WNBA on the rise

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

And while I am feeling feisty, here is this: Before anybody comes out with "Cunningham has a right to say anything she darn well pleases", well, of course.

My point is, why insult and antagonize people just to have something to say on Yahoo Sports X? Why say the first thing that comes into your head without thinking? Why be a buzz killer and trash the facilitator, if not the source, of your bread and butter? The deal is done and many folks are excited so what is the sense of blabbing and putting a damper on things?

Do you want Bill Belichek who always gives benign answers & nothing revealing w/zero personality, or do you want Charles Barkley who is always going to give his honest reaction w/humor in his colorful takes?

"But it's all right now
I learned my lesson well
You see, you can't please everyone
So you got to please yourself"

- Garden Party

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Don't take this badly but I have to say it: Can we drop the subjects of misguided posters, racist blogs, and derelict forum moderators? This thread is supposed to be about the WNBA. I am truly sorry that I brought up that other thread. Now let's let it die.

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

kq76, I am the OP of this thread. If there is any more discussion of these topics, I ask that you close it. I will wait a certain interval, then open a new thread that hopefully will stick to the subject of the WNBA. Thank you.

Also, kq76, it might help if you would please change the thread title to something else, such as "WNBA on the rise". I have removed my reference to the other thread in my opening post. Thanks.

[TC Dale]

Changed the title for you.

[Déjà Bru]

Excellent, many thanks.

[Antonin]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

I had to look this up; apparently what Sophia Cunningham says is not exactly "front page" news. Here is one account:

WNBA star rips Detroit expansion: 'Don't know how excited people are ... going to Detroit'

"I also think that you want to listen to your players, too," said Cunningham . . . "Where do they want to play? Where are they going to get excited to play?" Then she uttered this: "I don't know how excited people are to be going to Detroit or Cincinnati".

Wrong city, Sophia. You meant "Cleveland". Anything else to buttress your opinion? After all, you play for INDIANAPOLIS which doesn't strike many as all that exciting, either.

Meanwhile, you have given the Detroit and Cleveland teams extra incentive to whup a$$ when they face the Fever in the future. And by the way, your team is part of the WNBA and the league may not appreciate your flapping your gums.

These days, there are a million sports reporting outlets. People who have no business talking at all have microphones and cameras shoved in their faces all the time. The result is often blurted baloney.

This story belongs in my "Dumbest thing that I read about recently" thread.

I wonder if she has ever been to Cleveland. No matter. If she came here, she would find friendly people, great restaurants, a world-class art museum, a world-class orchestra, and passionate sports fans.

The whole "your city sucks!" poke-in-the-eye is really boring. Love your own ciity, respect the other guy's (or gal's) city.

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Also, kq76, it might help if you would please change the thread title to something else, such as "WNBA on the rise". I have removed my reference to the other thread in my opening post. Thanks.

Why not just use WNBA as the title. Your revision still has potential negative consequences.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Antonin

I wonder if she has ever been to Cleveland. No matter. If she came here, she would find friendly people, great restaurants, a world-class art museum, a world-class orchestra, and passionate sports fans.

Not to mention beautiful lakefront views, if I remember correctly.

Oh, wait a moment. All of us "totally misread the situation". Our bad.

Sophie Cunningham clarifies comments on Detroit, Cleveland WNBA expansion: 'I think people totally misread the situation'

This image sums it up nicely. Take the mic out of her hand and put a basketball in it.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Take the mic out of her hand and put a basketball in it.

But no! Here is another Indiana Fever player with a mic! Although this one has a more intelligent point to make. From The Athletic:

Caitlin Clark to WNBA commissioner on pay: ‘It makes no sense. … Help us out’

By Shannon Ryan

When the WNBA’s Commissioner’s Cup was introduced five years ago, the league branded it as another opportunity to put money in players’ pockets.

