The WNBA is celebrating its 30th anniversary this season, expecting it to be the best season ever. Instead, the league is making headlines for all the wrong reasons. Bad as things are, they could get worse if circumstances fester.
Young stars such as Olivia Miles, Caitlin Clark, Paige Bueckers and Sonia Citron made it easy for the league to market the 2026 season. But there has been far more discussion about off-the-court nonsense than about what is happening on the court.
Seriously, when was the last time you heard the electronic or social media talking primarily about what WNBA players and teams are actually doing on the court? Instead, it seems as though there is a civil war taking place between players and fans. At times, that conflict has even bordered on racism from some fans.
That is a terrible look for WNBA commissioner Cathy Engelbert–and, by extension, NBA commissioner Adam Silver–considering the NBA’s relationship with and investment in the WNBA. It is difficult to call the WNBA a major professional sports league when so much negative baggage accompanies it.
Saturday’s incident involving DiJonai Carrington is a perfect example. Carrington was rightfully ejected after being assessed a Flagrant Foul 2 when she came from behind and knocked Indiana Fever forward Sophie Cunningham to the floor, making contact with Cunningham’s head and neck during a fast-break layup. Carrington subsequently complained on Threads about “white privilege.” Remarkably, Carrington has not been suspended by the league.
That’s one example of a pattern: the WNBA doesn’t know how to make an ugly situation go away. Instead, the controversy festers, becoming another annoying reminder of the league’s leadership problems.
Just two months ago, Connecticut Sun forward Alyssa Thomas was allowed to continue playing after an incident involving Caitlin Clark in which Thomas struck Clark in the throat. Engelbert initially appeared reluctant to suspend Thomas until Silver intervened and a one-game suspension was handed down. One game? That’s incredibly light.
Carrington’s incident is only the latest example of what is wrong with the WNBA. There appears to be an increasing sense of anarchy involving players, fans and even owners, with consequences seemingly applied inconsistently.
Then came the Angel Reese-Paige Bueckers betting controversy. The WNBA posted a video on X showing Reese and Bueckers betting $400 on the outcome of a game between their respective teams, the Atlanta Dream and Dallas Wings. The winner would receive $400. Atlanta won, and Reese posted a video about receiving her $400. Once fans noticed what was happening, the story made its way into the national media.
The WNBA deleted the video. But by then, the damage had been done. The league chose not to suspend Reese or Bueckers, apparently viewing the wager as harmless fun. But it is difficult to dismiss the incident as a joke when Reese was publicly celebrating the money she won. Besides, there is nothing funny about betting on a professional sporting event.
The fact that the WNBA has relationships with sportsbooks—that is another discussion for another day—doesn’t mean its players should be wagering on games in which they have a personal or professional connection to the outcome. The league had an opportunity to send a clear message: Players cannot bet on games involving their teams. Instead, it chose not to. That is poor leadership.
And make no mistake: If this had been Cunningham or Clark, would the league have reacted the same way? That is the question many fans are asking.
Perceived double standards are toxic for any professional sports league. They destroy credibility, create resentment and make fans wonder whether the rules actually apply equally to everyone.
Then there was the incident involving Seattle Storm co-owner Celeste Keaton, who directed expletives at two fans after they brought a sign supporting Cunningham and her comments regarding transgender athletes in women’s sports. Whether someone agrees with Cunningham or disagrees with her is beside the point. An owner should not be verbally attacking fans. It’s unbecoming of someone in a position of authority and particularly troubling for someone who represents the organization publicly. To the league’s credit, Keaton was suspended from attending the Storm’s next five home games and fined an undisclosed amount.
But again, the incident contributed to the perception that the WNBA has become a league where everyone is fighting everyone else.
Catlin Clark earlier this season (photo, USAToday)
And then there is Caitlin Clark. Clark should be the jewel of the WNBA. Instead, under Engelbert’s leadership, she sometimes seems to be treated like an outcast. Clark has been the target of repeated physical confrontations. Players have mocked her. Opponents have appeared to go after her with a level of intensity that has become a recurring storyline.
To be fair, Clark does herself no favors at times. She trash-talks. She gets emotional with officials. She is not above giving opponents a piece of her mind. That said, Clark’s first three seasons in the WNBA have become a pattern, and the league’s leadership appears unwilling—or unable—to address it convincingly. Even more troubling is the perception that Clark’s own coach, Stephanie White, has been unwilling to push back against the treatment Clark receives from opponents.
Why is it that WNBA media personalities such as Monica McNutt, Renee Montgomery and others seem so willing to publicly criticize Clark? At some point, you have to wonder whether the league understands what it has.
Clark is not a problem for the WNBA. She is an opportunity.
Perhaps that is inevitable as professional sports become increasingly corporate. But one has to wonder whether the constant off-court controversies, player conflicts and perceived lack of leadership are taking a toll on the league’s culture.
WNBA’s Englebert under fire (photo, NY Times)
Hall of Famers Sue Bird and Cheryl Miller recently expressed concerns during NBC’s WNBA halftime coverage about how these issues are beginning to hurt the league’s brand. That should be a warning sign, and that is where the league needs a strong commissioner to step in. A commissioner has to establish standards, enforce them consistently, and make sure the league does not spiral out of control.
Right now, that’s not happening. Part of the problem is credibility. A commissioner doesn’t necessarily need to have played or coached basketball, but that person must understand the culture of the sport and command the respect of the people inside it. Engelbert has struggled with that.
The WNBA is approaching a critical moment. It has young stars, unprecedented attention and an opportunity to establish itself as a major professional sports league. But attention alone isn’t enough. The league needs leadership, accountability, and consistency. And it needs someone willing to put the interests of the league ahead of individual players, owners, political agendas, and social-media battles.
That person needs to be respected and have credibility, gravitas, and skills. It’s called leadership.
Without that, the WNBA’s 30th anniversary won’t be remembered as the beginning of its greatest era, but as the moment when the league lost control of its own story. If that happens, the storyline will be far more serious than “a public-relations problem.”
