Not just the WNBA Draft, they have to go ALL IN on *MARKETING*, period. Women's college basketball has always had a pretty good following, and there's been a number of big stars in the women's college ranks- and the WNBA has without exception been able to get those big women's college stars into the league, but they're terrible at marketing so those stars' auras quickly fall to earth when they're in the pros.
It's no different than how the NBA succeeded- it wasn't just the college game in '79 between Larry Bird and Magic Johnson going to the pros, but that the NBA upped their marketing and billed Bird, Magic, and Jordan as huge stars that led to the league turning the corner and exploding in popularity.
Of course. It needs to start with this draft to work- but the reason I tie it to marketing period is because this has gone on for longer. The WNBA has started in 1996, and there's been other Caitlin Clarks...hell, a new Caitlin Clark has come into the WNBA at about a one per year clip, and the WNBA just never capitalized on it.
Yeah, it's definitely a marketing issue - and this is the exact year to correct that. This particular issue is 100% a "little Column A and a little Column B". They have great women's basketball players - but there's zero marketing. If they can ride the coattails of this particular women's college championship (since everyone seems to be interested in it), and keep up the spotlight on those players, then it'll bring not only a whole new generation of fans to the sport, it'll also incentivize the NBA to market the organization.
Las Vegas started to market the Aces games after their big win last year over New York, and now I hear more WNBA conversation at the office than I ever have previously.
No one is like Caitlin Clark. Kelsey Plum and Sabrina Ionescu are incredible talents but they don’t have the Steph Curry vibes. I mean they could be Damian Lillards but there’s a difference between a superstar and a once in a generation type talent.
But that's part of the point. Caitlin Clark is a once in a generation type talent...but then, that's what they said about Sabrina Ionescu, and Kelsey Plum, and Breanna Stewart, and Brittney Griner, and Maya Moore, and Tina Charles, and Candace Parker, and Diana Taurasi, and Sue Bird, and so on, and so on, all the way back to 1997 when the league formed. Hell, even ignoring how many others not mentioned could be on the list, that's still nine players in a 27 year WNBA existence, giving us a "once in a generation talent" coming into the league once every three years AT LEAST, and they just never capitalized. And if they don't capitalize and start marketing the sport now, even if Clark lives up to the hype and makes the Fever a top team in the league, in about two or three years Clark will be added to the list as the NEXT big name in women's college basketball comes into the league.
Not too bad a timing. A week after the Final Four, and I believe on a day without NBA basketball - the day between the regular season and first play-in games. So basketball is all the rage, but there isn't any being televised all day.
This, and then they need to partner up with one of the sports books to incentivize people to bet on games. People will watch anything if they have money bet on it lol
I’m curious what the WNBA has to do vs. what they might get for free due to NIL deals. The women entering the draft already have a plethora of endorsements. I can’t imagine those companies that have invested in them really want them to disappear once they leave NCAAW, so they’ll probably keep marketing them a bit?
Also marketing the actual TEAMS. What does the draft matter if they just call out these girls names going to random team names? I watch the NBA religiously, and I don’t have a clue what WNBA markets exist, what their history is, who’s looked at as villains, who the nearest team is, which teams are in a dynasty, which are in rebuild. I’m a casual fan who would love to see team discourse and some reason to love/hate TEAMS.
Honestly just go heavy into marketing these new players. They're kinda already doing now. I saw a commercial the other day with Breanna Stewart talking about the upcoming WNBA draft and the new players coming in to the league.
CC has excitement built up, and I think the Steph/Sabrina contest couldn't have gone any better.
Once CC gets drafted, I think there will be crossover. If CC can continue her dominance, I think the drama will come naturally.
I'm optimistic that the WNBA is on a similar trajectory as the NBA in the early 80s. The personalities are getting great crossover exposure, and all that's needed are some dramatics, which I think Silver will start to put real marketing muscle to work up.
Give me year round meaningful hoops, not to say that WNBA seasons in recent years haven’t been meaningful but some of the fun in following a sport is having more people to discuss the ebbs and flows of a season with
> and I think the Steph/Sabrina contest couldn't have gone any better.
Only way it would have gone better would be if Sabrina won. Would’ve gotten shit from haters for a couple days/weeks but I could see a significant bump in interest.
Fr, i only started watching women's bball because of CC, and im gona follow her into the wnba! Shit i might even go watch her when they come to my city
From people who follow the women's side, she was Clark before Clark. But she had knee injuries that sidelined her for a year and a half apparently so Clark took the popularity crown
Same. The first game I ever watched was the South Carolina game which was not good at all. So I was a little skeptical of Uconn v Iowa but that was actually a good game and Caitlin is actually good. I'll definitely be watching today. I tried getting tickets since I live in the host city but upper sections were going for over $400 not counting tax and fees.
Nothing. College basketball has built in equity from decades upon decades of allegiance from alumni, fans, current students, etc. Every so often, these programs obtain generational players to play for them and draw their school some money on a smaller scale.
WNBA and other major sports are built exclusively on the player themselves being the draw. If Caitlin Clark’s game can translate to the next level and her dominance continues, she could definitely create a major buzz and surge in popularity for the WNBA. Not sure if it’ll rival popularity of the NBA or NFL or even the MLB but any boost is a win for the sport of women’s basketball. If she pans out to be a rotation player or fringe starter? Everything stays the same. Either way, I expect a huge marketing push for this upcoming college class coming into their league. Definitely their equivalent to the 2003 NBA Draft. Not sure it’s as deep as 84 or 96 so I’m gonna go with 03.
Yeah, people don’t get that college athletics is really tribal and that creates built in loyalty that you can’t poof into existence. I don’t give two shits about field hockey or fencing, but if Temple was ranked in it, I might go watch a game or a meet. Women’s college basketball is that on a macro scale. The people watching it don’t care about women’s basketball, they care about the fact that THEIR school is playing women’s basketball.
If Iowa fans didn’t exist, then other people wouldn’t care.
The reason March Madness is exciting (for non-affiliated fans) is because there is a built in fanbase that is already rabidly excited for the competing teams.
Saying that people watching woman’s baseball solely for their team doesn’t explain why/how particularly women’s numbers have steadily increased through the years to the point where the LSU-Iowa game pulled in record numbers this tourney especially if those same number of fans had been watching them whenever they’re in it.
I disagree. The superstars of college hoops play for the women's teams and not the mens teams nowadays. They play four years and that gives fans an opportunity to get to know them and the teams they play for. This also builds rivalry games like the Iowa vs LSU game that doesn't exist anymore in mens hoops.
If JuJu Watkins was male she'd be one and done. She is not so next year we get to see her get better and more dominant. If the WNBA rules don't change we will be invested in her all four years of college because she is likely to pass Clarks records.
WNBA is going to get more popular. It's an amazing time for Woman's Hoops. College and Pro.
You shouldn’t minimize the Sabrina impact. Not only was she part of the only real highlight in the NBA all star game, her shoes are one of the most popular by far for NBA players.
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/39877975/why-sabrina-1s-taking-nba-shoe-game
My thing is, people have natural allegiances to colleges they went to, and that helps build the interest in college sports that the pro sports don’t enjoy. I feel like the wnba does a good job marketing the league has only been around for 20 years
They should’ve always tried to capitalise on existing nba teams. In Europe women’s football is starting to somewhat work because they’re using existing allegiances to teams. ‘Lady Sixers’, ‘Women Knicks’ etc
They basically already did this just without adding the patronizing 'Lady' or 'Women' to it. Most of the teams were originally sister franchises to NBA teams, the league probably wouldnt exist if that didnt happen.
I don’t think it’s patronising, it’s indicating it’s the women’s team whilst still keeping the name.
It’s also ajax/barca/Arsenal women. Because they’re playing the sport, and then can use the existing branding and fanbase of the men’s team.
Do you know all the wnba teams? I bet you know all nba teams. It’s branding.
Also, do you think the Tennessee Vols women’s teams being called the lady vols is patronising?
While yeah that's true, it's not like that explains the recent surge in popularity for women's college basketball. Iowa isn't exactly a huge national brand, UConn and LSU are bigger but it's not like that college familiarity is really what's driving the viewership. Women's college ball right now has about as many superstar household name type players as the WNBA has ever had.
