Lowering the rim: Only the worst idea ever
Candace Parker
It’s starting to become a spring/summer tradition: One DimeMag.com writer takes his shot at defending/promoting the WNBA, while trying to get to the bottom of why the particularly vocal WNBA haters hate the league so much. Since most of the Dime crew pretends like they’re allergic to women’s basketball, I figured it would have to be me doing the dirty work every year, until Ben York stepped to the plate yesterday.
So I’m not here for that. I just want to address one of the “solutions” critics (sometimes seriously, sometimes jokingly) often propose to raise the WNBA’s profile: Lowering the rim.
As patently dumb as it sounds, this idea actually has supporters. The premise is that if it’s easier for women to dunk, more of them would dunk, and all of a sudden a wave of guys and kids who stayed away from the WNBA would come running to the arena and the TV ratings would skyrocket.
Here’s the deal, though: Lowering the rim for the women’s game would be (1) totally unnecessary, (2) insulting, and (3) wouldn’t increase viewership nearly as much as you think.
Lowering the rim to nine feet or 9.5 feet isn’t the same as shortening golf courses or contracting baseball/softball diamonds for women. Those two concepts have a wide-ranging impact on the entire sport — almost to where it’s not even the same sport — and its main components, whether it be running, pitching, driving, etc. Dunking isn’t a main component of basketball. It’s a luxury, a singular move, kind of like a spin move in football. You don’t alter the field of play just to make one move happen more often.
It’s not like women have problems shooting the ball at a higher rim — half the time they beat the guys in the NCAA three-point “Battle of the Sexes.” Lowering the rim wouldn’t cut down on turnovers or even increase scoring, two of the biggest parts of the women’s game that turn off WNBA critics. (Those issues in the women’s game have already been addressed by having a smaller ball.) If anything, shooting percentages would drop dramatically and scoring would go down for at least a few years with a lowered rim, since these women who all grew up shooting on 10-foot rims would have to re-adjust their years of repetition and training.
So really, the only benefit of lowering the rim is that it’d become easier for players to dunk, to please one segment of fans — and yet those people who claim they’d start watching the women’s game if they dunked more often would most likely stop watching after the novelty wore off, anyway. It’s like the people who said they’d watch hockey if they could follow the puck easier; How did that whole “blue puck” thing on TV work? Either you appreciate the game or you don’t, no gimmicks necessary.
Not to get all whimsical, but part of the beauty of basketball is that the game is the same for everyone. From little kids to grown men to grown women, from French Lick to Little Rock to Jersey City, the rim is 10 feet high. Maintaining that uniformity is in the best interest of not just the women’s game, but the game in general.
-->
July 24th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Sacto_J says:
Agreed, AB. The problem alot of the haters have is that they enjoy basketball for the individuality of the sport that MJ glamorized and made popular, ironic as that may be as he didn’t win a single championship until he bought into the team concept. The ladies don’t have the advantage of ridiculous hops or towering height (for the most part.) But that’s what makes watching their game intriguing. For a gym rat type who plays ball because of the team concept, the WNBA is actually a great learning tool for spacing the floor, cutting, making good passes, and taking the high percentage shot, something the men’s side of the game often forgets when you have a player who can go 1 on 5, and to me its those players and the coaches who try to ride them to a championship that irritate me the most. That’s just not good basketball…
July 24th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
sh!tfaced says:
nice one. plus there would be fights everywhere too, with your sister at home, at the park, the gym, at school, etc. they’d have to get adjustable goals just to satisfy everyone.
July 24th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
hnicmuckz says:
the rim has to stay at 10 feet, thats lame
July 24th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Steve A says:
Basketball for Women, especially since they have their own Pro Leagues, is a good thing. But, that doesn’t mean it should be popular or worth viewership. It’s not an exciting brand of basketball, period. That is why it hasn’t gained any popularity, the men’s game is so advanced that it’s not even worth comparing. Is the whole country “missing out”? Sorry, I don’t think so. Basketball is a great game for anyone to enjoy, but that doesn’t mean anyone should watch anybody play basketball. In America, we want to watch the people who are the BEST, regardless if it’s male/female.
