Is The WNBA Folding?

[VAUConnFan]

Link:
http://www.foxsportswest.com/fox-sp...-One-website-says-?blockID=905213&feedID=3707

Let's hope not.

 

[doggydaddy]

6 WNBA teams are privately owned. It might hurt some teams if the NBA drops its support but not all teams.

It's not closing shop this year.

 

[VAMike23]

A very cursory, high level "analysis" there. Per Minny coach Cheryl Reeve, the number of profitable teams is up, and I think the league's marketing deals are slightly increased as well -$- over last year. I also think this year's draft class will give ratings a little bump.

I don't see the league going away.

 

[Blueballer]

Watched the Indiana - San Antonio matchup tonight. Surprised SA was ahead as much as they were without Hammond. The officiating was putrid of course.

BUT - What freaked me out was seeing the WNBA commercial promoting "3 to see" !!! Are they kidding? We had enough of that baloney hype during the college season when none of them made it to the championship game.

 

[vtcwbuff]

Watched the Indiana - San Antonio matchup tonight. Surprised SA was ahead as much as they were without Hammond. The officiating was putrid of course.

BUT - What freaked me out was seeing the WNBA commercial promoting "3 to see" !!! Are they kidding? We had enough of that baloney hype during the college season when none of them made it to the championship game.

The WNBA is "hyping" (I would call it marketing) league professionals. What does that have to do with anything they may or may not have done at the college level?

 

[Blueballer]

The WNBA is "hyping" (I would call it marketing) league professionals. What does that have to do with anything they may or may not have done at the college level?

Bcause it's the SAME promotion! I mean can they come up with an original concept?

 

[blackbird]

ESPN hyped the 3 to see in College so they could continue it into the pros.

I don't see the WNBA folding, as I'm pretty sure they just signed a pretty big deal with ESPN.

 

[RadyLady]

They did actually modify it from "3 to see" to "4 to see" to include the 4th draft pick Taylor Hill. Can't link it because I'm on tap a talk but will do so when I get to a computer, but I believe I saw this on the ESPN webpage for women's basketball this morning.

So I jumped back to the page to see if I could copy and paste the URL which I don't seem to be able to it this time and even though the top video shows the for to see the headliner article is actually 3 to see but they do mention Taylor Hill

Sent from my SGH-T769 using Tapatalk 2

 

[MilfordHusky]

Sorry, but my Big 4 to Watch are Diana Taurasi, Sue Bird (when playing), Maya Moore, and Tina Charles.

Non-UConn players of interest to me include Lauren Jackson, Penny Taylor, Angel McCaughtry, Tamika Catchings, and Seimone Augustus.

 

[Wonkster]

.
One web site said the WNBA is folding, so it must be true!

What a non-story.

 

[jplotinus]

WNBA might be hyping the "4 to see" because it matches the salary scale IIRC. Top 4 draft choices get top rookie$. Slides after that. Of course, the word "top" concerning money and the WNBA is a bit of an oxymoron.

I'm not sure I would totally lament the demise of the WNBA because their use of $ as a weapon irks me. I think they've got an exploitative business model. The minimum/maximum amount each team can pay in salary is <$1million divided among 11 players.

That is too little and too few.

As the presumed Mecca of wbb, it might behoove us to advocate ,or at least call for, better pay for and better treatment of those we revere.

I am jist observin' :-/

 

[UConnCat]

A couple of interesting tweets from Geno:

Geno Auriemma ‏@genoauriemma 3h
WNBA says three to see are ready for debuts. Agree. Can't wait to se Diana Taurasi Tamika Catchings Candace Parker #respect.

Geno Auriemma ‏@genoauriemma 2h
Oops. Forgot to add Tina Charles Maya Moore Lauren Jackson #dominators

Of course, Lauren Jackson won't be playing with the Storm this summer but his point is well taken.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

WNBA might be hyping the "4 to see" because it matches the salary scale IIRC. Top 4 draft choices get top rookie$. Slides after that. Of course, the word "top" concerning money and the WNBA is a bit of an oxymoron.

I'm not sure I would totally lament the demise of the WNBA because their use of $ as a weapon irks me. I think they've got an exploitative business model. The minimum/maximum amount each team can pay in salary is <$1million divided among 11 players.

