The WNBA Fan Marketing Problem

Note: This is a long opinion piece. Forewarned is forearmed.

I found this article from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (*) that explains that the governing body of Washington High School Athletics is proposing to ban booing at high school games.

"I don't know why people think it's acceptable to boo in the first place," WIAA Executive Director Mike Colbrese said. "It's a pretty novel concept to me."

Policies are still in the draft stages, and would add to WIAA rules that prohibit hand-made signs and artificial noisemakers at state tournament basketball games. Some schools, including those in the South Puget Sound League, prohibit students from painting their faces.

This leads me to conclude the following - why go to the games at all? Why not just watch the games on TV? Why not just wait for the boxscore to come in the paper?

"But if you don't go, you're going to miss the amazing athleticism of these fine young athletes!"

Well...athleticism only goes so far. If you watch, say, the NBA Network, you can see amazing athleticism (or great team play, if you're watching women's basketball) almost 24 hours a day. If the entire purpose of attending a sports game is "to see these wonderful players in real time", then television suits those purposes just as well. Furthermore, it's free, or at least it's cheaper than paying $10 to park and $35 for a ticket where you're surrounded by people that you'd normally cross the street to avoid. (**)

I'm not really so much interested in what the article is about - you can have your own opinions regarding how much abuse opposing teams should face from the crowd, or how officials should be treated, and how much is too much. My main point is that the entire concept of being a fan has become quite sanitized and passive.

Think about your basketball experience. You show up at the arena. You sit down and get a good (hopefully) seat. From that point on your participation is not only unnecessary, it's also probably not wanted, either, as the article above shows. You let the fans start showing up with their own signs and costumes and immediately fear sets in from echelons above reason that something might get all out of control, the bete noire of organized sports.

Remember the "every-bo-dee-CLAP-YOUR-HANDS!" chant that you hear piped in to just about every basketball game around? It's a sad state when the audience has to be told to show its appreciation.

I remember an Atlanta Dream game where the crowd went deathly silent. It was odd. We were getting stomped by twenty points again. I don't think the crowd knew what to do. They were afraid to boo, so they just did - nothing. I swear if two fans were chatting about the weather at the opposite end of Philips Arena, I could have told you the temperature outside from hearsay.

I think you have to give fans a reason to attend games other than "boy, these players are great". There are a lot of great players in the world. Me, I'll be attending Dream games until I die - "loyalty until death" - but the problem is that there's no reason to attend WNBA games, other than "support women's athletics". Come to think of it, there's no reason to attend NBA games, either - which is why attendance is dropping in both leagues. You attend basketball games because a) you like basketball - a lot, and b) you have nothing better to do with your time and money.

So here's the conundrum the WNBA faces - how do you get people to watch WNBA games when there are other things they could be doing with their time and money? This is the conundrum faced by sports marketers across the board.

My solution: make the game a communal experience again. Make the thrill of attending an WNBA game something that can't be replicated by watching the game on TV.

Some of the funniest and most memorable parts of basketball games are the promotions. Anything that involves the audience is a winner. Anything that takes them out of the seat and makes them a part of the action is a winner.

What are the winners?

* Giving away free swag. I love it when the Dream dance team starts throwing around free crap or shooting T-shirts in the air. The rule is that you should not give away too much stuff - then it becomes "everybody gets a trophy" day. There should be some real doubt left in the audience as to whether or not you'll get any swag.

* The kiss-cam. You don't see kissing on televised basketball.

* The dance-off. Now the fans are cast in the role of judges.

* Having fans shoot free throws for cash, little kids dressing up - "Hey! That could be (me, my kid) down there!"

What are the losers?

* "Everybody-clap-your-hands."

* Mascots. Not all mascots though. The Famous Chicken knows how to do it. (Can't we get him at a Dream game?) He uses props, humor, and you never know what the hell he's going to do next. A guy standing around in a suit looking goofy just doesn't do it.

* "Free swag to the first five thousand who show up." Everybody gets a trophy. Meh.

If the WNBA is going to move tickets, the audience has to be made active participants. They have to have some sort of emotional investment in coming to the games other than a love of basketball. This is how you draw in the casual basketball fans and turn them into screaming maniacs that would run through Hell in a gasoline suit before they'd miss attending a game in person.

