Player Harper vs Edgecomb vs Bailey vs WNBA

[ambchang]

"Pay us what we deserve" What are they deserving of? Their words, their egos, their asinine requests...

Maybe, it's just the loud ones i've seen on tv or yt that create such a shit image of that league.

Either way, 20-30k/yr seems reasonable for them seeing how it's not a profitable league and they play a child's game which they're no good at.

So did they or did they not ask for the same compensation as nbaers?

 

[NotoriousHOP]

I don't watch the WNBA so I don't particularly care and that is the attitude I suggest for anyone else that doesn't watch.

If someone pays to watch, it's a product, just not a money making product. But just because it loses money that doesn't mean that they can inflate salaries and lose even more. If teams aren't selling out the arena at NBA prices then they can't pay NBA salaries to WNBA players.

The WNBA owners should offer profit sharing. Guarantee that twenty-five percent of net profits goes into a player pool that gets paid out as player bonuses to supplement their salary. Put the onus on them to raise the visibility, quality, and profitability of the product to reap those benefits.

 

[Shmurs]

…I think Harper is now erasing whatever point I was making. He’s a freak. Closer to Flagg than Bailey or Edgecomb by a large margin.

 

[Shmurs]

I don't watch the WNBA so I don't particularly care and that is the attitude I suggest for anyone else that doesn't watch.

If someone pays to watch, it's a product, just not a money making product. But just because it loses money that doesn't mean that they can inflate salaries and lose even more. If teams aren't selling out the arena at NBA prices then they can't pay NBA salaries to WNBA players.

The WNBA owners should offer profit sharing. Guarantee that twenty-five percent of net profits goes into a player pool that gets paid out as player bonuses to supplement their salary. Put the onus on them to raise the visibility, quality, and profitability of the product to reap those benefits.

No profit at the moment and it’s only 1 player who anyone cares about. A democratic pay structure is not in order. Anyone who isn’t Clarke or one of the ones with sex appeal shouldn’t be factoring into the plans for the league. Because that’s literally all they have. CC and some who are leaning into fashion/being good looking.

The violence is fun too, I guess. But I don’t think it goes anywhere and is pretty toxic for their inner politics.

Though I would probably watch if I knew the flying dildos were going to be regular things.

 

[koriwhat]

So did they or did they not ask for the same compensation as nbaers?

To me, it was implied and I'm sure I'm not the only one who got that sentiment from the loudest of their "players".

Either way, let's see that league stand on its own feet. If that happens, we wouldn't even be having this conversation because there'd be no wnba.

 

[koriwhat]

Put some "trans women" in the wnba and I'll watch. Let the circus begin!

 

[spurraider21]

Put some "trans women" in the wnba and I'll watch. Let the circus begin!

thats up to you tbh. stick to bball and nobody would complain lol

give this subject a rest

 

[koriwhat]

give this subject a rest

It's called replying to another member here. Don't like discourse, you injected yourself and feelings in, put me on ignore or be an adult and move on.

 

[koriwhat]

give this subject a rest

Lol btw, so the wnba isn't bball afterall. Got it!

 

[blueguy]

It's called replying to another member here. Don't like discourse, you injected yourself and feelings in, put me on ignore or be an adult and move on.

Yeah, dude it was a hilarious joke. You workshop that with Matt Walsh?

 

[koriwhat]

Yeah, dude it was a hilarious joke. You workshop that with Matt Walsh?

You're weird and I don't watch Walsh. Sorry you're Walsh's #1 fan.

See SR, this dude made it about politics. Screech at him or is that not allowed by the cult you're in?

 

[LeBowen]

You're weird and I don't watch Walsh. Sorry you're Walsh's #1 fan.

See SR, this dude made it about politics. Screech at him or is that not allowed by the cult you're in?

Actually, you're the only member who's constantly been out of line and baiting people since we switched forums.

It's called replying to another member here. Don't like discourse, you injected yourself and feelings in, put me on ignore or be an adult and move on.