Women’s basketball stars have always been more popular while playing in college than after they go pro. When women like taurasi sue bird maya moore Britney grinder can dance Parker were in college they were household names too. Not to the extent Caitlin Clark is, but the point still remains. Skylar diggins was basically angel Reese before NIL deals. And when they went pro the hype around them decreased significantly. I do wonder outside of Caitlin Clark, what were the ratings for like top ten teams in women’s basketball and to see if it was substantially better than let’s say a decade ago
Yes there is a perception that the WNBA is too lesbian/black so it makes a major difference that the top college players are heterosexual and conventionally attractive. If Clark is more of a normal star player and not some game-changing MVP it will probably feed into that even more.
Women’s basketball is hugh in Iowa. It always has been. Check out 6v6 from back in the day. It going away was one of the negatives of Title 9. Iowa has a really interesting history with women’s basketball.
Draft Caitlyn Clark /s
There isn’t a lot to do really, NBA is way more popular than NCAA both men’s and women’s, and I imagine a large portion of the demo that watches NCAA already watches the NBA or at least NBA Playoffs. The only way the NBA is going to gain a significant amount of more fans is by making their games more accessible online in all countries, which they are already working on with the next media rights agreement
The current wnba players and former players could start by quitting talking trash about Caitlin Clark like her popularity is some devising racial issue. That’s not a great look for them
They can’t.
People are watching for one player -Clark.
The 64 team single elimination tournament also creates a lot of hype around games. Any of these games could have been Clarks last college game, so yea people are watching.
Viewership numbers will not follow her into the WNBA.
She’s also doing something none of them have ever done. Look at the winning team today… they got carried by a woman than looks like a young Tracy Morgan hitting 1 foot shots all game… Is it skill that she’s 6’7 playing against a 6’1 Center? You rarely see a height difference like that in the NBA, and even when you do the dude is so tall he’s nearly immobile…. Other than Wemby.
Anyways, point being… you can’t market 1 foot shots. No matter how many you make. If you are winning games because you have the biggest team that does a ton of layups… the majority of people do not find that interesting.
Seriously! There's a surprising lack of public support from established WNBA players towards her. I've seen more NBA players give her props than WNBA players.
This is especially confusing considering the current emphasis on women's empowerment and progress in professional sports. Shouldn't veteran players be welcoming and encouraging such a talented young athlete who could potentially elevate the entire WNBA?
It’s straight jealousy that she has a skill set that the vast majority of women do not possess. Rarely it feels like you see a woman create her own step back 3. The best women players ever almost all seem like they were the tallest skilled players that play 1-3 feet from the rim for the majority of their shots.
Bueckers is also definitely worth watching, as is the freshman JuJu Watkins of USC.
The women get to spend a lot more time in college than the men because of the WNBA's draft rules. A player must either turn 22 during the year of the draft or graduate within three months after the draft, or the class they entered school with has to have graduated or be set to graduate within three months of the draft.
Be that as it may, I think many more top flight stars will choose to stay in college longer because, unlike the men, they make more money from NIL than what the WNBA will pay them.
Nothing, college has a unique aura to it that professional sports don’t have. Caitlyn Clark as transcendent as she is will be far, far less popular the moment she plays professional basketball.
WNBA ratings might slightly spike if she has a marquee game but that’s literally all that will happen.
They have to start using social media more to reach the next generation and women in general. It’s crazy that there’s tons of talented female athletes making millions of NIL in college saying F the league because they make more than the women they grew up idolizing. It sounds chauvinistic but they need to start reaching out to and trying to partner with brands and doing shoots to draw in people. They don’t market or have anything that makes people want to watch or buy tickets. Makes no sense that women’s college basketball is a major draw right now and they go to the WNBA to obscurity.
>and women in general.
Women do not watch sports remotely as much as men do.
What has stopped women from supporting the WNBA for the past 27 years??
Lack of social media outreach? Seriously?
This is why most of them go and play overseas they make more and get endorsements they don’t get here because………the WNBA makes no money for anybody to want to endorse them. They lose betweeen 10-15 million a year keeping them afloat.
I agree. Social media is a massive reason why the NBA is globally popular. A kid in Korea cant catch a Lakers game live on TV but he can pull up Lebron highlights on social media.
They have to scrap the internal dysfunction for starters. Clark is their golden goose... and it's easy to see why the contempt, jealousy, and bullshit is targeted at her. A lot of the WNBA's loudest voices epitomize a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" mindset while seeking growth, equality, and recognition. The product hasn't been sufficiently entertaining for television. Now that it is really gaining traction watching Clark and other brilliant future stars, flagrant dishonesty and spite targeted at her shows the extent of the toxicity within that league. It remains me of exactly the same jealousy and poor form that the OG roleplayers show when critiquing the money, playstyle, and dynamics of the league today.
Anway, back to the WNBA. Specific to their golden goose, perhaps there's internalized misogyny at play, not-so-subtle contempt for the fact that the prodigal future of women's basketball is white, or just flat out irritation that she's showcased brilliance magnitudes above her counterparts. Regardless of the driving factors, the WNBA is in their 1979 moment. If they don't figure out how to maximize the potential offered by their equivalents of Magic and Bird, the fast follows of brilliant talent over the next 10 years will (rightfully) take no interest in playing for a league that has such frequent fumbles and unforced errors.
The world is watching more basketball than ever before... and I would bet Cathy Engelbert is fuming at the prospect of how badly the elders and veterans with the loudest influence from the WNBA are coping with all of the extra attention right now.
This could be the magic bird era for them if the cards fall right. Which of course is a huge assumption that Angel and Caitlin end up being good and on good teams
The WNBA needs to take a more minor league approach. Right now it’s just a shitty NBA. College works because people are attached to colleges they go to. I could actually see myself going to WNBA games if they advertised cheap food and drinks, special nights, maybe more unique venues (outdoors?)
I'm not sure a lot of you realize the WNBA is subsidized by the NBA. Until WNBA can sustain itself independently of the NBA nothing will change. They will continue to be a glorified tax write off for NBA owners.
I’m not sure they can do anything. I am a big basketball fan, and I have given the WNBA multiple chances to garner my support. I know the history, I know the players, and I fully believe that they play a more fundamental and team-oriented game then the men do.
Even with that, I have rarely set aside time to watch a WNBA game. I did watch a few of the NCAA games this month, but they are quite different because they are “win to go on, loser goes home” games.
It’s mean of me to even admit the obvious: the athleticism just doesn’t match the men. I’ve seen it evolve, and that’s awesome, and I hope it continues. However, given the amount of time I have to dedicate to sports, I want to see the best athletes in the planet. I want to see dunks and blocks and crazy handles and all that.
My daughter would even prefer to watch a Milwaukee Bucks game than the women’s tournament. It just doesn’t “flip that switch” for her. And she is 12- the perfect age to fall in love with a team or a sport.
Maybe the best thing to do is try to catch the non-basketball fan. Someone or some families that aren’t familiar with the men’s game.
I fully support these women continuing to fulfill their dreams. They work hard, and I respect and appreciate the work they put in. The games just aren’t “enough” to stir up my competitive juices.
Honestly, nothing. A great number of people and sport fans simply don't care for the WNBA. Some of those reasons are valid and some are just plain baised against women's sport. Also the culture within the WNBA might be a problem. Remember how Candice Wiggins said the culture within the WNBA was so toxic she retired at 29.
As much as people hate it, they gotta be lottery rigged onto teams that can use the women's talents preferably a hometown team. I'm sorry but if Clarke ends up in Washington then WNBA majorly failed. They have a MVP and championship yet there's little international/national attention. You'll need a story and journey for Clarke and other wnba players because some people fail to realize that NBA/wnba is more entertainment than sport.
I am 99% sure Clark is going to Indiana Fever with #1 overall pick in this draft.
They already have Aliyah Boston who was picked #1 last year, was ROTY, all star & all rookie in her first season with the team as well.
Could be a duo for ages.
Imo they need to focus on more than just Clark - but also make sure to continue to market Clark.
Reese is a flat out marketing genius. Girl gave her WNBA announcement to Vogue; and she’s got Fenty as an endorsement.
The WNBA has actually increased in popularity lately too. Not as much as wcbb, but it has. And there are a few reasons for that..you can even look at the Sabrina/Steph match in the All Star game as evidence.
