Joined
·
10,532 Posts
How are inspiration, sponsorships and fame of our best paid and most popular WTA players connected? What are some of the biggest criteria as to who inspires who, who supports who, who gets sponsors etc.? We've been going back and forth "defending" our favourite players without getting to the bottom of it at all. Trying to make sense of other people views and positions can be quite a hard thing, getting others to understand yours just as much.
So lets talk about our biggest stars namely: Serena & Venus Williams and Sharapova. The entire thing is a bit controversial, so bear with this opening post...
*
For ages we've been hearing about how the Williams sisters have been such an inspiration to black people. This is no different on this board. This raises a lot of questions and because tennis is such an international sport even moreso.
Why is it that it has to be black players to inspire them? A lot of them only got into the sport because of it and follow it because of it. This is good for tennis, because the sport got more fans and people playing. Just like we talk about the Chinese finding inspiration in Li Na that they are able to do it, it seems that the same implies to the former. With the Chinese though it's not a matter of race, but rather nationality.
The Williams and their fans are adamant about them being Americans and representing the USA everytime they step on the court, so why is it that other American athletes fail to inspire them or they hadn't got inspired before the WS arrived? Why isn't being American enough when talking about the fans in the USA?
Serena Williams is the most accomplished active tennis player at the moment and her fans argue that she should be given the most sponsorship money and attention. It's often mentionned how Sharapova only gets more money, because she's white and blond. If black people are so proud and inspired by the Willams, why is it wrong for white people or even just immigrants doing big things in the USA to be inspired by Sharapova. Adding up overall potential target groups one ends up with having more opportunities for sponsors to make money, doesn't one? From a business point of view it makes sense if you apply the same criteria that these Williams fans use for themselves. Especially because as Serena says herself "tennis is a white sport". (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjzLNrk15oQ). You don't even have to limit it to tennis fans to have similar "target groups". You invest money in order to make more money. That's what the simplistic view of it basically is.
Isn't it a bit weird that a lot of black people cheer for the WS, because they are black, but they "accuse" white people of cheering for white people finding it sort of racist and vilifying them for it? That goes just as much for being a fan or sponsoring a player. Why is it that deemed okay? Why is getting and drawing extra inspiration from beating the "blonde, white Russian" glorified, celebrated and encouraged? (For example here on the board or Serena's entourage telling her how much more money Sharapova makes etc. to "fuel her on"). That is obviously only a partial reason to perform better, we're not saying this is the sole motivation here. One could only imagine though what the backlash would be if there was somebody who you'd even only get a vibe off wanting to beat the WS because they are black, again even if it was only a partial reason. Similar to the backlash the "tennis establishment", the commentators, the USTA, a lot Americans etc. receive for not supporting or favouring them.
To expand on the whole sponsorship thing eluding to the "simplistic view" of it all: there are a lot more reasons as to why you'd want to sponsor somebody or how successful you are acquiring sponsors. It's not just "black and white" (sorry for the pun...). It depends on:
*results
*style of game
*the quality of your management and knowing people in the business
*being good at business oneself
*your professionalism on and off the court and even away from the game which can include: incidents, violations, being humble, being sportsmanlike, being gracious and grateful, being able to learn / forgive / apologize, being rooted, no major unecessary scandals in personal life or explicit pictures etc. that could scare off sponsors, being sincere, character, reliability)
*sacrife and time spent in acquiring and keeping the sponsors
*personality
*looks and style
*personal story
*charity
*nationality
*religion
*political views
*fluency in languages
*"x-factor"
*something different, something new, something that reflects today's "vibe"
EDIT: *age
The list goes on and on and a lot of it actually isn't even really measurable or "doesn't even make sense" so to say. It's more complicated than one thinks, that's why the managers and the executives get the big bucks.
So, to finish this opening post, please try to think about it, argue and discuss seriously rather just give some shallow answers that leave these very real questions unanswered or just attack for no reason.
There are a lot of things that are intertwined, so I guess only a serious discussion will enable us to get more clarity on all of these matters.
So lets talk about our biggest stars namely: Serena & Venus Williams and Sharapova. The entire thing is a bit controversial, so bear with this opening post...
*
For ages we've been hearing about how the Williams sisters have been such an inspiration to black people. This is no different on this board. This raises a lot of questions and because tennis is such an international sport even moreso.
Why is it that it has to be black players to inspire them? A lot of them only got into the sport because of it and follow it because of it. This is good for tennis, because the sport got more fans and people playing. Just like we talk about the Chinese finding inspiration in Li Na that they are able to do it, it seems that the same implies to the former. With the Chinese though it's not a matter of race, but rather nationality.
The Williams and their fans are adamant about them being Americans and representing the USA everytime they step on the court, so why is it that other American athletes fail to inspire them or they hadn't got inspired before the WS arrived? Why isn't being American enough when talking about the fans in the USA?
Serena Williams is the most accomplished active tennis player at the moment and her fans argue that she should be given the most sponsorship money and attention. It's often mentionned how Sharapova only gets more money, because she's white and blond. If black people are so proud and inspired by the Willams, why is it wrong for white people or even just immigrants doing big things in the USA to be inspired by Sharapova. Adding up overall potential target groups one ends up with having more opportunities for sponsors to make money, doesn't one? From a business point of view it makes sense if you apply the same criteria that these Williams fans use for themselves. Especially because as Serena says herself "tennis is a white sport". (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjzLNrk15oQ). You don't even have to limit it to tennis fans to have similar "target groups". You invest money in order to make more money. That's what the simplistic view of it basically is.
Isn't it a bit weird that a lot of black people cheer for the WS, because they are black, but they "accuse" white people of cheering for white people finding it sort of racist and vilifying them for it? That goes just as much for being a fan or sponsoring a player. Why is it that deemed okay? Why is getting and drawing extra inspiration from beating the "blonde, white Russian" glorified, celebrated and encouraged? (For example here on the board or Serena's entourage telling her how much more money Sharapova makes etc. to "fuel her on"). That is obviously only a partial reason to perform better, we're not saying this is the sole motivation here. One could only imagine though what the backlash would be if there was somebody who you'd even only get a vibe off wanting to beat the WS because they are black, again even if it was only a partial reason. Similar to the backlash the "tennis establishment", the commentators, the USTA, a lot Americans etc. receive for not supporting or favouring them.
To expand on the whole sponsorship thing eluding to the "simplistic view" of it all: there are a lot more reasons as to why you'd want to sponsor somebody or how successful you are acquiring sponsors. It's not just "black and white" (sorry for the pun...). It depends on:
*results
*style of game
*the quality of your management and knowing people in the business
*being good at business oneself
*your professionalism on and off the court and even away from the game which can include: incidents, violations, being humble, being sportsmanlike, being gracious and grateful, being able to learn / forgive / apologize, being rooted, no major unecessary scandals in personal life or explicit pictures etc. that could scare off sponsors, being sincere, character, reliability)
*sacrife and time spent in acquiring and keeping the sponsors
*personality
*looks and style
*personal story
*charity
*nationality
*religion
*political views
*fluency in languages
*"x-factor"
*something different, something new, something that reflects today's "vibe"
EDIT: *age
The list goes on and on and a lot of it actually isn't even really measurable or "doesn't even make sense" so to say. It's more complicated than one thinks, that's why the managers and the executives get the big bucks.
So, to finish this opening post, please try to think about it, argue and discuss seriously rather just give some shallow answers that leave these very real questions unanswered or just attack for no reason.
There are a lot of things that are intertwined, so I guess only a serious discussion will enable us to get more clarity on all of these matters.
