Women's basketball: still not ready for prime time?

From our guest blogger, Catherine Kozub, comes a word on March Madness:

You may recall that it's almost one year since Don Imus uttered his idiotic comments. (Editor's note: Imus is back on the air, free to slur again from the studios of WABC in New York.) The Rutgers'women's team will be playing tomorrow night for a spot in the Final Four. Once again, like most women's college hoops, the game can only be seen if you have cable television. (It will be aired on ESPN.)

I suppose the good thing about women not having the same opportunity as men for earning a lot of dollars in basketball is that they are more likely to stay in college and earn their degrees than the top male players. I'll admit that early in the NCAA tournament many of the women's games are kind of boring compared to the men's games because scores are more uneven; I think that this is because there are not as many women competing in the sport as men. Nonetheless, as each stage of the tournament progresses, the games becoming more exciting and higher-scoring.

It's too bad that there are not any broadcast TV networks (i.e., CBS, ABC, FOX) covering the final women's games. CBS shows all the men's games. Oh, well. I guess it's not a big deal...maybe by the time I'm eligible for Social Security (assuming there is Social Security 40 years from now), women will be playing on network television.

At least there is a woman running for president this year and she's had a lot of TV time. Have any of the candidates talked about Social Security, or is that not important anymore? Are voters more excited about the prospect of universal health care than about getting $300 bi-weekly (is it even that much?) if they manage to exceed the age of 65?

I'm taking a brief break from watching a women's college basketball game between Maryland and Stanford. Well, back to the game - Maryland (my team) is down by 8 points.

--Catherine Kozub