Commissioner Cathy Engelbert in hot seat over CNBC comments

[ellobo]

When she said, "It is a little that Bird/Magic moment...when those two rookies came in, from a big college rivalry, one white, one black..." my cringe meter and my WTF meter simultaneously hit 100%.

Obviously she's not going to fix toxic online discourse in an interview on CNBC. But she could avoid saying something guaranteed to piss off her players and undermine her own leadership position.

[cdubbz]

We all have the same goal here.

My point is that I don't think Englebert is going to be able to do much good in a CNBC interview. I wish it would help, but I don't think it will.

Mainly because the people that need to hear it are not listening to Englebert or any voice associated with the WNBA.

They are only listening to the bull they are fed on social media.

I wish I knew how to fix it. I just don't. So I'm not going to be too hard Englebert in a CNBC interview.

Nothing Cathy says would stop the crazies. I agree. Especially during a CNBC interview where the target audience definitely isn't the people who watch the W.

But she had a responsibility to rebuke this behavior on behalf of the league and it's players, who are the receiving end of this abuse, and she shirked her duty. That's where the problem lies.

Yeah I agree with both points you guys made. Many leaders in the past have spoken out against racism and bad behavior, but here we are in 2024 and nothing has changed really. But Cathy saying it would have pleased the people who want to hear it and who are being affected by it especially those in the WNBA.

I've been posting on threads a lot where it's a LITTLE more sane than twitter, but a lot of folks still are calling for her resignation (which i think is a huge overreaction).

[G R E Y]

There's a balance and clear line between minimizing and stoking and these comments somehow managed to do both.

Well she skirted the issue but it's important to also not magnify the problem. In trying to focus on I guess positive aspects of the league, Engelbert left the wrong sort of impression.The WNBA is still in its earlier era (relative to NBA - think where it was at this point of its growth), now in a newer stage of bigger stars and attention, all in a social media world. Engelbert erred on the side of placating and turning to league growth rather than on focusing on players and relationship with them as Silver does.

Check out the first response to OP's tweet. Social media and player relations/fan base issues got mishandled but with the WNBA's statement of what the commish should have done, there's a sense of micromanaging and magnifying this all the more.

The combative nature within the league looks to be not only among players and fan bases but also within league leadership as well. That's my overall sense of the WNBA, that it is still in these stages of working out a smoother working relationship among all the parts involved. It is frankly a bumpier ride on the current road of success than I anticipated.

[Ice Man]

The combative nature within the league looks to be not only among players and fan bases

Is that true? I am new to the WNBA but in my viewership I have only seen one player whom I would call a combative grudge-bearer, than being Chennedy Carter. (Has it in for both Caitlin Clark and Sabrina Mabrey, and has a back history before that.)

As for fan bases, I dunno, it sure doesn't seem like a Yankees vs. Red Sox vibe to me. But maybe I am missing something.

[G R E Y]

The combative nature within the league looks to be not only among players and fan bases

Is that true? I am new to the WNBA but in my viewership I have only seen one player whom I would call a combative grudge-bearer, than being Chennedy Carter. (Has it in for both Caitlin Clark and Sabrina Mabrey, and has a back history before that.)

As for fan bases, I dunno, it sure doesn't seem like a Yankees vs. Red Sox vibe to me. But maybe I am missing something.

Just my general impression overall. There's less of a sense of partnership or togetherness for a common goal, less polished... Doesn't need to be Yankees vs. Red Sox level for there to be friction.

[MrDollarBills]

We all have the same goal here.

My point is that I don't think Englebert is going to be able to do much good in a CNBC interview. I wish it would help, but I don't think it will.

Mainly because the people that need to hear it are not listening to Englebert or any voice associated with the WNBA.

They are only listening to the bull they are fed on social media.

I wish I knew how to fix it. I just don't. So I'm not going to be too hard Englebert in a CNBC interview.

Nothing Cathy says would stop the crazies. I agree. Especially during a CNBC interview where the target audience definitely isn't the people who watch the W.

But she had a responsibility to rebuke this behavior on behalf of the league and it's players, who are the receiving end of this abuse, and she shirked her duty. That's where the problem lies.

Yeah I agree with both points you guys made. Many leaders in the past have spoken out against racism and bad behavior, but here we are in 2024 and nothing has changed really. But Cathy saying it would have pleased the people who want to hear it and who are being affected by it especially those in the WNBA.

I've been posting on threads a lot where it's a LITTLE more sane than twitter, but a lot of folks still are calling for her resignation (which i think is a huge overreaction).

