It is easier to pay almost $1000 to an official, and then a pension and health insurance and the many other benefits that will have people want to take games off to watch tape.

It is not going to happen.

Peace

Replay? Coaches going to toss bean bags on the court, I suppose? Well, if they want to make it like football, perhaps we should go to 5 man crews while we're at it.

Right. If the coaches think that it's a problem that Steve Welmer worked 28 days in a row, then put it in the contracts that "the official agrees not to work more than 3 of the previous 5 days before the date of this contest."

Sure, they all want a "fresh" Welmer, but what makes the 28th game "more important" than the 27th or 26th game?

Re: some good points
 

but overall the guy makes some very good points. With more and more games being televised now, its only going to increase the scrutiny that we as officials are under.

But I agree with him, many officials work too many games and sooner or later its going to catch up with them.

I see it in our local HS and colleges, and I'm sure it's even more evident in the big conferences.

Thanks
David [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree, we see guys (me) overworking at the HS level. Does this affect our officiating? Maybe, maybe not. I'm an adreneline junkie and when that ball goes up, I'm good to go. After the game I might be wiped out and getting up for work the next day might be tough. I think sometimes these D1 guys might get a little more down time to R&R. I know they have to travel, but probably get an extra hour of sleep than most of us.

The more and more these games mean to the Universities, equals more and more pressure placed on coaches/players, equals more and more blame placed on officials.

Let's look at relative attendance numbers:

The average women's D-I game in 2003-04 attracted an average of 1617 fans and the average women's game in the NCAA tournament averaged only 7587 fans.

The average men's D-I home game had 5154 butts in the seat and the average game in the NCAA tournament had 20483.

The average attendance in women's D-III is 212., less than half the attendance at a typical D-III men's game. (Frankly, both of these stats are pitiful and we get more at high school games, easily).

The average WNBA game draws 8,000 fans. The lowest average NBA attendance last season was 13798.

There's a reason the men's game gets more attention -- more people watch.

Everything you say is true, but it's a circular reasoning situation. If more media paid more attention to the women's side, attendance and tv viewership would go up. Three years ago, there were no women's college bball games on network tv. It was all on cable. Two years ago, CBS took a gamble, by showing some of the last games, and it paid off. Last year, they showed abot 15 games, and they got a higher level of advertisements which I think shows that viewership rose. So I think the potential is there.

But even so, in an article about officiating in college basketball, why not at least mention how things are on the women's side? Including them both together in one article could only increase the interest in the guy's rantings.

If more media paid more attention to the women's side, attendance and tv viewership would go up. [/B][/QUOTE]Juulie, I don't believe that for a minute. The interest in women's basketball just isn't there for most male viewers and attendees. People just won't watch anything that they have no interest in.

Juulie, I don't believe that for a minute. The interest in women's basketball just isn't there for most male viewers and attendees. People just won't watch anything that they have no interest in. [/B][/QUOTE]

I didn't say it would equal men's, but it would increase from what it is now. The CBS viewership has gone up every year, that's why they continue to broadcast more and more women's games.

There are women's games all over the TV and still the arenas are empty and only the "premiere" games get on CBS or other network TV.

The media covers a lot of HS girl's basketball in my state and still no one attends many of those games. Even when there is a double header and the girl's game is second, everyone leaves after the boy's game is over.

The media coverage is not going to make people watch a game they just do not enjoy. The media covers soccer and hockey all the time and no one attends those games for the most part.

Peace

I have not been to a hockey game all year and I probably won't:-)
I would say the women's side is a growing entity and someday will be a bigger deal. Maybe not as big as the men's game but it will continue to grow, especially with the addition of the high-flying-dunks.

Until women as a whole support their sports, women's and girl's basketball is not going to get the big attendance or coverage that some would like to see it.

My girlfriend goes to a lot of games with me during the season than most. She has been doing this for years. I primarily only work boy's games and she likes to go when she is not working. I took her to a girl's regional championship last week. I did not tell her it was a girl's game before she left. When we got there and she noticed that it was a girl's game, she immediately state, "if you would have told me it was a girl's game I would have stayed at home." She said this is a very joking manner, but she was really rather serious too. She is the typical women that the women's game is not getting to their games. I went to the game to watch the officials and support a friend of mine on his playoff game. She did more commenting on the game and why she did not like the girl's game than I do. That is the person that is not watching. My girlfriend is not the biggest sports fan either, I never have to twist her arm to watch the Super Bowl or regular season boy's or men's basketball games. Men and women that could not make their 8th grade basketball team are more fanatical about boy's or men's basketball then the athletes that used to play girl's basketball.

Peace