Taurasi to Sit Out WNBA Season; Should Force League to Action

Diana Taurasi will sit out the upcoming WNBA Season.

Tweet
  Diana Taurasi made news this week by announcing she wouldn't be suiting up for the WNBA Champion Phoenix Mercury for the 2015 season.

  Instead, she is going to rest. But here's the catcher, she's still going to get paid -- by her Russian team, UMMC-Ekaterinburg

  During the WNBA's off-season (which happens to be twice as long as the four-month summer season), Taurasi, like many women's players go overseas to earn a living.

  To protect their investment (UMMC is reportedly paying Taurasi $1.5 million this season) and secure Taurasi for the following season, the Russian club offered to pay her to sit out the 2015 WNBA season.

  Get paid to rest -- not a bad gig.

Two Leagues, Year-Round Seasons
  To be honest, I'm surprised Taurasi/UMMC is the first instance of this happening. The best players in the world play year round, between the WNBA and Europe, Asia or Australia.

  One full season overseas (September-May) is hard enough on your body. Remove the summer months to rest, recover and rejuvenate? I don't know how they do it for an entire year.

  Taurasi has played 10 year-round seasons. That's a lot of wear and tear to put on an aging body, in a cutthroat, short-lived profession.

  I look at what Taurasi has done for 10 consecutive years and say she's made a sacrifice. To play year-round, at the highest level, puts an amazing toll on your body. My body wouldn't have held up for one year-round season, let alone 10.

  This is where I get to why.

Why Play?

Taurasi was the league's MVP in 2009, & two-time Finals MVP.

  Why has she sacrificed? Why do players like Diana Tauarsi, Tamika Catchings, Maya Moore, et al play in the WNBA, when financially it might not make sense? It's not for the money or the glamour of the WNBA. They sacrifice to help the league maintain and (hopefully) grow.

  First, to have the opportunity to play professionally at 'home' has to be an incredible feeling. It's something I was never able to do.

  Secondly, and what I think is most-important, is that they don't want the WNBA to fail.

  Players feel an obligation to the opportunity. The WNBA hasn't always been around, and players want it to succeed. In order for it to succeed, the best players need to be on the court.

  We are just now at the tail end of players' careers who remember a time when there was no WNBA. When there was no viable opportunity to play professionally in the US.

  The the Tamika Catchings, Sue Birds, Diana Taurasis, the Deanna Nolans.

  As we get further away from that generation, there might become a time when the league is taken for granted. When players assume the league has always been here, and will always be here.

  It wouldn't shock me to see more players sit out WNBA seasons to allow their bodies and minds recover from the longer, more financially rewarding overseas seasons. Especially as the younger generation asserts itself.

Moore is one of the top young talents in the league.

  Point blank, it looks bad for the league to have one of its top five players be paid more NOT to play.

  And I don't blame Taurasi. A basketball career is finite, and she's trying to make the most of it financially.

  But it could become a turning point.

Danger Zone?
  Here's what needs to happen -- somehow, someway -- the WNBA needs to find a way for this not to become a trend. Otherwise, they'll be in danger of becoming a second-tier league, or worse, obsolete.

  The players who have sacrificed to help the league, that's still in its infancy, grow, need to see the support from the WNBA in return.

  The WNBA has league maximum and league minimum salaries -- for both veterans and rookies.

  In 2013, the minimum salary for rookies was $35,190. The league's top four drafted players earned at maximum $48,470. Every other rookie, earned between 35k and 48k.

Maya Moore plays WNBA off-seasons in China.

  The minimum salary for a player with three-plus years of experience was $55,000 while the maximum salary for a six-plus year player was $107,000.

  Based on her 10 years of experience, Taurasi is at the 107k maximum. Again, her contract with UMMC is $1.5 million. (Keep in mind, most overseas salaries reported are post-tax earnings, while WNBA are pre-tax.)

  You do the math; what would you do?

LeBron vs. Steve Blake Analogy
  While the WNBA pay scale is a nice idea, it doesn't make sense.

  A 10-year veteran role player, should not earn the same salary as Diana Taurasi --a three-time WNBA Champion, two-time WNBA Finals MVP, three-time Gold Medalist, etc). Why? Because she doesn't bring the same value to the franchise, nor to the league.

