Liz Cambage mad Becky Hammon got a giant wnba coaching contract.

[beasted]

If we go purely by a ratio of skill to pay, it's unfair for G leaguers who would average 100 ppg in the wnba and make $30k.

I think the WNBA Finals would easily pull better ratings than the G League finals without looking it up though.

They can just try to make WNBA more marketable with a few changes. Slimmer uniforms, shorter games, a few things that come to mind.

[bison]

So people who own a business shouldn’t make money from it? Who is supposed to make it? If it’s the employees exclusively…why create the business to begin with?

And I’m not sure there is anything unfair about the gender situation. The nba isn’t for men alone. The nba is for the best. If a female were good enough there is no rule stopping them from being in the nba. I’m not sure an equally funded much lower level is a matter of fairness.

The wnba max salary is being paid 7k for a nights work that loses your employer money to even provide. It’s 225K for I believe 3 months of work. And that 225K is for some players not enough to risk injury for their real league overseas.

Making enough doing what you love to refuse 100-200K for a summer job isn’t exactly poverty.

Its poverty relative to people who can generate a 75 billion dollar digital rights deal to do what you do. It’s not poverty relative to generated interest is it?

athletes make absurd money because they generate absurd money. People don’t like to see it but it’s hard to argue with. Paying absurd money to a league that doesn’t generate any would seem to give ammo to the “That job does not deserve so much money” crowd. It’s just outright charity at that point and I’m sure we can both think of better uses of charitable donations of millions than athletes.

If you’re just handing out money…not because the recipients create it….but just because they play sports?

That’s when it’s kinda…grimy to me. If it came out the nba was gonna pay every g league player 4 million for their league nobody watches we’d start hearing a lot about the dreaded homeless veterans, underpaid teachers, and medical assistants.

And I feel like you might be someone we would hear from on it. But the nba should make every female player a millionaire out of sheer charity as some kinda theoretical long term investment?

The entire enterprise is essentially charity as it is. I can think of better places for charity to be directed.

Women sports can make money….depending on the sport. It just doesn’t feel like the interest is there to do it on a pro level in basketball. Sponsors have female tennis players eating good.


Maybe the difference is how many resources were poured into them in the sports infancy. I can’t say. But I can say they seem to earn their money. If other athletes don’t I don’t know if it’s a moral issue to invest untold millions till they do no matter their gender.

An employer who pays their employee for their labor and services is NOT a form of 'charity' ffs. And I never said no one should make money off a business or that women deserve an 'absurd' amount of money. I don't even think the male professional athletes 'deserve' the absurd amount of money they make. But the point isn't about the sheer number of dollars, its about who profits off the labor of others. As I pointed out, owners get paid the most out of every NBA employee for doing considerably the least amount of work--They do not train, they do not coach, they do not make front office decisions, they don't sell popcorn, they dont clean the arena restrooms, they dont produce post-game shows, etc etc. They just own assets and property which itself is not a real form of work. So if we can't justify the large amounts of money profited by owners, then we can their employers including both women AND men basketball players. (Turns out NBA players are actually underpaid!)

[bison]

I'm thinking about this idea of "subsidies". As a society, aren't we subsidizing these people who have massive asset holdings, spread out over the country (or world?).

Ding ding!

Also here's an idea: Publicly owned franchises.

[fsvr54]

Look at Karl Marx Jr. over here.

[FultzNationRISE]

I think the WNBA Finals would easily pull better ratings than the G League finals without looking it up though.

They can just try to make WNBA more marketable with a few changes. Slimmer uniforms, shorter games, a few things that come to mind.

HARD disagree.

Lots of NBA fans would watch a G League final, simply to see which prospects they should be calling in to local talk radio about and clamoring for their team to sign.

I don't see anybody watching a WNBA finals.

[Kblaze8855]

An employer who pays their employee for their labor and services is NOT a form of 'charity' ffs.

Paying people to show up and generate no income for you because you agreed to support them essentially is charity. If it were a real business…it wouldn’t stay open. Running a business at a loss for nearly 30 years paying people to do you financial harm is….something. Call it something else. It isn’t thaaaaat far from charity. Maybe call it a PR expenditure. That would also be true.

And I never said no one should make money off a business or that women deserve an 'absurd' amount of money. I don't even think the male professional athletes 'deserve' the absurd amount of money they make. But the point isn't about the sheer number of dollars, its about who profits off the labor of others. As I pointed out, owners get paid the most out of every NBA employee for doing considerably the least amount of work--They do not train, they do not coach, they do not make front office decisions, they don't sell popcorn, they dont clean the arena restrooms, they dont produce post-game shows, etc etc. They just own assets and property which itself is not a real form of work.

They provide the platform for the rest to matter.

If I own a farm and let you use it to grow crops I’m not out of line to ask for half the crops. Your knowledge of farming is useless without somewhere to apply it.

The idea that owners of companies need to do their own bottom end labor to justify being paid by a business they run is….amazing.

So if we can't justify the large amounts of money profited by owners, then we can their employers including both women AND men basketball players. (Turns out NBA players are actually underpaid!)

That requires an assumption that we can’t justify owners being paid to own a business. You’re one of a small number of people who doesn’t seem to find business ownership justification enough for getting proceeds from the business. Normal people don’t find it unusual. Normal people find that…the reason to own a business.