Resigning is a bit too far, I agree.

She has an opportunity to do better.

[MrDollarBills]

When she said, "It is a little that Bird/Magic moment...when those two rookies came in, from a big college rivalry, one white, one black..." my cringe meter and my WTF meter simultaneously hit 100%.

Obviously she's not going to fix toxic online discourse in an interview on CNBC. But she could avoid saying something guaranteed to piss off her players and undermine her own leadership position.

Yeah. That part gave me the ick.

Not sure what WNBA PR is being paid for but clearly they need to review some things

[Wingy]

We all have the same goal here.

My point is that I don't think Englebert is going to be able to do much good in a CNBC interview. I wish it would help, but I don't think it will.

Mainly because the people that need to hear it are not listening to Englebert or any voice associated with the WNBA.

They are only listening to the bull they are fed on social media.

I wish I knew how to fix it. I just don't. So I'm not going to be too hard Englebert in a CNBC interview.

“Well first, there’s no place for bigotry, or racism in our league.”

She couldn’t even say that before whatever she ended up saying.

C’mon, the bar could not possibly be any lower, and she couldn’t even clear it.

[cdubbz]

She posted this yesterday on her twitter. Not to be nit picky, but I think she should have said more than one sentence to appease people?

Read on Twitter

[zimpy27]

She posted this yesterday on her twitter. Not to be nit picky, but I think she should have said more than one sentence to appease people?

Read on Twitter

That's fine I think.


Look growth is messy, more eyes on the sport brings more offensive people. People that are watching for the wrong reasons will eventually watch for the right reasons or they will stop watching.


But what I'm seeing from the WNBA does seem divided. I think we all assume that they want more money at any cost but maybe they don't? Maybe they'd prefer the league to be run on larger morals that shouldn't be stepped over to bring more money in.

I can see this being a dividing point between leaders and players. Ultimately CEOs want growth over everything. Grow first then sort out the morals later, use the platform to educate, etc. But that may not be something players agree with, morals first and grow within that restriction.

[Green Chile]

We all have the same goal here.

My point is that I don't think Englebert is going to be able to do much good in a CNBC interview. I wish it would help, but I don't think it will.

Mainly because the people that need to hear it are not listening to Englebert or any voice associated with the WNBA.

They are only listening to the bull they are fed on social media.

I wish I knew how to fix it. I just don't. So I'm not going to be too hard Englebert in a CNBC interview.

While I agree with this overall, it's a bad look that Stewie -- who is not paid to be a public spokesperson for the league -- gave a much better answer than the commissioner did. Well, maybe Engelbert can get some media training from Breanna. You know, a couple of sessions.

Watching it again (I had a few cold pops last night), yeah, I agree that she dropped the ball.

[MrDollarBills]

Am i misguided in thinking that making a brief statement on behalf of common human decency shouldn't impact the WNBA's bottom line? Like at all?

Like I will wager 99% of the trolls/weirdos/criminals making death threats to players aren't lining up to buy tickets and merchandise. I doubt Cathy would have turned off newer fans/sponsors who worry about brand security by saying "hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players".

There shouldn't be any divide here, but maybe I am being naive.

[MrDollarBills]

We all have the same goal here.

My point is that I don't think Englebert is going to be able to do much good in a CNBC interview. I wish it would help, but I don't think it will.

Mainly because the people that need to hear it are not listening to Englebert or any voice associated with the WNBA.

They are only listening to the bull they are fed on social media.

I wish I knew how to fix it. I just don't. So I'm not going to be too hard Englebert in a CNBC interview.

“Well first, there’s no place for bigotry, or racism in our league.”

She couldn’t even say that before whatever she ended up saying.

C’mon, the bar could not possibly be any lower, and she couldn’t even clear it.

I wish I could find Stef Dolson's statement I saw earlier. She went off, hell she went further than she probably needed to, but anyone who knows Big Mama Stef she stands on business.

Cathy didn't even need to say 1/10th of what Stef and Stewie did to make a strong stand on this. It's honestly sad.

[zimpy27]

Am i misguided in thinking that making a brief statement on behalf of common human decency shouldn't impact the WNBA's bottom line? Like at all?

Like I will wager 99% of the trolls/weirdos/criminals making death threats to players aren't lining up to buy tickets and merchandise. I doubt Cathy would have turned off newer fans/sponsors who worry about brand security by saying "hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players".

There shouldn't be any divide here, but maybe I am being naive.

"hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players"

I think she does say this in the follow up tweet this isn't divisive. But do you feel like this is a strong statement? How does the WNBA plan to not let those things be used against their players? They can't control social media, at most they can kick people out of stadiums.