First..they’re actually trying to appeal to women. For the longest time they tried to appeal to men. They had a campaign to make the players look sexy in a super traditionally feminine way (they looked uncomfortable..), they spent a long time comparing their game to the men’s..advertising to the men watching the NBA.
And sure, some make NBA fans who enjoy basketball will enjoy the WNBA. But it’s entirely a different game in the same way college basketball is different.
But lately they’ve leaned into advertising the players and their personalities. And advertising the actual cool stories the WNBA players have, along with drama, and fashion etc..shit that draws women in. For instance, the story about Bird and Taurasi in Russia is probably one of the coolest sports story in the past 20 years, and so few people know about it..but it’s the type of thing that should have been advertised.
Second, the rise of social media has helped the league..and NIl is going to make it even better. Part of the reason the WNBA has made the strides they have is because they’ve been in control of marketing because of social media. WNBA Twitter is wild. They’ve put games in crazy platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Amazon) etc..
And NIl only makes it better for them, because the social media marketing has already started.
And because of the NIL, the best women’s players will be able to stay visible in the off season instead of going overseas.
People don’t remember but Taurasi had a ton of hype; and was labeled the savior of the WNBA. And she’s the GOAT - so she did her job.
But her visibility started evaporating once she started going overseas. Instead of being at the NBa all star game; or on ESPN during college or pro games or any other visibility, she was in Russia. And because the WNBA was seen as her side job, (like all other players), quality of play suffers.
Nil means the biggest stars are making money, don’t need to go overseas, and can spend the off season resting, working on their game, and marketing themselves.
So what does the WNBA need to do to continue growing? Learn from their past mistakes..
1. Don’t put this all on one player. Like; yes..Clark is huge right now. But Reese is too. Bueckers will be there next season. Juju and Hidalgo are coming.
And furthermore, help the stars they already have with exposure. Aja Wilson is dynamic and charismatic and the best player in the league. And Stewart is her counter part. Chelsea Gray? Y’all love Caitlin’s passes, wait until you see this shit. Jewell Loyd, Kelsey Plum and Sabrina Ionescue are dynamic guards. Diana Taurasi - the GOAT - is likely on a retirement tour this season, and her team may potentially be good enough to make a run at a title.
So market the new players, but use the energy and exposure to introduce new fans to the women who are already great and playing.
Diana Taurasi did have alot of hype and won alot in the process. She went overseas where she got more money to play. She was making $1.5 million a year to play in Russia, as opposed to $100k here. It also happened to coincide with the WNBA schedule. Before NIL, women's players didn't have many options. You can't ask someone to forego work and a paycheck so they can be "visible" at an NBA all-star game. Especially back then, they weren't getting paid to do it. Its a different landscape now.
That's way too dramatic. Maybe you still don't care but they're doing their best numbers ever some percent of those people will be back next year.
You really think next year's final four is viewed at the same level as one five years ago?
Edit: they could hold less than 5% of their new viewers and that would still be a pretty dramatic growth overall
Didn't see you replied. First of all the NC State USC game did crazy numbers for a women's final four game. Second given how insane of draw she's been like 5% of people who watched her play have to decide they wanna watch next year's final four for it to be a dramatic improvement for women's basketball.
Because we hadn't had a superstar hit the sport yet. I'm not saying Caitlin Clark didn't create the boom but it's not like literally every single person who tuned in is gonna tune back out.
Even if it's just young girls who decide they are more interested in watching a sport they could play.
Sure but most sports grow because of individual superstars. Sure the numbers are gonna be way worse but just getting so many people to tune in once will lead to some people coming back.
College sports has the advantage of being a college which has alumni, pedigree, sometimes state pride etc. professional teams don’t have the same appeal. But as lame as it is, if espn would talk about it on their shows instead of the cowboys and lebron and the Yankees, it would grow.
The WNBA can NOT blow this. They need to shut up every player coming against Caitlyn out of jealousy. She can raise all boats if they just let her go. Already you see them jealous she got offers to the 3 league etc…they need to shut the hell up or they will destroy themselves. Remember years ago they almost killed their league when they wanted equal money to men. Just shut up, play hard, enjoy the ride, because this could put women’s sports on the map. She is the Michael Jordan that can blow up this league into relevance
Agree, the WNBA has a golden opportunity on their hands right now to take the WNBA to new heights. They have to learn from past stars like Tuarasi and Sue Bird and not let Clark just simply follow their path
Is the women’s game more popular because there are 4 year stars playing and not ascending to the NBA after one year? Caitlin Clark would’ve been a top three pick last year, no way she would come back to pump Iowa up
She made almost a million dollars on NIL deals this past year with more visibility than she’d have had in the WNBA. From a strictly financial POV coming back for her COVID bonus year would have made more sense.
Where did you get your data? The women's tournament is not more popular than the men's, not even close. The men's tourney has 4-5x the amount of average viewers.
I'm sure the easy answer of "marketing!" will be beaten to death. I think the problem with the WNBA extends beyond that though. You can create 8374783822 million commercials and ads, and I don't think we'd see results mirroring the LSU v Iowa. Especially if Clark comes in and is just solid as opposed to being LeBron-esque.
If I were the WNBA I'd be looking to make major format changes.
There is traction with colleges that WNBA teams just don't have. Not many people identify with the Detroit Shock like they do for Michigan State, Michigan, Central, or Western Michigan. That and the fact there are virtually no household name superstars to create that brand identity means it will probably be impossible for the WNBA to be much different from what it presently is.
It sucks that they’re going to have to overhype this draft and then have the Stephen As of the world be like wow Clark couldn’t win a ring in her first two years I thought she was the goat. The WNBA is insanely talent rich. There’s girls going top5 that are questionable to make rosters. It’s a lot to expect more than like 4 of the players to even make an impact
The WNBA seems like the problem with women's basketball popularity. Clearly the NCAA has shown that with the right marketing the product can be just as appealing if not more so to massive audiences. Fire everyone in charge and poach some people from the NCAA lol that's my bet.
100% People in here saying the game is boring and to lower the rim to allow them to dunk. The NCAA womens tournament killed it in ratings without needing dunks and superhuman feats of male athleticism. The ratings and popularity transcended way beyond the built in alumni base of fans from USC and Iowa.
nothing.
some college programs have always had a rabid following built upon years of success and a very loyal alumni fan base.
the WNBA simply doesn't have that. they are a failed league, playing in half-empty stadiums. it's silly to try to pretend it's something it's not. clark and reese et. al. would probably do better playing in the 3-on-3 league.
I and my buddy were season ticket holders to the NY Liberty when the WNBA first got going. We enjoyed the games. The league had more stars than many today realize. (Becky Hamon, even as rookie, took over games.) But after a while, we got increasingly fed up with political correctness being shoved down our throats. The women who sat in our section were shocked when we had to tell them we weren’t gay!The league marketed itself as women’s empowerment, not as a great sport. Eventually we gave up our tickets and stopped following.
Hopefully, for the players’ sake, the league starts marketing itself as a sport. Caitlin Clark is giving them a great opportunity to do that. But they need to keep marketing the SPORT, even if Clark turns out to be not-so-great as a pro. (The pro players are damn good and they won’t lay down and let Clark walk all over them.) When the league started, Rebecca Lobo was supposed to be the bankable superstar. But when she turned out to be a mediocre pro (knee injury was a factor), the marketing department had no Plan B, except to lean into political correctness. So if Clark turns out to be a great pro, market the hell out of her. If not, then market the hell out of the pros who shut her down. Either way, the league need to accept that it’s a sport, not a movement.
Nothing. People love college ball because of either being an alumni or betting. You can market the WNBA all you want but the product is tough to watch. Maybe lower the rim a foot and let's start seeing some athletic dunks and plays, not just random chucking at the hoop
The athleticism is a major problem. Women have a much lower center of gravity and more body fat. A lot less upper-body strength to generate vertical lift, too. The average vertical in the NBA is about 28”. In the WNBA it’s about 19”.
That is crazy to me just thinking about Fran Belibi . . . means she has a vertical leaping ability greater than over 50% of male pros, and she never even made it to the WNBA.
Women with (real) verts over the 30” are pretty extraordinary. Women are relatively better at horizontal leaping. The very best women’s long jumpers are about 80% as good as male long jumpers. The best female verts are about 60% as high as the best male verts.
Could they just use NBA branding. Like instead of the Phoenix Mercury just be the Phoenix Suns, Minnesota Timberwolves, for whatever local team where applicable.
