONE playing, not just the girls.

Rex_Banner		2007-04-03 05:28:38 PM

So all 8 people who actually care can watch the game on a different channel?

Cameron_Talley		2007-04-03 06:08:35 PM

Hell, I love Women's Basketball (it doesn't hurt that I was in in the Pep ban the year Baylor won it all).

But that's way too many frakking channels. Two would suffice (one in standard def, one in HD).

And like someone said above: Women's basketball > NBA.

glave27		2007-04-03 08:30:32 PM

I'm sorry, but this game does mean something.

Pat Summitt. No man other than Bobby Knight or Coach K would want to go against her. BTW, she's the winningest coach in Division 1 history (men or women).

And players? Candice Parker is scary. She can shoot, she can pass, she can defend, and she can dunk on people. I'm a guy and rooting for Rutgers (NY guy) but she is fun to watch.

attackingpencil		2007-04-03 10:09:04 PM

RE: Pat Summitt
There is far, far less competition in women's ball then in men's. Hence, easier to get wins, especially since there are so few high quality programs.

Not saying she's not a good coach, just saying take the statistics with a grain of salt.

drunk_bouncnbaloruber		2007-04-04 12:02:50 AM

Pat Summit has been offered the position of the men's coach at UT numerous times in the past. She could probably coach them better than Bruce Pearl, Buzz Peterson, Jerry Green, Kevin O'Neill, and Wade Houston combined.

CommiePuddin		2007-04-04 12:32:49 AM

So ESPN should just give up their rights to Division I-A football and Division I basketball by refusing to run the other sport championships, per their contract?

IAmRight		2007-04-04 04:23:03 AM

"Pat Summit has been offered the position of the men's coach at UT numerous times in the past. She could probably coach them better than Bruce Pearl, Buzz Peterson, Jerry Green, Kevin O'Neill, and Wade Houston combined."

Rick Pitino was a top level college coach. Therefore, he could probably coach an NBA team better than Mike D'Antoni, Flip Saunders, and Avery Johnson combined. I mean, they have no championships.

Do you realize how ridiculous the comparisons are? And there's more of a talent difference between men's and women's college basketball than there are between men's college ball and the NBA.

"And players? Candice Parker is scary. She can shoot, she can pass, she can defend, and she can dunk on people. I'm a guy and rooting for Rutgers (NY guy) but she is fun to watch."

And she wouldn't make it off the bench for any mediocre men's team. She can't dunk ON people. she can dunk if there's no one in her way. Isn't she the one that got the gay-ass McDonald's slam dunk title for a wimpy-ass dunk where she covered her eyes (sorta) with her arm halfway in the air there, while all the guys were doing elbow in the rim, windmill, between the legs dunks?

Displayed 35 of 35 comments

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.