  I'll give you an NBA comparison to make it more obvious: Should LeBron James and Steve Blake earn the same salary? (I bet even Steve Blake would say 'of course not!')

  Currently, they're both in their 12th NBA season. So under the WNBA's pay scale, they would earn the same salary. Instead, this season LeBron will earn $20.6 million from the Cavs, while Blake will earn $2.1 million from the Trail Blazers. Seems comparable for what they bring to their teams and to the NBA.

  I'm not here to compare and argue NBA vs. WNBA salaries. They're different animals, and cannot be compared. But if the WNBA is to remain relevant in the women's basketball world, the powers that be must come up with a solution to compensate, and keep its best/most-visible players on their court.

The only uniform you'll see Taurasi in during 2015.

Franchise Tag Solution?
  Franchise tags are used in the NFL, but in a different manner than what I would be suggesting. In this instance, franchise tag means superstar.

  Each of the 12 WNBA teams should be allowed two (?) franchise tags. Teams can then pay those players whatever they deem fair, and either the league raises the salary cap, or franchise tags do not apply towards the salary cap. (The current salary cap for WNBA teams is $913,000.)

  The number of players who garner the Taurasi-types of salaries overseas are very few. Likewise, the number of players who the WNBA should tag as superstars should be just as few. In fact, allowing 24 franchise tags for the entire league might be too many. But that's not for me to decide.

  This is a solution I came up with in 20-minutes, give-or-take a few. There are many other options, and there are people much smarter than I who should be working to find a solution.

  Because as it stands right now, the WNBA needs its superstars exponentially more than they need the WNBA. I certainly don't want to witness the league's demise, but whatever their solution, the WNBA better be working on it ASAP.

LINKS:

WNBA Salaries 2013 Season

Shorter Hems for Women's Hoopsters?

France: Dresses for uniforms.

Tweet
**Originally appeared on SLAM Online April 4th, 2012**
  As a kid, the day you got your uniform was always one of the best days of the basketball season. You remember YMCA ball: when you got to put on your bright purple t-shirt for the first time.

  And as you got older, that day didn't lose any of its luster, as the uniforms usually got better and better with each passing year. Maybe you got to pick out your number that day too. But uniform day was exciting for another reason as well: the 'real' season was about to get underway.

  Even as a professional, uniform day is still one of the best. There's nothing like getting your gear, and donning it for the first time.

  As of late however, in Europe, uniform day is slowly turning into a nightmare for us ladies.

  Sponsors and the almighty dollar (or Euro, in this case) have always ruled. What they say goes. 

  Sponsors pay the bills after all, so it's understandable. If they want you at a dinner, you're there. If they want you at a community event, you're there. If they want you out shaking hands, there you are, shaking hands. And if they want you in tight shorts on the court, unfortunately for you, you'll be in tight shorts on the court.

  I was made aware of this my rookie season in Italy. After putting on my uniform shorts for the first time for Pool Comense, I immediately asked our manager if they had anything larger. The pair I had tried on, fit more like a pair of running shorts, or soccer shorts. I definitely hadn't worn a pair of basketball shorts THAT short since I was a youngster.

  Our manager smiled at me and said, 'the sponsors want the uniforms to show more of your bodies,' as she made a figure-outlining motion with her hands. I laughed it off, said ok, and wore the shorts I was given. 

  I never got used to them, as I tried stretching them out before each and every game, and probably wore them lower on my waist than I have ever worn a pair of shorts.

  That was my first season. Every year after that has been hit or miss in regards to uniforms. 

  Sometimes I've had the latest and greatest, Nike outfitted gear (that you can never complain about), and other times I've had lesser-known brands supply our uniforms. You roll with the punches, but I've always been given a basketball uniform.

  After this past year however, things are headed in the wrong direction. FIBA, the body that runs the highly-touted EuroLeague (among other competitions), recently enacted uniform regulations that ONLY applies to the women's league:

'The FIBA Europe prior to this season (2011-2012) accepted new regulations regarding uniforms in EuroLeague Women that state that shorts have to be at least 10 cm above the knee and there can be only two centimeters between the shorts and the skin.'

  They're regulating how long the shorts can be, and also how tight to the skin the shorts must be worn. 

  This begs the question: WHY?

