2025 WNBA Off-Season | Page 6 | The Boneyard
.

2025 WNBA Off-Season

sivad40 said:
One of the WNBA demands in the negotiations is that players don't play in Unrivaled and AU.
Expand ...

The only way this ends up in the CBA is if the WNBA increases salaries significantly. The reason those two leagues exist is because the WNBA doesn't pay the players enough.

If they want the players to only play in the WNBA, they need to pay them salaries that are competitive with Unrivaled/AU and the international leagues. They need to make the WNBA into a league that's great enough that players don't want to play anywhere else.
 
Wasn't one of the reasons for the formation of UnRivaled was for players who were burnt out/fried going over to Europe, Korea, China or Australia to play in one domestic place -- Florida -- for a set time, while making enough money to augment what are still relatively paltry salaries for the vast majority of players?

The W has solid money being invested in it, for sure. And that can and should result in larger salaries which may or may not hurt UnRivaled. We'll get an idea of where this going with the new CBA. However, having one of the faces of the W trash the commissioner who is going to be in charge of the new CBA is certainly going to, err, make things interesting.

BTW, I do think Englebert has done some solid things for the league, but 'Phee has noted some attitudes which may show some intransigence on leadership's part. Not a good idea to think this this popularity is only due to the W (See Clark, Caitlin or Bueckers, Paige or Watkins, JuJu -- all of whom were/are doing their things in college.).

Another area....they chose that the way forward is in conjunction with NBA money. This is evident in the downright "our way or the highway" treatment of the Connecticut Sun.

I'm writing this while watching the nailbiter between Las Vegas and Indiana, which is now tied at 84, so excuse lack of flow, clarity.
 
Last edited:
I will add a couple of thoughts.

I think overall Cathy has done a good job. I think the big thing was getting the NBA players buy-in (attending games, wearing apparel, talking about them in interviews) to normalize watching and discussing the WNBA.

During a recent interview with one of the WNBA podcasters (can't find it at the moment) when answering a question in relation to Unrivaled Engelbert mentioned something like "it is unusual to have a capital raising so close together". I took that a shot at Unrivaled's ownership.

During a recent interview (starts 12:55) with Sean Evans when answering a question about the future of Unrivaled, Breanna Stewart said:

"I think about us expanding, you know we were able to play in this facility which could really hold probably 3 to 5 thousand people but we want 20, 25 on a nightly basis and paying everybody seven figures".
 
Last edited:
hoopsdiva said:
I think Phee will be with the league longer than Cathy Englebert.
Expand ...
Phee's gonna be the comissioner someday.

sivad40 said:
One of the WNBA demands in the negotiations is that players don't play in Unrivaled and AU.
Expand ...
Really? Then will they also prevent players from going overseas? The whole prioritization thing is a sham - prevent players from playing somewhere else to make more money than the WNBA provides. And, somewhere in here could be legal issue, maybe antitrust? Heck, I'm just a former engineer/data analyst, but that demand smells of monopolization.

Imagine telling players it's us or the highway? With all the NIL that some are bringing from college, and the continuation of sponsorships in the pros, some players would ROFL over this demand and say, ok, I'll play in Unrivaled in the winter for more money and ciao to the W. Let's look at the high profile players - Clark, Stewie, Paige, A'ja, Reese, etc, etc. I would bet that at least one of them would leave the W and have more freedom to play where they want, for the money they deserve.
 
CTGirl15 said:
The only way this ends up in the CBA is if the WNBA increases salaries significantly. The reason those two leagues exist is because the WNBA doesn't pay the players enough.

If they want the players to only play in the WNBA, they need to pay them salaries that are competitive with Unrivaled/AU and the international leagues. They need to make the WNBA into a league that's great enough that players don't want to play anywhere else.
Expand ...

The leagues exist so players don't have to go overseas to play. Especially after what happened to BG. But.... they def have to increase the salaries
 
Geew1992 said:
The leagues exist so players don't have to go overseas to play. Especially after what happened to BG. But.... they def have to increase the salaries
Expand ...

Yes, its so they don't have to go overseas, but the reason a lot of the WNBA players were going overseas in the first place was because they were not making enough money in the WNBA to cover their offseason needs. There are absolutely players that go overseas to play basketball year round or who want to make a lot of money, but many players who would go overseas in the offseason did so because they needed the money and resources to help them keep being an elite player.

