cavjock88 said:

---

---

Wow...those jokes won't fly in today's woke cancel culture where it is okay to laugh at men, but never at women.

infinity ag said:

---

---

When their league can turn a profit - without being subsidized by men - then they can ask for a bigger share of the profit.

Currently, they should get a bigger share of the loss.

Norm Macdonald crapping on the WNBA, Hillary Clinton and OJ Simpson. What a nationnal treasure he was !!!!

2000AgPhD said:

---

For me, watching women's basketball at any level is painful. Is that sexist? Maybe, but it is about as entertaining as watching paint dry.

---

It's not sexist, it's about the last part, entertainment. All sports are for entertainment, some just do a better job of it to others. There's a small faction that ARE entertained by the WNBA, I am not one. And to drive the point home, there is a tangible reason viewership has grown since Clark entered the league - the entertainment value increased. Whether it's watching the cat fights that result from jealous players hacking her or the fact she's actually a good player, the entertainment value has increased somewhat. Not for me personally, I think it's a boring product. But there are those who are entertained by the WNBA and they are enjoying the best the WNBA has ever had to offer. Even though it's still not financially viable. But, these women are totally tuned out to the fact they are modern day court jesters, easily replaced.

Quote:

---

Most people understand that physically, men and women are not the same.

Prior to puberty, boys and girls are physically similar in size, strength, and skill except when it comes to throwing. By the age of three, boys can throw objects farther, faster, and with greater accuracy than girls. No other physical activity in early childhood shows such a pronounced gap between the sexes. As they get older, boys across cultures refine this ability tossing sticks, stones, balls, or whatever is at hand. By adolescence, their advantage in throwing ability has tripled.

The male edge in throwing power and speed is evident even in the smallest hunter-gatherer societies.

- from Sexual Politics by Robert Henderson

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

Most people understand that physically, men and women are not the same.

Prior to puberty, boys and girls are physically similar in size, strength, and skill except when it comes to throwing. By the age of three, boys can throw objects farther, faster, and with greater accuracy than girls. No other physical activity in early childhood shows such a pronounced gap between the sexes. As they get older, boys across cultures refine this ability tossing sticks, stones, balls, or whatever is at hand. By adolescence, their advantage in throwing ability has tripled.

The male edge in throwing power and speed is evident even in the smallest hunter-gatherer societies.

- from Sexual Politics by Robert Henderson

---

---

the first sentence about prior to puberty is not correct....My son - u12 soccer player- would smash u14 girls teams. My daughter plays u14.. it is not close. Especially for the boys, puberty hasn't hit yet and still..

It would be no different in basketball...

Aston04 said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

Most people understand that physically, men and women are not the same.

Prior to puberty, boys and girls are physically similar in size, strength, and skill except when it comes to throwing. By the age of three, boys can throw objects farther, faster, and with greater accuracy than girls. No other physical activity in early childhood shows such a pronounced gap between the sexes. As they get older, boys across cultures refine this ability tossing sticks, stones, balls, or whatever is at hand. By adolescence, their advantage in throwing ability has tripled.

The male edge in throwing power and speed is evident even in the smallest hunter-gatherer societies.

- from Sexual Politics by Robert Henderson

---

---

the first sentence about prior to puberty is not correct....My son - u12 soccer player- would smash u14 girls teams. My daughter plays u14.. it is not close. Especially for the boys, puberty hasn't hit yet and still..

It would be no different in basketball...

---

You are right, didn't a 12U or 14U boys soccer team in Dallas beat the women's USA soccer team badly? Thought I saw that somewhere or watched a video about it.

I'm sure some of the women in the WNBA are pretty athletic, like Cheryl Swoopes, she was a beast at Tech...She might have been able to hang with some really athletic men, but their is hardly any women like her in basketball. I mean she is probably like 1 in a million..

They should stick to mostly women's sports, like softball and volleyball. make a professional league for that and own it..Women's softball is actually pretty fun to watch...It's hard to watch WNBA when the regular NBA is so much better even with the crappy rules the men play with in this era.

Ramdiesel said:

---

Aston04 said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

Most people understand that physically, men and women are not the same.

Prior to puberty, boys and girls are physically similar in size, strength, and skill except when it comes to throwing. By the age of three, boys can throw objects farther, faster, and with greater accuracy than girls. No other physical activity in early childhood shows such a pronounced gap between the sexes. As they get older, boys across cultures refine this ability tossing sticks, stones, balls, or whatever is at hand. By adolescence, their advantage in throwing ability has tripled.

