Author Topic: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded? (Read 2030 times)

mumzie · « **on:** March 09, 2004, 11:25:44 PM »

Now - before you all get your knickers in a twist - read what I've written - ok? :-)

This isn't a guy against gal thing. It's a legitimate question.

I've heard over and over again that the reason the PWBA failed is because it was always the same faces on TV over and over.

Yet, reading this month's Bowlers Journal, Martin says that the exempt tour is going to succeed and build stars because the same faces will be on TV over and over.

Have I missed something, or what???

Juggernaut · « **Reply #1 on:** March 10, 2004, 02:32:39 PM »

What I think is this. The pwba folded because the core market for it wasn't strong enough to support it.

Yes, lots of women bowl, but how many will watch it on tv? How many are influenced by what the pro is throwing, or are they influenced more by what they like?

Men will watch the pro tour avidly, but the products advertised, and also but the latest, greatest ball that the pro won the latest tournament with

Not knocking the ladies, heck they're great, it's just that not enough people were watching the ladies or buying the products, plain and simple.
--------------------
Just call me Darreyl, it's much easier to say!

BadShot · « **Reply #2 on:** March 10, 2004, 02:37:19 PM »

without trying to be chauvinistic . . .

did you look at the faces/features of the women that were appearing on the pwba telecasts?!? i'd have to love the heck outta bowling to watch those heifers bowl . . .

women in general just don't generate the power that the men do . . . i can see that type of ball reaction in my league.

lack of charisma . . .

men's bowling has matured to the point where you won't see the same people every weekend. just too many good bowlers. but you will probably see one or two of the top sixteen every weekend.

women definitely deserve a tour, but reason dictates that it should not be a charity case for the owners/sponsors.

audiences want to see the types of people that they aspire to become, not an advertisement for weight watchers and butches-r-us . . .

that's my opinion of the women's tour situation.
--------------------
That which does not kill me makes me stronger . . .

northface28 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 10, 2004, 02:38:30 PM »

Im going to go with mumzie on this. I dont see the exempt tour lasting very long, I think it will get very stale after while and they will go back to the way it is now. On the womens tour I got tired LeAnne Barrette, Carolyn Dorin Ballard, Kelly Kulick, Kim Terrell, Michelle Feldmen, and Wendy McPherson making every show or what seemed like every show. I enjoyed watching but it got very redundant after a while. Same women, different centers.
--------------------
She bangs, She bangs!!!- William Hung

Steven · « **Reply #4 on:** March 10, 2004, 03:01:29 PM »

quote:
I've heard over and over again that the reason the PWBA failed is because it was always the same faces on TV over and over.

Mumzie: If you've heard the above 'over and over' again, then it must be from a group of people who don't want to acknowledge reality (or possibly listening to Michelle talk to herself). You know, I know, and the American people know the real truth -- the PWBA tour failed because it didn't have mass appeal. Period. It's not about marketing, commentators, or who happened to be the players on any given week. The cruel fact is that there weren't enough viewers willing to watch. No viewers = no sponsors = no telecast = no tour.

Don't make this more complicated that it really is.
--------------------
"You want the truth? -- You can't handle the truth! "

bamaster · « **Reply #5 on:** March 10, 2004, 03:43:28 PM »

Couple things come to my mind. First off, the same faces kept showing up on the PWBA because there are not that many very talented women bowlers who toured. Don't get mad at me, there were 34 entries in the PWBA tour stop they had in Houston last year. Absolutely pathetic, so no wonder it's the same people on tv, there is no competition.

I've watched women bowling before and it's as exciting as watching an apple brown. Maybe Feldman is fun to watch... but no one could throw it better than Tammy Turner did back in the days. I like watching board-splitters with the best of them, but from what I have been told (don't know from experience) that ladies tour was a little softer and easier to score. But like I said, I don't know for sure.

Also, maybe a pro shop operator can chime in here, of your monthly ball sales, how many come from women? Bowling has always been a mostly-men sport, as far as I know. That leads me to believe that product sales come from mostly men. The fact that television viewership is higher for men than it has been for women is a reflection of that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the LCT wants to lower the qualifying average to 170 for membership. That's 40 pins lower than the PBA requirement. And I think the PBA requirement is too low. So now the LCT is bringing in a lower caliber bowler to its ranks. Probably a smart move financially, but that won't change a thing when it comes to who will be dominating the money list.

I think the PBA is definitetly on the right track. They have the talent on Tour, they viewers, the financial backing and an enourmous regional program which is a breeding ground for the next year's stars. The PWBA had very little, if any, of that in my humble opinion.

I think the LCT is a good move. Build from the ground up. Once they build a consistent regional program they may be able to yield a better touring crop. Until then, it seems the public was tired of the same women faces on television.

Tony
http://www.allBowling.com

mumzie · « **Reply #6 on:** March 10, 2004, 06:00:41 PM »

quote:

did you look at the faces/features of the women that were appearing on the pwba telecasts?!? i'd have to love the heck outta bowling to watch those heifers bowl .