That is too little and too few.

As the presumed Mecca of wbb, it might behoove us to advocate ,or at least call for, better pay for and better treatment of those we revere.

I am jist observin' :-/

Except that there is no money to pay. That's the problem.

I wish - very badly - that it wasn't so, but I'll get on your bandwagon when teams post solid profits. For the nonce, the salary "has" increased (and players decreased to "help" that stat).

I'm not a doomsayer that says "the league is folding" - but I don't suppose it is impossible. That's why efforts have to be put into keeping it from folding, more so than increasing salaries.

 

[socal613ws]

dude come on that article says JC Penney is going out of business. That's not happening either too. Don't listen to that rabble.

 

[jplotinus]

Except that there is no money to pay. That's the problem.

I wish - very badly - that it wasn't so, but I'll get on your bandwagon when teams post solid profits. For the nonce, the salary "has" increased (and players decreased to "help" that stat).

I'm not a doomsayer that says "the league is folding" - but I don't suppose it is impossible. That's why efforts have to be put into keeping it from folding, more so than increasing salaries.

I mostly understand ("nounce"?) and I don't think we're going to "fall out" or get on each other's last nerve over this, but I do need to address the underlying assumption that it is ok for the league to balance its books by underpaying the players.

That is not cool.

In the larger context, the "accepted" thought stream is that the answer to austerity is to cut pay, jobs and benefits on one hand and bailout banks on the other. That is clearly an ordering of priorities and not a lack of money, per se.

So it is in the WNBA.

>7000 in average attendance is far above what the nba had when I was still wet behind the ears. I remember, clearly, seeing Bill Russell take my home team to the woodshed in the '60s in a doubleheader, no less, in front of a record crowd of 3000.

Another troublesome assumption is that the WNBA can only grow if the players are short changed. It might be just as valid to say that paying the players decently will have the effect of stimulating growth.

People may flock to see something that is perceived to be of high value where high value is fostered by high pay, not low pay.

People also have to want the players to be highly paid in order to encourage that to happen. I want higher pay for WNBA players. I hope this will come about sooner rather than later. It is not good to think Stef, Bria, then KML, Brianna, Kiah (hopefully) and then Stewie, Mo and Mo will be drafted to much ballyhoo but only little pay.

I want better for them. The WNBA has no real need to underpay its players.

PS
Hey Sun players, if you guys are lurking, send a PM. We need to chitter chatter.
Seriously...

 

[alexrgct]

I mostly understand ("nounce"?) and I don't think we're going to "fall out" or get on each other's last nerve over this, but I do need to address the underlying assumption that it is ok for the league to balance its books by underpaying the players.

That is not cool.

In the larger context, the "accepted" thought stream is that the answer to austerity is to cut pay, jobs and benefits on one hand and bailout banks on the other. That is clearly an ordering of priorities and not a lack of money, per se.

So it is in the WNBA.

>7000 in average attendance is far above what the nba had when I was still wet behind the ears. I remember, clearly, seeing Bill Russell take my home team to the woodshed in the '60s in a doubleheader, no less, in front of a record crowd of 3000.

Another troublesome assumption is that the WNBA can only grow if the players are short changed. It might be just as valid to say that paying the players decently will have the effect of stimulating growth.

People may flock to see something that is perceived to be of high value where high value is fostered by high pay, not low pay.

People also have to want the players to be highly paid in order to encourage that to happen. I want higher pay for WNBA players. I hope this will come about sooner rather than later. It is not good to think Stef, Bria, then KML, Brianna, Kiah (hopefully) and then Stewie, Mo and Mo will be drafted to much ballyhoo but only little pay.

I want better for them. The WNBA has no real need to underpay its players.

PS
Hey Sun players, if you guys are lurking, send a PM. We need to chitter chatter.
Seriously...

What evidence is there that the league is "underpaying" its players? Players are paid in the vicinity of 50K for three months' worth of work. Show me a solvent league where women's basketball players are getting paid more, and I'll show you some beachfront property I've got in St Louis.

People will not "flock" to a product because the people who produce it are paid a lot of money. That's ridiculous. People flock to products that interest them. The fact of the matter is that there isn't a ton of interest in women's professional sports in this country, and that's damn sure not going to change because the league decides to pay its players more. If anything, it would make some people root against the league even more. The last thing the league needs is to look more like a charity case than it's been to this point.

