WNBA Expansion

Thinking big

Every spring, as recent women’s college basketball stars are cut from WNBA teams, women’s basketball fans, media, and players cry out for expansion, either in the form of expanded rosters, actual expansion franchises, or a development league. Every spring, I suggest they are thinking too small.

The franchise model dominates professional sports in the United States and creates a significant barrier to entry, while also guaranteeing rising franchise values. The winners in this model are the owners, and especially those who bought early. As Morgan Housel wrote in The Psychology of Money, “Compounding works best when you can give a plan years or decades to grow…Endurance is key.” Joe Lacob bought the Golden State Warriors for $450 million in 2010; the Warriors are currently worth $7.5 billion. Stephen Curry was the highest-paid player in the NBA this season at $48 million. Curry is as responsible as anyone for the giant franchise value increase, but Lacob is the one who benefits the most. Curry would have to play 150 more seasons at his current salary to afford the Warriors current valuation! The NBA increases franchise values by maintaining scarcity (and not paying to develop its talent, as I wrote about last week).

European sports clubs traditionally operated differently, although more and more are moving in this direction as owners see the absurd wealth created by American sports franchises. In Europe, there is not a scarcity or a monopoly; one cannot buy entrance into a league through expansion (although Dubai is attempting to do so in the EuroLeague). Instead, teams earn promotion through winning, and are relegated through losing, as many Americans have learned by following Ryan Reynolds, Rob McElhenney, and Wrexham AFC.

Rather than follow the model of other United States franchises, I would argue the WNBA should differentiate itself and introduce promotion and relegation to the U.S. professional sports landscape. Various articles place the likely expansion fee around $20 million, although that is likely to rise. Leagues tend to add two teams at a time, so WNBA expansion could add roughly $50 million, split in some way between the league and its current 12 franchises. Current franchises would net $3-4 million each. The league would expand to 14 teams, increasing the number of players from roughly 144 to 168. This would be an improvement, and likely enough roster spots to keep the most popular college players in the league, but does it constitute a dramatic change?

Personally, I would offer 10 cities/ownership groups the opportunity to buy into WNBA2 for $2-5 million each in Year 1 (Y1). Current WNBA owners (CWO) would split $20-50 million in Y1. At the end of Y1, the WNBA2 champion would be promoted to the WNBA, and WNBA2 would add 2 more franchises, at $5 million each. The CWO would split an additional $10 million.

Y2 would have 13 WNBA teams and 11 WNBA2 teams. At the end of Y2, the WNBA2 champion would earn promotion, and WNBA2 would add an additional 2-3 franchises at $5 million per. CWO would again split $10-15 million.

This would continue until the WNBA reaches 16 teams and the WNBA2 reaches 16 teams. CWO stand to profit far more through this method than through adding two expansion teams, although their franchise values are unlikely to skyrocket as quickly. The additional up front payments are meant to offset the limited valuation increases.

WNBA would move from 144 players to 384 players! This is the reason the teams need to be added slowly, as doubling the number of players in one year would decrease the competitive level. However, adding players through a second division smooths this process. Teams and players are more proven before reaching the WNBA. Also, the WNBA2 champion could be rewarded with the #1 pick in the WNBA Draft, creating additional incentive to win and assisting with the competitiveness when moving to the higher division.

Once each division reaches 16 teams, full promotion/relegation would begin. The WNBA2 champion would earn promotion and the last-placed WNBA team would be relegated every year, even if the team is an original member. The exact promotion/relegation system can be determined. Some leagues automatically relegate the last-placed team. Some leagues have a series between the last two teams with the loser being relegated.

My personal favorite is a guaranteed promotion for the WNBA2 champion and a guaranteed demotion for the worst WNBA team. Then, the WNBA2 runner-up and the second-worst WNBA team play a three-game series concurrently with the WNBA playoffs for a spot in the WNBA. Therefore, two teams from WNBA2 have a chance at promotion, and two teams from WNBA are in danger of relegation.