The most involved fans in the world are English (and European) football fans. They have it going on; it's a friggin' religion over there. They have team scarfs, team colors, dances, signs (gigantic mo-fos that cover several rows of seats), chants (that's why I included those chants). Going to a Premiere League football game is about more than just watching football. It's a communal experience, in the same way that going to The Rocky Horror Picture Show is an experience.

"But what about hooliganism? We don't want a bunch of gaily-painted psychos at WNBA games! We don't want riots!"

True. "Hooliganism" is just fan participation that's completely out of control. There's a spectrum.

Fan participation scale

0 - reading the boxscore, watching highlights on ESPN
1 - watching the game, passively, on television
2 -
3 - fans come to games but are passive observers - the norm at WNBA games - in some cases, this is actually a "2" on the scale and not a "3"
4 -
5 -
6 -
7 - an interesting English football game, most Japanese baseball games
8 - a really interesting English football game
9 -
10 - the roof is raised, violence may spill over
11 - firehoses and teargas - police are called

My theory: If you move the participatory experience to a 7 or 8 from the current 2 or 3 it is now, more people will attend the games. We don't want hooligans, but we don't want passive attendees, either.

How do we get there? Anyone running a WNBA marketing plan would not want to lose control. However, I think more can be added in, in small steps, such as:

- A creative cheering section. Make one section of seats the "official cheering section". (You limit the riotousness to one area.) Fans are offered reduced costs for good seats - you don't want to displace season tix holders who have paid full value for their seats. Here's the rub: you have to audition to get in. "Hey, Dream fans! If you show that you're willing to go the last full measure, you'll get great seats for $5 a game!")

Yes, you lose the value of the tickets - but in exchange you get something that no other WNBA team has - a group of fanatics that are willing to raise the roof for the entire length of the game.

- Chants. The chants can be posted on the jumbotron. They can be laudatory ("la la la the Dream is great la la la") or they can be centered around individual players. Or even the enemy - hey, in NHL games in Nashville they would show little vidoes of the Nashville Predators mascot making the enemy mascot miserable. Why not a few catcalls.

- Prizes for creativity. "Wildest costume." "LARGEST sign." Winner gets a private chat session with Dream players.

- The (Atlanta Dream, Washington Mystics, etc.) Band. At last, the Brooklyn Dodgers Sym-PHONY Orchestra can be recreated! "Fans, if you can form a *band* that will play at games, not only will we *let* you play while seated in the audience, but we'll reduce the price of your tickets.")

(* * *)

The more the fans are involved, the more tickets you'll sell. Really, what does the WNBA have to lose?

As a marketer, you try the ideas, making sure the proper controls are there. If an idea works, you keep it and introduce it to the other teams. If it fails, you either adjust it so that it works next time or forget it. But a marketer should be doing new things every single game. I suggest that the book WNBA marketers should read should not be "Sports Marketing 101" but the autobiography of John Boyd - you should always be doing something different at every game - "by the time the opposition figures out what you're doing, you're doing something else".

Imagine this:

A WNBA fan comes to his or her first game. Let's say it's a Minnesota Lynx game.

They immediately enter a sea of color. There is green and white everywhere. The arena is packed. Fans are waving around flags - not just little flags, but giant banners. The atmosphere is reminiscent of a Mardi Gras. Fans are shouting encouragement at their favorite players, who are taking their warmups.

The Lynx take the field as the lights dim. The crowd goes wild. The Minnesota Weakest Lynx "Band" begins to fire up their somewhat out-of-tune instruments and the crowd begins chanting the Lynx Fight Song.

As the game continues, the crowd - never stops talking. There are claps. There are chants. There are chants at the enemy, creative stuff, too. The crowd gets involved before the game, stays involved during the game, and indeed, only breaks up slowly after the game.

It's an experience he or she never forgets. Tickets are purchased for the next game.

And the cycle continues....






(*) - for some reason, they call the website seattlepi.com, leading one to think that this is a website devoted to private investigation.

(**) - one could argue that movie goers are not only passive spectators, but are happy in being passive. The difference, however, is that movies by their nature are radically different experiences each time that require passivity for the suspension of disbelief whereas sports are just variations on a theme.

