As the curtain closes on another thrilling season of women’s basketball, I’m left pondering the what-ifs. My journey began at the NCAA Final Four and took me on a whirlwind ride through the Olympics and into the WNBA playoffs. Last night, I was among the 1.84 million viewers captivated by Caitlin Clark’s electrifying performance in the first round. However, I couldn’t help but notice that the other three matchups failed to garner the same attention, collectively drawing fewer viewers than the single Fever game.
Despite the naysayers, I firmly believe that women’s basketball has the potential to captivate audiences. So, I’d like to propose a simple yet impactful change to elevate the sport: revamp the playoff format. The current system, adopted in 2016, features a 3-5-5 format with single-elimination games in the first two rounds. While I understand the need for change, the execution falls short.
The most glaring issue lies in the scheduling of games. The higher seed hosts Games 1 and 2, with the potential Game 3 taking place in the lower-seeded team’s arena. This setup raises more questions than answers. Take the Indiana Fever’s series, for instance. As underdogs, they were forced to play Games 1 and 2 on the road, never getting a chance to showcase their skills on their home court. And if they had managed to hold onto their slim lead, they would’ve sent the 3-seed packing to Indiana for an elimination game – a scenario that defies logic.
The solution is simple: give the higher-seeded team a legitimate advantage in Game 2, and ensure that no team has to travel for an elimination game. It’s a matter of fairness and common sense. By doing so, we could’ve seen more series go the distance, rather than the zero we witnessed in Round 1. Perhaps it’s a matter of resources, but with the influx of talent like Angel Reese and Caitlin Clark, it’s time to rethink the logistics and create a more captivating product.
Leave a Reply