WNBA 2026

[MU82]

I enjoy watching Caitlin Clark play basketball, even though I wish she'd whine less.

There are quite a few WNBA and NBA players one can say that about, BTW.

[Jay Bee]

Enes and Royce will be a fun watch

[cheebs09]

Enes and Royce will be a fun watch

Nice of them to get in on the grift.

[Uncle Rico]

Nice of them to get in on the grift.

If there's one thing the culture warriors on the right are good at, it's grifting.  And with the mouth breathers who don't give a rip about women sports and are buried in the closet or wish they were women, they'll have a bunch of support.

[Billy Hoyle]

Nice of them to get in on the grift.

"We embrace justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion," the players' union said. "Those are the values that unite this Union and allow it to protect women's sports while creating transformational change.**

**Certain exceptions apply.  Looking at you, Ms. Cunningham**

[Pakuni]

Nice of them to get in on the grift.

Give the guys a break. They washed out in the only thing they ever had going for them in life.

[Billy Hoyle]

Give the guys a break. They washed out in the only thing they ever had going for them in life.

the third overall pick, 11ppg (career high of 18.7) and 8rpg (career high of 11 three times) over an 11-year NBA career with $102 million in career earnings. Yeah, what a loser. He should have played at least 13 years. 

[BM1090]

the third overall pick, 11ppg (career high of 18.7) and 8rpg (career high of 11 three times) over an 11-year NBA career with $102 million in career earnings. Yeah, what a loser. He should have played at least 13 years. 

Obviously he had a very successful basketball career. I'd categorize Royce White the same way. 3.46 million in three years and a cup of coffee in the league makes him more successful at his profession than any of us.

None of that changes what he said, though.

[panda]

What a testament to the players and product of the wnba that they've grown so much in spite often the absolute incompetence from leadership.

[21Jumpstreet]

Imagine being NBA players and not getting drafted into the W. This stunt is one of the more inane things I've seen in awhile.

[Pakuni]

the third overall pick, 11ppg (career high of 18.7) and 8rpg (career high of 11 three times) over an 11-year NBA career with $102 million in career earnings. Yeah, what a loser. He should have played at least 13 years. 

Third overall pick who was largely a career backup who bounced around the league. But sure, he made a bunch of money.
And yet, he's still a loser. I wish him the best on his transition, though.

[JWags85]

What a testament to the players and product of the wnba that they've grown so much in spite often the absolute incompetence from leadership.

It's remarkable really and gonna be a fascinating topic for books and case studies a decade or so down the road. 

There has been terrible leadership from league officials, an abundance of absurd and obnoxious gate keeping and exclusionary attitudes from the legacy and long time fan base, and an overall disjointed messaging and marketing push cause the W's top teams and stars can't even seem to align on what they want to be.  But despite all of this, the league continues to grow and find ways to thrive. 

Even taking out CC and the league's failure to market/capitalize there, I think the W markets its other stars terribly.  It feels like the focus of the league and its media (before the recent Cunningham kerfluffle) was Aja Wilson, CC vs Angel, and then a whole host of random off the court personal and relationship drama . I mean, you don't have to be a Clay Travis level biased/bigoted commentator to think that an overemphasis on the lesbian contingent/culture/relationships of the W is not an effective angle to broaden the league's reach, appeal, and marketability.  I think the Stud Budz are funny and have a unique part to play in the league's growth (Courtney Williams could be the most likable/uniformly liked star in the league), but the ASG weekend and the coverage around it and their off the court antics is a prime example.

This is gonna be a really important offseason for the league.  Hope they get a new commissioner and sort a myriad of things out. While a fan, I've been critical of the overall quality of play at times, but I think it's improved greatly over the last 2 years.

[MU82]

Quality of play is quite high. So impressed with newcomers like Miles, Malonga, Bueckers, Clark, etc, to go with the stars who have been around for a bit.

Leadership (or lack thereof), conflicts, imaging, etc are mostly a hot mess.

More than any other U.S. pro league, the WNBA reflects our nation's divisions. Not sure there's any way to "fix" that.

[panda]

Quality of play is quite high. So impressed with newcomers like Miles, Malonga, Bueckers, Clark, etc, to go with the stars who have been around for a bit.