How about we don't compare WNBA attendance to the early NBA? The WNBA has been the beneficiary of corporate welfare since its inception, with millions in marketing being funneled its way. The NBA had nothing of the sort.

I'm happy to see the league endure, but let's not act like the players are being underpaid relative to their value in the marketplace. They are being paid a decent salary relative to their ages and number of months out of the year they devote to playing in the WNBA.

But hey, tilt at windmills and speculate some more about what "might" and "may" happen if other people throw a ton of money, none of which is yours, down a black hole.

 

[jplotinus]

What evidence is there that the league is "underpaying" its players? Players are paid in the vicinity of 50K for three months' worth of work. Show me a solvent league where women's basketball players are getting paid more, and I'll show you some beachfront property I've got in St Louis.

People will not "flock" to a product because the people who produce it are paid a lot of money. That's ridiculous. People flock to products that interest them. The fact of the matter is that there isn't a ton of interest in women's professional sports in this country, and that's damn sure not going to change because the league decides to pay its players more. If anything, it would make some people root against the league even more. The last thing the league needs is to look more like a charity case than it's been to this point.

How about we don't compare WNBA attendance to the early NBA? The WNBA has been the beneficiary of corporate welfare since its inception, with millions in marketing being funneled its way. The NBA had nothing of the sort.

I'm happy to see the league endure, but let's not act like the players are being underpaid relative to their value in the marketplace. They are being paid a decent salary relative to their ages and number of months out of the year they devote to playing in the WNBA.

But hey, tilt at windmills and speculate some more about what "might" and "may" happen if other people throw a ton of money, none of which is yours, down a black hole.

Nope, your post is wide of the mark, valiant though it may be in defense of the poor, poor, pitiful, in part, WNBA, with a tad of noblesse oblige, added in as a confounding variable, or so it would appear.

Comparison with the early nba is apt. What is even moreso is the overall comparison of male salaries in whatever occupation with female salaries. I do hope some of our women posters on a board concerning itself with womens basketball in general, and UCONN in particular will give consideration here.

There is always and 4evah some set of noble sounding, but lame nonetheless, excuse set for why women need to be paid less for doing the same thing as men. And usually for their (women's) own good.

So it is in the post to which this replies.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Nope, your post is wide of the mark, valiant though it may be in defense of the poor, poor, pitiful, in part, WNBA, with a tad of noblesse oblige, added in as a confounding variable, or so it would appear.

Comparison with the early nba is apt. What is even moreso is the overall comparison of male salaries in whatever occupation with female salaries. I do hope some of our women posters on a board concerning itself with womens basketball in general, and UCONN in particular will give consideration here.

There is always and 4evah some set of noble sounding, but lame nonetheless, excuse set for why women need to be paid less for doing the same thing as men. And usually for their (women's) own good.

So it is in the post to which this replies.

Indeed, if the women's players in the WNBA need to make a corresponding amount to the men's players in the NBA today, then the WNBA might as well close tomorrow. What part of "there is no money there, they are not making any" is so hard to understand??? If a woman played in the NBA I would expect her paid an NBA salary; different ball game.

And comparisons to the start up of the NBA might engender comparison to men's players salaries at start-up, which were probably not very good at the time, either.

 

[jplotinus]

Indeed, if the women's players in the WNBA need to make a corresponding amount to the men's players in the NBA today, then the WNBA might as well close tomorrow. What part of "there is no money there, they are not making any" is so hard to understand??? If a woman played in the NBA I would expect her paid an NBA salary; different ball game.

And comparisons to the start up of the NBA might engender comparison to men's players salaries at start-up, which were probably not very good at the time, either.

Hey,

If you PM, discussion will be strictly confidential. As you can see, your salary scale is a sensitive topic, having a tendency to generate a backlash at the mere suggestion that the scale is too low. If resistance is this high on a message board, one can imagine that the blowback would be that much greater if word ever got out that any of you were concerned about the issue. The likelihood of being traded or cut obviously plays into anything you might say, let alone do, along these lines. Still, a PM might be useful for exploratory purposes.