See, that's the thing.
We shouldn't need an ignore function. Obviously some personal beefs can happen, but if you're annoying most people in here already and believe me you already are, you're going to get banned.
Everyone was given a chance regardless of their reputation, it's a fresh start after all. Don't waste it, you're not like those fiends left at ST, you actually know basketball.
Leave all that other shit for somewhere else.

 

[koriwhat]

Actually, you're the only member who's constantly been out of line and baiting people since we switched forums.


See, that's the thing.
We shouldn't need an ignore function. Obviously some personal beefs can happen, but if you're annoying most people in here already and believe me you already are, you're going to get banned.
Everyone was given a chance regardless of their reputation, it's a fresh start after all. Don't waste it, you're not like those fiends left at ST, you actually know basketball.
Leave all that other shit for somewhere else.

I've "constantly" been out of line? How so? And how do you know I was trying to bait anyone about anything? I simply have an opinion you don't like and was having a conversation with a couple others who were doing the same.

So I can only post if I subscribe to your same opinion(s)? Weird. I wasn't rude and simply responded to those who asked me to respond.

Lol "don't waste it"... Ban me if you'd like you authoritarian weirdo. I won't miss you in the least.

I don't believe anything retards have to say so I'm definitely not going to believe anything you say, white knight.

Btw, got that same energy for everyone in this thread or just me? Yeah, I thought so...

 

[O_V]

VJ looks way better than I expected, but so does Harp. I have no ragrets.

 

[koriwhat]

You see it’s MEN’S sports that are unprofitable, actually…as nba players are now making 70 million a year and hockey players in a relatively unpopular league are making 16. The owners are just laundering money, evidently.

I watch sports on tv and screw around on the internet a lot. In both settings women’s sports are put in front of my face so I have to indulge my subconscious and ask the question, “huh?”. Nobody goes and stews about this after they log off. It’s just a topic with a very clear truth. But the truth isn’t what we’re allowed to say in public settings. I find that annoying. And then I go live life.

No, you got that wrong, I'm not allowed to say it.

 

[SPURt]

I read through this whole ass thread, not because anyone other than Flagg can hold Harper’s jock but because of the WNBA discussion. You’re in a web browser, new tab and see do a basic search and you ding dongs would see what the WNBA players were asking for

The NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB all share 50% of revenue with their players, the WNBA is 10%. Even in the 80s, revenue splits of 53% started in 1983.

They get $200 million a year from media rights, tickets, merch. Yet run an operating loss of $50 million a year. They stay solvent because the NBA keeps them alive because the WNBA attracts an audience the NBA has not attracted traditionally, that being young females. The WNBA also is growing 29% YoY.


Regardless of how you feel about women’s sports or women in general, the revenue split is not good or even remotely fair compared to any pro league metric out there.

I personally have followed the WNBA since it began. It is a good basketball fix in the offseason. I don’t watch it comparing it to the men’s game, it is its own product with different principles. A’ja Wilson is playing unbelievable ball.

This is the most Spurstalk thread I’ve seen so far

 

[STAT88]

I don’t watch much WNBA but all I know is Lauren Jackson is still the GOAT. Aja is second.

 

[spurraider21]

Why are you all still talking about wnba in a Harper vs Edgecombe thread? Jfc

 

[scott]

If you want to talk about the WNBA, start a WNBA thread. Let this be the end of it. Thank you.

 

[spursparker9]

Can change the title to Harper vs Edgecomb vs Bailey?

 

[Shmurs]

I read through this whole ass thread, not because anyone other than Flagg can hold Harper’s jock but because of the WNBA discussion. You’re in a web browser, new tab and see do a basic search and you ding dongs would see what the WNBA players were asking for

The NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB all share 50% of revenue with their players, the WNBA is 10%. Even in the 80s, revenue splits of 53% started in 1983.

They get $200 million a year from media rights, tickets, merch. Yet run an operating loss of $50 million a year. They stay solvent because the NBA keeps them alive because the WNBA attracts an audience the NBA has not attracted traditionally, that being young females. The WNBA also is growing 29% YoY.


