[81alum]

There are some useful observations in the NYT article, and a couple of specious ones.  On the useful side:

Shooting percentages and scoring have reached all-time lows.

Yes indeed, over the last twenty years the game has been becoming more "physical" which means the finesse game of the 1990s is becoming more and more of a wrestling match.  It is a negative and ugly development in my opinion, mostly because it diminishes one of the principle attractions of WBB compared with MBB.

Only one team, Tennessee, averaged more than 10,000 fans last season.

A lame observation.  How many teams even have a court that seats 10,000?  We certainly don't.

Brittney Griner recently told ESPN that her former coach at Baylor, Kim Mulkey, asked her not to reveal that she was gay while in college, fearful that it would harm recruiting and undermine Baylor’s basketball program.

This is absolutely repellent, and gives me another reason to hate Mulkey and Baylor.

One is to simulate tennis and hold a Grand Slam of basketball, playing the men’s and women’s Final Fours simultaneously in the same city on a trial basis.

This is a terrible idea.  WBB needs to differentiate itself more from MBB both stylistically and economically.

that the season be shortened to one semester;

That would be a disaster for quarter-based programs like us.  It also would favor programs that recruit top talent over those that develop it.  Probably another net minus for Stanford, that consistently shows enormous improvement from November to March.

One way to create more competitive balance, Ackerman said, was to reduce scholarships from 15 to 13 per university (and use the two leftover scholarships for other women’s sports).

  I'm still thinking about this one.  Major injuries seem to be much more common in WBB than in other sports, so I'm not too sure about this.

To speed up the women’s game, reduce the physicality and raise scoring, Ackerman has proposed several measures: a wider lane, a 24-second shot clock instead of a 30-second clock, and four 10-minute quarters instead of two 20-minute halves.

  I am in support of these goals, but I'm not sure I like any of these measures.  TV has already interrupted the game so much that adding a couple of extra interruptions for quarter changes seems silly.  We used to score 20 more points per game on the same shot clock, so shortening the shot clock is not needed to raise scoring, and instead will shift strategy away from set plays, the triangle, and assists and towards transition, run and gun, and selfish solo play.  A wider lane?  I need to hear a rationale for that one.  That sounds to me a little like raising the basket for women or lowering it for men!

She also called for a serious exploration of a proposal by UConn Coach Geno Auriemma to lower the rim to 9 or 9 ½ feet from 10 feet.

Ugh.  Of course Geno favors it.  It helps with his guard-heavy style of play, and hurts post-heavy programs like Stanford.  It would also promote dunking and in general make WBB appear more like MBB, which is the last thing it needs.

The one proposal that I would like to see is one that was not made.  There needs to be a serious effort--involving money--to improve the quality of officiating for WBB.  In particular officials need to consistently call fouls for pushing and shoving under the basket, as they used to be called.  The "anything goes among the big girls" mentality that has taken over the game in the last 10-15 years is overwhelmingly responsible for the defensive surge, the lack of scoring, and the stagnating to declining fan base.  Watching sumo wrestling is not what attracted fans to this game--watching elegant and crisp team play is.

[81alum]

There are some useful observations in the NYT article, and a couple of specious ones.  On the useful side:

Shooting percentages and scoring have reached all-time lows.

Yes indeed, over the last twenty years the game has been becoming more "physical" which means the finesse game of the 1990s is becoming more and more of a wrestling match.  It is a negative and ugly development in my opinion, mostly because it diminishes one of the principle attractions of WBB compared with MBB.

Only one team, Tennessee, averaged more than 10,000 fans last season.

A lame observation.  How many teams even have a court that seats 10,000?  We certainly don't.

Brittney Griner recently told ESPN that her former coach at Baylor, Kim Mulkey, asked her not to reveal that she was gay while in college, fearful that it would harm recruiting and undermine Baylor’s basketball program.

This is absolutely repellent, and gives me another reason to hate Mulkey and Baylor.

One is to simulate tennis and hold a Grand Slam of basketball, playing the men’s and women’s Final Fours simultaneously in the same city on a trial basis.

This is a terrible idea.  WBB needs to differentiate itself more from MBB both stylistically and economically.

that the season be shortened to one semester;

That would be a disaster for quarter-based programs like us.  It also would favor programs that recruit top talent over those that develop it.  Probably another net minus for Stanford, that consistently shows enormous improvement from November to March.

One way to create more competitive balance, Ackerman said, was to reduce scholarships from 15 to 13 per university (and use the two leftover scholarships for other women’s sports).

  I'm still thinking about this one.  Major injuries seem to be much more common in WBB than in other sports, so I'm not too sure about this.

To speed up the women’s game, reduce the physicality and raise scoring, Ackerman has proposed several measures: a wider lane, a 24-second shot clock instead of a 30-second clock, and four 10-minute quarters instead of two 20-minute halves.

  I am in support of these goals, but I'm not sure I like any of these measures.  TV has already interrupted the game so much that adding a couple of extra interruptions for quarter changes seems silly.  We used to score 20 more points per game on the same shot clock, so shortening the shot clock is not needed to raise scoring, and instead will shift strategy away from set plays, the triangle, and assists and towards transition, run and gun, and selfish solo play.  A wider lane?  I need to hear a rationale for that one.  That sounds to me a little like raising the basket for women or lowering it for men!

She also called for a serious exploration of a proposal by UConn Coach Geno Auriemma to lower the rim to 9 or 9 ½ feet from 10 feet.

Ugh.  Of course Geno favors it.  It helps with his guard-heavy style of play, and hurts post-heavy programs like Stanford.  It would also promote dunking and in general make WBB appear more like MBB, which is the last thing it needs.

The one proposal that I would like to see is one that was not made.  There needs to be a serious effort--involving money--to improve the quality of officiating for WBB.  In particular officials need to consistently call fouls for pushing and shoving under the basket, as they used to be called.  The "anything goes among the big girls" mentality that has taken over the game in the last 10-15 years is overwhelmingly responsible for the defensive surge, the lack of scoring, and the stagnating to declining fan base.  Watching sumo wrestling is not what attracted fans to this game--watching elegant and crisp team play is.