The male edge in throwing power and speed is evident even in the smallest hunter-gatherer societies.

- from Sexual Politics by Robert Henderson

---

---

the first sentence about prior to puberty is not correct....My son - u12 soccer player- would smash u14 girls teams. My daughter plays u14.. it is not close. Especially for the boys, puberty hasn't hit yet and still..

It would be no different in basketball...

---

You are right, didn't a 12U or 14U boys soccer team in Dallas beat the women's USA soccer team badly? Thought I saw that somewhere or watched a video about it.

I'm sure some of the women in the WNBA are pretty athletic, like Cheryl Swoopes, she was a beast at Tech...She might have been able to hang with some really athletic men, but their is hardly any women like her in basketball. I mean she is probably like 1 in a million..

They should stick to mostly women's sports, like softball and volleyball. make a professional league for that and own it..Women's softball is actually pretty fun to watch...It's hard to watch WNBA when the regular NBA is so much better even with the crappy rules the men play with in this era.

---

It was such a bad beatdown tgat they had to use copywrite claims to get it deleted everywhere it was posted. Pretty sure it was by double digits.

FatZilla said:

---

Ramdiesel said:

---

Aston04 said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

Most people understand that physically, men and women are not the same.

Prior to puberty, boys and girls are physically similar in size, strength, and skill except when it comes to throwing. By the age of three, boys can throw objects farther, faster, and with greater accuracy than girls. No other physical activity in early childhood shows such a pronounced gap between the sexes. As they get older, boys across cultures refine this ability tossing sticks, stones, balls, or whatever is at hand. By adolescence, their advantage in throwing ability has tripled.

The male edge in throwing power and speed is evident even in the smallest hunter-gatherer societies.

- from Sexual Politics by Robert Henderson

---

---

the first sentence about prior to puberty is not correct....My son - u12 soccer player- would smash u14 girls teams. My daughter plays u14.. it is not close. Especially for the boys, puberty hasn't hit yet and still..

It would be no different in basketball...

---

You are right, didn't a 12U or 14U boys soccer team in Dallas beat the women's USA soccer team badly? Thought I saw that somewhere or watched a video about it.

I'm sure some of the women in the WNBA are pretty athletic, like Cheryl Swoopes, she was a beast at Tech...She might have been able to hang with some really athletic men, but their is hardly any women like her in basketball. I mean she is probably like 1 in a million..

They should stick to mostly women's sports, like softball and volleyball. make a professional league for that and own it..Women's softball is actually pretty fun to watch...It's hard to watch WNBA when the regular NBA is so much better even with the crappy rules the men play with in this era.

---

It was such a bad beatdown tgat they had to use copywrite claims to get it deleted everywhere it was posted. Pretty sure it was by double digits.

---

5-2

https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/a-dallas-fc-under-15-boys-squad-beat-the-u-s-womens-national-team-in-a-scrimmage/

fc2112 said:

---

Angel Reese highlight video from their all Star game.

Angel Reese All-Star Game highlights 🔥 pic.twitter.com/969V6tzuHV

— BricksCenter (@BricksCenter) July 20, 2025

Seriously, a decent 5A boys team from Texas runs either team off the floor, right?

---

Boys JV team would crush them.

Our HS JV team had 5 players over 6'2. 7 players could dunk. Both point guards ran track.

( Houston Clear Lake HS)

Aston04 said:

---

In fairness- the next media contract for wnba is gonna be for a lot more money bc of clark. I could see the league turning profitable.

---

Not if they continue to beat the hell out of her every game with the refs looking away.

But then, violence sells which made ice hockey "popular" in the early years.

TXAG 05 said:

---

EclipseAg said:

---

The WNBA is just like any other minor league sport -- baseball, hockey, etc.

The individual teams may have a core group of die-hard fans and sponsors and maybe even break even financially every now and then. But they will never capture the sporting public's attention because they are minor league.

Back in the day, I was a huge fan of the Houston Aeros, who drew great crowds to the Summit and competed and won championships in the IHL and AHL. But the team's fan base was STILL miniscule compared to the Astros or Rockets.

Because they were minor league.

---

Or the Houston Comets, they won 4 championships in a row and still no one cared and don't even exist anymore.

---

Stop with the facts.

