|
Post by Coach Huey on Jan 11, 2008 8:31:42 GMT -6
For generating PR for a program when a superstar female athlete joins and actually Plays for a 1-AA team, sure, that will certainly create tons of buzz and coverage. Yes, the games would be on TV or Internet for that reason, and yes Winning helps everything. I know I would watch to see what happens. And, the more success she had, then the more people would watch. And of course, it would definitely Ramp Up Female TV & Internet viewership by a large margin, thereby increasing ratings. In terms of generating money that seems obvious: Ad revenue, ticket sales, t-shirts, tv-shows, hats, jerseys, and on and on, and on. There are many possibilities for income generation. Hope that helps. KB No it wouldn't. As evidenced by ratings of the various sports, viewers want EXECUTION, not spectacle. Content, not hype. XFL, New Coke, Catwoman , All opened with a "bang" and fizzled VERY VERY shortly because they had HYPE not content. Regardless of how silly this notion is (taking a chance on a female position player just to be "different" or innovative...to get publicity for being innovative..) i believe this would never happen because of the mentality of the MALES involved. Just like the females in combat...I don't think you will see this "innovation" because males can't deal with the results when they go bad (girl gets trucked/injured in a violent collosion) I agree 100% with you. That was the point I was alluding to. Show me how ratings - and thus money - would soar in the long-term for this? Because, the data I have seen just don't support this "theory". (as coachd as mentioned). 1 or 2 games? Sure, but that is chump change as far as just how much more revenue you actually gain than if you didn't have a woman playing. Full season? Over the course of her career? Not supported by current viewership reports and fan attendance surveys.
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Jan 11, 2008 12:11:08 GMT -6
Good posts and varied opinions regarding this topic. It is enjoyable to think outside the box in our profession - especially on these type of forums.
My first year as Varsity head coach in 1993, two girls came out for football on our JV team - one of them quit but the other girl stuck it out all season. She was Not fast or terribly athletic but tough and loved football. She played special teams a play or two per game, and she constantly worked hard at WR in practice. In the last game of the year - she caught a 5-yard Hitch route and the entire team went nuts for her and was happy for her.
I don't want to re-post what I wrote earlier but to Brophy's latest post above - the 'Z' receiver spot is exactly what I was thinking too in terms of putting a Venus/Serena Williams or Marion Jones type of Female superstar on the field. The ability to motion, align her off the L.O.S. and devise various ways to get her the football offers flexibility, etc.
Personally - it would appear that the female 100-meter track stars at the high school & collegiate levels would be the place to recruit for speed burning talent...if any of the women are interested and have the ability to catch the football. Which I have personally seen and know can be coached to a male or female athlete.
Some of the coaches on here have mentioned other drills or positions to put that Female Superstar on the field - to me a speed burner type of racehorse athlete stays on the perimeter either at WR or DE.
To Coach Huey: Yeah, you could be right too about ratings and $, but I guess we will have to see when it actually happens.
KB
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 11, 2008 13:39:45 GMT -6
Good posts and varied opinions regarding this topic. It is enjoyable to think outside the box in our profession - especially on these type of forums. My first year as Varsity head coach in 1993, two girls came out for football on our JV team - one of them quit but the other girl stuck it out all season. She was Not fast or terribly athletic but tough and loved football. She played special teams a play or two per game, and she constantly worked hard at WR in practice. In the last game of the year - she caught a 5-yard Hitch route and the entire team went nuts for her and was happy for her. I don't want to re-post what I wrote earlier but to Brophy's latest post above - the 'Z' receiver spot is exactly what I was thinking too in terms of putting a Venus/Serena Williams or Marion Jones type of Female superstar on the field. The ability to motion, align her off the L.O.S. and devise various ways to get her the football offers flexibility, etc. Personally - it would appear that the female 100-meter track stars at the high school & collegiate levels would be the place to recruit for speed burning talent...if any of the women are interested and have the ability to catch the football. Which I have personally seen and know can be coached to a male or female athlete. Some of the coaches on here have mentioned other drills or positions to put that Female Superstar on the field - to me a speed burner type of racehorse athlete stays on the perimeter either at WR or DE. To Coach Huey: Yeah, you could be right too about ratings and $, but I guess we will have to see when it actually happens. KB But why? Thinking out of the box is used to solve problems. I was not aware that there was a shortage of qualified male Z receivers in scholarship football such that we needed to develop a crop from the physically inferior gender (with respect to speed, explosion, muscular development, ability to generate torque...etc. ) This is not thinking out of the box to solve a problem, this is looking for a way to gain publicity. So, unless marketing the program is the problem..I dont see the point.
|
|
|
Post by jraybern on Jan 11, 2008 13:57:14 GMT -6
OK, lets assume she is a burner. Would it be likely that she would be able to do the other things that being successful at the WR position for example? I don't think so. Change of direction is just as important if not more in football. I have played with some very fast individuals who could not cut. If this female is going to run a fade on every play, there isn't a high school corner out there who couldn't be taught to cover her (just play off and stay over the top). Next, would she also have the leaping ability needed to go get passes? In fact, she is going to have to be even better at this skill because more than likely she will be shorter than her male counterparts. What about hands? My wife's hands are litterally 2/3 the size of mine and my hands aren't that big. I know that lots of great players had small hands, but there is a reason this is looked at by NFL scouts. Larger hands HELP someone be successful at positions where ballhandling is done. Will she have the hand strength to catch the ball? Watch a girl catch a football. They can make the diamond with their thumbs and pointer fingers touching and that ball still squirts through there when thrown with a little velocity. This is a strength issue. Others have mentioned the other things that WRs must do like block. Could you really teach someone with THAT MUCH up against them to be successful doing all of the things needed to be successful at any level higher than middle school football in a competitive league at any position other than K/P? I doubt it. Of course, there is a girl in my school that weighs probably 200 pounds and can outlift most of the boys in the school............ hmmm, I do need a new nose guard.