The trophy for winning rewards a team for excelling in regular-season intraleague competition and comes with a $500,000 purse to be split among the winning squad’s players. The event is popular among fans and appears to be motivating for players.

But after Tuesday’s win in the event, Indiana Fever star Caitlin Clark used the prize to point out the desire for WNBA players to receive higher salaries.

“You get more (money) for this than you do if you’re the (WNBA Finals) champion,” Indiana Fever guard Caitlin Clark said on a teammate’s locker room Instagram livestream Tuesday night after her team won the championship against the Minnesota Lynx. “It makes no sense. Someone tell (WNBA commissioner) Cathy (Engelbert) to help us out.” She jokingly referred to the competition as the “Cathy Cup.”

The WNBA champions receive $11,356 per player, significantly less than the Commissioner’s Cup winners receive. Clark didn’t play in the game due to a groin injury, but her $78,066 salary is a pittance compared to her net worth, a discrepancy similar to that experienced by many WNBA stars with their paychecks.

Under the current collective bargaining agreement, the WNBA supermax contract is $249,244, and Clark would have to complete her four-year rookie contract before earning that amount.

These terms were agreed upon in the 2020 collective bargaining agreement. However, the players’ association and the league are currently in negotiations again, following the players’ decision to opt out of the current agreement. Salaries are reportedly a key issue in these talks, as the league’s popularity is on the rise.

The current agreement included more than $1.6 million in annual marketing opportunities for players and various performance bonuses.

“I think the money has been more top of the mind for (the players) than anything else,” Fever coach Stephanie White said before Tuesday’s game.

The league is in the spotlight like never before. The WNBA reported that its broadcast audience reached a record 54 million unique viewers across networks in 2024, setting a new benchmark with 22 regular-season telecasts that averaged at least 1 million viewers. Attendance also reached new heights, and merchandise sales substantially increased, primarily driven by the emergence of new stars like Clark, Angel Reese and others entering the league.

Significantly increasing salaries is a complicated issue. Unlike the 50-50 NBA split, WNBA player salaries currently account for less than 10 percent of the league’s revenue.

The league also has a hard cap per team — $1.5 million total shared among 11 or 12 players on a roster — that limits player salaries. A key to increasing revenue, thus salaries, is media rights contracts. Last year, a $2.2 billion media rights deal, spanning 11 years, was the richest in women’s sports league history.

WNBA expansion is also changing the landscape, with additional roster spots expected to become available over the next five years, including the addition of three new teams. The league announced it will bring in Cleveland in 2028, Detroit in 2029 and Philadelphia in 2030, in addition to the new franchises in Toronto and Portland (beginning next season) and the Golden State Valkyries, which launched this season.

Indianapolis hosts the All-Star Game on July 18, when the topic of salary and league growth will be center stage. Clark and Minnesota’s Napheesa Collier were named captains.

Now, Caitlin Clark's salary is ridiculously low. Sure, she is making millions more in endorsements, but that's just her and a few other WNBA superstars. You may be making more than the average WNBA player.

Should it change? Yes. But, critically, not until WNBA teams are well-established and flush with cash. They are getting there, though, and pipers will need to be paid.

Until then, let us hope the WNBA superstars of the future will contribute to a fund to support the future pensioners of today.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Now, Caitlin Clark's salary is ridiculously low. Sure, she is making millions more in endorsements, but that's just her and a few other WNBA superstars. You may be making more than the average WNBA player.

Should it change? Yes. But, critically, not until WNBA teams are well-established and flush with cash. They are getting there, though, and pipers will need to be paid.

Until then, let us hope the WNBA superstars of the future will contribute to a fund to support the future pensioners of today.

1st off, I'm not going to step on anybody seeking a higher salary. But some perspective & qualification............$80,000 for a 6 month year straight out of college is not "ridiculously low". Ask Clark what her fellow Hawkeye grads are pulling @ their entry level positions after paying their college loans. Clark's salary is "ridiculously low" in comparison to what men make in pro sports. And it is "ridiculously low" when taking into account her value to the league.

