Roy S. Johnson: Misplaced outrage over Caitlin Clark’s WNBA contract should spark change

[Auburn85 432]

https://www.al.com/opinion/2024/04/roy-s-johnson-misplaced-outrage-over-caitlins-clarks-wnba-contract-should-spark-change.html

 

Quote

 

April 18

This is an opinion column.

 

America’s gender pay gap is real, extremely real.

 

Women with full-time wages and salaries earned 83.6 percent of what men in made 2023, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The 21.8% gap is lower than in 2022 (22.9) yet, notes the Economic Policy Institute, it’s essentially the same as it was three decades ago (23.2% in 1994).

 

The gap is unacceptable and must continue to be addressed—though the pervasive attack on DEI makes it that more difficult. (Bet the bullies didn’t think that one through. Or maybe they did. Sorry, I digress.)

Now, the world is losing its ever-loving mind over WNBA No. 1 draft pick Caitlin Clark’s rookie contract: four years totaling $338,056—about $84,500 annually.

 

 

That’s more than what half of single Americans earn, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. It’s sofa change relative to the four-year rookie contract signed by 2023 NBA No. 1 draft pick Victor “Wemby” Wembanyama: $55.2 million--$12.2 million in season 1, escalating to $16.9 million in 2026-27, the fourth year of the deal.

 

 

That math ain’t mathin’. Hence, the outrage that torched social media following Monday’s WNBA draft. After the former Iowa star was selected by the Indiana Fever, America’s temperature soared.

 

 

“Shameful,” MSN host Joy Reid shared on Instagram. “Pay women athletes, ALL of them, a fair wage!!!”

Even President Biden weighed in: “… [R]ight now we’re seeing that even if you’re the best, women are not paid their fair share,” he tweeted, or X’d.

 

 

 

 

Hold on, Mr. Prez and er’body else. Breathe. This is a false comparison, though an easy one to make.

 

 

Let me help. Let’s start with this: The NBA and WNBA are two wholly separate operations—like two distinct companies under the same corporate parent. The NBA is almost 80 years old, formed in June 1946. The WNBA was born in 1996. Call it, with all respect, the NBA’s well-loved grandchild.

 

Salaries in professional sports are generally collectively bargained by the league and the players’ union. In the NBA and WNBA, the unions—which, remember, represent current players—agreed to a rookie wage scale, assuring new players prove their worth as professionals before reaching free agency.

 

 

Additionally, salaries are driven by each league’s overall annual revenue—which is largely determined by three primary sources: television rights fees, sponsorships, ticket sales, and merchandise sales—and the percentage of that revenue that is negotiated to flow to players in salary and other benefits.

 

 

“The common sports fan sees a discrepancy between WNBA and NBA player salaries and immediately goes to the amount of dollars a specific athlete or group of athletes might be getting,” says Jim Cavale, my friend, sports entrepreneur, and an expert on the financial intricacies of college and professional sports. “The reality is it’s more of a discrepancy of the pool—the overall amount generated by the leagues. What athletes get from the pool is determined by what is negotiated between the players’ union and the league as a percentage of gross revenues.”

 

 

So, here we go: The NBA generated $10.58 billion in revenue in 2022-23. The WNBA? Between $180 million and $200 million for its 2023 season.

 

 

Distinctly different pools.

 

 

Why the vast difference? Start here:

 

 

Television rights fees

 

 

Disney (ABC/ESPN) and Warner Bros., Discovery Sports (TNT) pay the NBA $2.6 billion each season to broadcast 165 nationally televised games. The 10-year agreement ($24 billion overall) was signed in 2014, thus it expires after the 2024-25 season. NBA officials are salivating, looking for between $60 billion and $72 billion overall in the next agreement, per reports.

 

 

The WNBA receives $60 million annually for media rights, a deal that also expires in ‘25. League officials hope to double that amount.

 

 

Television ratings

 

 

BA games last season averaged just under 1.6 million viewers per game. On ABC, the WNBA averaged 627,000 viewers.

 

 

Attendance

 

 

The NBA, which has an 82-game schedule, set an all-time attendance record this regular season: 22,58,518. Last season, WNBA attendance, in its 36-game season, was 1,587,488, its highest in 13 years.

There’s more that contributes to the discrepancy in the size of the NBA and WNBA pools, but this is key: the percentage of revenues received by the players, as negotiated by the respective players’ unions.

 

 

NBA players collectively bargained a guaranteed minimum of 53 percent of the league’s gross revenues. WNBA players have no such guarantee, and currently receive between 10 percent and 20 percent of the league’s revenues. (WNBA players do receive 50 percent of what is CBA-defined as “incremental” revenue—the amount generated above specified targets.)

 

 

Thus, WNBA players have agreed to a much smaller percentage of a vastly smaller pool.

 

 

Moreover, the players from both leagues agreed to a rookie wage scale, assuring that new players prove their worth before entering free agency. So, the size of the No. 1 pick’s first contract is pre-determined, whether it be Caitlin Clark or Clark Kent.

 

 

Every major sport has a gender pay gap, according to a 2023 study conducted by Adelphi University.

 

 

In 1973, tennis’ U.S Open became the first of the four grand slams to offer equal prize money to men and women. That was seismic. The year prior, men’s singles champion Ilie Nastase received $25,000, while women’s champion Billie Jean King was handed a $10,000 check. It wasn’t until 2007 that Wimbledon became the final grand slam to offer equal prize money to men and women.

 

 

Last summer the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) approved a plan to reach pay equity at all events featuring men and women by 2033.

 

 

Yeah, 2033. Women athletes have been in this battle since King whipped Bobby Riggs in three straight sets in the famed Battle of the Sexes in the Houston Astrodome in 1973.

 

 

Now, don’t fret over Caitlin Clark’s bag. Women’s basketball is on fire, and she’s the match. The NCAA women’s final, with Clark and Iowa losing to undefeated and indomitable South Carolina, outdrew the men’s final for the first time. UConn’s victory over Purdue was watched by 14.82 million viewers, well short of the 18.87 million who watched the women’s final.

Moreover, 2.45 million people watched Monday’s WNBA draft, a stunning 307% jump from last summer’s draft.

That heat will boost the league and all its players. But only if…

 

 

If outrage over the pay gap is transferred to television ratings, attendance, and WNBA merchandise revenue, all things that will increase the league’s gross revenues—the size of the pool.

Also, know this: the WNBA’s CBA has an out clause, exercisable by either the league or the player in 2025.

 

 

I’m calling it now: WNBA players will opt out and negotiate a new deal, just as they did in 2018. Among other things, they’ll likely seek a guaranteed percentage of gross revenue. Maybe not 53 percent like NBA players receive, but something.

 

 

Something that will ensure the pay gap will be smaller for the young girls now being inspired by Clark, Cameron Brink, Kamilla Cardoso, Angel Reese, Dawn Staley, Kim Mulkey, and the plethora of women who’ve set women’s basketball on fire.