End of the WNBA??

[HuskyFan1125]

Just found this on Yahoo home page.

Interesting?

Thoughts?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/5-disappearing-brands-in-2014-191735396.html?vp=1

 

[ThisJustIn]

Yawn. They've been saying that since....1997.

 

[HuskyFan1125]

Yawn. They've been saying that since....1997.

Didn't mean to bore you, just saw it and thought I would pass it on.....

 

[Icebear]

Yawn. They've been saying that since....1997.

There is one difference though. David Stern is retiring now.

 

[ThisJustIn]

There is one difference though. David Stern is retiring now.

True, but much has changed within the ownership(s) since 1997.

 

[pvdoggy]

Just found this on Yahoo home page.

Interesting?

Thoughts?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/5-disappearing-brands-in-2014-191735396.html?vp=1

Would not surprise me. With a few exceptions, there is not enough money to be made in women's sport
and the WNBA cannot be considered a loss leader for the NBA for the owners to continue to support it.
I am a little surprise that most of the teams are losing money though given how little they pay their
players.

 

[jsloanjr]

The quality on BB in the WNBA is very poor for the past 4 years or so. Too many players come back from Europe, China, Russia injured and can play to full capacity. WE dropped our Sun tickets 3 years ago when the quality went south.......We get free tickets from Mohegan Casino and we pass unless the include a Voucher for dinner or a hotel..........When was the last time the Sun had a fully healthy team?........I wish them well.............Lets see how the AAC does come March.......

 

[cferraro04]

The best way for the WNBA to survive is for the powers that be to do exactly the opposite of what you would think. That is throw more money at it. Pay the women who play the game more money... Guess what women will up their game, they will work to get more skilled because they will want a shot at the big money. The best players from all over the world will want to play in the USA because they will be paying more than Russia, Turkey, China, Europe. We still get foreign players who want to play in the USA now but it is because those that play here want to play in with the best players in the world and for the most knowledgeable fan bases in the world...but, it really is all about the money.

 

[Teacherdeb]

The best way for the WNBA to survive is for the powers that be to do exactly the opposite of what you would think. That is throw more money at it. Pay the women who play the game more money... Guess what women will up their game, they will work to get more skilled because they will want a shot at the big money. The best players from all over the world will want to play in the USA because they will be paying more than Russia, Turkey, China, Europe. We still get foreign players who want to play in the USA now but it is because those that play here want to play in with the best players in the world and for the most knowledgeable fan bases in the world...but, it really is all about the money.

I think you are dead on- basketball is an American invention, and we should have the strongest league in the world with players compensated accordingly. Hope this post generates some interesting discussion!

 

[johnnyc]

That is throw more money at it. Pay the women who play the game more money...

Ticket prices will then go up. Will attendance be able to match the rising salaries of the players?

 

[alexrgct]

There is no way in hell WNBA players will experience a significant salary hike. The WNBA will go the way of the ABL if that happens.

 

[JoePgh]

There are several points to be made on this general topic:

1. The economics of professional basketball outside the US are very weird and difficult to comprehend. Their per-game attendance is well below that of the WNBA (reportedly about 2,000 fans per game), despite lower ticket prices than the WNBA. Clearly the teams that pay the big salaries operate at a huge loss (partially offset by sponsor funding which the WNBA is starting to pursue), which is apparently just fine with the wealthy owners. I'm not sure why this motivation works for so many teams over such a long period of time, but apparently it doesn't reliably work -- witness Renee's problems in getting paid by her Eastern European team.
2. Nonetheless, in the US, it seems unlikely that profitability would be disregarded in that way. No one (including the NBA) will fund losses of European or Russian magnitude by the WNBA, so the league will have to remain cost-conscious. The 11-person roster with no IR is the biggest symptom of that issue, and it does have a tangible negative effect on quality.
3. Despite the higher salaries elsewhere, the majority of players (excluding the older and most established stars such as Asjha Jones) want and need to play in the WNBA. Doing so is the very best way to establish their credentials to earn the European salaries, since the world recognizes that the level of competition in the WNBA is unmatched in any foreign league.
4. The quality of play in the WNBA is very high, not to be compared to the NCAA Top 25 at all. UConn has a great team this year, but it is unlikely that it could win a series against the worst and most injured WNBA team (that would be the Sun, unfortunately). A 12-person roster and a usable IR would improve it considerably, but at significant additional expense.
5. Why the fans on this board seem to get more excited about UConn-vs.-UCF games than about the Sun vs. Minnesota is a complete mystery to me. It certainly has nothing to do with the relative quality of the basketball being played. If people like those on this board would take the same interest in great women's basketball in the summer as they already do in Top 25 NCAA basketball in the winter, the WNBA's financial problems might melt away.
6. But even so, I think reports of the WNBA's death will continue to be premature. Right now, all indications are that most teams operate at a near breakeven level financially, with small losses for most teams and small profits for a few. So it doesn't cost the owners a lot to subsidize their teams and the league, and the PR benefit from doing so (the same political forces that underlie the continuing support for Title IX) is very substantial.

