Byron McCauley

bmccauley@enquirer.com

This week we learned that while its home arena is renovated, the University of Cincinnati men's basketball team will play at 9,000-seat BB&T Arena at Northern Kentucky University.

The woman's team, meanwhile, will play at a 1,000-seat high school gym.

The university may have meant no harm, basing its decision purely on attendance figures, arena availability and making it easier for the women to get to a nearby gym, as opposed to busing across the Ohio River.

But the harm it caused was real, prompting critics to wonder why women were still being treated differently than men. Even the most iconic Bearcats basketball player, Oscar Robertson, was taken aback.

“I think that it’s really difficult for the women to accept something like that, in this day and age,” Robertson told me. “They should play the same night the men play, but instead of eight o’clock play at 6. Or play in the afternoon.”

Full disclosure: One of my three daughters is a proud graduate of Saint Ursula Academy, whose fine gym will play host to the Bearcats women’s basketball team next season. And, I was part of the English faculty at UC for two years, having taught journalism classes. I admire both institutions.



The larger issue here is the dissonance reflected in the decision and its longer-term ramifications.



I understand the long-standing argument that women’s sports don’t make the kind of money men’s sports do – especially football and men’s basketball at UC, with their storied programs. It is also true that we have invested in those men's programs much longer and with more vigor.



Back in 1975, when both basketball teams played at Armory Fieldhouse, a women’s game between UC and Miami was stopped before the final buzzer. The players were ushered off the court to allow the men’s teams to warm up. The men’s game had new radio sponsors; the women’s game did not.



Women’s sports matter now more than ever, largely thanks to the federal 1972 law known as Title IX. It prohibited sex discrimination in any educational program or activity that receives federal financial aid. Today women enjoy unprecedented success -- and access -- in college sports and in life.



That means there is a real possibility that my middle daughter could earn a college scholarship in golf while studying to be a veterinarian. Or my youngest girl could play collegiate soccer on scholarship while learning how to build suspension bridges.

So what's the solution? Robertson's proposed revival of the double-header is one worthy idea, as are others, including playing at Cincinnati State, Thomas More, or Mount St. Joseph.

UC signaled the desire to establish a new winning tradition in 2009 when it hired Jamelle Elliott from the University of Connecticut, where she was an assistant. UConn has the best women’s college basketball program ever. She had been a part of six national championships, one as a player and five as an assistant coach. Elliott is still building the program; however, I’m guessing it's going to be a tougher recruiting challenge to play in a high school gym, if only for a year.

This issue goes way beyond sports. It has picked the scabs off deep and old wounds. Twelve years ago, Nike produced an iconic ad campaign called “If you let us play sports.” In TV commercials, girls looked us in the eye and told us playing sports will make them confident, healthy and successful.



Women and girls matter. Girls are strong. Girls can do and be anything. I sincerely believe that, and that’s what I convey to my own daughters every chance I get.

Maybe that's why I'm struggling so much with where the UC women playing next year. The optics look more like 1975 than 2017 – even though the intent surely was to do no harm.



Byron McCauley writes a general interest column on Wednesdays and Fridays and is a member of The Enquirer editorial board. He can be reached at bmccauley@enquirer.com or 513-768-8565.