If WNBA expansion means more like Indiana, it can wait

The WNBA season starts today, and so far, I’ve no plans to watch.

How weird is it that the W hasn’t kept up with women’s college ball, which is booming. Some folks believe it very much is, considering the quality of the players who aren’t making the final cut — Charli Collier, the #1 pick in ’21, didn’t make the Dallas Wings, for instance.

They are calling for expansion, but I’m as reluctant as league officials, though Northern California hasn’t had a good WNBA team in 16 or 18 years.

Take the best eight players who were cut yesterday, add four or six women to fill out the roster, what have you got? An expansion team. Would they be worth, say, $29 to watch (the price of the WNBA League Pass subscription)? Indiana has been in last place for years, and Seattle figures to join them down there (for the loss of Stewart and Bird, while not acquiring much to replace them — Storm boss Valavanis, I’m open to a job offer). I don’t want to watch those teams while idiots tell me what they can see (basketball is not a TV sport — if it’s played right, the team moves together, but the stupid nature of televised sports is to announce who has the ball).

The Fever drew 1800 per game, which counts tickets sold, not the number of butts in seats. The league doesn’t need more of that.

If not league expansion, then at least grow the rosters, it’s said, but that’s even worse. A basketball team isn’t made up of the 12 or 15 best players available, it’s comprised of the three best, three or five more to complement the nucleus, and four or six who greet the players coming off the floor. The team members who don’t play — they have to like not playing.

I think WNBA commissioner Engelbert would agree with me when I say: Let’s see what happens this year in the college game, then the year after that in the W.

Iowa has sold out their arena for the season, and Connecticut gets their most marketable player back. 2023-24 could be the most lucrative WCBB season ever — if it trickles up (watch the attendance where Clark and Bueckers land), then putting another couple teams on the map might be viable, because teams that will be worse than Indiana and Seattle can bank on a visit from Caitlin Clark.

I put it to myself this way: If Clark, Bueckers, Pili, and Brink were rookies this year, would I pay for televised games? Probably.