John and Mary

I was inspired by a blog post from a blog called Bloggin' NBA: The Good Girls of Basketball. The gist of the article is that WNBA seem to be rarely involved in the sort of "bad boy" behavior associated with NBA players.

Part of it is that from the time a player is a young prospect until the time he's an NBA veteran, there are pressures on all of the authority figures involved in his life to do two things when he gets in trouble:

a) cover up, and
b) look away.

You can look at multiple examples of a male basketball player and a female basketball player in the same situations, but each will have to live by a different set of rules to be successful.

For example, there are several major colleges * that feel the need to improve their college basketball status by grabbing a successful player out of high school. There is pressure both from the high school administration and from outside forces for this kid to make it to college. If grades have to be "brought up" artifically by means legal or not, there is the money and the willpower to do it.

If John Doe Baller is an all-"D" student, lots will happen. His grades will be altered. Someone will take his SATs for him. Or he'll be extensively tutored, or he'll be sent to a private school that is simply a memorization boot camp for future college ballers.

If Mary Roe Baller is an all-"D" student, she'll just be allowed to fail. There aren't powerful alumni support organization in women's basketball that are going to make those kind of arrangements for a prospect. Pat and Geno will just sign someone else. Mary might have to get her GED, or spend two years in JUCO before she gets to put on the orange or blue.

John will get money under the table, under the belief that he brings money to the school. (He doesn't, according to statistical studies - the college will at best break even; basketball and football are status symbols and not money earners.)

Mary will get a handshake. Maybe some new shoes.

If John is pulled over for speeding and is under the influence of alcohol, Joe says, "I play for Money U." The officer recognizes him. Joe is allowed to go on his way.

If Mary is pulled over for speeding and Mary says, "I play for Money U," Mary spends 24 hours in the drunk tank and probably faces suspension from the team or worse.

If John gets mad at someone and beats Richard Victim with an inch of his life, a massive game of cover-up begins. Alumni play good cop and bad cop. The good cops of the alumni offer Richard Victim money to make the assault charges go away. The bad cops tells Richard that he'll become persona non grata at the campus. The evil cops threaten Richard's life if he squeals. Richard drops the charges and the record is expunged. The media department has no comment.

If Mary gets mad at someone and beats Rhonda Victim with an inch of her life, Mary loses her scholarship and gets 200 hours of community service. Next year, she's playing for a bottom-tier Division I school after sitting out a year. The coach and the media department of the school lament Mary's hair-trigger temper.

John can leave college after a year if he doesn't like it. He claims hardship. He walks right into a seven-figure salary.

If Mary doesn't like college, tough titty. She sweats it all four years. If Mary suffers an ACL tear in her sophomore year that ends her career, well, life is tough.

By the time Mary reaches the WNBA, all of the really bad apples have been weeded out. The violent types, the boozers, the chronic fuck-ups. Mary has learned that talent takes place to not screwing up your shot. Whereas John and his friends have learned the opposite lesson - if you screw up your shot, talent provides a multitude of second opportunities.

The NBA is a player's league. The players set the rules. They are primary.

The WNBA is an owner's league. The owners set the rules. They are primary.

If John is seen partying it up at discos with lines of cocaine freely offered, the media cover it up.

If Mary is seen partying it up at discos with lines of cocaine freely offered, the media doesn't cover it up. Nothing Mary does draws any attention from the media. Unless Mary Roe Baller is snorting cocaine off a (heretofore supposedly) heterosexual supermodel's backside. Then everyone cares.

If John Doe Baller is snorting cocaine off a (heretofore supposedly) heterosexual male model's backside, that bit of information NEVER reaches the media. The cocaine, maybe; the homosexuality, never. Any NBA reporter who reported it would be shut out of locker room news gathering so fast it would make his head spin. Even Mike Lupica would never have the same level of access if he reported something like that. Even though the NBA's player culture might be notoriously intolerant, the players would roast that unfortunate reporter alive. The editor, were he so foolish to let such a story reach the print or the air, might lose his job.

(There is an exception - if John is suffering from HIV. Then John's tale of woe becomes a cautionary tale.)

There are times, frankly, when John wishes he could be forgotten.

There are times, frankly, when Mary wishes she could be remembered.