[Spurs m8]

Liz Cambadge and Ben Simmons are terrible aussies...
Cannot stand them.

Liz is worse than Ben, though

[FKAri]

This is exactly why the NBA needs to triple or quadruple the pay of WNBA players. They can afford it. It's also stupid to frame this as "PC reasons" as if it's just a matter of decorum. You realize hundreds of thousands of girls enjoy playing basketball, right? And that it's only fair that there should be a professional level of competition that they should be able to aspire to. This is the purpose of the WNBA. But that level of competition is always going to be hampered if you don't provide girls the incentive to train hard and become not just pro-level players, but good enough to actually advance and evolve the womens game so that the quality of their game is better. If the pay is mediocre, the quality will be mediocre. This is true across any business, and it's stupid to reduce the discourse simply to TV ratings.

The idea that something has to be profitable in order to exist is a recent and novel idea that has existed for a small fraction of how long our societies have existed. But the same people who swear on the concept as if it were the Bible get upset when you suggest tripling WNBA salaries while oblivious to the fact that NBA owners pig out on half the revenue the NBA generates even if their positions literally produce no work or no labor. Owning arenas and signing checks is not real work but they make billions regardless and chud ass sports fans are too stupid to see the forest for the trees here.

Almost an excerpt from The Communist Manifesto.

[Kblaze8855]

I just went through the profiles of all the owners in the NBA. 23/30 primary owners were heirs, real estate, or private equity guys. Somehow, I think we could get basketball on TV without them.

I'm thinking about this idea of "subsidies". As a society, aren't we subsidizing these people who have massive asset holdings, spread out over the country (or world?).

For example, Dan Gilbert founded Quicken Loans (Rocket Mortgage now). A mortgage is a fairly simple concept, and it is predicated on the fact that if you cannot repay the loan, the house reverts to the bank as collateral. However, this depends on the ability to evict the occupant. This would be much less profitable if you had to find your own goons to go eject people, especially without the authority of the state backing up your violence. In our society we direct a lot of money towards the police and legal system to enforce ownership and contracts, so businesses and investors do not have to take on these costs themselves. This is why one man can own a billion dollars worth of real estate or loans payable.

You are obviously one of those anti lender/anti landlord(and possibly the concept of land ownership) people and I have to ask….


In a world where a piece of OSB is 60 dollars and land isn’t getting any cheaper(nor is the labor to build anything) where exactly are people who don’t have large sums of money supposed to get a house? Not government owned “housing”. A home of their own.

Are they to wonder off to the west and build it with their bare hands on “free” land they claimed from the natives like it used to work?

How do you suggest an end to lending? Or is your issue that the lenders don’t hand over 290k and take no action to get it back or to cover themselves while the people they gave it to don’t pay?

You think they should have to hire goons to evict….to do their “violence”. I suppose you consider the concept of asking someone to leave a home they aren’t paying for “violence”. What’s your solution?

People without 150+ thousand dollars liquid(at least) never own homes or keep building them with skyrocketing costs and let them stay there for free?

You have a sustainable answer? You thinking we should ban owning more than one property per family maybe? Make it illegal to own a home as a company? Try to drive down costs by taking the existing properties you don’t believe companies/landlords should own and handing them out like Robinhood? Give away federal land out west where there’s a lot of it build free housing and give it away? Manufacturer free housing cities with jobs and opportunities out of nowhere on the plains of Nebraska and valleys of Montana where there’s plenty of land but nobody currently lives to support a diverse group moving there?

Whats your real world solution to most people not having the money to own a house free and clear up front?

[Zeppelin]

The Williams sisters tried facing a dude ranked 200 in the world. He crushed them while smoking cigarettes on changeovers. Sampras or Agassi would win even if they never had a service game.

[ThRRR3tardSatan]

I think the WNBA Finals would easily pull better ratings than the G League finals without looking it up though.

They can just try to make WNBA more marketable with a few changes. Slimmer uniforms, shorter games, a few things that come to mind.

A concession stand of drugs.

Recaps of Keeping up with the Kardashians during timeouts.

[Kblaze8855]

The Williams sisters tried facing a dude ranked 200 in the world. He crushed them while smoking cigarettes on changeovers. Sampras or Agassi would win even if they never had a service game.

Joakim Noah’s dad beat the #1 woman in the world while wearing a bra and dress once in a match I’m sure he’d be cancelled for today.

[beasted]

But entertainment isn't always about skill. I would easily rather watch the top women's pros face each other rather than a match with anyone ranked 200s in the men's.

I would much rather watch women's volleyball, ice skating, etc etc over men's.

[Kblaze8855]

And that’s fine. And when they sell ads and digital access…and gambling rights…those women deserve a cut of the money you allow their organizations to generate. I don’t think you’d find anyone who disagrees with that.

But when people don’t support it I don’t know why anyone would expect the people to be paid well. They can afford to pay well anyway but as I said I don’t know why athletes should get such “They don’t generate money….but let’s give it to them anyway” consideration over more useful people in society.

Give athletes who generate massive money a portion of that massive money. If we are just giving it away though without them having to generate it? I can think of better places to put it.

[iamgine]

If the NBA is to subsidize the WNBA for 'the good of the sport', they should include WNBA games in NBA games as sort of undercard.

Kinda like how in boxing you have the undercards facing against each other before the main event. Or in tennis and badminton where they have all the events on the same day.