 

[Jim]

Here's the quickest way for the WNBA to increase revenue -- fire the idiot who comes up with the schedule. Teams play games two or three consecutive days, then they are off for ten. They schedule games for 11:00am, noon, and 1:00pm on weekdays. Who holding a job (with possibly money to spend) can attend one of these games or even watch on TV? Even though it is played in the summer, this isn't baseball, people.

Here's what you do: put the games on Monday and Thursday nights (baseball travel days) plus afternoons on weekends. Get a consistent, regular schedule with reasonable pricing at the games, and then watch the revenues rise.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Here's the quickest way for the WNBA to increase revenue -- fire the idiot who comes up with the schedule. Teams play games two or three consecutive days, then they are off for ten. They schedule games for 11:00am, noon, and 1:00pm on weekdays. Who holding a job (with possibly money to spend) can attend one of these games or even watch on TV? Even though it is played in the summer, this isn't baseball, people.

Here's what you do: put the games on Monday and Thursday nights (baseball travel days) plus afternoons on weekends. Get a consistent, regular schedule with reasonable pricing at the games, and then watch the revenues rise.

The sequence of games is weird, with the couple together then gap till the next (I don't think anyone plays 3 days in a row). I think most franchises only have one weekday day game (as does my local college team, Arizona) where they invite school groups (UofA) and camp groups (WNBA). That is marketing, and I doubt it affects the bottom line much. I don't remember more than the one day game per season any time I paid attention (which wasn't always, I admit).

I don't think it is competing with baseball, either. Playing on a relatively consistent night might help - but if people care, they will find a way.

Like anything else, however, it is expensive in the long run for season tix to 17 games, even the more reasonably priced ones. I did a 4 game, 2 seat package in the 2nd row looking down the end line for the Mercury, and we won't discuss the cost, plus the fact that I don't live in Phoenix, so there were hotel considerations.

 

[stwainfan]

It would be nice if the players didn't have to go overseas to make money.

 

[tomcat]

There are several points to be made on this general topic:

1. 
   [ ]The economics of professional basketball outside the US are very weird and difficult to comprehend. Their per-game attendance is well below that of the WNBA (reportedly about 2,000 fans per game), despite lower ticket prices than the WNBA. Clearly the teams that pay the big salaries operate at a huge loss (partially offset by sponsor funding which the WNBA is starting to pursue), which is apparently just fine with the wealthy owners. I'm not sure why this motivation works for so many teams over such a long period of time, but apparently it doesn't reliably work -- witness Renee's problems in getting paid by her Eastern European team.
   [ ]Nonetheless, in the US, it seems unlikely that profitability would be disregarded in that way. No one (including the NBA) will fund losses of European or Russian magnitude by the WNBA, so the league will have to remain cost-conscious. The 11-person roster with no IR is the biggest symptom of that issue, and it does have a tangible negative effect on quality.
   [ ]Despite the higher salaries elsewhere, the majority of players (excluding the older and most established stars such as Asjha Jones) want and need to play in the WNBA. Doing so is the very best way to establish their credentials to earn the European salaries, since the world recognizes that the level of competition in the WNBA is unmatched in any foreign league.
   [ ]The quality of play in the WNBA is very high, not to be compared to the NCAA Top 25 at all. UConn has a great team this year, but it is unlikely that it could win a series against the worst and most injured WNBA team (that would be the Sun, unfortunately). A 12-person roster and a usable IR would improve it considerably, but at significant additional expense.
   [ ]Why the fans on this board seem to get more excited about UConn-vs.-UCF games than about the Sun vs. Minnesota is a complete mystery to me. It certainly has nothing to do with the relative quality of the basketball being played. If people like those on this board would take the same interest in great women's basketball in the summer as they already do in Top 25 NCAA basketball in the winter, the WNBA's financial problems might melt away.
   [ ]But even so, I think reports of the WNBA's death will continue to be premature. Right now, all indications are that most teams operate at a near breakeven level financially, with small losses for most teams and small profits for a few. So it doesn't cost the owners a lot to subsidize their teams and the league, and the PR benefit from doing so (the same political forces that underlie the continuing support for Title IX) is very substantial.