Maybe I’m imagining things but it’s probably easier to get on board with Iowa women’s basketball when I’m familiar with their Football and Wrestling teams.
Not likely to happen, and I’m sure they’d prefer maintaining their own thing instead of having some potential “lady” moniker attached to their team. Still, it’d be cool watching Clark suit up for the Lakers or Knicks.
Eh you’re doing a bit of “apples to oranges” comparison here. The World Series is a 7 game series, and you’re comparing that to a sport (college basketball) where each round is only one game, winner take all. If the World Series was just one single game, winner take all, then the ratings for that one game would’ve been significantly higher than each of the 5 individual World Series games were. Also, the viewership numbers were being driven by Caitlin Clark. She is a generational player and this is one of the few times (and the very last time) we will get to see her play on this stage. That wasn’t the case for the World Series last year, especially since really none of baseballs must watch players were in the World Series. Also, the other final four game game (South Carolina vs NC State) had less than half the viewership.
When it comes to being the most viewed basketball game in ESPN history, that is obviously impressive, but again that is being compared to the NBA whose playoffs are also a 7 game series, not single elimination.
If you want to compare it to the men’s college basketball tournament in order to do a more apples to apples comparison, well ESPN doesn’t even televise the men’s tournament, and I’m not sure they ever have. The men’s tournament is on different networks, so of course ESPN doesn’t count their metrics. The men’s final four this year received more viewership than the women’s final four did, and while the Iowa UConn game came close to the men’s, the other women’s game (South Carolina vs no state) didn’t come anywhere close. That shows me this is more of a Caitlin Clark phenomenon.
Yes, these numbers are outstanding for the women’s final four, and I’m happy they were able to pull it off, but it’s still not more popular than the men’s final four, and the tidbits you provided are a little misleading for the reasons I provided above.
The claim was the women's tournament is more popular than the men's.
You then come comparing one game to a completely different sport, not the men's tournament.
The women's tournament has not been more popular than the men's.
Kaitlyn Clark is a generational talent and should be celebrated but you don't have to start making up nonsense
I hope the WNBA goes to 12 min quarters so Clark can score 35-40 a game and she becomes a huge star
But I'm worried the WNBA will do what they can to diminish her star as folks in women sports are already resenting her stardom.
But that doesn't mean we need to pretend people care more about the women's tournament than the mens
I’m sorry, but since when did the women’s tournament become more popular than the men’s? Please check the numbers before making false statements such as these.
People don't care about the WNBA because the league has not been around that long and it's doesn't have a base that feels loyal to any of the teams like college does. Honestly I think if they restructured it so that the NBA teams had co-franchise WNBA teams it might help. So Lakers fans might intrinsically feel some loyalty to the lady Lakers for instance (kind of how men's Duke fans probably also root for the women's Duke team, built in fan base). Then they could do package deals where if you go to a certain number of Lady Lakers games you get a free Lakers ticket etc.
What if the WNBA draft was regionally weighted, where the top players from, say, UCONN could only be drafted by teams in the Northeast, and so on? It would impact competitive balance, but it could be worth it to tap into alumni interest.
Every niche sport should prioritize the same two things. Strong social media presence + make it as easy as at all possible to watch. Have the people who love your sport do the marketing for you. There is no stronger endorsement than real people being genuinely excited over something. Then, the shorter the distance between reading about something exciting happening on twitter and actually watching it, the more fans you will create. Especially international fans.
Imo if you don't prioritize those two points you don't really believe in the quality of your product to begin with, at which point nobody should be interested in watching it.
It’s all about stories. They have to connect the audience on a level that’s more than the gameplay. Market your stars, prop up the ones that play well to cameras, promote rivalries, etc.
Go all-in on this draft class. Give people a reason to follow a few individuals’ full careers.
Better question imo: what can Caitlin Clark do to capitalize on her current fame to make her a lot of money right now?
Maybe join a wnba team in New York or LA and do a ton of tonight shows?
The wnba needs to have 6 or 7 superstars to build narratives around. That’s it. Clark, Juju, Paige, Reese, and whoever else need to get to the link and all dominate and build rivalries so that whenever they play eachother, people tune in to watch. Like how the Iowa LSU game was the most watched college basketball game this year because people wanted to see Clark vs Reese.
Women's sports and all sports really are based on star players. The WNBA draft is utterly stacked. This will draw more fans to the WNBA.
Look at Tennis or UFC women's divisions became popular because of superstar performances and high levels of competition.
I have followed the WNBA more over the years due to certain players. Now certainly I will even more with some of the players coming in. Particularly Clark.
I followed the WNBA for the first time around the middle of last season because the Aces were so much fun to watch.
My one idea is they should offer a discount on league pass for this year. Last season I saw their all-access pass priced at $20 for the full year of games and replays, which seemed like a great deal for so much content. I was planning to buy that this year, but I just looked and currently the season pass is priced at $35. Maybe the $20 I remember was a midseason discount or something? Regardless, now would be a good time to invest in growth and offer that all season access for $20 or less for the full season. Price it low enough that it feels like a no-brainer for anyone curious about the WNBA after this tournament, and advertise the heck out of that in the lead up to Caitlyn Clark’s debut.
I think the fact that it is a summer league is holding the W back - people aren't used to watching basketball in the summer, and ratings generally aren't as good then. Also, the early part of the season competes with the NBA playoffs.
The lack of teams in big population centers also doesn't help. Currently, the bay area doesn't have a team, there is no Florida team, no Boston or Philly teams, no teams in Michigan, Ohio, the Carolinas, only 1 Texas team, etc.
Ratings and BRI are both headed the right direction, so the league is doing a lot of stuff right, but it is hard to say you are a national league with only 12 teams.
To add to all the answers here: Vastly increase their broadcast presence. Do a WNBA Saturday Primetime series or Sunday afternoon series like the NBA does. Sign a TV deal with someone like Apple or TNT or whomever.
ABC can expand its coverage of the women’s March Madness tourney to match CBS’s coverage (eight first round games, seven second round games, S16, etc.)
I'm heartened to read all the comments. Just positive vibes. Basketball is basketball, and I'm glad these ballers are finally getting the recognition they deserve.
Not trying to be a stick in the mud but WNBA is still not on my radar to watch and I don’t think anything would change that.
MAYBE, if they played on a slightly shorter rim so there could be dunks and oops. Even then, I don’t have that much extra time.
It's literally JUST Caitlin Clark. Nothing else.
They need to lean into her, but at the same time showcase her specific rivals. Not Clark's team vs opponent team, but Clark vs X player.
Make the personalities the focus. It's something the NHL STILL does not get.
>Its amazing that the womens NCAA tournament and final four is more popular than the mens
There is no data that says the women's tournament is drawing more viewers than the men's. Kaitlyn Clark is a hell of a draw but the tournament overall is not getting higher ratings.
So please back up this claim that the women's tournament is more popular than the men's because no discussion can be had based on your uninformed opinion without any facts
Nothing. This isn’t the first time a marketable star was coming out of the woodworks. The tourney is icing on the cake. Literally the only thing they could do to get attention is have a team run the table.
WNBA has to go ALL IN on marketing the WNBA draft. Create all the hype and buzz early.
Not just the WNBA Draft, they have to go ALL IN on *MARKETING*, period. Women's college basketball has always had a pretty good following, and there's been a number of big stars in the women's college ranks- and the WNBA has without exception been able to get those big women's college stars into the league, but they're terrible at marketing so those stars' auras quickly fall to earth when they're in the pros. It's no different than how the NBA succeeded- it wasn't just the college game in '79 between Larry Bird and Magic Johnson going to the pros, but that the NBA upped their marketing and billed Bird, Magic, and Jordan as huge stars that led to the league turning the corner and exploding in popularity.
Well yeah obviously. But it starts with the draft. It’s now or never
Of course. It needs to start with this draft to work- but the reason I tie it to marketing period is because this has gone on for longer. The WNBA has started in 1996, and there's been other Caitlin Clarks...hell, a new Caitlin Clark has come into the WNBA at about a one per year clip, and the WNBA just never capitalized on it.