Seeing Norm Macdonald mocking the WNBA got me to wondering how long the league has been around. Very surprised to learn that it's been nearly 30 years lol. If they can't get it done in that amount of time then they're never going to turn a profit. They should rename the teams after different parasites because that's all they will ever be...


ETA - thank you for the Norm Macdonald clip. If he had only existed to play Burt Reynolds on Celebrity Jeopardy then his place in comedy history would have been assured, but his Weekend Updates and various comedy drops on youtube made him one of the all-time greats. He was a treasure!

As long as there is today's espn (it's propaganda machine), there will be wnba and you will like it; no, you will love it and believe what you are told about the greatness of the "W" and it's recent reparations grift on the back of C Clark.

Would not surprise if they were invested monetarily big time.

If they are losing $50 million this year as I have seen reported, then each player is WORTH ($320,512.82). They can submit their payments to the NBA teams in their city.

Even into the 1970s, NFL & MLB players were often working off season jobs. The average NFL salary in 1980 was $78,657, that's a very good salary at the time, but not comparable to what current NFL players average.

In the 70s, the NFL didn't have the revenue stream that it has today.

I think that's a fair comparison to the WNBA, but, the NFL was still profitable at that time.

Spin off the WNBA and make it separate. Let them manage their own finances and not beg the Govt for funds. Pay each player NBA salaries then! No one will complain.

BREAKING: WNBA players will earn an additional $20.50 in salary next year.

League sources describe the move as “historic.”

(Via @ESPMNBA) pic.twitter.com/x1NKdjGtq1

— NBACentel (@TheNBACentel) July 22, 2025

TyHolden said:

---

BREAKING: WNBA players will earn an additional $20.50 in salary next year.

League sources describe the move as “historic.”

(Via @ESPMNBA) pic.twitter.com/x1NKdjGtq1

— NBACentel (@TheNBACentel) July 22, 2025

---

The WNBA commissioner looks like tennis player Chris Evert.

I'm actually genuinely curious as to how the league is losing $50M every year?

They don't own their own arenas since they play in existing NBA arenas, most of them don't own their own practice facilities. Sure they have to cover travel costs and player salaries. Do they have to arena pay rent to the NBA team in which they play?

It ain't like their average game attendance is 100 people and advertisers are buying ads in their telecasts and sponsoring the teams to a degree.

Not a fan at all, but curious how the math is working on this to get to a $50M loss?

Charter flights

Rascal said:

---

I'm actually genuinely curious as to how the league is losing $50M every year?

They don't own their own arenas since they play in existing NBA arenas, most of them don't own their own practice facilities. Sure they have to cover travel costs and player salaries. Do they have to arena pay rent to the NBA team in which they play?

It ain't like their average game attendance is 100 people and advertisers are buying ads in their telecasts and sponsoring the teams to a degree.

Not a fan at all, but curious how the math is working on this to get to a $50M loss?

---

Ai Breakdown:

WNBA Revenue Breakdown and Loss (Approximate)

Category Amount
Total Revenue $200 million
NBA Cut (42%) $84 million
Investor Cut (16%) $32 million
Revenue Remaining $84 million

Expenses

Item Amount
Charter Flights $25 million
Player Salaries (12 teams) $36 million
Operations & Staff $40 million
Total Expenses ~$101 million

Bottom Line

Result Amount
Operating Loss $17 million
Other Costs & Accounting $20+ million
Total Annual Loss ~$40 million

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Rascal said:

---

I'm actually genuinely curious as to how the league is losing $50M every year?

They don't own their own arenas since they play in existing NBA arenas, most of them don't own their own practice facilities. Sure they have to cover travel costs and player salaries. Do they have to arena pay rent to the NBA team in which they play?

It ain't like their average game attendance is 100 people and advertisers are buying ads in their telecasts and sponsoring the teams to a degree.

Not a fan at all, but curious how the math is working on this to get to a $50M loss?

---

Ai Breakdown:

WNBA Revenue Breakdown and Loss (Approximate)

Category Amount
Total Revenue $200 million
NBA Cut (42%) $84 million
Investor Cut (16%) $32 million
Revenue Remaining $84 million

Expenses

Item Amount
Charter Flights $25 million
Player Salaries (12 teams) $36 million
Operations & Staff $40 million
Total Expenses ~$101 million

Bottom Line

Result Amount
Operating Loss $17 million
Other Costs & Accounting $20+ million
Total Annual Loss ~$40 million

---

So, they're really just upset about the 58% take from the NBA and the Investors?