Leadership (or lack thereof), conflicts, imaging, etc are mostly a hot mess.

More than any other U.S. pro league, the WNBA reflects our nation's divisions. Not sure there's any way to "fix" that.

Will absolutely not get into politics - simply bringing it up because it's cogent.

Extremely weak leadership allowed the discourse to reach this point and for fringe media outlets to latch onto the league as they have.

They cannot stop slipping on banana peels. No other league would allow what carrington did without some degree of punishment.

New leadership can take this league and women's sports to the next level. Current leadership is actively prohibiting massive growth because of their inexperience and fear or upsetting the minority.

[Billy Hoyle]

Will absolutely not get into politics - simply bringing it up because it's cogent.

Extremely weak leadership allowed the discourse to reach this point and for fringe media outlets to latch onto the league as they have.

They cannot stop slipping on banana peels. No other league would allow what carrington did without some degree of punishment.

New leadership can take this league and women's sports to the next level. Current leadership is actively prohibiting massive growth because of their inexperience and fear or upsetting the minority.

for years the W was so desperate for coverage they would allow any journalist to cover them and it's showing. The column in the Athletic by Candace Buckner this morning is a perfect example of that. Time for hack journalists like that to go away and focus on basketball, not some weirdo street preacher who shows up at every event in Indy.

[Pakuni]

I mean, you don't have to be a Clay Travis level biased/bigoted commentator to think that an overemphasis on the lesbian contingent/culture/relationships of the W is not an effective angle to broaden the league's reach, appeal, and marketability

I'm very much a casual when it comes to the WNBA, so I'll start by acknowledging that I may be missing something here. But in my limited viewings/readings, I've never come across anything that felt like an overemphasis on lesbian relationships. The biggest thing in that sphere that I can think of is how much the league tried to shut down the Azzi Fudd-Paige Bueckers angle at draft time.
What are some examples of this?

And as sick as many are of Travis and Taylor, I've never heard the complaint being centered around the hetero-normativeness of their relationship. Same with Steph and Ayesha Curry, or the Beckhams, or Myles Garrett or Chloe Kim, or Livy Dunne and Paul Skenes. Nobody suggests Bill Belichick tone it down with Jordon Hudson, lest they offend the gays.
If the argument is that the "lesbian contingent/culture/relationships" is somehow turning off potential fans, then aren't you really saying the league should bend to bigotry? Regardless, I'm skeptical that there's a legion of potential women's basketball fans who would be tuning in to the WNBA if the players were just a little less gay.

[MU82]

for years the W was so desperate for coverage they would allow any journalist to cover them and it's showing. The column in the Athletic by Candace Buckner this morning is a perfect example of that. Time for hack journalists like that to go away and focus on basketball, not some weirdo street preacher who shows up at every event in Indy.

I mean, Candace Buckner works for the NY Times (via The Athletic). No league is going to make columnists and/or reporters from the NYT and similar outlets "go away."

[MU82]

I'm very much a casual when it comes to the WNBA, so I'll start by acknowledging that I may be missing something here. But in my limited viewings/readings, I've never come across anything that felt like an overemphasis on lesbian relationships. The biggest thing in that sphere that I can think of is how much the league tried to shut down the Azzi Fudd-Paige Bueckers angle at draft time.
What are some examples of this?

And as sick as many are of Travis and Taylor, I've never heard the complaint being centered around the hetero-normativeness of their relationship. Same with Steph and Ayesha Curry, or the Beckhams, or Myles Garrett or Chloe Kim, or Livy Dunne and Paul Skenes. Nobody suggests Bill Belichick tone it down with Jordon Hudson, lest they offend the gays.
If the argument is that the "lesbian contingent/culture/relationships" is somehow turning off potential fans, then aren't you really saying the league should bend to bigotry? Regardless, I'm skeptical that there's a legion of potential women's basketball fans who would be tuning in to the WNBA if the players were just a little less gay.

I follow the WNBA pretty closely, and I also do not believe the league overemphasizes lesbian relationships. Not sure what Wags is thinking with that.

[MuggsyB]

Kelsey Mitchell is a heck of a player.  Pure scorer with tremendous ball skills and the ability to lace the triple. 