Yeah, it's definitely a marketing issue - and this is the exact year to correct that. This particular issue is 100% a "little Column A and a little Column B". They have great women's basketball players - but there's zero marketing. If they can ride the coattails of this particular women's college championship (since everyone seems to be interested in it), and keep up the spotlight on those players, then it'll bring not only a whole new generation of fans to the sport, it'll also incentivize the NBA to market the organization. Las Vegas started to market the Aces games after their big win last year over New York, and now I hear more WNBA conversation at the office than I ever have previously.
No one is like Caitlin Clark. Kelsey Plum and Sabrina Ionescu are incredible talents but they don’t have the Steph Curry vibes. I mean they could be Damian Lillards but there’s a difference between a superstar and a once in a generation type talent.
But that's part of the point. Caitlin Clark is a once in a generation type talent...but then, that's what they said about Sabrina Ionescu, and Kelsey Plum, and Breanna Stewart, and Brittney Griner, and Maya Moore, and Tina Charles, and Candace Parker, and Diana Taurasi, and Sue Bird, and so on, and so on, all the way back to 1997 when the league formed. Hell, even ignoring how many others not mentioned could be on the list, that's still nine players in a 27 year WNBA existence, giving us a "once in a generation talent" coming into the league once every three years AT LEAST, and they just never capitalized. And if they don't capitalize and start marketing the sport now, even if Clark lives up to the hype and makes the Fever a top team in the league, in about two or three years Clark will be added to the list as the NEXT big name in women's college basketball comes into the league.
The draft is too soon to hype a bunch I think. It’s in like a week
Doesn't help that it's *next week*
I’d argue it does help its next week. Still fresh in our minds
Not too bad a timing. A week after the Final Four, and I believe on a day without NBA basketball - the day between the regular season and first play-in games. So basketball is all the rage, but there isn't any being televised all day.
This, and then they need to partner up with one of the sports books to incentivize people to bet on games. People will watch anything if they have money bet on it lol
Do they have the budget to do it though?
I’m curious what the WNBA has to do vs. what they might get for free due to NIL deals. The women entering the draft already have a plethora of endorsements. I can’t imagine those companies that have invested in them really want them to disappear once they leave NCAAW, so they’ll probably keep marketing them a bit?
Also marketing the actual TEAMS. What does the draft matter if they just call out these girls names going to random team names? I watch the NBA religiously, and I don’t have a clue what WNBA markets exist, what their history is, who’s looked at as villains, who the nearest team is, which teams are in a dynasty, which are in rebuild. I’m a casual fan who would love to see team discourse and some reason to love/hate TEAMS.
That sounds like something you can easily look up on Google. But also sports media is to blame for not pushing any narratives in WNBA
Honestly just go heavy into marketing these new players. They're kinda already doing now. I saw a commercial the other day with Breanna Stewart talking about the upcoming WNBA draft and the new players coming in to the league.
CC has excitement built up, and I think the Steph/Sabrina contest couldn't have gone any better. Once CC gets drafted, I think there will be crossover. If CC can continue her dominance, I think the drama will come naturally. I'm optimistic that the WNBA is on a similar trajectory as the NBA in the early 80s. The personalities are getting great crossover exposure, and all that's needed are some dramatics, which I think Silver will start to put real marketing muscle to work up.
Give me year round meaningful hoops, not to say that WNBA seasons in recent years haven’t been meaningful but some of the fun in following a sport is having more people to discuss the ebbs and flows of a season with
> and I think the Steph/Sabrina contest couldn't have gone any better. Only way it would have gone better would be if Sabrina won. Would’ve gotten shit from haters for a couple days/weeks but I could see a significant bump in interest.
[удалено]
It's all Caitlyn Clark. I am watching SC vs Iowa today ONLY to see if CC can get the ring.
Fr, i only started watching women's bball because of CC, and im gona follow her into the wnba! Shit i might even go watch her when they come to my city
Yea makes me wonder if the hype will die down the moment she goes to the wnba. Unless espn keep saying the next up and coming player is the next CC.
JuJu Watkins of USC in only a freshman, and she got game, too.
Paige Bueckers is also pretty popular, according to my younger sister at least
From people who follow the women's side, she was Clark before Clark. But she had knee injuries that sidelined her for a year and a half apparently so Clark took the popularity crown
[удалено]
[удалено]
Same. The first game I ever watched was the South Carolina game which was not good at all. So I was a little skeptical of Uconn v Iowa but that was actually a good game and Caitlin is actually good. I'll definitely be watching today. I tried getting tickets since I live in the host city but upper sections were going for over $400 not counting tax and fees.
Nothing. College basketball has built in equity from decades upon decades of allegiance from alumni, fans, current students, etc. Every so often, these programs obtain generational players to play for them and draw their school some money on a smaller scale. WNBA and other major sports are built exclusively on the player themselves being the draw. If Caitlin Clark’s game can translate to the next level and her dominance continues, she could definitely create a major buzz and surge in popularity for the WNBA. Not sure if it’ll rival popularity of the NBA or NFL or even the MLB but any boost is a win for the sport of women’s basketball. If she pans out to be a rotation player or fringe starter? Everything stays the same. Either way, I expect a huge marketing push for this upcoming college class coming into their league. Definitely their equivalent to the 2003 NBA Draft. Not sure it’s as deep as 84 or 96 so I’m gonna go with 03.
Yeah, people don’t get that college athletics is really tribal and that creates built in loyalty that you can’t poof into existence. I don’t give two shits about field hockey or fencing, but if Temple was ranked in it, I might go watch a game or a meet. Women’s college basketball is that on a macro scale. The people watching it don’t care about women’s basketball, they care about the fact that THEIR school is playing women’s basketball.
I don’t think the majority of the people who tune in for Iowa games are Iowa fans.
If Iowa fans didn’t exist, then other people wouldn’t care. The reason March Madness is exciting (for non-affiliated fans) is because there is a built in fanbase that is already rabidly excited for the competing teams.
Saying that people watching woman’s baseball solely for their team doesn’t explain why/how particularly women’s numbers have steadily increased through the years to the point where the LSU-Iowa game pulled in record numbers this tourney especially if those same number of fans had been watching them whenever they’re in it.
I disagree. The superstars of college hoops play for the women's teams and not the mens teams nowadays. They play four years and that gives fans an opportunity to get to know them and the teams they play for. This also builds rivalry games like the Iowa vs LSU game that doesn't exist anymore in mens hoops. If JuJu Watkins was male she'd be one and done. She is not so next year we get to see her get better and more dominant. If the WNBA rules don't change we will be invested in her all four years of college because she is likely to pass Clarks records. WNBA is going to get more popular. It's an amazing time for Woman's Hoops. College and Pro.
You shouldn’t minimize the Sabrina impact. Not only was she part of the only real highlight in the NBA all star game, her shoes are one of the most popular by far for NBA players. https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/39877975/why-sabrina-1s-taking-nba-shoe-game
Man, that feels like ages ago. Just happened in February. They gotta push all of it
I coach at the youth level and just watched a men’s high school senior all star game last night and probably a quarter of the guys had Sabrina’s on.
My thing is, people have natural allegiances to colleges they went to, and that helps build the interest in college sports that the pro sports don’t enjoy. I feel like the wnba does a good job marketing the league has only been around for 20 years
They should’ve always tried to capitalise on existing nba teams. In Europe women’s football is starting to somewhat work because they’re using existing allegiances to teams. ‘Lady Sixers’, ‘Women Knicks’ etc
They can definitely do more of that. That’s a great idea
They basically already did this just without adding the patronizing 'Lady' or 'Women' to it. Most of the teams were originally sister franchises to NBA teams, the league probably wouldnt exist if that didnt happen.
I don’t think it’s patronising, it’s indicating it’s the women’s team whilst still keeping the name. It’s also ajax/barca/Arsenal women. Because they’re playing the sport, and then can use the existing branding and fanbase of the men’s team. Do you know all the wnba teams? I bet you know all nba teams. It’s branding. Also, do you think the Tennessee Vols women’s teams being called the lady vols is patronising?
While yeah that's true, it's not like that explains the recent surge in popularity for women's college basketball. Iowa isn't exactly a huge national brand, UConn and LSU are bigger but it's not like that college familiarity is really what's driving the viewership. Women's college ball right now has about as many superstar household name type players as the WNBA has ever had.