 

[trisailin]

What I love is people who have ZERO actual understanding of the economics of running something telling those that do run said something how to do it. It's always easy to spend somebody else' money.
Since jplotinus seems to believe the players are being paid unfairly, my question is why doesn't he start his own league, and offer to pay them more. Since they would be paid more, it should be no trouble getting players.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

What I love is people who have ZERO actual understanding of the economics of running something telling those that do run said something how to do it. It's always easy to spend somebody else' money.
Since jplotinus seems to believe the players are being paid unfairly, my question is why doesn't he start his own league, and offer to pay them more. Since they would be paid more, it should be no trouble getting players.

That's my point. They really are underpaid, but . . .. The NBA players, IMHO, are grossly overpaid, but . . ..

All is neither here nor there, as each are paid at the rate set by their business success and as negotiated. And yes, FWIW, the WNBA salary range is set by collective bargaining, in the same fashion as the men's salaries.

 

[Scotter]

I think people tend to forget that as recently as the 80's a large percentage of NFL players had off-season jobs. It is only in the last 20 years with the expansion of cable and satellite that TV revenues have grown to the point that there are huge salaries. And what made those TV contracts work is fan bases that were grown and built up over generations.

The only somewhat league comparable to the WNBA is the MLS, which both began about the same time. There is more growth potential for the MLS, but it does has to fight similar startup and perception issues. They both have to fight the stigma of being leagues with a second tier quality of play (MLS versus Europe and WNBA versus NBA). They both have complicated relationships with European colleagues where they rely on the European clubs to help subsidize salaries (MLS through exhibition games and selling players, and WNBA through off season jobs), but also have calendar that is in regular logistical conflict with the international calendar that the European clubs are on.

I think it is telling that the minimum MLS salary which the majority of players make close to is still only 32,000. There is a higher range of salaries in the MLS partlyl driven by the need to compete for top players since the players can't play a full European season like WNBA players can. Overall the WNBA salaries aren't that far off from the majority of MLS salaries.

 

[svetbird]

it may be a lost leader for the nba but young girls all over the nation get into basketball (nba as well )because of the wnba. keeping my love of the wnba out of it. this would be a horrible decision from a marketing standpoint

 

[vtcwbuff]

Jplot - ever run a business? How can a business survive if expenses exceed income? The WNBA (and player salaries) suffers from lack of interest.

Maybe the league can get a government subsidy.

 

[jplotinus]

What I love is people who have ZERO actual understanding of the economics of running something telling those that do run said something how to do it. It's always easy to spend somebody else' money.
Since jplotinus seems to believe the players are being paid unfairly, my question is why doesn't he start his own league, and offer to pay them more. Since they would be paid more, it should be no trouble getting players.

The thing I find most interesting about posts like the above is the degree to which they reflect a genuine, pure, unadulterated adoration of the ownership and management side of the equation.

Posts like that quoted above seem to take it very personally, as if the losses are there own, if extra money has to be taken from team ownership and management to pay players.

One might ask, does the NBA and the independent owners of WNBA franchises need the help? Don't they already have (well) paid staffs consisting in business executives, sales people, accountants, lawyers, PR specialists and assorted assistants for all of the foregoing, all looking out for ownership interests?

Basically, the decision to post a comment crying (crocodile) tears lamenting the fate of the poor, poor, pitiful WNBA ownership side constitute, at the very same time, a direct slap in the face of the women players. If that is an overstatement, it isn't by much. The owners very clearly and very openly put the players in a take it or leave it situation, and have done since year one.

I, on the other hand, want to make it clear that women professional athletes deserve better pay and it is appropriate to say so and to act accordingly. Some people side with the economic interests of the players, some don't. I'm beginning to wonder, though, why, in a message board on women's basketball there have not been more posts favorable to the players' interests?

The players have interests that deserve protection, don't they? Do BYers also subscribe to the notion that female professional athletes have to take what they're offered and not ever dare ask for one cent more?

I am just asking.

For those of you who are honor bound to defend WNBA owners, fine, have at it. As Brittney Griner has eloquently said, be who you are. If you have a need to shill for the poor, hapless, long suffering, truly generous, ever so nice WNBA owners who are bending over backwards to pay an entire WNBA team $800,000 for a season, then go on and do what you need to do.