Sixteen teams per division creates an easy 30-game home/away schedule, which is a reduction in games from the current schedule; however, for national television broadcasts, there would be a dramatic increase in the number of available games.

Additionally, all 32 teams would compete in a true Cup competition. I have competed in Cups in a few ways, but to increase games, the first round could start with a home/away matchup based on total points (if I win by 8 at home, and lose by 6 on the road, I advance). This guarantees every team two more games and at least one home game. Matchups are determined by drawing, but many WNBA2 teams would get a home game against a WNBA teams.

Another way to increase games would be to start with eight four-team pools. Each team plays home/away with the other three teams, which would guarantee six games in the cup spread out through the first half of the season. The quarterfinals could be a single game (any WNBA2 team facing a WNBA team would host; others decided by coin flips), and then a Final Four. The FF could be on All-Star Weekend, or the FF could be partnered with the NBA Summer League in Las Vegas. The league could create a permanent location and weekend to allow women’s basketball fans to plan in advance, like the College World Series (baseball and softball), or could partner with a big AAU event to play in the same city with planned events. Maybe a city like Louisville or Tampa or Jacksonville or San Diego does not get a franchise, but becomes the home of the WNBA Cup Final Four each summer with other WBCA events surrounding the games like the NCAA FF.

In this method, all teams play between 36-39 games, nearly the same as the current schedule, and WNBA2 teams would get some home games against the WNBA teams.

Each year would have a Cup champion and a league champion, and the next season could kick off with a big opening weekend game between the two champions, either as a final exhibition game or the first regular season game of the season, as many European soccer leagues do.

This strategy would increase roster spots, bring WNBA teams into many more markets, enrich the current owners, and differentiate the WNBA from all other United States professional sports leagues.

Imagine Y1 with 10 franchises in Boston, Columbia (SC), Knoxville (TN), Miami, Charlotte, Louisville, Iowa City, Sacramento, Portland, and Oakland. Can you imagine the excitement if Columbia played Knoxville or Iowa City played Louisville to be promoted to the WNBA? In following years, cities like Albuquerque, Austin, Boise, Columbus, Denver, Detroit, Lexington, Omaha, Spokane, Toronto could add teams, creating a mix of current NBA cities and smaller cities with large women’s college basketball fanbases.

Most importantly, possibly, former WNBA players would have opportunities to purchase franchises that may not exist if franchises cost $20-25 million and only two opportunities exist. Imagine Dawn Staley owning the Columbia franchise with Aja Wilson (when she retires). Candace Parker (when she retires) owning the Knoxville franchise. Sylvia Fowles owning the Miami franchise. Sherryl Swoopes in Austin. Yolanda Griffith, Kara Lawson, and Ticha Penicheiro re-starting the Sacramento Monarchs!

As WNBA franchise values increase, ex-players who built the league would have opportunities to build generational wealth that was never afforded to the ex-NBA players who built the league into what it is today. Imagine if Kareem Abdul Jabbar had partial ownership of the Lakers when he retired; he made $6 million in his NBA career! Jerry Buss bought the Lakers (and the L.A. Kings) for $67 million. The Lakers are worth $6.4 billion now. Former WNBA players who are wealthy by normal standards, but not by professional sports ownership standards, would have opportunities to benefit as WNBA franchise values increase.

Or, just add two franchises with wealthy ownership groups who can afford $20-25 million, maybe with a former player as a minority owner, 20 more roster spots, and two new markets (Oakland and Boston, Toronto?). I don’t see the downside to trying something new.

Also, as a final aside, at the youth level, like it or not, basketball competes with soccer, volleyball, lacrosse, softball, and more for talented female athletes. There is a (inaccurate) perception among many that opportunities are more plentiful in other sports. Tripling the number of professional opportunities in the WNBA would be one way to move ahead of these other sports and demonstrate a viable path to a professional sports career (not to mention additional coaching, athletic training, management, broadcasting, etc. opportunities that 20 new franchises would open for predominantly women and women of color).