Rapid rate of WNBA expansion is exciting … but not best move for the league

Yahoo

16 hours ago

WNBA fans were treated Monday to the news of not one, but three new teams set to debut by 2030. But while the league celebrates its return to two former markets in Cleveland and Detroit and forays into another in Philadelphia, the expansion explosion raises concerns about how the WNBA will handle this growth.
Combined with the newest franchise in Golden State and 2026's two entrants into the league (Toronto and Portland), the W will have expanded in size by 50 percent from 2024 to the end of the decade. Although these decisions reflect confidence in the business of the WNBA and its future potential, the league is getting ahead of itself. Growing the league to 16 teams was reasonable, but expansion at this pace and this scale — apparently, it's not even done yet — robs the W of its unique character and will introduce a host of new problems for a league that is still reckoning with its internal growth.
Advertisement
The WNBA prides itself on being the toughest league to make. Commissioner Cathy Engelbert called it the 'most elite women's sports league in the world' during her news conference Monday. The exclusivity of the WNBA is a feature, not a bug. By adding at least 60 more roster spots over the next five years, the W is diluting its brand. Fans tune in for the high level of play and the concentration of talent. The 2023 WNBA Finals were the highest-rated in nearly two decades because of the presence of super-teams — six members of the 2024 U.S. Olympic team started in those games. With expansion, superstars will be spread throughout the league, resulting in fewer truly great teams.
For years, players and fans have clamored for more roster spots because of the surfeit of talent in the college system and international play, but adding three more expansion teams, in addition to Portland and Toronto, is overcorrecting. Perhaps an improvement in the quality of the W's player experience (higher salaries and better facilities) will attract more international talent, and more roster spots will unearth players who have previously given up on the WNBA as a prospect. But the number of stars is more of a fixed commodity, and they will be dispersed throughout the league.
Think back to the 2010s-era Minnesota Lynx, who started four Hall of Famers alongside Rebekkah Brunson, who remains the league's only five-time champion. Teams like the Lynx will be a thing of the past in an expansion era.
But talent distribution is just one of a litany of issues with the WNBA's plan.
Advertisement
Continuity is also tougher to maintain with near-annual expansion. Front offices have to plan for expansion drafts in four of the next five offseasons. Even teams that have drafted well and built deep rosters will have players plucked away without their control.
The explosion in teams fails to address the more pressing issue in the WNBA, which is the number of players on an individual roster. With 11 or 12 players on each team, there isn't much space for organizations to hold on to younger players or locker room veterans. Adding more franchises won't solve that problem, as each team will still have to stack its roster with players who can contribute in the present. The developmental infrastructure is still lacking.
If the goal is to allow more players to compete in the WNBA, expanding to 16 teams and 14 roster spots rather than 18 teams of 12 would create a bigger league and more pathways for players to learn and grow on the job. With teams of 12, franchises will inevitably be forced to draw on hardship contracts throughout the season as injuries arise, and the pool of players available to join at a moment's notice will be significantly smaller than it already is.
Expansion doesn't just mean more players. It means more of everything.
Advertisement
First up, more games. Engelbert cited the introduction of the Valkyries as a reason for the schedule to grow from 40 games in 2024 to 44 in 2025, so it stands to reason that more teams will continue to lengthen the schedule. Players have already complained about the cadence of games this year when the schedule is relatively spaced out due to no Olympic break. The WNBA is bookended by college basketball in April and November, so extending the season in either direction seems implausible, especially when its primary television partner, ESPN, also carries NCAA games. Packing more games within the same six months would further diminish the quality of the product and limit the significance of regular-season games. After all, the intensity of each game is one of the WNBA's draws relative to leagues with longer regular seasons.
Expanding to 18 teams also requires more operations staff at the league level. Is the W prepared to invest in that personnel? Already, the league doesn't have an off-site replay center or last two-minute reports, purportedly because of costs. More teams and more games will require more general league staff to handle communicating with teams, officiating, public relations and other functions.
Looking around the league, current franchises in Connecticut, Los Angeles and Chicago lag behind an acceptable standard of player experience and practice facilities. Before bringing in expansion teams, the WNBA should make sure its existing organizations can handle the demands of this new era. The optics of expansion are better than relocation, but throwing energy and resources behind new teams instead of old doesn't solve the WNBA's problems.
All of these new organizations will require new coaches, general managers and people to work in basketball operations. The early success of Golden State suggests that candidates are out there to fill these roles, but difficulties in Portland indicate that not every situation will be smooth.
Advertisement
The WNBA is five years removed from what it considered an existential crisis season to even stay in business. That it has emerged from that period to become an attractive growth property is a commendable success story. The NBA couldn't wash its hands of the WNBA quickly enough during the 2000s, and now it's rushing to get back in.
But that doesn't mean this rate of expansion is the right move for the league or that the W can afford to dilute its talent and likely diminish its quality just as all eyes are on it. The league has a good thing going, a high-level product that demands excellence from its players and serves its fans. Sacrificing that for a quick cash grab in expansion fees is a disappointing move.
This article originally appeared in The Athletic.
Minnesota Lynx, New York Liberty, Seattle Storm, Los Angeles Sparks, Washington Mystics, Atlanta Dream, Chicago Sky, Connecticut Sun, Indiana Fever, Dallas Wings, Las Vegas Aces, Phoenix Mercury, Golden State Valkyries, WNBA, Sports Business, Opinion
2025 The Athletic Media Company