July 24th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Just a Fan says:
standardization is a good thing, 10 feet is fine. I actually just started watching the WNBA, its more fundamental and I think it serves as a good learning tool if you want to play organized.
These girls don’t have crazy highlights but the moves they do, average players can add to their game too. It’s definitely not as exciting as watching someone get posterized but its not entirely godawful that u can’t bear.
I admit the turnover issue is pretty big, lots of careless passes, ball handling. If its on tv, i’ll watch it.
July 24th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Scott says:
Here’s an odd fact, and completely irrelevant to this story, with the exception of the net being lower.
I moved into a fairly new development/suburb in November. There’s a huge park in one area of the development, it has tennis courts, a playground for kids, some forestry, along with tons of open field. It also has a full court. The winter months passed, and when summer came I was excited to hit this new court that seemed to have players on it all the time.
So I go to check it out, take one shot, hit the backboard by miles, and walk up to the net only to find it’s a lowered net. It’s probably 9.5 feet. The idiotic part of it is that both these nets are the same height on either end, and both are the kind where the post arc’s and is cemented into the ground, so its not adjustable at all.
There’s a high school and an elementary school across the street from this park, and I can only imagine some genius thought that they should make the rims lower for the ‘kids’.
It’s such a waste of a full court. Considering in the suburbs of Toronto full courts in parks are like one in 10 if not a worse ratio, it was frustrating to find the rims low.
So now I play at a school a little farther away, but their rims are 10 feet. I probably will never play on that full court again, I don’t see the point.
Thats my story, I thought I’d share.
July 24th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
pilight says:
Lowering the rim would also hurt us in international play. FIBA isn’t going to lower it, so the US players would be at a competitive disadvantage if they were accustomed to playing with a lower rim.
July 24th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
srb says:
the hoop i always play knockout on with my friends is 9 feet. I love it, but I would absolutely hate to have to play a serious game on that hoop. (still can’t dunk so whatever)
Good column though here – convincing.
July 24th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
dk says:
@dime in ref. Ben York
Finally a great fucking idea! After reading his last article its an awesome idea to let him cover the WNBA, because then I will have no clue WTF he is talking about! Have a GW!
July 24th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
TJ says:
I also think it is weak that women use a smaller ball.
July 24th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
weezy f says:
too much thought into the wnba bottom line is that its not interesting at all..there arent any interesting storylines to follow..no real rivalries..the women arent quick or physical..its a slow game..NOT ENTERTAINING
July 24th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
robmo35 says:
Lowering the rim may not be a good idea, but the concept that the WNBA game is the same set up as the NBA is just plain false. Basketball is not the same for everyone. WNBA’ers play shorter games with a shorter 3-point line than their male counterparts, I’m not even going to discuss season length. Offenses are geared to perimeter rather than paint play, making for a slower paced less interesting game. As far as the fundamental argument there are hell of a lot of turn overs in the WNBA, demonstrating a lack of ball handling, and passing ability two crucial fundamentals of the game.
Finally the NBA is constantly revamping itself to put an exciting product on the floor, it might behoove the WNBA to start thinking along those lines.
Please keep Austin Burton on the WNBA beat.
July 24th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
danny says:
whats wrong with the winba?
All the players look like men.
July 24th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Ben York says:
Very well said, Austin. Couldn’t agree more.
July 24th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Diego says:
Plus, even lowering it to 9 or 9.5 feet, I don’t think viewers exactly would be wowed by the WNBA gals’ dunks. Most of them can’t jump much (so don’t have much hang time) and have small hand so can’t palm, so there would be a hell of a lot of horrendous missed dunks when all the chicks starting trying to dunk on the lower rims!
I still propose tight fitting outfits like the volleyball players wear! Look, at the beach, the girls wear little swimsuits, while guys keep wearing bigger and bigger trunks. I’m not saying this isn’t sexist brainwashing the fellows have somehow made happen come every summertime. I’m just saying why can’t same rules apply on the pro basketball court?
July 24th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Jason says:
You know, this makes me think. Yes, a ball that’s *too* small becomes hard to shoot – but a ball that’s too large doesn’t even fit through the rim. So if the women are shooting a smaller ball, it’s not really an apples-to-apples comparison to have shooting contests or compare field goal percentages. Unless they are shooting the same ball, what you have isn’t a legit contest, just a stunt.