And wanting that to be more like 49% so that the difference of $20 million goes toward increasing their salaries to around $56 million or a +55% increase?

The nba gives an estimated 15 million or so a year to the wnba, plus heavily discounted rental fees, etc. They given hundreds of millions to the wnba over the years

The investors aren't going to take less.

The nba essentially owns the wnba. Increasing player pay makes absolutely no sense when it's operating at a loss, even with nba investments into it. The nba isn't getting cash back out, it's getting increased value. At some point, the roi isnt going to be there

Who?mikejones! said:

---

The nba gives an estimated 15 million or so a year to the wnba, plus heavily discounted rental fees, etc. They given hundreds of millions to the wnba over the years

The investors aren't going to take less.

The nba essentially owns the wnba. Increasing player pay makes absolutely no sense when it's operating at a loss, even with nba investments into it. The nba isn't getting cash back out, it's getting increased value. At some point, the roi isnt going to be there

---

Don't you know?
Business economics rules don't apply to female sensibilities.

Why did the nba ever agree to these insane structures?

FriendlyAg said:

---

Why did the nba ever agree to these insane structures?

---

Tax write off?

FriendlyAg said:

---

Why did the nba ever agree to these insane structures?

---

Because it is run by old white men who have had enough money and success and now want female adulation to top off their careers as "feminists".

And yes, a tax write off. But then they are gazillionaires so having more money means not a whole lot.

Those wnba teams were worth 15 or 20 millions a decade ago. Now they are worth 200 million.

So, it's a wealth creator that worth it despite the losses at this rate. If those losses grow too much, it will become to burdensome and not justify the investment

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Those wnba teams were worth 15 or 20 millions a decade ago. Now they are worth 200 million.

So, it's a wealth creator that worth it despite the losses at this rate. If those losses grow too much, it will become to burdensome and not justify the investment

---

How is their value in an entity that rarely creates a profit? The Fever will probably be the only team to end the year in the black.

It creates wealth. If mark cubs owned/was forced to own whatever the Dallas wnba team is 10 years ago and it was worth 20 million and he sold it today for 200 million, it's probably a good deal, especially the nba funding was a collective effort and not solely on the Mavericks.

So far is how is there value, I dunno. I know the nba uses the wnba for packaged TV deals so it increase TV value. And the wnba did sign a pretty massive TV deal recently. I don't know on what real ground such a deal was good sense, as their TV ratings a pretty consistent unless it's Clark playing.

I think the sports would is betting on the inevitably of the wnba being popular. ESPN alone has invested a **** ton of time and money in it to let it go away quietly.

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Those wnba teams were worth 15 or 20 millions a decade ago. Now they are worth 200 million.

So, it's a wealth creator that worth it despite the losses at this rate. If those losses grow too much, it will become to burdensome and not justify the investment

---

How do you know they are worth 200M? Where did you see these numbers?

Seems just made up to make the ladies happy.

A value is assigned based on cash flow. A beggarly league has negative cash flows. This includes all revenue sources like advertising, etc etc. Why would someone pay 200M when it does not make any money and hasn't in 30 years?

The only thing that I can think is a possibility is that it is a legal tax scam (loophole) so it would value along with a larger business, not by itself.

infinity ag said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Those wnba teams were worth 15 or 20 millions a decade ago. Now they are worth 200 million.

So, it's a wealth creator that worth it despite the losses at this rate. If those losses grow too much, it will become to burdensome and not justify the investment

---

How do you know they are worth 200M? Where did you see these numbers?

Seems just made up to make the ladies happy.

A value is assigned based on cash flow. A beggarly league has negative cash flows.

---

https://www.si.com/wnba/here-what-every-wnba-franchise-worth

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brettknight/2025/06/06/the-wnbas-most-valuable-teams-2025/

https://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/45271533/reports-wnba-liberty-sell-stake-record-450m-valuation

https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/storm/report-storm-valued-at-wnba-record-151-million-after-sale-of-minority-stakes/

I don't really understand it, but, someone sees value in them.

If I were an owner I would offer them the following CBA:

Reduce current 9.8% revenue share distribution to 5% revenue share distribution and then another 8-10% distribution share for players on PROFITABLE teams.

I'm guessing they would reject the offer.

Quote:

---

Because it is run by old white men who have had enough money and success and now want female adulation to top off their careers as "feminists".

---

They think they're going to get adulation from a league that craps on some of their best players solely because they're white? Dunno about that