It happens twice a week during basketball season. At one gym, the boys team runs out on the floor, the cheerleaders pumping their pom-pons as the fans cheer each starter. At another gym across town, the girls team faces another funereal atmosphere, with only parents, boyfriends and the occasional stray prepwriter dotting the stands on one side of the floor.
In a few enlightened leagues, it's not this way. The girls and boys both play on the same site on the same night, before the same fans - and no one gets shortchanged.
The natural question is obvious: Why doesn't it work this way everywhere? The answer is sadly indicative of the subcurrent of sexism that still haunts American athletics: The boys coaches won't stand for it.
In a recent meeting of a new league in California where the idea of playing the girls and boys varsity games back-to-back (with the girls game first, to be sure), one boys coach said "The girls games are terrible. I can barely stand to watch."
Others said they couldn't watch their freshmen play if the girls played at the same site, as if the boys varsity coach takes his spot in the stands at 4:30 for the 7:30 tipoff and misses not a moment of a game that includes maybe four future varsity members, none of whom remotely resemble the players they will be when the varsity coach finally gets them. He might see a half of the JV game before taking his team into the locker room to go over the scouting report and get ready for the main event, but to hear the coaches talk, they need every second of observation of boys they see every day in practice and all summer long.
Let's be serious. The boys coaches don't want the girls there for two reasons: 1) It rocks their masculine world; and 2) The girls team might actually be better in some years and the boys coach would have to swallow his not-insignificant ego.
But we all know girls can play the game (you wouldn't be reading this if you didn't believe that), though I will concede that a bad girls high school game is worse than a bad boys high school game. On the other hand, there are schools where the girls team is not only more successful, but draws better than the boys team - and puts on a much better display of fundamental basketball. When that happens, the boys coach must not only deal with a mediocre team, he must also answer too many ego-busting questions about when he's going to get it together like the girls. (And this doesn't even include the boys themselves, who also must swallow large amounts of testosterone when they're 5-20 and the girls are playing for the state title.)
Truthfully, there is not one good reason why the boys and girls shouldn't play at the same site on the same night. One of the primary justifications for high school sports is that it improves school spirit, which translates into a more upbeat campus and happier students. If that's the case, then putting the boys and girls together can only amplify the positive effects of athletics because it gets more people involved in the process.
Typically, if the girls game is at 6 p.m. and the boys follow at 7:30, fans will start to trickle in about halftime of the girls game. If it's a close game, or the girls have a good team, the fans will get involved. If they don't, nothing is lost - in fact, the boosters might even sell a few more hotdogs. Over time, more and more students and parents will make an effort to see the girls game, because they will begin to know the players and enjoy the different style of play.
In some cases, if the girls team is outstanding and the boys team weak, fans will leave at halftime of the boys game - but the best situation is when both teams are good. Then, the gym is rocking and rolling all night long, and everybody, from players to students to parents, is pumped up, excited and happy.
That last scenario is also the most negative for split sites. What do the students and fans do when both teams are good, both are playing critical games and they play at the same time in different places? If the girls are playing for the league title and the boys are playing for third place, where do the cheerleaders go? If it's the classic archrivalry in one of those years when all four teams are good, which game gets shortchanged?
Usually, it will be the girls, but not always. Girls games in the San Francisco Bay Area can draw 1,200 people on their own, and as time goes on, it's more and more likely that fans will choose to see the females rather than the males (though the opposite will still be the norm) - and what will the boys coaches say then?
Of course, some girls coaches don't want to share the gym with the boys. They say the girls can build their own audience, and they don't need to be a preliminary to anyone else.
That's true as far as it goes, but what we're really talking about here is high school sports as a whole, and high school sports benefit if the girls and boys play together. I would argue that the girls benefit most of the time as well, and that the audience they attract will soon come to the female-only preseason games or special Saturday, non-league games in January and February - if the girls team is winning.