July 24th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
capnkimo says:
raise the rim, lower the rim, either way im still not gonna watch the wnba. the only lady sport i enjoy watching is women’s tennis
July 24th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Big T says:
Whatever happened to equality for men and women? They’re basically saying we’re the superior species if they have to lower the basketball rim. Pathetic.
July 24th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
T.J says:
I understand where everybodies coming from but would lowering the rim really be THAT bad? It would help to bring sum more highlights to the WNBA. A couple more dunks really couldn’t hurt the leagues popularity. Seein a more youtubes from the WNBA could be a good thing. FIBA would probably be happy if we lowered our rims cause at least that would make us have to adjust a lil when we play the rest of the world. Really that would help give them more of a chance because we usually just dominate the rest of the world. I’m not completely for it but I can’t say I’m completely against it either
July 24th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Big Freeze says:
If a man undergoes a sex change, then is he/she then eligible to play in the WNBA?
I would watch women’s bball if there some amazon monster tranny who dominated and dunked on everyone. Maybe Richard Jefferson will get his junk turned outside-in and play in the WNBA. He’s not fooling anyone with the straight act.
July 24th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
dk says:
I actually dont mind watching theWNBA when i have to, because of a freind or a date. I compare it to the differences from the NBA and WNBA to that of the diff. betwen Micheal Jordan and Scottie Pippen
July 24th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Ian says:
“I compare it to the differences from the NBA and WNBA to that of the diff. betwen Micheal Jordan and Scottie Pippen”
goh thats bs
July 24th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
Ender says:
The summer is a real down time if you don’t like baseball (and I don’t). Still, I have no desire to watch the WNBA. It has totally no pull for me. MMA and arena football are both great to watch, and provide some redemption for summer sports viewing.
July 24th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
smoove chips says:
the tennis shorts !!!
as sexist as it sounds you will double your male viewers guaranfluckinteed and get some of you tennis fans.
id watch.i’d have favorite players too,i’d know their names..
in short.i’d start to give a shyt.
July 25th, 2009 at 2:19 am
JC says:
http://imagesx.sports.cn/Image/2008/04/25/0211054392.jpg
Australian women’s national basketball team. Did those uniforms make ppl watch them in the Olympics? Dont really think so.
There just needs to be a few more stars (i.e. Candace Parker) who play a more male-ish game to get some fans. There are 10x more than the 1st year the WNBA started, but the league needs mainly the new breed for it to change.
Maybe a rule change here or there like the NBA did (backcourt time, backdown rule, no touch on the perimeter, illegal defense change) and you get a change.
Till the old perception of women’s bball changes, nothing will change.
July 25th, 2009 at 3:00 am
smoove chips says:
i wanna lie to you but I cant.I am interested.i couls see a coupla off platers in those kinda outfits.Especially in the NBA off season
Hell to the yeah !!!
seriously what is there to do now.im not watching nascar,or the tour de whogivesfuck,golf,.I m in limbo cuz.
you’d be offering skilled basketball with eyepopping presentation(some of those wnba chick are fyne) at my lowest point.cover them in whipped cream and i’d owe you for life.
July 25th, 2009 at 3:04 am
smoove chips says:
not touch on the perimeter.Nope.Enhance that.
touches everywhere fam,for anything,anytime,anyone(female)lol !!
the nfl needs to start.I can’t take this anymore
July 25th, 2009 at 3:33 am
doc says:
Let them play in the unis them volleyball chicks wore at the olympics.
July 25th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Jsmoove says:
Lowering the rim would just make it more of a joke than it already is. There would be 5th grade boys playing on 10ft while fully grown women who are trying to convince everyone that they too are athletes would be playing on shorter goals. Dunking will just never be a part of women’s basketball, its in the physical make up of the players – they just don’t have the same athletic capacity as men when it comes to raw physical abilities such as jumping.
Lowering the rim .5 – 1 foot isn’t going to change that. It won’t suddenly allow any of them to start throwing down windmills, putbacks, aly-oops, or any kind of dunk that would even warrent excitement. The same 2-3 players would still be the only ones dunking, and it would still be a simple one hand flush.