So I don't think using Clark's situation is a fair look into the situation as a whole. And while I maintain the NBA & WNBA's situations are by no means an apples to apples comparison, the fact the Lakers can sell for $10B's despite half of the revenue being earmarked for 15 or 20 employees tells you the WNBA owners could afford a better split than 90/10.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Clark's salary is "ridiculously low" in comparison to what men make in pro sports. And it is "ridiculously low" when taking into account her value to the league.

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. For perspective: The WNBA's minimum player salary for the 2025 season is $66,079. The minimum salary for an NBA player during the past season was $1,157,153. But, as I mentioned in my post, time and riches for the women's league will even the playing field, so to speak. Hopefully.

[LD84]

The revenue split should and has to change during this CBA negotiation or else we will see a player strike.

But the exact percentages are difficult to ascertain.
And that is mostly due to how difficult it is to get that information out of teams and the lengths they will go to in order to obfuscate those numbers.

I hope they can reach an agreement, but I would also not be surprised if we see some sort of labor stoppage in the near future.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by LD84

I hope they can reach an agreement, but I would also not be surprised if we see some sort of labor stoppage in the near future.

It's funny you said that because I was thinking the same thing after I posted my "Hopefully" sign-off in my last post. That's what it's going to take, for sure, and multiple instances of it.

First, though, they need the gravitas to pull it off. The star power. Only in the past couple of years are we seeing this beginning to happen.

[LD84]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

It's funny you said that because I was thinking the same thing after I posted my "Hopefully" sign-off in my last post. That's what it's going to take, for sure, and multiple instances of it.

First, though, they need the gravitas to pull it off. The star power. Only in the past couple of years are we seeing this beginning to happen.

The emergence of a 3 on 3 league gives them a bit of leverage. And now with COVID over and travel fully opened up, European clubs are again ready and willing to take on players.

Russia is still a no go, but every other league would offer six figure salaries and other perks.

The players have the leverage to get a better split.

But the accounting of the teams is the sticking point. They can claim they are losing money or breaking even and make it look they are on paper. Sports can have some very creative but still legal accounting.

But another thing the players have on their side is that we know the expansion fees that these new owners are paying. Those numbers are public.


The league is doing well and on the upswing. But it still has a ways to go.
Another way in which it could improve both for players, and for us as viewer is to expand rosters.
Right now, teams are capped at 12 players. Many teams even choose to go into a season with 11 players to save money.

This means teams simply cannot develop raw players. The #1 overall pick from 2021, Charli Collier was waived in her second season after playing only a total of 45 games for the Dallas Wings.

Now the 2021 WNBA draft was one of their worst talent wise, and I am not saying that Charli Collier was ever going to be an All-Star, or even a starer or even a rotational player.
But due to roster constraints, Dallas simply could not keep her on the roster and develop her.
And this happens quite a bit. It is not uncommon for players from the mid to late 1st round be cut from their teams after very few games or never even play for the team that drafts them.

With only 11 or 12 players. You have to have players on your roster who can contribute right away.

Some may feel that this makes for a better product. But I feel like it would be better for teams to have 14 or 15 roster spots and be able to roster younger and raw project players for further development.
Having a large pool of players that can get the best coaching and development available is only going to improve the quality of the basketball.

And to that end, the WNBA needs to begin a sub league like the NBA G League.
It can begin small. 2-4 teams.
With the goal of within a few decades, every WNBA team having their own development team that they can shuttle players between.

Not only would this give more opportunities for women to play basketball professionally, it would be another tool for teams to use to aid in the development of young players.

The NBA G League has been a tremendous success.
54% of players who played a single NBA game in the 2024-2025 season had played at least one game in the NBA G-League.

It took almost a quarter of a century to reach this point. But it has become a true minor league and an invaluable asset for teams to develop fringe or even future All-Star and All NBA level players.