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 11, 2008 14:46:26 GMT -6
We have male track stars that we can't turn into WRs. Why do we think that we can turn a female track star into a WR. Look around the NFL, we don't have too many guys that can run a 100 meters at a world class level. Sure you have the little Holiday kid from LSU, but rarely is there an NFL guy who could compete at a world class level in track and field. Vice versa, there aren't many 100 meter dash guys who can switch over and play NFL football. So why do we think we can convert a woman to play football from a track star. And like CoachD said, why do we need to do this? I don't hear many women 100 meter dash champions complaining about their lack of opprotunies in football.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2008 14:52:07 GMT -6
just a question here....... (the Marion Jones story actually breaks my heart, FOR her sake...sending her to prison for an offense we celebrate with our candidates)...that in this hypothetical situation, we are insinuating that a female can naturally achieve athletic performance results that surpass an adult male's. Ignoring the fact that 18-24 year old males are aided with the production of enormous levels of testosterone naturally. HOW do we honestly think that a female would be capable of overcoming this genetic advantage without anabolic supplementation? We're talking real-life here. The 'possibility' has been laid out, but now we're down to brass tacks - WHAT would have to happen to make the possibility a REALITY? But why? Thinking out of the box is used to solve problems. I was not aware that there was a shortage of qualified male Z receivers This is not thinking out of the box to solve a problem, this is looking for a way to gain publicity. So, unless marketing the program is the problem..I dont see the point. unfortunately for this discussion, that makes waaaay too much sense. UNLESS....you had a; 1) supremely gifted female athlete 2) with an unusually large muscle frame 3) an uncanny ability to digest routes,concepts, and technique in a short period of time 4) a DIAA coach and administration desperate enough for attention 5) a once-in-a-lifetime athlete willing to give up noteriety and fame in a sport arena they could dominate, for a chance to assume a mediocre role in a sport they wouldn't even be a blip on or have any possibility of furthering as a profession.
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jan 11, 2008 15:22:33 GMT -6
I wish I could share other's views on the logical perspective of this but my glasses are tinted differently than ... ;D
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2008 15:40:43 GMT -6
Not to be a Debbie Downer, but how many University Board of Directors would favor being 'cute' (gaining noteriety from a kitschy sideshow act) over the never-ending looming possibility of a multi-million dollar sexual discrimination/harassment suit that would never end (possibility of being litigated once she arrives and the 'threat' never ends until she is dead).
How many NCAA sports are coed?
Not trying to kill a dream, but those are some issues one might want to address before leaping off the diving board of imagination.
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 11, 2008 17:04:20 GMT -6
I still stand by my argument of why would a world class female athlete even want to try this when she could dominate her own sport and gain popularity, respect and money doing so. Before you argue about body size, speed, take a hit, sexual discrimination lawsuits, why would she even want to do it in the first place??? Title 9 has given women every opportunity to be successful in their own playing field, what would be the point of risking a career in something you are extremely good at, just to "try" something else.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2008 17:44:19 GMT -6
I still stand by my argument of why would a world class female athlete even want to try this when she could dominate her own sport and gain popularity, respect and money doing so. Before you argue about body size, speed, take a hit, sexual discrimination lawsuits, why would she even want to do it in the first place??? Title 9 has given women every opportunity to be successful in their own playing field, what would be the point of risking a career in something you are extremely good at, just to "try" something else. Her dad died in a coal mining accident when she was really young and football is her way of connecting with her dad. ...I'm writing the after school special for ABC right now.
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 11, 2008 17:47:12 GMT -6
Brophy thats not an after school special, thats a halmark Sunday night after 60 minutes, your late local news will follow special.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 11, 2008 18:36:59 GMT -6
Their was a Nike commercial a few years back with Marion Jones in it. It was trying to make her out to be great and stuff (which she is), and one of the comments was "I bench 155", like that was something impressive. I remember the commercial because of that comment. I turned to one of my coaching friends and said that "I figured she would have benched way more than that."
Every single JV DB I have ever coached, I mean ever, benched more than that.
Div 1 - get freaking real!!!!
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 11, 2008 18:44:09 GMT -6
It is ALL about innovation
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Jan 12, 2008 17:07:42 GMT -6
As long is this thread is still alive, I'll say it AGAIN... the female burner would get drilled. One play, one Big hit, and she would go to the sideline and never be heard from again! It's just not going to happen! New thread - Patriots vs Jags anyone?
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 12, 2008 17:14:18 GMT -6
fbdoc--I have to disagree with you here on this. I don't think she would take one big hit and not be heard from again. HOWEVER, you bring up the point I made earlier---the MALES would have a bigger issue with her taking the big hit than she would...(again, like females in combat...if 19 year old girls were coming home in flag draped carpets, things would be tremendously different)
I agree though, this is a ridiculous thread based on marketing, promotion, and wanting to be known as an "innovator" rather than based on any credible football themes. How about Brett Favre.
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Jan 12, 2008 17:22:27 GMT -6
Yes it has - from the sublime to the ridiculous! But I'm telling you, she would be gone . Packer DB's are tough.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 12, 2008 19:07:29 GMT -6
Liberalhater---I was not talking about those she was competing against. I was talking about the general population....
Doesn't really matter, this is an absurd thread, with the only real point being looking for ways to be known as an 'innovator"
NOW..... could a girl who would grow to be an Olympic medal winner make significant contributions at the H.S. level? I bet so, especially at the lower enrollment schools.
|
|