July 25th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
John Molina says:
Lowering the rim??
For me, its about execution, teamwork, not the individual dunk.
If Naismith realized they would be dunking the basketball, he would have found a crossbeam a bit higher to have that janitor nail the beach pasket on.
The beam just happened to be 10 feet high.
Naismith was about a team game, and I for one, hope it remains 10 feet for good and if dunking doesnt become a regular part of the womens game, thats fine by me. Show me good passing and teamwork.
Dunking maybe a good snipit on ESPN, but its still just 2 points.
July 25th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
dk says:
@22 It was a joke and you not being aborted is the punch line…
July 25th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
sans says:
I played on 9 footers the other day and it took my shot out of the game real quick. Caught my first oop in gametime–at 5’9″–so I feel the dunking aspect of this argument, but no one is going to wath. Women don’t support the league, and even when they argue for Title ix (which has made a world of difference) they don’t put their money on their their liberal mouths.
Cheap tickets. Tie ins with basketball camps. Candace Parker playing preseason in the NBA. These are ways to increase WNBA attendance and interest. Lisa Leslie dunking soft–not it.
I would love to see you guys cover more W.
And the argument that it is an unattractive game needs to be put in check by the more attractive players–especially some of the girls on the Comets. Convince a Playboy shoot–that will increase market shares.
Peace.
July 25th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Coop says:
Volleyball, the sport that most closely relates to the movements of basketball, has a lower net for women.
It makes a pretty big difference. While not the most entertaining sport in general, the lower net makes women’s volleyball much more watchable.
July 26th, 2009 at 10:37 am
fReSh says:
LOWER THAT RIM…….i totally support the lowering of the rim…..all that concerns…..pah…..wnba will stay where it is when they dont change somthn ooooor just let those steroids/enhancements flow
lowering the rim is way better than lettin them play in skirts
not for me personally….but….ok when i think bout those girls……NO SKIRTS! LOWER THAT RIM!
July 26th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Sweet English says:
Its like the clip out of family guy.
‘John:They sure do make it look difficult terry.
Terry: They sure do John, but the real question is having this tiny amount of talent really worth a lifetime of grotesque appearance? Thats for the FAN to decide.
fan: yaaay
July 26th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
ZACH says:
Austin: How can you say the game is the same for everyone when the ball isn’t the same? (as you stated in an earlier paragraph).
I brought up the lowering the rim thing on Ben’s post, and also noted it wouldn’t be pure ball. I still probably wouldn’t watch it even if they did lower them (just disclosing that). The sad fact about women’s sports is that they usually have to wear skimpy outfits or adapt there rules to survive. (ie volleyball, tennis) With the exception of golf I can’t think of a popular women’s sport that doesn’t have very small uniforms. I am not a hater of the WNBA I just dont find it that entertaining. (As a DET fan I tried to watch the Shock,I watched about 7 or 8 games, and I just didn’t enjoy it)
July 27th, 2009 at 9:13 am
Chicagorilla says:
S. Fowles doesn’t need the rim lowered. Did anyone see her dunk during the all-star game? Sure it was lame that they all moved out of the way to let her do it. It’s nothing that the guys in the NBA haven’t done (Check the 2003 Rookie Game where Lebron and Tayshun Prince had the lane cleared so they can dunk), but it does take away from the fun.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
danocasa says:
lowering the rim would not create more highlights…you think they are going to have a womens dunk contest if they lowered the rim?
heres the deal guys….if the WNBA can survive another ten years, they will be good enough by themselves to be entertaining. its the same reason the NBA was terrible during the 40s and 50s. you guys think watching a whole bunch of 6 foot white guys taking set shots all day was entertaining? hell no. but when the NBA got into the 60s, and the guys that were growing up playing ball when the NBA was around made it to the L, the NBA became entertaining. all the ballers had a real reason and dream to drive for, an actual professional league. they could devote their whole lives for this one dream, not split it with wondering if they should get some education and job experience for another career because basketball had no real future before that.
same thing goes for the girls. the WNBA has only been around for 14 years. when the girls that grew up with the WNBA around get to the WNBA, a bigger percentage of them will be entertaining to watch. i mean, some already are (watch some women US olympic games, then talk to me about girls not being entertaining, candace parker, diana taurasi, and sue bird are better than everyone on this site).
i coach and ref a youth basketball league (12-13 years old), and every year there are a handful of girls that come in and sign up with the boys, and the girls fucking murder them all, no joke. and that number of girls is getting bigger and bigger every year.
so if the NBA can keep the WNBA afloat for ten more years, it will be not only self-sustaining, but everyone here will enjoy watching it.