* - These major colleges are sometimes called "basketball colleges". The tirem is not mean to compliment the institution reaching its athletic goals. In essence, these are trade schools. As Paul Fussell wrote, the quality of an educational institution is usually (but not always) inversely proportional to the quality of its sports teams and the role that sports plays in campus life.

Small Market Blues

A Kansas City sports blog laments the fact that not only can the owners of the Sprint Center in Kansas City not "land" an NBA or NHL team, it can't land a WNBA team either. The arena's owners have been chatting up a Kansas City franchise for years now, including the years 2006 (when Charlotte disbanded and the players were dispersed) and 2008, when the Dream got its team.

The lone commenter writes "no tennant (sic) in the sprint center is better than a wnba team". It looks like the lone commenter is going to get his wish.

Here's what I don't get about the small market blues. When Baltimore's mayor talked up the possibility of a WNBA franchises, there were many more comments than the ones on the blog I linked to in the first paragraph. A third of the comments were the angrydumbjock.com crowd, who feared that some lesbian somewhere in Baltimore might be made happy by the arrival of a WNBA team. Another third focused on the perceived corruption of Baltimore's mayor.

The final third considered the arrival of a WNBA franchise as an insult. "Baltimore is a big league city," was the cry. They feared that the acceptance of a WNBA franchise would doom them to second-class status.

Here's one thing about dumbjocks and dumbjocksniffers - despite the fact that many of them are in sales, marketing, and the traditional "macho boy" kinds of business professions, when it comes to spots fandom they toss their business acumen right out the window. They forget about the necessity of networking.

First, take a look at all of the WNBA cities. They are all big league cities. In the entire history of the WNBA, there has been only one city that didn't have a corresponding NBA franchise - Uncasville, Connecticut, home of the Mohegan Sun casino. (The other is Seattle, but it did have an NBA franchise at the beginning of 2008.)

Second, many of these cities still have NBA ownership or staff operations.

Third, just about every WNBA game is attended by someone who knows something in the NBA. Either actual NBA players are watching (whenever I attend Dream games, the Dream make sure to highlight them on the jumbotron), or arena owners, or local businessment with money and sports connections, or whatever.

You would think that people would come to the obvious conclusion - if you want an NBA franchise, the best way to draw the NBA's attention is to start a WNBA team. Claims of the dumbjocksniffers set aside, the WNBA is assisted financially by the NBA because David Stern sees it in the NBA's best interest to have the WNBA around. And what does it cost the NBA to prop up the W? About as much as it costs for a low-scoring point guard on the New York Knicks. It's a low-cost subsidy that yields high results. (My fear is that the next WNBA commissioner will not be as smart as Stern is.) Those little kids that go to WNBA games might grow up to be WNBA fans -- and NBA fans as well.

When you start a WNBA francise, you make friends with WNBA President Donna Orender. Donna is in David Stern's back pocket. If you know Donna, you know David Stern by extension. And the rule in business is that it's easier to do business with people with whom you have some sort of "in", some sort of social connection.

What you don't do is belly up to the bar and claim, "We're a big league city and we deserve consideration". One thing about big league cities - they don't brag about how big league they are. It's little league cities that have some point to make.

So if you're living in Baltimore, or Kansas City, or Tulsa, why don't you use your brains? Get that WNBA team. A few seasons of good attendance, and when those NBA owners want to bail out on their teams - and you know that's going to happen sooner or later - guess where David Stern and the ownership will be looking first?

Imminent Doom of WNBA Foretold

With the Houston Comets franchise in danger of either relocating or being folded, even WNBA fans are expressing some doubt about the WNBA's stability. Jock-ish sportswriters and perpetual detractors say that the WNBA can't work and that the financial troubles and franchise relocations are a sign that no one really gives a damn and that WNBA watchers need to turn their attentions to more serious and stable sports.

I think that to drive the point home, the WNBA should look at the following unstable sports franchises. If the names aren't known to you, you can go to Wikipedia or a sports encyclopedia - I don't expect readers to be experts on dead leagues.