[Pakuni]

for years the W was so desperate for coverage they would allow any journalist to cover them and it's showing. The column in the Athletic by Candace Buckner this morning is a perfect example of that. Time for hack journalists like that to go away and focus on basketball, not some weirdo street preacher who shows up at every event in Indy.

Just read the column. Not a clue of what it is in there that you found upsetting. Are we reading the same column?

[Billy Hoyle]

Just read the column. Not a clue of what it is in there that you found upsetting. Are we reading the same column?

the "preacher" she specificaly blames Cunningham for attracting is at every event in Indy. Colts, conventions, Pacers, the US Swim Trials. And yet now it's Cunningham's fault:

And about what happened earlier ... regret to mention that a demonstrator of one spent an hour or so before the game outside Gainbridge Fieldhouse, speaking into a megaphone about chromosomes.

It any outlet is keeping the conversation focused on anything but sports in the WNBA it's the Athletic.

[CreightonWarrior]

I don't know if there are any other leagues that more is talked about what happens off the court than on the court (besides, of course, the NFL and their treatment of Anders Carlson).

[Pakuni]

the "preacher" she specificaly blames Cunningham for attracting is at every event in Indy. Colts, conventions, Pacers, the US Swim Trials. And yet now it's Cunningham's fault:

And about what happened earlier ... regret to mention that a demonstrator of one spent an hour or so before the game outside Gainbridge Fieldhouse, speaking into a megaphone about chromosomes.

OK. This sentence was not in yesterday's column. Nor is there any mention of a preacher, chromosomes, megaphones, etc.
Maybe you were reading something else?

Check for yourself:
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7504642/2026/08/11/wnba-drama-sophie-cunningham-caitlin-clark-dijonai-carrington/

It any outlet is keeping the conversation focused on anything but sports in the WNBA it's the Athletic.

Can I introduce you to Fox News, Barstool and OutKick?
From 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday, Fox News mentioned the WNBA and Cunningham a combined 98 times. They slacked off yesterday, mentioning them only a combined 17 times.
Must not be anything newsy happening in the world.

Outkick currently has six (!) WNBA stories on its homepage. One of them is about sports.
https://www.foxnews.com/outkick

[JWags85]

I'm very much a casual when it comes to the WNBA, so I'll start by acknowledging that I may be missing something here. But in my limited viewings/readings, I've never come across anything that felt like an overemphasis on lesbian relationships. The biggest thing in that sphere that I can think of is how much the league tried to shut down the Azzi Fudd-Paige Bueckers angle at draft time.
What are some examples of this?

And as sick as many are of Travis and Taylor, I've never heard the complaint being centered around the hetero-normativeness of their relationship. Same with Steph and Ayesha Curry, or the Beckhams, or Myles Garrett or Chloe Kim, or Livy Dunne and Paul Skenes. Nobody suggests Bill Belichick tone it down with Jordon Hudson, lest they offend the gays.
If the argument is that the "lesbian contingent/culture/relationships" is somehow turning off potential fans, then aren't you really saying the league should bend to bigotry? Regardless, I'm skeptical that there's a legion of potential women's basketball fans who would be tuning in to the WNBA if the players were just a little less gay.

I follow the WNBA pretty closely, and I also do not believe the league overemphasizes lesbian relationships. Not sure what Wags is thinking with that.

I don't think its a direct marketing approach from the WNBA front office, but I do think its a pronounced angle from the "new media" associated with the league...Podcasts (both players and content creators), bloggers, prominent league affiliated social media, etc...

There is a sizeable contingent that view the WNBA as an LGBT league, not LGBT friendly or an LGBT ally, but that LGBT is a central part of the league and its marketing/narratives.  Which is why some of the stuff around intra-player romantic relationships and drama, inappropriate behavior on livestreams at WNBA events during the All Star weekend, etc... is not curbed in a way that you'd see in other professional leagues.

Of course there is endless amounts of relationship and romantic improprieties in the NBA/NFL, but IMO, you don't see prominent media names in those leagues, social media or otherwise, amplifying it and its usually kept to fringe fan commentary.  And to be fair, none of the relationships you're talking about are between players/within the league.  Its a unique situation in professional, but instead of it all being approached mindfully and nuanced, the WNBA-verse (not explicitly the league office though they don't do ANYTHING proactively) seems to embrace and celebrate the messiness.