  I'm not really sure what FIBA is trying to accomplish. If selling more tickets is a motivator, I'm curious, have attendance numbers increased since the uniform rule was instituted?

  As I mentioned before, sometimes the uniform requirements don't come from the leagues, but from individual team sponsors. In my nine professional seasons in Europe, I have played against a handful of teams who have worn dresses (including one this season).

  'Combi' uniforms (also called 'onesies' -- all spandex material you may have seen on the Australian National Team) have been adopted in various leagues around the world as well.

  But instances of the 'FIBA concept' of short/tight fitting uniforms are seemingly on the rise. In fact, the team I play for this season in France, is finalizing an equipment deal for next season that would put the team in such uniforms. 

  Maybe they're trying to put more femininity into the game? I, for one, don't think they look good. When I see players wearing these uniforms I think they no longer look like basketball players, and that they surely can't be comfortable. If the players aren't comfortable, I think it would only make their play suffer.

  Let's flip the script and say that all of a sudden, FIBA started mandating that the men play in ultra tight uniforms. Or took it a step further, and made them play shirtless. How would that go over? I know it would be met with HUGE uproar, and would quickly be overturned.

  If they're trying to make women's basketball 'sexy', they need to stop right there. Athletics are not meant to be sexy. People might say, look at tennis or volleyball uniforms! Fabulous. But tennis and volleyball players have been playing in those uniforms for decades.

  To quote FIBA secretary general Patrick Baumann, "they are great athletes, but also beautiful athletes and there's no reason not to show it." No reason not to show 'it'. That statement has ZERO to do with the quality of basketball being played, and EVERYTHING to do sex-appeal.

  If I'm not mistaken, women's professional leagues have already tried, and failed, to use sex-appeal to promote the popularity of the sport. In early professional leagues in the US, women wore 'combi' uniforms. Those leagues quickly folded.

  Fans aren't interested in how tight the uniforms are worn. They are interested in watching high quality, entertaining basketball. That's it. There are countless other arenas of entertainment to get 'sexy' in the world. Let's keep that motivation out of basketball.

  One player, Diana Taurasi, refused to wear FIBA's tight-fitting uniforms this season, resulting in thousands of dollars worth of fines. For every EuroLeague Women game Taurasi played in, disobeying the new uniform rules, she was fined 2,000 Euro ($2,600). 

  Taurasi's team, Galatasaray of Turkey, played 18 EuroLeague games; equaling fines amounting to 36,000 Euro ($47,000). It's been reported that FIBA didn't fine her the full amount, but either way, it's a pretty expensive stance to be taking.

  I applaud Taurasi for standing up to FIBA, and letting them know her feelings. She was quoted in lovewomensbasketball.com in February as saying, 'They want to make basketball sexy, but basketball isn’t sexy, it’s a sport...The uniforms are cultural and we have been playing in them for years, that will not change. If you want sexy uniforms, go read Playboy.'

  Here's another reason I take issue with 'non-traditional' uniforms: the majority of European teams are run strictly by men. From the President, to the coach, on down to the board members. I've had one woman coach, and one woman in management in nine seasons. In addition, every single referee is a man (I think I remember having one woman referee since I've been playing in Europe). I'm also willing to bet that FIBA doesn't have many female representatives on staff.

  So I guess you can say it's a man's world, and women are just playing in it.

  Finally, it's not about 'do I look good in this uniform?' Or 'you're a beautiful woman, you should have no problem showing off your body'. Or having confidence in your body. It's that these uniforms are objectifying to a large degree (not to mention uncomfortable).

  Basketball should never be about gender. When I'm on the court, it's not about being a woman or worrying about being 'feminine enough'. On the court, I'm a basketball player first. A woman second. Off the court, those roles are reversed.

  I've always been excited to put on my uniform come game day. But put me in a tennis dress, a skirt, or a tight fitting uniform, and I suddenly don't feel like a basketball player anymore.

  For me, it's always been about being an athlete, and playing the game well. Maybe fans' thoughts are different than mine. But isn't the object of professional basketball to play the game, and to play it to the best of your abilities?

  Hopefully FIBA (and sponsors, for that matter) listens to its players, and realizes they've made a mistake. Their sole motivation should be improving the quality of the game, and increasing the popularity of women's basketball in that manner, not objectifying its players with ridiculous uniforms.