I agree with all the points made except next to last. Of course the "quality" of play in the WNBA is higher than in college because they've skimmed the cream of the college players and concentrated them in one small league. I can't be bothered with the WNBA not because of that, but because the emphasis is on a different kind of game than what is played in college ball. WNBA, in my humble opinion, is run by people who, not surprisingly, want the basketball to be played at an NBA level. As a result, the WNBA game looks like a hybrid between the women's college game and the NBA, which I maintain is more spectacle than sport, a kind of cross between the WWE and rollerball. if you like that sort of thing, you'l like the WNBA. Those of us who believe that women's basketball is not men's basketball except played at a lower level are not likely to enjoy the WNBA all that much, at least not enough to become season ticket holders. As a personal example, my wife and I keep talking about going to a Mercury game to see former UConn players, especially when someone like Sue Bird comes in to town. Somehow, we're never motivated enough to do it.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I agree with all the points made except next to last. Of course the "quality" of play in the WNBA is higher than in college because they've skimmed the cream of the college players and concentrated them in one small league. I can't be bothered with the WNBA not because of that, but because the emphasis is on a different kind of game than what is played in college ball. WNBA, in my humble opinion, is run by people who, not surprisingly, want the basketball to be played at an NBA level. As a result, the WNBA game looks like a hybrid between the women's college game and the NBA, which I maintain is more spectacle than sport, a kind of cross between the WWE and rollerball. if you like that sort of thing, you'l like the WNBA. Those of us who believe that women's basketball is not men's basketball except played at a lower level are not likely to enjoy the WNBA all that much, at least not enough to become season ticket holders. As a personal example, my wife and I keep talking about going to a Mercury game to see former UConn players, especially when someone like Sue Bird comes in to town. Somehow, we're never motivated enough to do it.

The problem being, I am assured, that you cannot play the college game with teams made up of players that are that good. The college game depends - to some extent - on there being weak or average players somewhere on the court that the good players are worked into positions to exploit. When all the players are that good, it just don't work. That pass that worked against even UConn just don't fly when you try it on players who have played professionally for 5 years.

While it is entertainment as well, I don't think that is a major focus of the style of play.

 

[Striper69]

I think the college game is far different than the WNBA.

Most college players (on scholarships) are there to get help funding their educations. WNBA players play to try to make a living playing basketball.

Interesting thread but I just wanted to make that one point.

I think the WNBA is just now revving up to get bigger. This year will be fantastic with Sue Bird coming back. I can't wait to see her play this year along with all my other favorites. This year's draft will help too. It's going to be a good one!

 

[Striper69]

One more thing. I was thinking yesterday as I drove to Philly to watch Louisville play Temple: I wish they would start a franchise in Wilmington, De. or Philly. Preferably with Elena Delle Donne playing on it. A few hundred fans go down to Washington, DC every time she plays there so they'd support a team in those cities.

 

[Striper69]

Here's the quickest way for the WNBA to increase revenue -- fire the idiot who comes up with the schedule. Teams play games two or three consecutive days, then they are off for ten. They schedule games for 11:00am, noon, and 1:00pm on weekdays. Who holding a job (with possibly money to spend) can attend one of these games or even watch on TV? Even though it is played in the summer, this isn't baseball, people.

Here's what you do: put the games on Monday and Thursday nights (baseball travel days) plus afternoons on weekends. Get a consistent, regular schedule with reasonable pricing at the games, and then watch the revenues rise.