Take a good look at a number of the guys, as well...
Although they can throw the ball well, most of them aren't going to win any beauty contests either - AND - I don't think any of them are Chippendale material.

michelle · « **Reply #7 on:** March 10, 2004, 09:25:23 PM »

We had a tour stop in Houston? Only thing I can think of that was in Houston was the Luci, and that is a regional doubles event that usually fills long before the deadline...

Juggernaut · « **Reply #8 on:** March 10, 2004, 09:54:33 PM »

O.K. here it is, right out in the open for everybody. LET THE WOMEN PROS JOIN THE PBA! PBA stands for professional bowlers association, right? Aren't the ladies considered to be professionals?

I know the odds of them winning isn't nearly as good, but some of the ladies could probably hold their own, and something is better than nothing. So I say, LET THEM IN, after all, variety is the spice of life.

P.S. And just think of the viewership increase if one of the ladies DID make the show! Men and women both would watch. And if a lady should win, that would REALLY increase the interest!!!!!!
--------------------
Just call me Darreyl, it's much easier to say!

bamaster · « **Reply #9 on:** March 10, 2004, 10:10:06 PM »

quote:
We had a tour stop in Houston? Only thing I can think of that was in Houston was the Luci, and that is a regional doubles event that usually fills long before the deadline...

Ok, it wasn't last year... it was October 2002.

Round 1
Round 2
Round 3
Round 4
Round 5
Round 6
Championship

Tony

Edited on 3/10/2004 11:04 PM

mumzie · « **Reply #10 on:** March 11, 2004, 12:20:50 AM »

I may eat my words some day, but I really doubt it.
The PBA will NOT let the women in. Ever. Once in a while a woman might win the pro am and get to bowl with the boys, but that's the only loophole the ladies have, and will likely be the only one they'll ever have. Period.

Now - for all you stating let the women bowl with the men -Lets say for discussions sake that the PBA says ok, you can bowl next year. the women have NOT been allowed to bowl this year, and are therefore NOT in a good position for the all exempt field next year. Do you really think that the women can qualify through the "rabbit" squads and then make it through the tournaments? I don't. Maybe once in a while one would, but I don't think so.

Now - I want a woman's tour as much as the next person - a lot more than most. I don't want to donate to the men's tour, and I doubt any other women feel any differently.

mumzie · « **Reply #11 on:** March 11, 2004, 01:13:21 PM »

As I have said before in other threads - the PWBA was not just about TV. The issues that were rampant throughout the organization had very little to do with TV. The organization was very poorly run, poorly organized, and with all the politics and infighting, has been doomed for several years.

When posting the original thread, I was attempting to address the messages I've been hearing. I thought it was interesting that the industry was saying that one tour folded and the other would be a huge success based on the same rationale. That's all.

BadShot · « **Reply #12 on:** March 11, 2004, 01:30:22 PM »

mumzie, you're right about the guys, too. but the power of the shots is what attracts viewers, i think. why is john daly such an attraction in golf?!? i tend to not watch the men's matches when they're just a couple of redneck hippos playing up the 2nd arrow . . .

chris barnes, amletto monacelli, robert smith and patrick healy, jr are the only bowlers i can think of just off the top of my head who can even pretend to look decent/athletic. but there's alot of power out there, and for the fans that's enough.

someone with real charisma, who can cross the bowling boundaries (an arnold palmer or tiger woods of bowling) will need to appear in order to salvage both tours, in my opinion. walter ray isn't the pied piper. i don't see anyone out there, except barnes, who may have a shot to help the pro game.
--------------------
That which does not kill me makes me stronger . . .

michelle · « **Reply #13 on:** March 11, 2004, 02:16:00 PM »

quote:
quote:
We had a tour stop in Houston? Only thing I can think of that was in Houston was the Luci, and that is a regional doubles event that usually fills long before the deadline...

Ok, it wasn't last year... it was October 2002.

See, now if you had said Stinkadena, I would have placed it right away

I'm not really certain where to place blame on the low turnout for that event...I feel that some of those seed were sown by the lack of sport-compliant patterns in the regional program. The Dallas turnout in 2001 was much higher than in 2002, and I know a number of people told me that they did not feel competitive due to the lack of equipment and exposure to sport patterns. Many of those same people that did not bowl Dallas in 2002 were probably the same ones that skipped stinkadena. There were a number of regionals prior to 2003 that were on relatively easy patterns, and as such, the regional program did little to prepare people for the national events.

Author Topic: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded? (Read 2030 times)

mumzie

Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

Juggernaut

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

BadShot

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

northface28

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

Steven

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

bamaster

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

mumzie

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

michelle

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

Juggernaut

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

bamaster

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

mumzie

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

mumzie

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

BadShot

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?

michelle

Re: Why should the exempt tour succeed when the women's tour folded?