Inequities in college basketball? Auriemma has some thoughts

Although he tested positive for COVID-19, Geno Auriemma didn’t lose his taste for equality. He sat there at home as his UConn basketball team headed to San Antonio, watching the Huskies roll in the first two rounds, watching the NCAA suffer multiple embarrassments as the inequity between the men’s and women’s national tournaments continued to surface.

Auriemma was not surprised. “There was no, ‘Oh, wow!’ moment for me,” Auriemma said after he had rejoined the Huskies for Saturday’s game against Iowa. “No, ‘I can’t believe it.’ ”

A few dumbbells that passed as a weight room. No March Madness logo across center court. Smaller gift bags. A different COVID test. News conferences that didn’t provide a transcription service like the men. Photos made available throughout the men’s tournament, yet only starting with the women’s Sweet 16. Food discrepancies.

“Years ago, you could say, ‘OK, what difference does it make?’ Even though you knew what you were doing wasn’t exactly equitable,” Auriemma said. “In today’s world, there’s just too much information out there. Just too many people paying attention. I did think, how could they be so insensitive? It wasn’t even the weight room or the food situation. You heard stories about the food situation in Indianapolis as well. Accommodations, restrictions, none of that. To me, it’s all a symbol.

“An example of how no matter how much time has passed since Title IX was enacted (in 1972) — I equate it to racism. You can say we had the Civil Rights Act of 1964. OK, all that meant is this is what you should do, and if you don’t you are going to get into trouble. That didn’t mean everybody was going to do it. We have Title IX. This is what you have to do to comply. ‘OK, so what’s the bare minimum I have to do? I’m only complying because it’s the law, not because I think it’s the right thing to do.’ That’s the way it has been approached at a lot of places. You know as well as I do the situation I had to deal with at UConn for a number of years. And we were winning championships. Can you imagine what it’s like at the other 95 percent of the schools in America? Our situation

now at UConn is probably unusual because of the way we’re treated. Not everybody is valued like we are.”

I had asked Auriemma for 10 minutes Friday. He gave me 30.

Yes, the fact the men’s tournament used PCR tests, considered more accurate, and the women used the antigen testing bothered him. Some false positives led to stressful moments for those women. Yes, the “March Madness” matter led Auriemma to wonder exactly how far the law firm hired by the NCAA to conduct a gender-equity review of all its championships will press on financial matters. He also is irked at the disrespect shown to the women with the shorter 3-point arc.

In short, the most powerful voice in women’s basketball is much more interested in getting at the root of the problem for transcendent change. You already heard some powerful opinions on the subject in recent days? Try these words on.

“It used to be death and taxes are the two sure things you can count on,” Auriemma said. “In my mind, the two things you can count on are racism and sexism. They are embedded in the culture of not just the United States but everywhere. Add religious intolerance. Those three things have been around since the beginning of time. Look at how hard we try to deal with it, but have we really tried? Do we have enough people to deal with it?

“There are just some people in the world who are never going to respect female athletes because they believe they are less an athlete. Serena Williams doesn’t have to play Roger Federer in his prime to prove herself. Softball, baseball, different games. Basketball, both games can be great. So what are we doing here beyond perpetuating a stereotype? It’s like racism. It doesn’t start when you get to college. It doesn’t start with one organization. It starts when you’re a little kid going to school and what you’re taught at home and then it’s perpetuated by adults.”

Auriemma insists the problem does not start with the NCAA, although the events of recent days demonstrate that it certainly doesn’t preclude the ruling body.

“When the NBA decided to have the bubble, it was, ‘Spare no expense’ to make sure that it went off seamlessly,” Auriemma said. “In a horrible situation, try to make the best of it. When the WNBA had their bubble, people went, they don’t have this and that, what the men had. Well, you know what? That’s two professional organizations. They don’t have to be equal. But we’re talking about a college environment here with supposedly a non-profit organization representing male and female athletes in charge of running both championships. And you choose to do it one way in one area and another way in another area? Again, it’s not the weight room or the gift bag. It’s that it came to light the stark differences and the seat at the table women’s basketball has when it comes to the national championships.”

The Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that the NCAA itself — although it receives dues payments from colleges that receive federal funds — wasn’t subject to lawsuits for Title IX. So it’s not going to get sued over swag bags.

“The NCAA is an easy target in all this,” Auriemma said. “This is a college sports issue that starts, absolutely, on campus. The NCAA is made up of administrators, from presidents to athletic directors and so on, who work on college campuses. They fill all the committees. The NCAA gets their marching orders from college campuses. So that’s where it has to start.”

Auriemma’s premise: Each athlete should be treated as an athlete, not female or male, who is trying to reach a level of success within the confines of the school’s resources.

He used his former assistant Marisa Moseley, who Friday left Boston University to become head coach at Wisconsin, as an example.

“She understands their resources at BU and how their athletes are going to be able to be funded is not going to be the same as UConn,” Auriemma said. “Their men are probably not going to have the resources our men do, either. But if the women are treated the exact same as the men at BU, then I think the school is doing the intended job.

“The disparity is really hard to generalize, because it’s not the same at every school. If you’re at one of the big schools where the budget is $200 million and you’re spending X amount on facilities and resources and you’re giving your women the best facilities and resources, treating them with the same priority, then you’re doing your job.”

The flip side, Auriemma pointed out, is when schools multiply their investment, they multiply their expectations.

“Bring in the best coaches, promote the sport the best way possible and demand the coach perform at a certain level commensurate with what they’re given,” he said. “Yes, more coaches will lose jobs. People would rather deal with that than deal with no expectations for your job performance.

“If you hire a guy to coach the men’s team and in four, five years that guy doesn’t go to the NCAA Tournament, it doesn’t matter what it costs, they’re going to fire that guy. If you hire a women’s coach and all you expect from that woman is graduate all your players, make sure everybody stays out of trouble and, oh yeah, try to win more games than you lose … how much are you really going to invest in that program?”

The men’s tournament budget for 2019 was $28 million, while the women’s was $14.5 million. There are some legitimate reasons, such as the fact that first-round women’s games are held on campus. In large part because of the deal with CBS, the men’s tournament brought in a total net income of $864.6 million in 2019. The women’s event lost $2.8 million. The larger truth is the women’s game has enjoyed steadily increasing viewership and growing television sponsorships (not part of the NCAA bottom line). Yet the result? Unlike the men, the NCAA provides no payouts to schools for wins in the women’s tournament. No revenue-sharing. March Madness means an awful lot to CBS and its relationship with the college power structure run overwhelmingly by men.

“I’m not privy to the contractual obligations,” Auriemma said. “But how hard is it to put March Madness on the logo instead of Women’s Basketball? So I guess my feeling is there is something preventing them from doing that where they should say, listen, we’re going to do it anyway and you’re going to have to deal with it. It’s all about how much leverage you have and how much leverage you are willing to use. And what are you willing to give up so someone else has the same feeling about March Madness?

“How about how the games are promoted? Our game with Iowa is the first women’s tournament game since 1995 to be broadcast on a national (over-the-air) network. And that was our game when we played the Final Four on Saturday and Sunday and were happy to do it because we were on CBS. To think it has taken 25 years to happen again, crazy. In 2002, we played the Final Four at the Alamodome and we had nearly 30,000 fans (a record 29,619). Even that’s not enough to say, hey, this is a big-time operation? This is a sport worth investing more into?

“Our leadership has to be better at the NCAA level, men’s and women’s side. Our leadership has to be better at each university in America.”