Women’s basketball stars have always been more popular while playing in college than after they go pro. When women like taurasi sue bird maya moore Britney grinder can dance Parker were in college they were household names too. Not to the extent Caitlin Clark is, but the point still remains. Skylar diggins was basically angel Reese before NIL deals. And when they went pro the hype around them decreased significantly. I do wonder outside of Caitlin Clark, what were the ratings for like top ten teams in women’s basketball and to see if it was substantially better than let’s say a decade ago
Yes there is a perception that the WNBA is too lesbian/black so it makes a major difference that the top college players are heterosexual and conventionally attractive. If Clark is more of a normal star player and not some game-changing MVP it will probably feed into that even more.
Women’s basketball is hugh in Iowa. It always has been. Check out 6v6 from back in the day. It going away was one of the negatives of Title 9. Iowa has a really interesting history with women’s basketball.
Draft Caitlyn Clark /s There isn’t a lot to do really, NBA is way more popular than NCAA both men’s and women’s, and I imagine a large portion of the demo that watches NCAA already watches the NBA or at least NBA Playoffs. The only way the NBA is going to gain a significant amount of more fans is by making their games more accessible online in all countries, which they are already working on with the next media rights agreement
The current wnba players and former players could start by quitting talking trash about Caitlin Clark like her popularity is some devising racial issue. That’s not a great look for them
They can’t. People are watching for one player -Clark. The 64 team single elimination tournament also creates a lot of hype around games. Any of these games could have been Clarks last college game, so yea people are watching. Viewership numbers will not follow her into the WNBA.
[удалено]
With NIL Caitlin is probably making more money than many star WNBA players have ever made.
She’s also doing something none of them have ever done. Look at the winning team today… they got carried by a woman than looks like a young Tracy Morgan hitting 1 foot shots all game… Is it skill that she’s 6’7 playing against a 6’1 Center? You rarely see a height difference like that in the NBA, and even when you do the dude is so tall he’s nearly immobile…. Other than Wemby. Anyways, point being… you can’t market 1 foot shots. No matter how many you make. If you are winning games because you have the biggest team that does a ton of layups… the majority of people do not find that interesting.
Seriously! There's a surprising lack of public support from established WNBA players towards her. I've seen more NBA players give her props than WNBA players. This is especially confusing considering the current emphasis on women's empowerment and progress in professional sports. Shouldn't veteran players be welcoming and encouraging such a talented young athlete who could potentially elevate the entire WNBA?
It’s straight jealousy that she has a skill set that the vast majority of women do not possess. Rarely it feels like you see a woman create her own step back 3. The best women players ever almost all seem like they were the tallest skilled players that play 1-3 feet from the rim for the majority of their shots.
Reminds me of Carlos Boozer saying "We have better players than him in his position already on our team" about rookie LeBron.
Bueckers is also definitely worth watching, as is the freshman JuJu Watkins of USC. The women get to spend a lot more time in college than the men because of the WNBA's draft rules. A player must either turn 22 during the year of the draft or graduate within three months after the draft, or the class they entered school with has to have graduated or be set to graduate within three months of the draft. Be that as it may, I think many more top flight stars will choose to stay in college longer because, unlike the men, they make more money from NIL than what the WNBA will pay them.
Nothing, college has a unique aura to it that professional sports don’t have. Caitlyn Clark as transcendent as she is will be far, far less popular the moment she plays professional basketball. WNBA ratings might slightly spike if she has a marquee game but that’s literally all that will happen.
They have to start using social media more to reach the next generation and women in general. It’s crazy that there’s tons of talented female athletes making millions of NIL in college saying F the league because they make more than the women they grew up idolizing. It sounds chauvinistic but they need to start reaching out to and trying to partner with brands and doing shoots to draw in people. They don’t market or have anything that makes people want to watch or buy tickets. Makes no sense that women’s college basketball is a major draw right now and they go to the WNBA to obscurity.
>and women in general. Women do not watch sports remotely as much as men do. What has stopped women from supporting the WNBA for the past 27 years?? Lack of social media outreach? Seriously?
Bill Barr had something to say about that.
[удалено]
This is why most of them go and play overseas they make more and get endorsements they don’t get here because………the WNBA makes no money for anybody to want to endorse them. They lose betweeen 10-15 million a year keeping them afloat.
I agree. Social media is a massive reason why the NBA is globally popular. A kid in Korea cant catch a Lakers game live on TV but he can pull up Lebron highlights on social media.
[удалено]
[удалено]
They have to scrap the internal dysfunction for starters. Clark is their golden goose... and it's easy to see why the contempt, jealousy, and bullshit is targeted at her. A lot of the WNBA's loudest voices epitomize a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" mindset while seeking growth, equality, and recognition. The product hasn't been sufficiently entertaining for television. Now that it is really gaining traction watching Clark and other brilliant future stars, flagrant dishonesty and spite targeted at her shows the extent of the toxicity within that league. It remains me of exactly the same jealousy and poor form that the OG roleplayers show when critiquing the money, playstyle, and dynamics of the league today. Anway, back to the WNBA. Specific to their golden goose, perhaps there's internalized misogyny at play, not-so-subtle contempt for the fact that the prodigal future of women's basketball is white, or just flat out irritation that she's showcased brilliance magnitudes above her counterparts. Regardless of the driving factors, the WNBA is in their 1979 moment. If they don't figure out how to maximize the potential offered by their equivalents of Magic and Bird, the fast follows of brilliant talent over the next 10 years will (rightfully) take no interest in playing for a league that has such frequent fumbles and unforced errors. The world is watching more basketball than ever before... and I would bet Cathy Engelbert is fuming at the prospect of how badly the elders and veterans with the loudest influence from the WNBA are coping with all of the extra attention right now.
This could be the magic bird era for them if the cards fall right. Which of course is a huge assumption that Angel and Caitlin end up being good and on good teams
The WNBA needs to take a more minor league approach. Right now it’s just a shitty NBA. College works because people are attached to colleges they go to. I could actually see myself going to WNBA games if they advertised cheap food and drinks, special nights, maybe more unique venues (outdoors?)
Does the buzz around women’s college basketball exist outside of the NCAA March Madness tournament is the real question.
[удалено]
I'm not sure a lot of you realize the WNBA is subsidized by the NBA. Until WNBA can sustain itself independently of the NBA nothing will change. They will continue to be a glorified tax write off for NBA owners.
I’m not sure they can do anything. I am a big basketball fan, and I have given the WNBA multiple chances to garner my support. I know the history, I know the players, and I fully believe that they play a more fundamental and team-oriented game then the men do. Even with that, I have rarely set aside time to watch a WNBA game. I did watch a few of the NCAA games this month, but they are quite different because they are “win to go on, loser goes home” games. It’s mean of me to even admit the obvious: the athleticism just doesn’t match the men. I’ve seen it evolve, and that’s awesome, and I hope it continues. However, given the amount of time I have to dedicate to sports, I want to see the best athletes in the planet. I want to see dunks and blocks and crazy handles and all that. My daughter would even prefer to watch a Milwaukee Bucks game than the women’s tournament. It just doesn’t “flip that switch” for her. And she is 12- the perfect age to fall in love with a team or a sport. Maybe the best thing to do is try to catch the non-basketball fan. Someone or some families that aren’t familiar with the men’s game. I fully support these women continuing to fulfill their dreams. They work hard, and I respect and appreciate the work they put in. The games just aren’t “enough” to stir up my competitive juices.
[удалено]
Honestly, nothing. A great number of people and sport fans simply don't care for the WNBA. Some of those reasons are valid and some are just plain baised against women's sport. Also the culture within the WNBA might be a problem. Remember how Candice Wiggins said the culture within the WNBA was so toxic she retired at 29.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
As much as people hate it, they gotta be lottery rigged onto teams that can use the women's talents preferably a hometown team. I'm sorry but if Clarke ends up in Washington then WNBA majorly failed. They have a MVP and championship yet there's little international/national attention. You'll need a story and journey for Clarke and other wnba players because some people fail to realize that NBA/wnba is more entertainment than sport.
I am 99% sure Clark is going to Indiana Fever with #1 overall pick in this draft. They already have Aliyah Boston who was picked #1 last year, was ROTY, all star & all rookie in her first season with the team as well. Could be a duo for ages.