Regardless of how you feel about women’s sports or women in general, the revenue split is not good or even remotely fair compared to any pro league metric out there.

I personally have followed the WNBA since it began. It is a good basketball fix in the offseason. I don’t watch it comparing it to the men’s game, it is its own product with different principles. A’ja Wilson is playing unbelievable ball.

This is the most Spurstalk thread I’ve seen so far

That’s a fairly naive take on economics.

If my lemonade stand is only turning $1 of profit per day, I’m going to be offering my staff a different percentage of my revenue than if my margins were higher and was getting $10 a day.

I get to decide, as owner, that my share of the revenue should be fixed. Which means I need to skim X off of the top and my employees will get a smaller percentage of revenue if my own take goes down.

And when I’m barely making any money as is, then the players have to make the very obvious and very fair bargain that to do a job that they enjoy, they will need to be paid less. They have the option of using their degrees to get into a better industry.

Men get a higher percentage because the owners cut is still worth their while and because people can name more than 2 players in the league.

The women players should, as always, feel grateful that there’s a contrived environment that they get to play in that makes it feel like they’re part of something big. But they should also be realistic about it being very unpopular and artificially pumped up by sports media.

In other words: the nba exists because of the players. The wnba exists because of the owners. Do you think that means both sets of players should have some kind of equal pay model?

 

[scott]

That’s a fairly naive take on economics.

If my lemonade stand is only turning $1 of profit per day, I’m going to be offering my staff a different percentage of my revenue than if my margins were higher and was getting $10 a day.

I get to decide, as owner, that my share of the revenue should be fixed. Which means I need to skim X off of the top and my employees will get a smaller percentage of revenue if my own take goes down.

And when I’m barely making any money as is, then the players have to make the very obvious and very fair bargain that to do a job that they enjoy, they will need to be paid less. They have the option of using their degrees to get into a better industry.

Men get a higher percentage because the owners cut is still worth their while and because people can name more than 2 players in the league.

The women players should, as always, feel grateful that there’s a contrived environment that they get to play in that makes it feel like they’re part of something big. But they should also be realistic about it being very unpopular and artificially pumped up by sports media.

In other words: the nba exists because of the players. The wnba exists because of the owners. Do you think that means both sets of players should have some kind of equal pay model?

In case my last post wasn't clear enough... if you want to talk about the WNBA, start a WNBA topic. Let's stop clogging up this one with off-topic debates.

Thanks.

 

[O_V]

Why are you all still talking about wnba in a Harper vs Edgecombe thread? Jfc

THAT is why this is the most Spurstalk thread so far. Lol

 

[blueguy]

You're weird and I don't watch Walsh. Sorry you're Walsh's #1 fan.

See SR, this dude made it about politics. Screech at him or is that not allowed by the cult you're in?

Bro, have u heard of projection? lol I think you’re the one upset.

 

[SPURt]

That’s a fairly naive take on economics.

If my lemonade stand is only turning $1 of profit per day, I’m going to be offering my staff a different percentage of my revenue than if my margins were higher and was getting $10 a day.

I get to decide, as owner, that my share of the revenue should be fixed. Which means I need to skim X off of the top and my employees will get a smaller percentage of revenue if my own take goes down.

And when I’m barely making any money as is, then the players have to make the very obvious and very fair bargain that to do a job that they enjoy, they will need to be paid less. They have the option of using their degrees to get into a better industry.

Men get a higher percentage because the owners cut is still worth their while and because people can name more than 2 players in the league.

The women players should, as always, feel grateful that there’s a contrived environment that they get to play in that makes it feel like they’re part of something big. But they should also be realistic about it being very unpopular and artificially pumped up by sports media.

In other words: the nba exists because of the players. The wnba exists because of the owners. Do you think that means both sets of players should have some kind of equal pay model?

Wrong. The WNBA exists because the NBA subsidizes it. Not because of the WNBA owners. The owners know they are in a losing business and would be insolvent without the NBA. If you can’t pay your players than don’t have a league.