The WNBA can't act like it has to be a players' #1 (or only) priority when the minimum commitment time is less than half the year (May - September) and the salary is a quarter what other leagues pay.
 
This brouhaha may have profound consequences for the CBA negotiations.

The commissioner position is one that requires realistic analysis. They work for the owners. They are presented as representing the league but they work in furtherance of the owners.

As such a commissioner needs an extraordinarily rare and diverse set of skills in order to maintain the fiction that they are advancing the interests of the league while representing ownership interests.

On one end of the spectrum is Roger Goodell who makes no bones about his work on behalf of the owners.

Until this brouhaha I thought the WNBA commissioner had done a wonderful job of walking the fine line was on the other end of the spectrum.. I suppose she's learned from all this that you have to be very careful how you shine on the representatives of the Union. But that's too late.

It's also odd because in the entire scheme of imposing improved standards and management of referees is a no-brainer.

So the WNBA commissioner's failure on a layup would suggest that her days are numbered.

The question is will a CBA be completed before she is invited to return to consulting?
 
Vowelguy said:
The players can choose whoever they want to represent them. Her involvement with Unrivaled is not a secret. If the players were concerned that this creates a conflict of interest, they could’ve made someone else VP.

What exactly is the “legal issue” here?
Expand ...
Stewie is also part of both leagues panels of negotiations.
 
azfan said:
This brouhaha may have profound consequences for the CBA negotiations.

The commissioner position is one that requires realistic analysis. They work for the owners. They are presented as representing the league but they work in furtherance of the owners.

As such a commissioner needs an extraordinarily rare and diverse set of skills in order to maintain the fiction that they are advancing the interests of the league while representing ownership interests.

On one end of the spectrum is Roger Goodell who makes no bones about his work on behalf of the owners.

Until this brouhaha I thought the WNBA commissioner had done a wonderful job of walking the fine line was on the other end of the spectrum.. I suppose she's learned from all this that you have to be very careful how you shine on the representatives of the Union. But that's too late.

It's also odd because in the entire scheme of imposing improved standards and management of referees is a no-brainer.

So the WNBA commissioner's failure on a layup would suggest that her days are numbered.

The question is will a CBA be completed before she is invited to return to consulting?
Expand ...
And if the players decide to walk, the NBA owners are going to take a hit, because they have already sold the TV rights.
 
By all reports this CBA talks will be long, and nasty!
The players have their backs up and ready to go the distance to get what they deserve!
If the owners think they can go hard-ball these players they're in for a huge surprise!
Look for a sit out strike by players!
Players leaders are intelligent and hard nosed!
 
NycUcWbbFan said:
Is Wimbledon a competitor of the U.S. Open?

It is 5x5 from May to September/October vs 3x3 in January. They are not competitors in any meaningful sense.
  • The businesses only intersect with respect to common players;
  • The players work for them at non-inter-lapping times which voids any claims of divided attention/ loyalties;
  • It’s not a zero-sum playing field for both businesses on any other aspects of their businesses;
  • There are no trade secrets / proprietary interest that one business gains vs. the other by sharing players.
There could be no conflict of interest implicated when businesses involved are time-differentiated non-competitors.
Expand ...
Using the Wimbledon and US Open comparison isn't accurate because both of those events are under same governing body and Unrivaled and the WNBA are separate entities.

Somebody on Twitter suggested that all of players should ditched the WNBA and join Unrivaled. Unrivaled would be responsible for paying over 150+ players the same salaries they currently pay 50+ plus players. The players and Unrivaled win and the WNBA lose. Problem solved.
 
sivad40 said:
Using the Wimbledon and US Open comparison isn't accurate because both of those events are under same governing body and Unrivaled and the WNBA are separate entities.

Somebody on Twitter suggested that all of players should ditched the WNBA and join Unrivaled. Unrivaled would be responsible for paying over 150+ players the same salaries they currently pay 50+ plus players. The players and Unrivaled win and the WNBA lose. Problem solved.
Expand ...
Wimbledon and the U.S. Open are owned by two separate entities in separate countries, the All England Lawn Tennis Ground Plc and the USTA, respectively.
 
