Should We Tweak the WNBA’s Branding?

The past couple of years in the WNBA have been interesting in a tummy-flopping way. Players are moving hither and thither at an astonishing rate. Some wonder if this might actually be hurting interest in the league by weakening its brand.

There’s always in interesting balance to be struck in professional sports. You want to provide owners and fans some stability while also allowing players to find a situation that suits them. Unfortunately for the WNBA, recent national economic realities have made any attempt to find that balance amazingly difficult.

Two franchises have folded without much in the way of public warning: Sacramento and Houston. One franchise almost folded but was instead moved: Detroit to Tulsa. Another franchise almost moved but found new ownership: Atlanta. In the midst of this, the WNBA cut its rosters from 13 players to 11 as well as dropping 3 non-active spots. Teams have also reduced the number of assistant coaches to 1…though several teams seem to be skirting that limit for now. I could go on, but the picture is clear: the WNBA has had a rough couple of years.

Salary Cap

Salaries in the WNBA have no surprise mega-contracts (or hecto-kilo contracts…let’s be real) being tossed about. High-performing long-term veterans know the maximum that they will be paid by their teams. Rookies know what they will get paid in their first three years.

I like the salary cap because it does what it’s intended to do: force teams to work within a budget, and allows a mechanism to “age out” under-performing veterans while also injecting “new blood” into the player pool. Rich teams don’t have an undue advantage over the struggling teams. You really couldn’t ask for a more level playing field.

On the down side, it really levels the playing field. Teams have often given up players as they age up the salary levels. No matter what chemistry that has been forged with a starting lineup, inevitably there will be some players who have to be traded or set adrift on the seas of free agency simply because keeping them will break the cap.

I’d like to see the cap loosened just a smidge. While “coring” a player allows you to save a player and gives them a $2,500 bonus, the fact is that teams don’t have much in the way of monetary incentives to offer to keep key mid-level players from chasing a pay envelope. When you figure the minimum and maximum salary caps and divide those by 11 players, there’s really only an average per-player difference of about $3,000.

Player Population

Teams need to have an optional non-active roster. While it’s true that few teams ever go 9-deep, much less 11-deep, the fact is that injuries, pregnancies, rest periods, etc. are a reality of the game. While I’d love to see the league bump up the allowed active roster to 12-players, it really isn’t necessary if you can carry the emergency personnel. There’s no doubt that a 2-player non-active roster is a necessity.

For the 2010 season, several teams find themselves with only nine healthy players. That means that you can’t hold 5-on-5 practices, especially on the road. This is ridiculous and should only ever happen in extraordinary circumstances. Unfortunately, as the wear-and-tear of the season builds, so too do the numbers of players unavailable for practice.

Now, I’m not saying that the non-active roster is mandatory. Some teams might not be able to afford the expense. Fine. At least they get the choice. Again, for the sake of stability, especially in the wake of season-ending injuries as well as pregnancies to franchise players, a team shouldn’t be unduly penalized by having to be short-benched. This is just plain dumb.

Wear and Tear

One key aspect to all of this is simply wear-and-tear to the league’s players. Almost all National Team players, barring injury, are playing year-round basketball. They play a full overseas season. Since they are typically on the best teams, they go deep into the playoffs. They typically enter the WNBA season days before the start of the regular season. They play all summer and two years out of every four they also have to play in either a World Championship or an Olympic Games. And the WNBA makes them fly coach.

Who does this?

It’s not really surprising that players opt to take time off. Sometimes it’s not their choice–they have injuries to rehab. Other times, they have to judge how much abuse they are doing to their bodies. Few get through without a few operations to their joints…many have more than a few procedures done over the course of their careers. So, when a Diana Taurasi suggests she may take off for all or part of a season, who can really blame her?

Clearly, the WNBA doesn’t want to see one of their brightest stars choosing to not play in their league. What do they have to offer her? A compressed schedule. Cheap airline seats. A limited salary structure that’s considerably less than what she can make overseas. Is the promise of being on home soil playing against the best competition in the world enough?

Keeping the Best at Home

There really isn’t a lot that the WNBA can do about players trying to build their nest eggs while they can. But then I thought about some players who don’t go overseas. They don’t because they are coaching. During the off-season they serve as assistant coaches for college teams. What if the WNBA actually encouraged athletic directors and WBCA coaches to hire this top talent?

I think a lot of players interested in coaching would welcome the chance, though it may be the case that they’d rather just go play overseas just like now. The thing is, it would foster another option while also using this wealth of expertise to train the next wave of pro ball players as well as the next generation of college and pro coaches. There are a lot of upsides. The major downside is the lack of continuous competition. There could be options for that, but that’s getting onto a totally different subject.

The thing is, the WNBA has a vested interest in focusing on league stability. Stability comes not just from teams not folding, or from expansion drafts plucking away players, but from building team identities. That will only happen if teams can build their own little dynasties. At the same time, players need to have options not to be trapped in a bad situation. No one wants to see a repeat of the poisonous relationship we saw between Swin Cash and Bill Laimbeer playing out in Detroit over the course of a couple of seasons.

It’s time that the WNBA does some tweaking of their branding formula. If they don’t, if they let the “W” turn into little more than a summer way station for the American Euroleague and Russia-league players dictating when and where they will play, then fan erosion is sure to follow. Fortunately, the WNBA has weathered the worst of a bad economic situation and should be able to navigate its way through the shoals to future success. The time for battening down the hatches is waning. Now the question is: what will the league do next to firm-up its foundation?