(* * *)

1876: Baseball's National League founded with eight teams.
1877: League loses franchises in New York and Philadelphia. League stumbles forward with six teams.
1878: League loses three franchises. Picks up three expansion franchises. Still a six-team league.
1879: League loses another two franchises. This time, picks up four franchises and is up to an eight-team league.
1880: League loses one franchise, picks up another franchise.
1881: League loses one franchise, picks up one franchise.
1882: For the first time, the league actually continues with the same group of franchises it had last year. However, there's competition from another league called the American Association.
1883: League loses another two franchises, but picks up two.
1884: Amazing! Once again, the league continues with the same franchises it had the year before!
1885: Still unstable. Loses a franchise, but picks another one up.
1886: Loses two more franchises, picks up another two. How can you tell who's in the league and who isn't in the league by this time?
1887: Drops two franchises, picks up two more. When is this crap going to end?

(* * *)

1920: National Football League starts out with 14 teams. One of them only plays one game. Scheduling left up to individual teams. No championship game.
1921: League blows up to 22 teams - however, five of the teams will fold after this year. Muncie and Cleveland will also fold after the season.
1922: It's going to be 18 teams this year, I think.
1923: League expands to 20 teams.
1924: That didn't work. Back to 18 teams. Chaotic scheduling. no championship game.
1925: Back to 20 teams this year. Championship, however, is a joke. We still can't figure out who the 1925 NFL Champion was.
1926: The NFL had 22 teams playing...well, at least part of an NFL season. Some folded. Some moved to rival leagues. College fans sit around and mock NFL, predict the league will be out of business in three years.
1927: It's time for radical cost-cutting measures. The weak sisters of the league are eliminated. This cuts the league down to 12 teams, its weakest ever. One team plays 13 games, another team plays five games, much laughter abounds.
1928: Down to 10 teams now. Two teams from the year before folded. College sports writer Norman Aloysious Chad predicts that league won't make it to end of year. In a column that showcases Aloysious's literary brilliance, he pens the well-known line "Who watches that crap, anyway?"
1929: Back up to 12 teams. One team decides to play a game under floodlights. Press claims that stunts like that can't save the NFL.
1930: Some teams move. Some teams drop out. League expands. We have 11 teams...I think.
1931: League has to cut down to 10 teams. Due to the Depression, one team folds in mid-season. Writers write 14th column of year on "NFL: An Experiment That Failed".

(* * *)

1946-47: Basketball Association of America starts out with uneven assortment of teams - six in one league, five in another.
1947-48: Four of the teams from the year before immediately collapse. They have to bring in another team from some other league to even out the teams.
1948-49: Looks promising. Four teams from the National Basketball League join the BAA. It's a twelve-team league!
1949-50: With both basketball leagues in bad shape, they join forces and become the National Basketball Association. They have 17 teams in three divisions.
1950-51: The 17 teams have to be contracted down to 11. Then one of the teams collapses in mid season.
1951-52: At last, some stability. One team relocates.
1952-53: For the first time, the teams from this year are the same teams from last year.
1953-54: So much for hope. The team in Indianapolis folds. That leaves the new NBA with nine teams.
1954-55: The franchise in Baltimore collapses in mid-season. With eight teams, the verdict is in: "pro basketball is a joke!"
1955-56: One of the teams ends up relocating in the tenth year of the league's existence.
1956-57: Thank god. More stability in an eight-team league with Minneapolis the westernmost team.
1957-58: Two relocations this time. It looks like the NBA is doomed to be an afterthought.

(* * *)

When looking back on these old failed leagues, the WNBA needs to learn some hard lessons. Either that, or they'll be a sports footnote, like those old failed leagues known as the National League, National Football League, and National Basketball Association.

The WNBA's "All-Sexy" Team?

According to MKRob at his Sports Blog, this team would be:

C: Lisa Leslie, Sparks
F: Candace Parker, Sparks
F: Swin Cash, Storm
G: Armintie Price, Sky
G: Deanna Nolan, Shock

Coach: Dawn Staley (ex-WNBA, now head coach at South Carolina)

I would replace Staley - who isn't even in the WNBA - with Jessie Kenlaw of the Washington Mystics. Now if we're going to open up the game to male coaches, well, that's a different ballgame. (I'll leave it up to you to figure out who the sexiest male coach is.)

Is such an article sexist? I don't think so. Baseball does this kind of stuff all the time. All-Handsome, All-Ugly, All-Ethnic, All-Tall, All-Blonde, All-Players With Long Names, etc. If the post stated that sexiness was the only value these players had, it would be sexist. However, I'd put these five players against any five in the WNBA in terms of talent.