The WNBA needs something like this in the future as it continues to grow and expand itself.

[Déjà Bru]

Interesting post. One that further highlights the astronomical difference in levels between the WNBA and the NBA.

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

But no! Here is another Indiana Fever player with a mic! Although this one has a more intelligent point to make. From The Athletic:

Now, Caitlin Clark's salary is ridiculously low. Sure, she is making millions more in endorsements, but that's just her and a few other WNBA superstars. You may be making more than the average WNBA player.

Should it change? Yes. But, critically, not until WNBA teams are well-established and flush with cash. They are getting there, though, and pipers will need to be paid.

Until then, let us hope the WNBA superstars of the future will contribute to a fund to support the future pensioners of today.

I have been saying this for years. It was all accounting that showed the WNBA taking a loss. 10% of the revenue of the WNBA goes to its players.

Given Indiana drawing 20k fans per game, vs. the base 5k for other teams, the disparity here must be extreme.

20k times a $50 ticket is a million dollars...which, for ONE game, could possibly pay their entire (Fevers) salary for the year.

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by LD84

....
The WNBA needs something like this in the future as it continues to grow and expand itself.

Agreed. Problem is that Caitlin Clark makes $78k a year. What would you pay the WNBA development league?? Minimum wage?

As it stands, the NCAA IS the development league, just like it is for the NFL. Even more so, for the WNBA, as they don't have the USFL, AFL, and God knows what other garbage football leagues that are out there.

[Déjà Bru]

Well, this is why I chose the thread title (correcting my first unfortunate choice) of "WNBA on the rise". It should be interesting to follow. Is this the road to success or a bubble of popularity?

[LD84]

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Agreed. Problem is that Caitlin Clark makes $78k a year. What would you pay the WNBA development league?? Minimum wage?

As it stands, the NCAA IS the development league, just like it is for the NFL. Even more so, for the WNBA, as they don't have the USFL, AFL, and God knows what other garbage football leagues that are out there.

Which is why I said future

And the median attendance for last season was 9800. Only two teams were below the 5,000 you cited.

This season it is even higher due to Golden State having sold out every home game so far.

And attendance is only a small piece of total revenue. The new media rights deal is the biggest driver, and as stated earlier, it was 2.1 billion.

Her $78,066 is going to be dwarfed by #1 overall picks in the next few seasons after they agree on a new CBA.

[pilight]

Originally Posted by LD84

But the exact percentages are difficult to ascertain.
And that is mostly due to how difficult it is to get that information out of teams and the lengths they will go to in order to obfuscate those numbers.

People are lining up to pay $250 million for expansion teams and equity sales for existing teams show them with even higher values. That doesn't happen unless the revenue is much, much greater than the teams have been saying. It certainly doesn't happen if they're losing money.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by pilight

People are lining up to pay $250 million for expansion teams and equity sales for existing teams show them with even higher values. That doesn't happen unless the revenue is much, much greater than the teams have been saying. It certainly doesn't happen if they're losing money.

The following is as close to politics as I ever want to come here, but nothing is going to induce the rich people who own sports teams to part with any more of their money than absolutely necessary other than force. Your point is well taken; these cheesy bums could well afford to pay their players more.

That is why unions and collective bargaining are so important, as are work stoppages when it comes down to that. But there is more that is required.

As I mentioned recently, up until a couple of years ago, the WNBA was still flying under the radar with no household names to speak of. Now that has begun to change and the players will be gaining the leverage that they need. Otherwise, all that owners need to do is make a few phone calls to acquire the equivalent of scabs to play for them and put on a show.

Of course, I am advocating that Clark and the others themselves join the one-percenters and, when it comes to that, I have no sympathy. As Cobra Mgr pointed out, they are already making good money for part-time jobs compared to the ninety-nine percenters. But what's fair is fair.

Now, please, no amplification of those comments into some discussion of political matters. Frankly, this has always been the nature of things.