It's worth noting that the contract was renewed fairly early in Mark Emmert's tenure ... and he was touted (from within the NCAA, naturally) as a "reform" guy.
This is their version of reform! And sadly, this is one of the few things the NCAA is right about - this is as much as we'll get from them in terms of "reform". Want the women's tournament to be televised? We'll do the minimum necessary to make that happen (keep in mind, the first women's tournament to have all games nationally televised was THIS YEAR) and do it as poorly as possible.
I think ESPN is changing their ways because they're beginning to see the value they're getting in that contract - they underpaid dramatically and if they keep publicizing women's hoops teams that aren't UConn, they'll have a relative gold mine until the next contract is up.
And that contract could go in any direction if it's bid properly. Getting the right contract at the right time can turn a struggling network into a secure one - in fact, ESPN knows this from experience, from grabbing the first two rounds of the men's tournament from CBS in the late '80s and demonstrating that yes, in fact, people do want to watch every game in a tournament. (Hmm. Wonder where that lesson could be put to use again?) Or Fox outbidding CBS for the NFC rights for NFL games not long after. (Yes, there is a theme here, and if you have ever watched sports on Paramount+ you know what it is.)
We might be better served by having Bally or Fox or someone else put in a sky-high bid for WBB (and softball! and volleyball!), but even if it's still on ESPN, there is a ton of money to be made from this tournament. Here's hoping that the organization bidding those rights out gets what they are worth next time ... and that the money is shared with the athletes who make all of this happen, and with the programs (like HBCUs) that are an important part of collegiate sports but currently get nothing from the NCAA except punishment.
It's worth noting that the contract was renewed fairly early in Mark Emmert's tenure ... and he was touted (from within the NCAA, naturally) as a "reform" guy.
This is their version of reform! And sadly, this is one of the few things the NCAA is right about - this is as much as we'll get from them in terms of "reform". Want the women's tournament to be televised? We'll do the minimum necessary to make that happen (keep in mind, the first women's tournament to have all games nationally televised was THIS YEAR) and do it as poorly as possible.
I think ESPN is changing their ways because they're beginning to see the value they're getting in that contract - they underpaid dramatically and if they keep publicizing women's hoops teams that aren't UConn, they'll have a relative gold mine until the next contract is up.
And that contract could go in any direction if it's bid properly. Getting the right contract at the right time can turn a struggling network into a secure one - in fact, ESPN knows this from experience, from grabbing the first two rounds of the men's tournament from CBS in the late '80s and demonstrating that yes, in fact, people do want to watch every game in a tournament. (Hmm. Wonder where that lesson could be put to use again?) Or Fox outbidding CBS for the NFC rights for NFL games not long after. (Yes, there is a theme here, and if you have ever watched sports on Paramount+ you know what it is.)
We might be better served by having Bally or Fox or someone else put in a sky-high bid for WBB (and softball! and volleyball!), but even if it's still on ESPN, there is a ton of money to be made from this tournament. Here's hoping that the organization bidding those rights out gets what they are worth next time ... and that the money is shared with the athletes who make all of this happen, and with the programs (like HBCUs) that are an important part of collegiate sports but currently get nothing from the NCAA except punishment.