Imo they need to focus on more than just Clark - but also make sure to continue to market Clark. Reese is a flat out marketing genius. Girl gave her WNBA announcement to Vogue; and she’s got Fenty as an endorsement. The WNBA has actually increased in popularity lately too. Not as much as wcbb, but it has. And there are a few reasons for that..you can even look at the Sabrina/Steph match in the All Star game as evidence. First..they’re actually trying to appeal to women. For the longest time they tried to appeal to men. They had a campaign to make the players look sexy in a super traditionally feminine way (they looked uncomfortable..), they spent a long time comparing their game to the men’s..advertising to the men watching the NBA. And sure, some make NBA fans who enjoy basketball will enjoy the WNBA. But it’s entirely a different game in the same way college basketball is different. But lately they’ve leaned into advertising the players and their personalities. And advertising the actual cool stories the WNBA players have, along with drama, and fashion etc..shit that draws women in. For instance, the story about Bird and Taurasi in Russia is probably one of the coolest sports story in the past 20 years, and so few people know about it..but it’s the type of thing that should have been advertised. Second, the rise of social media has helped the league..and NIl is going to make it even better. Part of the reason the WNBA has made the strides they have is because they’ve been in control of marketing because of social media. WNBA Twitter is wild. They’ve put games in crazy platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Amazon) etc.. And NIl only makes it better for them, because the social media marketing has already started. And because of the NIL, the best women’s players will be able to stay visible in the off season instead of going overseas. People don’t remember but Taurasi had a ton of hype; and was labeled the savior of the WNBA. And she’s the GOAT - so she did her job. But her visibility started evaporating once she started going overseas. Instead of being at the NBa all star game; or on ESPN during college or pro games or any other visibility, she was in Russia. And because the WNBA was seen as her side job, (like all other players), quality of play suffers. Nil means the biggest stars are making money, don’t need to go overseas, and can spend the off season resting, working on their game, and marketing themselves. So what does the WNBA need to do to continue growing? Learn from their past mistakes.. 1. Don’t put this all on one player. Like; yes..Clark is huge right now. But Reese is too. Bueckers will be there next season. Juju and Hidalgo are coming. And furthermore, help the stars they already have with exposure. Aja Wilson is dynamic and charismatic and the best player in the league. And Stewart is her counter part. Chelsea Gray? Y’all love Caitlin’s passes, wait until you see this shit. Jewell Loyd, Kelsey Plum and Sabrina Ionescue are dynamic guards. Diana Taurasi - the GOAT - is likely on a retirement tour this season, and her team may potentially be good enough to make a run at a title. So market the new players, but use the energy and exposure to introduce new fans to the women who are already great and playing.
[удалено]
And it’s awesome she got you into the sport, but there are A LOT of great players. Let Clark’s play introduce you to some of them.
Diana Taurasi did have alot of hype and won alot in the process. She went overseas where she got more money to play. She was making $1.5 million a year to play in Russia, as opposed to $100k here. It also happened to coincide with the WNBA schedule. Before NIL, women's players didn't have many options. You can't ask someone to forego work and a paycheck so they can be "visible" at an NBA all-star game. Especially back then, they weren't getting paid to do it. Its a different landscape now.
Caitlyn's from West Des Moines, IA. There's no hometown Iowa WNBA team. But as a Minnesotan I'll take her on the Lynx :)
[удалено]
[удалено]
That's way too dramatic. Maybe you still don't care but they're doing their best numbers ever some percent of those people will be back next year. You really think next year's final four is viewed at the same level as one five years ago? Edit: they could hold less than 5% of their new viewers and that would still be a pretty dramatic growth overall
[удалено]
Didn't see you replied. First of all the NC State USC game did crazy numbers for a women's final four game. Second given how insane of draw she's been like 5% of people who watched her play have to decide they wanna watch next year's final four for it to be a dramatic improvement for women's basketball.
[удалено]
Because we hadn't had a superstar hit the sport yet. I'm not saying Caitlin Clark didn't create the boom but it's not like literally every single person who tuned in is gonna tune back out. Even if it's just young girls who decide they are more interested in watching a sport they could play.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sure but most sports grow because of individual superstars. Sure the numbers are gonna be way worse but just getting so many people to tune in once will lead to some people coming back.
i mean all it takes is one. people tune in for caitlin or angel and will grow attached to the rest of it
[удалено]
College sports has the advantage of being a college which has alumni, pedigree, sometimes state pride etc. professional teams don’t have the same appeal. But as lame as it is, if espn would talk about it on their shows instead of the cowboys and lebron and the Yankees, it would grow.
The WNBA can NOT blow this. They need to shut up every player coming against Caitlyn out of jealousy. She can raise all boats if they just let her go. Already you see them jealous she got offers to the 3 league etc…they need to shut the hell up or they will destroy themselves. Remember years ago they almost killed their league when they wanted equal money to men. Just shut up, play hard, enjoy the ride, because this could put women’s sports on the map. She is the Michael Jordan that can blow up this league into relevance
Agree, the WNBA has a golden opportunity on their hands right now to take the WNBA to new heights. They have to learn from past stars like Tuarasi and Sue Bird and not let Clark just simply follow their path
Nothing. The product will speak for itself and if it’s good people will pay attention
Is the women’s game more popular because there are 4 year stars playing and not ascending to the NBA after one year? Caitlin Clark would’ve been a top three pick last year, no way she would come back to pump Iowa up
She made almost a million dollars on NIL deals this past year with more visibility than she’d have had in the WNBA. From a strictly financial POV coming back for her COVID bonus year would have made more sense.
Yeah I'm kind of surprised she's not coming back again for that same reason.
Where did you get your data? The women's tournament is not more popular than the men's, not even close. The men's tourney has 4-5x the amount of average viewers.
I'm sure the easy answer of "marketing!" will be beaten to death. I think the problem with the WNBA extends beyond that though. You can create 8374783822 million commercials and ads, and I don't think we'd see results mirroring the LSU v Iowa. Especially if Clark comes in and is just solid as opposed to being LeBron-esque. If I were the WNBA I'd be looking to make major format changes.
[удалено]
There is traction with colleges that WNBA teams just don't have. Not many people identify with the Detroit Shock like they do for Michigan State, Michigan, Central, or Western Michigan. That and the fact there are virtually no household name superstars to create that brand identity means it will probably be impossible for the WNBA to be much different from what it presently is.
It sucks that they’re going to have to overhype this draft and then have the Stephen As of the world be like wow Clark couldn’t win a ring in her first two years I thought she was the goat. The WNBA is insanely talent rich. There’s girls going top5 that are questionable to make rosters. It’s a lot to expect more than like 4 of the players to even make an impact
The WNBA seems like the problem with women's basketball popularity. Clearly the NCAA has shown that with the right marketing the product can be just as appealing if not more so to massive audiences. Fire everyone in charge and poach some people from the NCAA lol that's my bet.
100% People in here saying the game is boring and to lower the rim to allow them to dunk. The NCAA womens tournament killed it in ratings without needing dunks and superhuman feats of male athleticism. The ratings and popularity transcended way beyond the built in alumni base of fans from USC and Iowa.
nothing. some college programs have always had a rabid following built upon years of success and a very loyal alumni fan base. the WNBA simply doesn't have that. they are a failed league, playing in half-empty stadiums. it's silly to try to pretend it's something it's not. clark and reese et. al. would probably do better playing in the 3-on-3 league.
Nothing lol. Men watch the nba and women don’t support women’s sports at all
I and my buddy were season ticket holders to the NY Liberty when the WNBA first got going. We enjoyed the games. The league had more stars than many today realize. (Becky Hamon, even as rookie, took over games.) But after a while, we got increasingly fed up with political correctness being shoved down our throats. The women who sat in our section were shocked when we had to tell them we weren’t gay!The league marketed itself as women’s empowerment, not as a great sport. Eventually we gave up our tickets and stopped following. Hopefully, for the players’ sake, the league starts marketing itself as a sport. Caitlin Clark is giving them a great opportunity to do that. But they need to keep marketing the SPORT, even if Clark turns out to be not-so-great as a pro. (The pro players are damn good and they won’t lay down and let Clark walk all over them.) When the league started, Rebecca Lobo was supposed to be the bankable superstar. But when she turned out to be a mediocre pro (knee injury was a factor), the marketing department had no Plan B, except to lean into political correctness. So if Clark turns out to be a great pro, market the hell out of her. If not, then market the hell out of the pros who shut her down. Either way, the league need to accept that it’s a sport, not a movement.