NycUcWbbFan said:
Wimbledon and the U.S. Open are owned by two separate entities in separate countries, the All England Lawn Tennis Ground Plc and the USTA, respectively.
Expand ...
The International Tennis Federation is the governing body over both of them.
 
sivad40 said:
The International Tennis Federation is the governing body over both of them.
Expand ...
“Four of the ITF's leading National Associations - Tennis Australia, the French Federation of Tennis, United States Tennis Association and, in the case of Wimbledon, a joint Committee of Management consisting of The All England Lawn Tennis & Croquet Club and Lawn Tennis Association - own and organise each Grand Slam tournament.” Grand Slam tennis tournaments | ITF
 
baggerbob said:
And if the players decide to walk, the NBA owners are going to take a hit, because they have already sold the TV rights.
Expand ...
Tulin's Treasures: Aces Sweat Out the Fever After Phee Scorches the Earth Tulin's Treasures: Aces Sweat Out the Fever After Phee Scorches the Earth

"Engelbert’s actual role in this is to be a public face for NBA ownership and commissioner Adam Silver. That public face could definitely use a makeover once the labor situation is settled. It is, after all, the NBA that essentially has total control over the actions of the WNBA with a 42% ownership stake and WNBA franchise owners — many of whom are NBA owners — owning another 42%. No matter what anybody says publicly, it will be Silver and the NBA who give the final stamp of approval on the league side when and if the new CBA is agreed upon."


This is the key issue. The NBA and NBA owners own 84% of the wnba. So their calculus will be revenue and investment maximizing. The commissioner of the WNBA like all commissioners works for the ownership. Therefore the WNBA commissioner like Adam Silver works for the NBA.

I think the snafu is a result of two parts first the WNBA commissioner's faux pas and inability to credibly appear as a figurehead leading the league. The second is the NBA ownership clearly is not certain what they need to be doing with the WNBA. The explosion in the media over our officiating a really easily solved issue is head scratching.
 
Last edited:
NycUcWbbFan said:
“Four of the ITF's leading National Associations - Tennis Australia, the French Federation of Tennis, United States Tennis Association and, in the case of Wimbledon, a joint Committee of Management consisting of The All England Lawn Tennis & Croquet Club and Lawn Tennis Association - own and organise each Grand Slam tournament.” Grand Slam tennis tournaments | ITF
Expand ...
The point for me still is that US Open and Wimbledon comparisons isn't the same as the Unrivaled and the WNBA. Especially when they are more equal comparisons like the NBA and the Big 3.
 
sivad40 said:
The point for me still is that US Open and Wimbledon comparisons isn't the same as the Unrivaled and the WNBA. Especially when they are more equal comparisons like the NBA and the Big 3.
Expand ...
Your point about the Big 3 is a good one. While their teams comprise of retired NBA players, Ice Cube has done an impressive job in gaining more attention and earned a deal with CBS for media rights.
 
sivad40 said:
The point for me still is that US Open and Wimbledon comparisons isn't the same as the Unrivaled and the WNBA. Especially when they are more equal comparisons like the NBA and the Big 3.
Expand ...
Yeah, the context of the Wimbledon vs U.S. Open example was to dispel someone’s inherent assumption that there is automatic conflict of interest in a given situation.

Your example &1 is not useful to cite in such context.

&1 “The Big 3”, while also not intended and not de facto competitor of the NBA, currently does not actively recruit active NBA players. So, the NBA cannot directly threaten the Big 3’s viability.
 
NycUcWbbFan said:
Yeah, the context of the Wimbledon vs U.S. Open example was to dispel someone’s inherent assumption that there is automatic conflict of interest in a given situation.

Your example &1 is not useful to cite in such context.

&1 “The Big 3”, while also not intended and not de facto competitor of the NBA, currently does not actively recruit active NBA players. So, the NBA cannot directly threaten the Big 3’s viability.
Expand ...
You can't recruit what you have either.
 

CTFAN4LIFE said:
Could there be a less informed/ore ignorant position on this???...

share.newsbreak.com

Let the Sun Set Elsewhere; We Have Enough Basketball - NewsBreak

Why are Governor Lamont and state Treasurer Erick Russell so enthusiastic about using state pension money to make state government a minority owner of the
share.newsbreak.com share.newsbreak.com
Expand ...

Some of his assumptions (e.g. competition against UConn's teams) don't make sense, however in reading the article, I get where they're coming from. It sounds like previous investments by the state didn't accomplish what was intended and there is a concern the same would happen in this case. Does it make sense for a government body to spend this money now, when there could be other pressing matters in the state? It's not an easy question to answer.
 

Online statistics

Members online
335
Guests online
5,662
Total visitors
5,997
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,738
Messages
4,408,405
Members
10,228
Latest member
NEONDOHA


.
..
Top Bottom