July 27th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Powerslave says:
women have time to play ball between making meals?
August 5th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Stew Padasso says:
Umm, lowering the hoop would creat more dunks. More dunks would mean more highlights on sports center. More highlights on sports center means more people being exposed to wnba players.
I listen to ESPN radio everyday because I drive alot. No one ever says one word about the wbna. The only time I here anything about the wnba is when that stupid comercial comes on with that rediculious song and the announcer says something about someone named Candis Parker. Who the hell is Candis Parker?!?
I bet if the hoop was lowered and she had a dunk or 2 now and then we would see the hightlight on sports center and be able to tell who she is. Then, if I happened to click on a wnba game I might give it a chance becuase I would actualy know some of the players.
Hey Austin, you said part of the beauty of the game is that it is the same for everyone, but it’s not the same. The ball is already smaller and lighter for women. And that is because womens hands are smaller and they are not as stong as men. Well guess what, women are not as tall as men either. Did you know that? Oh and, is it insulting to the WBNA players because there ball is smaller and lighter? They must be pissed.
The facts is, no one watches the WNBA because it is boring! Lowering the hoop will make it more exciting. That will get more people to watch. It’s simple math. Get a calculator if you can’t figure out the equation.
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:41 pm
wholesale jordans says:
seriously what is there to do now.im not watching nascar,or the tour de whogivesfuck,golf,.I m in limbo cuz.
you’d be offering skilled basketball with eyepopping presentation(some of those wnba chick are fyne) at my lowest point.cover them in whipped cream and i’d owe you for life.
It’s simple math.
Get a calculator if you can’t figure out the equation.
October 9th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Tacordier says:
If you look at many other sports, women play on a field that is downsized: softball being the most obvious example, although even the current wnba has a smaller ball and different 3 point line.
The argument against lowering the rim basically stems from an absolutist point of view that is really just rooted in sexism. Who said the rim should have been at 10 feet in the first place? Lowering the rim to 9 feet would definitely give many more girls the opportunity to dunk, which not only makes the game more fun to watch, it makes it more fun to PLAY.
Those who say this would cause international problems are missing the issue; the change would be made internationally and thus no problems would exist. The changes would also be made at every level: High School, College, and Pro.
This would not be degrading, it would be empowering as women would be able to assert the right to play a game they love on their own terms. People who measure the respectability of the game with rim height are just chauvinist because they are keeping to a male-centered conception of what basketball should be.
October 28th, 2009 at 4:39 am
wnba hater says:
hey man, you’re missing the point. yes, lowering the hoops would make for more dunks. but it would also help shooting in the LONG RUN.
at the moment women do not shoot with their elbow in, meaning they make adjustments to make up for their lack of strength. elbow out = streak shooters. there is now “ray allen” of the women’s game because you need a certain amount of strength to shoot with correct form.
they made the ball smaller for a reason. they should lower the hoops as well.
the average woman is shorter and less physically built than a man, and people all over the world watch the nba to see lebron fly through the air to throw down over a 7 footer. this doesn’t happen in the wnba game. if you lower the hoops, the game becomes increasing based on athleticism as opposed to ‘fundamentals’
whats sells tickets? jason richardson doing a windmill dunk or sue bird doing a jump stop runner in the lane. come on, do not be naive.
Lowering the hoops is an absolute no brain solution to raise ticket sales and get people to watch the only professional sports league more of a joke than the mls.
November 16th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Silk Smoov says:
This is a no brainer bad idea. Simple as that.
Sincerely
Lady Prodigy Basketball
http://www.ladyprodigybasketball.com
March 30th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
brian mcnally says:
You guys sound like a bunch of Republican. Lower the freaking rim already. “Yes We Can”