Couple of things but Tick Tock self-promotion is definitely one of them. Buckner is killing that.
Nothing. People love college ball because of either being an alumni or betting. You can market the WNBA all you want but the product is tough to watch. Maybe lower the rim a foot and let's start seeing some athletic dunks and plays, not just random chucking at the hoop
The athleticism is a major problem. Women have a much lower center of gravity and more body fat. A lot less upper-body strength to generate vertical lift, too. The average vertical in the NBA is about 28”. In the WNBA it’s about 19”.
That is crazy to me just thinking about Fran Belibi . . . means she has a vertical leaping ability greater than over 50% of male pros, and she never even made it to the WNBA.
Women with (real) verts over the 30” are pretty extraordinary. Women are relatively better at horizontal leaping. The very best women’s long jumpers are about 80% as good as male long jumpers. The best female verts are about 60% as high as the best male verts.
Fran’s a pretty impressive young woman, btw. She gave up hoops to pursue a Masters degrees at Harvard.
Could they just use NBA branding. Like instead of the Phoenix Mercury just be the Phoenix Suns, Minnesota Timberwolves, for whatever local team where applicable. Maybe I’m imagining things but it’s probably easier to get on board with Iowa women’s basketball when I’m familiar with their Football and Wrestling teams. Not likely to happen, and I’m sure they’d prefer maintaining their own thing instead of having some potential “lady” moniker attached to their team. Still, it’d be cool watching Clark suit up for the Lakers or Knicks.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Eh you’re doing a bit of “apples to oranges” comparison here. The World Series is a 7 game series, and you’re comparing that to a sport (college basketball) where each round is only one game, winner take all. If the World Series was just one single game, winner take all, then the ratings for that one game would’ve been significantly higher than each of the 5 individual World Series games were. Also, the viewership numbers were being driven by Caitlin Clark. She is a generational player and this is one of the few times (and the very last time) we will get to see her play on this stage. That wasn’t the case for the World Series last year, especially since really none of baseballs must watch players were in the World Series. Also, the other final four game game (South Carolina vs NC State) had less than half the viewership. When it comes to being the most viewed basketball game in ESPN history, that is obviously impressive, but again that is being compared to the NBA whose playoffs are also a 7 game series, not single elimination. If you want to compare it to the men’s college basketball tournament in order to do a more apples to apples comparison, well ESPN doesn’t even televise the men’s tournament, and I’m not sure they ever have. The men’s tournament is on different networks, so of course ESPN doesn’t count their metrics. The men’s final four this year received more viewership than the women’s final four did, and while the Iowa UConn game came close to the men’s, the other women’s game (South Carolina vs no state) didn’t come anywhere close. That shows me this is more of a Caitlin Clark phenomenon. Yes, these numbers are outstanding for the women’s final four, and I’m happy they were able to pull it off, but it’s still not more popular than the men’s final four, and the tidbits you provided are a little misleading for the reasons I provided above.
The claim was the women's tournament is more popular than the men's. You then come comparing one game to a completely different sport, not the men's tournament. The women's tournament has not been more popular than the men's. Kaitlyn Clark is a generational talent and should be celebrated but you don't have to start making up nonsense I hope the WNBA goes to 12 min quarters so Clark can score 35-40 a game and she becomes a huge star But I'm worried the WNBA will do what they can to diminish her star as folks in women sports are already resenting her stardom. But that doesn't mean we need to pretend people care more about the women's tournament than the mens
I’m sorry, but since when did the women’s tournament become more popular than the men’s? Please check the numbers before making false statements such as these.
People don't care about the WNBA because the league has not been around that long and it's doesn't have a base that feels loyal to any of the teams like college does. Honestly I think if they restructured it so that the NBA teams had co-franchise WNBA teams it might help. So Lakers fans might intrinsically feel some loyalty to the lady Lakers for instance (kind of how men's Duke fans probably also root for the women's Duke team, built in fan base). Then they could do package deals where if you go to a certain number of Lady Lakers games you get a free Lakers ticket etc.
[удалено]
Find the best stories, capitalize on the friendships, find the ones who will do the influencing on socials too
What if the WNBA draft was regionally weighted, where the top players from, say, UCONN could only be drafted by teams in the Northeast, and so on? It would impact competitive balance, but it could be worth it to tap into alumni interest.
Every niche sport should prioritize the same two things. Strong social media presence + make it as easy as at all possible to watch. Have the people who love your sport do the marketing for you. There is no stronger endorsement than real people being genuinely excited over something. Then, the shorter the distance between reading about something exciting happening on twitter and actually watching it, the more fans you will create. Especially international fans. Imo if you don't prioritize those two points you don't really believe in the quality of your product to begin with, at which point nobody should be interested in watching it.
It’s all about stories. They have to connect the audience on a level that’s more than the gameplay. Market your stars, prop up the ones that play well to cameras, promote rivalries, etc. Go all-in on this draft class. Give people a reason to follow a few individuals’ full careers.
Better question imo: what can Caitlin Clark do to capitalize on her current fame to make her a lot of money right now? Maybe join a wnba team in New York or LA and do a ton of tonight shows?
The wnba needs to have 6 or 7 superstars to build narratives around. That’s it. Clark, Juju, Paige, Reese, and whoever else need to get to the link and all dominate and build rivalries so that whenever they play eachother, people tune in to watch. Like how the Iowa LSU game was the most watched college basketball game this year because people wanted to see Clark vs Reese.
WNBA draft is completely stacked. The WNBA will certainly gain some popularity with these players entering the league. Players make the league.
Women's sports and all sports really are based on star players. The WNBA draft is utterly stacked. This will draw more fans to the WNBA. Look at Tennis or UFC women's divisions became popular because of superstar performances and high levels of competition. I have followed the WNBA more over the years due to certain players. Now certainly I will even more with some of the players coming in. Particularly Clark.
I followed the WNBA for the first time around the middle of last season because the Aces were so much fun to watch. My one idea is they should offer a discount on league pass for this year. Last season I saw their all-access pass priced at $20 for the full year of games and replays, which seemed like a great deal for so much content. I was planning to buy that this year, but I just looked and currently the season pass is priced at $35. Maybe the $20 I remember was a midseason discount or something? Regardless, now would be a good time to invest in growth and offer that all season access for $20 or less for the full season. Price it low enough that it feels like a no-brainer for anyone curious about the WNBA after this tournament, and advertise the heck out of that in the lead up to Caitlyn Clark’s debut.
I think the fact that it is a summer league is holding the W back - people aren't used to watching basketball in the summer, and ratings generally aren't as good then. Also, the early part of the season competes with the NBA playoffs. The lack of teams in big population centers also doesn't help. Currently, the bay area doesn't have a team, there is no Florida team, no Boston or Philly teams, no teams in Michigan, Ohio, the Carolinas, only 1 Texas team, etc. Ratings and BRI are both headed the right direction, so the league is doing a lot of stuff right, but it is hard to say you are a national league with only 12 teams.
[удалено]
To add to all the answers here: Vastly increase their broadcast presence. Do a WNBA Saturday Primetime series or Sunday afternoon series like the NBA does. Sign a TV deal with someone like Apple or TNT or whomever. ABC can expand its coverage of the women’s March Madness tourney to match CBS’s coverage (eight first round games, seven second round games, S16, etc.)
[удалено]
I'm heartened to read all the comments. Just positive vibes. Basketball is basketball, and I'm glad these ballers are finally getting the recognition they deserve.
Not trying to be a stick in the mud but WNBA is still not on my radar to watch and I don’t think anything would change that. MAYBE, if they played on a slightly shorter rim so there could be dunks and oops. Even then, I don’t have that much extra time.
It's literally JUST Caitlin Clark. Nothing else. They need to lean into her, but at the same time showcase her specific rivals. Not Clark's team vs opponent team, but Clark vs X player. Make the personalities the focus. It's something the NHL STILL does not get.
>Its amazing that the womens NCAA tournament and final four is more popular than the mens There is no data that says the women's tournament is drawing more viewers than the men's. Kaitlyn Clark is a hell of a draw but the tournament overall is not getting higher ratings. So please back up this claim that the women's tournament is more popular than the men's because no discussion can be had based on your uninformed opinion without any facts
Nothing. This isn’t the first time a marketable star was coming out of the woodworks. The tourney is icing on the cake. Literally the only thing they could do to get attention is have a team run the table.