I hope they offer a WNBA tv package this year so you can see live telecasts of every game. I used the "All-Access" thing on the computer last season but the video wasn't very good. It was aways "jumpy" and sometimes froze. Getting quality telecasts would be awesome!

 

[Adesmar123]

Yawn. They've been saying that since....1997.

Did you see that on your Compaq computer, or on your flight on Eastern Airlines?

 

[Striper69]

Would not surprise me. With a few exceptions, there is not enough money to be made in women's sport
and the WNBA cannot be considered a loss leader for the NBA for the owners to continue to support it.
I am a little surprise that most of the teams are losing money though given how little they pay their
players.

I think they really need to think about lowering their ticket prices to get more fans in the seats. Times are kind of hard and the people who would be most likely to go to games probably can't afford to go the way the prices are now. I bought courtside seats and will next season but I want to see these players up close (and personal). I can't afford to do that at an NBA game. Can't even afford to go to an NBA period (or don't want to spend that much money).

 

[VAMike23]

I agree with all the points made except next to last. Of course the "quality" of play in the WNBA is higher than in college because they've skimmed the cream of the college players and concentrated them in one small league. I can't be bothered with the WNBA not because of that, but because the emphasis is on a different kind of game than what is played in college ball. WNBA, in my humble opinion, is run by people who, not surprisingly, want the basketball to be played at an NBA level. As a result, the WNBA game looks like a hybrid between the women's college game and the NBA, which I maintain is more spectacle than sport, a kind of cross between the WWE and rollerball. if you like that sort of thing, you'l like the WNBA. Those of us who believe that women's basketball is not men's basketball except played at a lower level are not likely to enjoy the WNBA all that much, at least not enough to become season ticket holders. As a personal example, my wife and I keep talking about going to a Mercury game to see former UConn players, especially when someone like Sue Bird comes in to town. Somehow, we're never motivated enough to do it.

Having watched most of the Minnesota Lynx's games over the past three years, I can say that for the most part their games compare quite favorably with many of the WCBB games I've seen. Different than UCONN's style but not like NBA-lite. Yes there are 'pro-style' plays you won't see at the college level but their overall play is generally not patterned after the men's game.

When I watch other WNBA games, I am usually not so impressed......

 

[Superhuskies]

Reconfigure teams to keep college rivalries going in pros/ WNBA..... 8 / 9 /10 teams based on college teams .... just a thought...
UConn grads in Conn..... Tenn grads in south .... Other SEC team grads together in south..... ACC grads in Wash.... UND players in Chicago,... Big Ten grads....in Indy...
Stanford Grads west coast.... Big 12 grads in Tex..... etc., etc.....---
and foreigners..? mixed in with teams outside of Conn team (and Tenn..? ) ... nahhhhh forget it... makes too much sense....

 

[JoePgh]

Regarding differences in style of play (mainly on offense, I assume) between WCBB and the WNBA, I would offer the following observations:

• The 24-second clock in the WNBA is a significant factor. That 6-second difference from the college game puts a significant damper on how many passes can be made before a shot is taken. I remember that Ketia Swanier, in particular, had difficulty adjusting to that. But overall, that is a positive difference in favor of the WNBA; in fact, Geno has advocated a 24-second shot clock in the college game.
• If those who see the WCBB game as "purer" mean that there is less emphasis on individual play (especially by stars) in the college game than in the WNBA, then I question how valid that distinction is. When UConn has had superstars (Diana, Maya, Tina, Stewie), Geno has allowed and even encouraged them to score using their individual talents. If it looks like it is "within the flow of the offense", that's because Geno designs the offense around the individual offensive talents of his players in a particular year.
• Many of the "pretty plays" that produce layups for UConn take advantage of predictable defensive breakdowns (in particular, defenders getting hypnotized by the ball and losing their man) that are simply not as likely to occur at the professional level.

If Geno coached in the WNBA under a 24-second shot clock, with stars on his own team and experienced and savvy defenders on the opposing team, I think his offense would look very much like what many WNBA teams (Minnesota, Mike Thibault's Sun teams) already run.

For all of these reasons, I don't think the holier-than-thou attitude towards women's professional basketball is really warranted.