After all, that's what it comes down to for drawing fans: winning. If you win, they will come. If boys teams win, then fans will show up. If girls teams win, fans will show up. If both teams from the same school are winning, there's no doubt that it's best for them to play together, to maximize the impact of the program, and maximize the home court advantage. If both teams are struggling, it still makes sense to keep them together, for then the two small crowds unite to be one medium-sized crowd. And finally, if one is better than the other, the stronger will help the weaker - and in time, the tables will be turned.
Finally, newspaper coverage will increase for both teams if the games are played back-to-back. Papers don't have enough people to go around, and they must cover girls games as well as boys games. If the two are at different sites, one will definitely wind up with a three-paragraph story; if they are at the same site, both will get better press, and more pictures.
But I'm preaching to the choir in this column, and what I really want to do is fire up fans of women's basketball enough that they'll go out and start agitating to have the boys and girls games in their town played on the same night at the same site. Be warned, though, that it's a long process, and will take some patient negotiating of the bureaucratic minefield.
It begins with the girls coach at your local high school. If he or she isn't in favor of it, that's your first selling job. Assuming you're successful, the next step is to to ask the boys coach what he thinks of it. Regardless of his answer, next in line is the athletic director. (If there are athletic directors for the boys and the girls, both must be talked to.) Again, the answers aren't that important - but following the process is. Later on, it will become vital that you have gone through channels.
Let's assume that the girls coach is for it, the boys coach is against it and the athletic director doesn't really care. Now, it's time to talk to the principal. At this point, having the backing of the booster club would be a good idea. Booster clubs can usually be convinced by talking about increased concessions and program sales, and should be approached through a board member who is a parent of a female athlete. If that board member brings up the issue, you won't be involved, and won't be seen as a meddling busybody (which of course you are, but nobody needs to know that.)
The principal usually will be against any change, but he also doesn't want to have any upset parents or community members around, so he'll listen. He may say that you have to write the superintendent of the school district, which isn't a bad idea even if the principal doesn't mention it. If the superintendent thinks the games should be at common sites, then it will very likely happen yesterday; if the superintendent isn't on board, things will be much more difficult. Usually, decisions are officially made by local high school leagues, which are run by the principals and/or the athletic directors - but if the superintendent has a preference, his will will be done. Even so, you might have to write a letter to each league board member, asking that the issue be brought to a vote. Most likely, you'll be ignored, which means at long last you can go to the people who will make something happen.
Those people sit on your local school boards. They are elected officials, and are very sensitive to any hint of political problems. Any action that can be seen as favoring one sex over the other is big trouble for a school board, and the mere whispering of the phrase "Title IX" can often work wonders in public forums.
But the first line of defense for any school board member is to say "Well, have you talked to the principal about it?" If you haven't, or you have missed any of the steps along the way, the board member will insist that you cover your tracks with paper and talk to everyone. (By the way, I would write a letter after every phone conversation and keep a copy, just so you have a paper trail to prove that you've done everything you've said you did. Boys coaches especially will claim never to have heard from you. Another hint is to approach a school board member with daughters, and if you're lucky enough to find one who's an athlete, you're halfway home.)
Once the school board gets involved, the superintendent will pay serious attention, because the school hires him or her. If there are a majority of votes on the school board for girls basketball games to precede boys games, then the superintendent will come to Jesus and every school in the district will now vote to support the change.
Sometimes that won't be enough, and agitation will have to take place in other school districts, but if that's the case, you should inspire interested parents or fans in neighboring districts to begin the same process.
But even if all goes well, it's important to remember that this is most likely a two-year process, and conceivably even three. There will be lots of roadblocks along the way, but eventually the idea will gain its own momentum, and supporters will come out of nowhere.
Because there is really no good argument against having the two games on the same night at the same site, the success rate for such campaigns should be two out of three or better - but it won't happen unless people push for it. Tradition, no matter how pointless, always dies hard.