Does it bother me?  Not in the least.  I've already said how much I enjoy the Stud Budz and think they are great, authentic, and hilarious.  But I don't think, for a league still in an uncertain arc, their live stream at an ASG after-party getting other players to twerk on them, aggressively cajoling Bueckers into and helping to take her shirt off, etc... is ideal.  There aren't legions of womens basketball fans that are only staying away cause of that "gross lesbian stuff", but I think there are potentially a non-insignificant amount of sports fans who can be brought to the WNBA with the right approach...

...Which sort of ties into my other broad reaching point.  In a vacuum, who cares (outside of bigots or people with an agenda who don't actually care about the WNBA), sure.  The vast differences in percentages of openly lesbian players in the WNBA vs gay players in other professional leagues, as well as differences in relationship behaviors of men vs women, is going to make it a unique situation, full stop.  And if you enjoy the league, that's not going to make you any less entertained by the on the court action (it obviously and certainly doesn't for me).  But like CreightonWarrior said, no league comes close to overemphasizing the off the count vs on the court, and that's not just from "haters".

But among the toxic sludge of discourse over the last 12-18 months (CC, CC vs Angel, collective bargaining and salaries, now the Cunningham stuff), there has been some interesting takes, podcasts, and posts about the idea that there are a lot of people associated with the WNBA (players, writers, fans) who still long for the "old", money losing, less high profile WNBA cause they could have it their way.  And they view the WNBA's recent success as a negative cause they can't be the way they were 5 years ago cause its too "corporate".

A prominent WNBA podcast said something to the effect of "this league was built by black queer woman and we need to keep it rooted in that".  CC's former teammate Sydney Colson has a fairly successful podcast where she was complaining that they used to be able to "speak up" and the league was about "speaking up" and everyone was united in that but now they can't cause they have more money and following and attention.  Then followed it up with "maybe we should just have separate leagues where one is accepting of everything that we are about" and another one "where y'all have it however you want in a certain way".

Sports and politics have always been intertwined.  I'm not going to say "shut up and dribble".  And I'm not even opposed to a lot of the things Colson or others stand for that they feel they can't talk about as much anymore (though I think that's probably entirely overstated).  But it all just feels profoundly immature and intentionally naive to the business of sports.  There is a difference between asking to betray or deny your beliefs/hide your identity, and not have it be front and center at the expense of a business.  If the WNBA is going to get even bigger, if those $1.2MM max contracts are going to go to $2MM, $4MM, $5MM...its going to be because the product on the floor is fantastic and keeps getting better and that's what the first thing people think of when they think of the WNBA.  Not the relationship drama of the week, not the trans issue, not the league's LGBT identity, not racist trolls, etc...  And unfortunately, that's still not the case.  I want what's best for the league and its future and that comes down to leadership with a better vision, strategy, and a steadying hand which I think could alleviate a lot of this.

One last point, with regards to leadership, is speaking of Courtney Williams/Stud Budz and the ASG drama, knowing what I know of her and what I've seen, if a better/stronger commissioner got her 1 on 1 and was like "listen, be you, what you do is great, but when you're streaming, be a bit smarter about XYZ", I think the response would be favorable and well received.  She's the WNBA's secret weapon that I still think they don't utilize well enough.  Everyone has seen the infamous clip about Brittney Griner saying she could be Demarcus Cousins 1v1 and Auriema saying he'd bet his house on Cousins.  Well someone was trying to bait Williams into talking about playing NBA players 1v1 and her response was hilarious about how she "wouldn't score crap, you kidding me?" especially given her game is heavily based around being a confident, cocky scorer.

Bit long winded, but hopefully that makes a modicum of sense.  I do think the new crop of young stars, and even more so young fans, are pushing things in the right direction, so any of these "worries" may be moot in 2-3 more seasons.

[MU82]

I really think you're making way too much into the "WNBA overemphasizes LGBT" thing, Wags. But you made your points, and I'll let them stand.

I'm still floored by Billy wanting the NYT to somehow be kept from writing about the WNBA. That wasn't on my Scoop bingo card.