Thoughts on the WNBA Draft and How to Best Cover the League
We know the league gets treated unfairly. How should the media respond?
Last Friday, I watched the WNBA Draft on ESPN. All things considered, I thought the league did a pretty good job. Obviously, a virtual draft is never going to have the same energy and atmosphere as a live one, but the WNBA still sent cool packages to every player including hats for every team and league commissioner Cathy Engelbert announced picks and spoke to many of the drafted players.
Ryan Ruocco and Rebecca Lobo hosted the event, with interviews from Holly Rowe and analysis from Sue Bird (side note: Sue Bird is great. Keep putting her on TV). While it wasn’t perfect, and I definitely left with the impression that ESPN could have thrown more resources behind it, everyone that contributed helped create a memorable experience for all of the young women selected.
But again, as I said, it wasn’t perfect, and people in my feeds on social media were quick to point out two issues in particular.
- The jersey for #1 overall pick Sabrina Ionescu sold out within minutes after she was taken by the New York Liberty.
- Beginning midway through the second round, Engelbert stopped announcing every pick and the speed of the draft picking up rapidly, with the remainder of picks first being announced on the ESPN BottomLine ticker during commercials breaks or while the coverage was focused elsewhere.
These are both rather unfortunate mistakes well-deserving of being called out. Ionescu is the most marketable player the WNBA has seen in years (and possibly ever, although it’s far too early to say anything definitively).
Especially considering that she all was all but certain to be headed to New York of all places, it seems foolish for Fanatics, the league’s jersey partner, not to have anticipated heavy interest. Sadly, this falls into a predictable pattern of women’s sports merchandise being far too difficult to obtain.
The issue of picks in the second half of the draft not being announced is not the fault of the WNBA, but ESPN for only giving the draft a two-hour timeslot for three rounds and 36 picks. For comparison, the first round of the NBA draft, which features 30 selections, typically takes around three hours while the 32-pick first round of the NFL Draft can take four or five hours since each team has 10 minutes to make their pick.
Had the WNBA Draft been given a third hour, it would’ve been able to run smoothly while still announcing every pick live on-air. Instead, after the first round clocked in at roughly 1:15, the draft needed to be accelerated to make time.
It’s worth noting that the NFL Draft reveals many of its picks during commercial breaks, but this only happens on the final days of what is a mammoth three-day event. With no other live sporting events to show, there is no excuse for ESPN not to give the WNBA enough time to play out the entire draft.
But, of course, ESPN is well-accustomed to doing the absolute bare minimum required to claim to support women’s sports. They didn’t even originally plan to air the draft on ESPN — it was scheduled for ESPN2 before social media backlash led to a change, which really tells you all you need to know.
The WNBA Draft served as both a celebration of the league’s future stars and a reminder of how outside sources continue to limit the league’s potential. While I’m grateful for the people willing to call this out, I’m simultaneously left wondering whether doing so is the best strategy for portraying the league in a positive light and helping it grow.
Since I understand that this is a strange argument to be making, I’d like to preface this by saying that I absolutely have the WNBA’s best interests at heart and that there is probably nothing in the sports world that angers me as much as the hate directed towards the league.
I sometimes write about the issues facing the WNBA and other women’s sports, but every time I do so (including right now), I debate if I should be because I know that I treat these sports differently than I would others.
In focusing on the issues facing the WNBA, the narrative of women’s basketball becomes one of struggle, a quest for legitimacy that arguably undermines the league’s intentions of continuing to grow and thrive. Additionally, articles that attempt to discuss these issues, such as league salaries, travel conditions, and TV deals, are regularly flooded by sexist arguments which trigger the same perpetual debates that add nothing new to the conversation and don’t help anyone.
side note: before you tell me these arguments are economic, not sexist ones, let me offer that while there are many sports outside of the Big 4 that receive occasional media attention, none that are played predominantly or most visibly by men are subjected to the same criticisms as women’s sports and women’s basketball in particular by those with no obligation to the sport. If someone doesn’t like boxing, rugby, or skateboarding, they simply decline to watch it. However, people regularly go out of their way to hate on the WNBA and other women’s sports. (I must also note that there is no reason women shouldn’t be allowed to participate in boxing, rugby, and skateboarding. These are only examples of relatively popular sports that men are almost exclusively shown competing in.)
So, what should we focus on when covering the WNBA and other women’s sports? I think more time should be spent on the actually players, games, and news surrounding these sports, something so obvious that the fact I need to even say it speaks volumes to the state of the sports media landscape.
Let me pose to you a question: how do we know when a game or activity qualifies as a sport? I once debated this topic in one of my classes, and while we spent considerable effort examining criteria and applying them to things we traditionally do and do not call sports, it was impossible to nail down an answer, leaving us to settle at the following: something is a sport when a large enough group of people say it is.
Obviously, there is no question as to whether basketball, regardless of who is playing it, is a sport. It is. But if we want the WNBA to be viewed as a major sports league, isn’t the best thing we can do just to treat it like one?
Personally, I have always defaulted to writing about the issues facing the WNBA because, regrettably, I have never considered myself knowledgeable enough about the league to write thoughtful analyses of free-agent signings, draft prospects, and trade rumors. But that is precisely the type of content that signals to someone uninformed that the league is worth taking seriously.
This idea still somewhat gives me pause because the reality is that many individuals and organizations will continue to harm the league, whether intentionally or simply out of ignorance, and they deserve to be called out for it. What makes this even more troubling is that this list includes TV networks like ESPN that actually hold partial TV rights to the league.
It’s already been proven from ESPN moving the WNBA Draft to their main channel that the public has the ability to create positive change. With this in mind, it becomes clear that future coverage of the WNBA shouldn’t be a choice between covering players and teams and bringing important issues to light, but a combination of the two.
I don’t think that negates my main point, though. Ultimately, I want us to be thoughtful in the ways that we write and talk about the WNBA to ensure that the overall tone of the league is more positive. If we believe the WNBA should be on a similar playing field, then it doesn’t do us well to act like the league is fighting from the bottom. Instead, we should work primarily to champion the league and its athletes while still being vocal when they aren’t given a fair shake.
Connor Groel is a writer who studies sport management at the University of Texas at Austin. He also serves as editor of the Top Level Sports publication on Medium, and the host of the Connor Groel Sports podcast. His book, “Sports, Technology, and Madness,” is available now. You can follow Connor on Medium, Facebook, and Twitter, and view his archives at toplevelsports.net.
