C.R.E.A.M. Soup de Jour

By Manny Yarbrough AKA “Tiny”

C.R.E.A.M. (Cash Rules Everything Around Me) is the omnipotent obstacle that stands in the way of all logical arguments fro settling disputes such as college football championships, women’s tennis payouts, Title IX, golf, etc.  First the populace calls for a playoff system in the college football race to determine a real Number One team.  Most arguments hold water, except C.R.E.A.M. is the overriding factor in all of this.  The bowl system that is in place has so much money tied to the BCS (Bowl Championship Series) process, that it makes it virtually impossible to put a playoff format in place.  The Bowls have been generating huge amounts of money for all who affiliate with them that they CAN’T stop/WON’T stop participating in a practice that delivers such a bountiful financial windfall.  Bowl games bring in so much revenue to the communities that they’re tied to, that any change brought about to usurp this process will be opposed with every fiber from these same communities.  The system in place (BCS) really stinks, but because of C.R.E.A.M., it will remain status quo.

I’ve heard rumblings of the unfair pay system in sports which men and women are involved in.  Here’s another instance of C.R.E.A.M. raising its ugly head.  When it comes to compensation, it all boils down to revenue(s) generated (C.R.E.A.M.0.  In the WNBA, there’s talk of forming a union, which on the surface sounds like a good idea, but the only problem is the WNBA is the underwritten wing of the NBA.  The league (WNBA) serves a wonderful purpose in the sporting fabric of society, but before they start heading toward labor strife, I feel they should concentrate their energies on making the league a self-sustaining entity so they can keep their place in the sporting world.  I think if labor problems were to arise now, the NBA could pull out and leave the league in a fledgling state, and I for one would not like to see that happen.  Women’s tennis and Women’s golf are two more unwitting pawns in C.R.E.A.M.’s ugly power play.  In the case of women’s gold, the ladies make a nice pay day in LPGA events, but I’ve heard rumblings of the LPGA not being on par with the PGA as fare as purse payouts are concerned.   The discrepancy in this situation stems from C.R.E.A.M. sponsorships.  A major portion of C.R.E.A.M. in golf revolves around sponsorship of dollars from corporations, golf companies, television, etc.  These dollars are allocated more to the men’s game than the women’s.  Armed with the PGA riding the star power of Tiger Woods, payouts are at an all time high in the men’s game.  With the emergence of LPGA stars like Annika Sorenstam and Michelle Wie, maybe we can see a shift in the horizon of C.R.E.A.M.

Now women’s tennis is a different story in the paradigm of C.R.E.A.M.  The ladies have an actionable gripe with the powers that be.  Tennis, with all its lore and pomp and circumstance, has always been a self sustaining C.R.E.A.M. entity for both men and women, and it was all good.  There have always been differences in pay between the sexes, even after Billy Jean King beat Bobby Riggs, it didn’t change the way the C.R.E.A.M. was spread out.  As things went along, a funny thing happened on the way to centre court.  Women stars started to make their impact on the sports psyche.  Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert started to become media magnets and raised women’s visibility in television and sponsorship.  Then the torch was passed on to the likes of Monica Seles and Steffi Graf and more and more people started watching women’s tennis.  With this increased viewer ship, payouts were increased, but it still lacked behind the men’s game.  Then toward the new millennium all hell broke loose.  Martina Hingis, Venus and Serena Williams, Lindsay Davenport and even Anna Kournikova bought women’s tennis viewer ship that started surpassing the men.  With the phenomena of the Williams sisters, C.R.E.A.M. rose through the roof but there was still disparity in the distribution of cash. Women’s tennis popularity is at an all- time high and they have the fiscal sustenance where they should be compensated equally, if not higher than their male counterparts.  The pundits don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to this argument of C.R.E.A.M.

In my last instance of C.R.E.A.M.’s duplicitous hold on the sporting universe, we have to examine that 800 lb. gorilla known as Title IX.  Title IX is the college rule (federal law) that mandates gender equity in the sporting place in college.  It calls for an equal amount of female sports as there are men’s sports on campus.  There is nothing wrong with gender equity, but it came with a price.  Most college’s athletic budgets live and die by C.R.E.A.M.  Producing sports put a strain on some departments and in turn forced some colleges to drop sports that they may have had a long running tradition with (i.e. Syracuse wrestling).   The way programs were set up they could take care of the non-revenue sports with no problem. However, with the increase in non-revenue sports brought on by Title IX, it became a budget buster for some men’s sports.  There are examples of certain women’s sports carrying their weight (Tennessee and Connecticut with basketball), but we must find a way for these sports to raise the influx of C.R.E.A.M. so ALL can be happy.