A USA Today column arguing that American sports are hostile to women is drawing sharp criticism for using a sports-betting advertisement, a viral AI video, and an architectural rendering as its central evidence. The piece, published Tuesday by columnist Nancy Armour, claims that the sports world is happy to take women's money but does not want women in its space or to treat them with «even the slightest shred of decency.»
The first example cited is a Novig advertisement featuring actress Sydney Sweeney, which Armour characterized as telling women their «only place in sports is as a sexualized object.» But the ad did not mention female athletes, fans, broadcasters, or women's sports. Novig is a sports prediction market, and the campaign was aimed primarily at men, who make up the core audience for sports betting. According to Novig CEO Jacob Fortinsky, Sweeney approached the company, owns equity in it, and drove much of the campaign's «visuals and messaging.» In other words, an adult woman made a business decision to use her own image to promote a company in which she has a financial interest.
Armour also claimed that Novig «backpedaled» on the ad, but Fortinsky publicly defended the campaign, credited Sweeney with driving the concept, and said the company was pleased with the response. The column linked the word «backpedaled» to a story whose headline said the CEO «defends» the ad.
The second example involves Arch Manning, the Texas quarterback, who laughed when asked about a fan-edited AI clip of head coach Steve Sarkisian's postgame interview. «Of him slapping Holly Rowe?» Manning said, laughing. «It's hilarious.» The AI video grew out of an awkward exchange after Texas' comeback victory over Ohio State, when Rowe attempted to interview Sarkisian moments after the game. Sarkisian shouted «Texas fight,» flashed the Hook 'em sign, and left to celebrate with his team. Rowe responded by throwing up her hands, rolling her eyes, and walking off. Texas later said technical problems with ESPN's equipment contributed to the failed interview.
The third example is an architectural rendering of Philadelphia's future arena that showed almost no women. The image was replaced within two days, and the building will be home to the city's WNBA team. Critics argue that using a quickly corrected rendering as evidence of a systemic problem stretches the definition of evidence beyond recognition.
The column has also drawn attention for what critics call a double standard. Armour anticipated that someone might point out that female athletes have posed nude for magazines, including ESPN's famous «Body Issue.» She insisted those examples are different because the athletes' bodies were «the product of years of work and training» and should be appreciated for their accomplishments rather than «ogled over for sexual gratification.» Critics say this amounts to Armour appointing herself the arbiter of which women's bodies are worthy of being displayed and which women are merely objects.
More broadly, the backlash reflects a growing debate over how claims of misogyny are substantiated in sports media. As women reach better positions in the sports world than ever before, finding evidence of systemic sexism becomes harder. The column's critics argue that stretching minor incidents into proof of widespread misogyny undermines the credibility of legitimate concerns. Supporters of Armour's perspective, meanwhile, maintain that even small examples can reflect larger cultural patterns that deserve scrutiny.
The episode has also highlighted the financial power of women in sports. Sweeney's equity stake in Novig and her creative control over the campaign illustrate a business landscape where women are not merely subjects of advertising but active participants shaping it. Similarly, the Philadelphia arena will host a WNBA team, a sign of the growing commercial footprint of women's professional sports. For critics of the column, these facts undercut the argument that sports does not want women in its space.
USA Today has not issued a public response to the criticism. The column remains available online, and the debate over its claims continues across social media and sports commentary outlets.