Put a Milo on Her

For those who don't care about baseball, there's a book called Moneyball, written by Michael M. Lewis, which tells the story of how Oakland Athletics general manager Billy Beane turned to statistical analysis to turn the A's around for pennies on the dollar.

However, some of Beane's decisions had nothing to do with statistics. The book takes the reader inside the Oakland A's draft process. Beane and his staff have to sort through literally hundreds of players, speaking with scouts and making analytical decisions.

But before a single slide rule is touched, we learn about Milo. Milo was a former administrative employee of the Oakland A's who would just say the most horrible things to people and got on everyone's nerves. (He once told a new employee, as a way of greeting, "I was against hiring you.") He gained such a reputation that the name "Milo" was synonymous with someone socially maladjusted.

The Athletics draft board was a large magnetic board with hundreds of names attached. When researching the backgrounds of these players, Beane would find psychological red flags. Some had histories of problems with drugs or the law. Some had "all Fs" in college. Some were "god-squadders", people excessively preoccupied with religion. Some players were revealed to have zero scores in ambition or competitiveness on the primitive psych metrics the A's used.

Whenever Beane heard something that disturbed him, he said, "Put a Milo on him."

At that moment, a magnetic sticker with a picture of ex-Athletics employee Milo was placed next to that player's name on the board. No matter what the player's talent, that player was immediately removed from consideration. For a young player hoping to become a pro, to have a Milo put on you was a potential death sentence from the Athletics. Instead of 30 teams looking to sign you, there would now be 29.

Beane's reasoning was that small, weak franchises could not afford to have the development of players derailed by outside issues. With only so much money to spend, the Athletics had no time to invest in psychological or behavior correction - the choices of the Athletics had to pay off immediately. A club like the Yankees could afford to spend the money or wait for someone to get their head sorted out, but not the A's.

I think the above is true also with poor teams. The "head" of a player is not taken into account when drafting or acquiring players. It's a real risk to spend one's time and energy on a basket case, particularly if you have a sub-.500 record. No coach of a struggling team should be worrying about whether or not a particular player is going to "show up" mentally.

The comment about whether Courtney Paris wanted to play in the WNBA or not was what prompted this post. I don't believe that's the case about Courtney; in fact, everything I've read about Paris suggests that she wants to take her game to greater and greater levels. If this was something she had said, as an imaginary GM it might make me want to pass on her during the draft. (However, there is no proof that she's said such a thing. - Pet)

The Atlanta Dream has a couple of players I'm concerned about. One is Izi Castro Marques. Her meltdown in Madrid was shocking, and it almost cost the Brazilian national team a spot in the Olympics. Of course, we don't know the whole story about the animosity between Paul Bassul and Izi, but Izi should be controlled enough to keep her personal issues off the basketball court.

The other is Betty Lennox. Lennox and Meadors have clashed, and those clashes have made the press. Clearly, they don't see eye to eye, but if there are differing points of view, they shouldn't be reported to the press.

As the newest WNBA franchise, it's important that we make sure that we don't have any future Milos on the Dream. I'm not saying that everyone on the Dream has to have a perfect mental makeup. However, if Coach Meadors is reading this, I have a polite suggestion -- Coach Meadors, when you're evaluating talent for the 2009 Draft, and you hear stories about a senior college player clashing with coaches, or the law, or if you hear that a player's heart might not be in the game at all times, don't try to fix those things yourself.

Put a Milo on her. We'll take the basket cases after we have a WNBA Championship behind us.

Did Houston's Early Dominance Hurt the WNBA?

While netscouring, I found an interesting opinion about the WNBA found in a blog about NASCAR, of all things. As Julie Bork says it....

Let me explain:

How many people remember when the WNBA was emerging a couple of years ago? It had a great start and there was lots of interest, and there were many basketball stadiums that were built and remodeled to accommodate a national women’s team. So what happened? The Houston Comets dominated the first five years of the sport, and people lost interest. So you say what about those people from Houston, they did not loose interest, right? WRONG! The ticket sales declined to almost nothing even in the Comets home town. You can hardly give the tickets away for free now. I am from Houston, and I lost interest too.

There's no way to prove that hypothesis, of course. But it's a very interesting one.