My impression is the players want a harder line set by making a bigger ongoing issue of this. I think that has the ability to put people off, people don't like being told what to do or how to act, even if they aren't racist or bigots, people just don't like to be restricted. It also draws attention away from the exciting play of the WNBA and focuses more on the troubled issues of a few terrible people. I don't think that's a smart marketing campaign for maximizing growth.

[MrDollarBills]

Am i misguided in thinking that making a brief statement on behalf of common human decency shouldn't impact the WNBA's bottom line? Like at all?

Like I will wager 99% of the trolls/weirdos/criminals making death threats to players aren't lining up to buy tickets and merchandise. I doubt Cathy would have turned off newer fans/sponsors who worry about brand security by saying "hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players".

There shouldn't be any divide here, but maybe I am being naive.

"hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players"

I think she does say this in the follow up tweet this isn't divisive. But do you feel like this is a strong statement? How does the WNBA plan to not let those things be used against their players? They can't control social media, at most they can kick people out of stadiums.

My impression is the players want a harder line set by making a bigger ongoing issue of this. I think that has the ability to put people off, people don't like being told what to do or how to act, even if they aren't racist or bigots, people just don't like to be restricted. It also draws attention away from the exciting play of the WNBA and focuses more on the troubled issues of a few terrible people. I don't think that's a smart marketing campaign for maximizing growth.

Well, this is a free country. There's no way to shut anyone up. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

That being said I don't equate the league publicly condemning social media abuse, racism/bigotry, stalking, and death threats to trying to silence anyone though or telling people how to act. Rebuking racism et all isn't silencing anyone or instructing people how to behave. It's telling them that their behavior sucks and they need to hold themselves accountable.

If someone is being racist, and I condemn them for it and say that I want nothing to do with them, I'm not silencing them or telling them how to act. I'm just telling them that they're an ass hole and I have no reason to tolerate their abuse.

It's a good system I think.

I mean the NBA banned two owners for racism. Private entities don't have to tolerate stuff that harms their employees and brand. I'm not sure how the WNBA publicly supporting all of their players against this stuff will hurt growth. The people who would be offended by this aren't going to watch or support anyway over the long run.

[Wingy]

Am i misguided in thinking that making a brief statement on behalf of common human decency shouldn't impact the WNBA's bottom line? Like at all?

Like I will wager 99% of the trolls/weirdos/criminals making death threats to players aren't lining up to buy tickets and merchandise. I doubt Cathy would have turned off newer fans/sponsors who worry about brand security by saying "hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players".

There shouldn't be any divide here, but maybe I am being naive.

"hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players"

I think she does say this in the follow up tweet this isn't divisive. But do you feel like this is a strong statement? How does the WNBA plan to not let those things be used against their players? They can't control social media, at most they can kick people out of stadiums.

My impression is the players want a harder line set by making a bigger ongoing issue of this. I think that has the ability to put people off, people don't like being told what to do or how to act, even if they aren't racist or bigots, people just don't like to be restricted. It also draws attention away from the exciting play of the WNBA and focuses more on the troubled issues of a few terrible people. I don't think that's a smart marketing campaign for maximizing growth.

She just needed to say a sentence. Maybe two. And this wouldn’t even be a thing. We wouldn’t be talking about it.

[zimpy27]

Am i misguided in thinking that making a brief statement on behalf of common human decency shouldn't impact the WNBA's bottom line? Like at all?

Like I will wager 99% of the trolls/weirdos/criminals making death threats to players aren't lining up to buy tickets and merchandise. I doubt Cathy would have turned off newer fans/sponsors who worry about brand security by saying "hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players".

There shouldn't be any divide here, but maybe I am being naive.

"hey our league is made up of women/people from all walks of life and we do not condone bigotry, racism, and misogyny nor will we tolerate it being used against our players"

I think she does say this in the follow up tweet this isn't divisive. But do you feel like this is a strong statement? How does the WNBA plan to not let those things be used against their players? They can't control social media, at most they can kick people out of stadiums.

My impression is the players want a harder line set by making a bigger ongoing issue of this. I think that has the ability to put people off, people don't like being told what to do or how to act, even if they aren't racist or bigots, people just don't like to be restricted. It also draws attention away from the exciting play of the WNBA and focuses more on the troubled issues of a few terrible people. I don't think that's a smart marketing campaign for maximizing growth.

Well, this is a free country. There's no way to shut anyone up. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

That being said I don't equate the league publicly condemning social media abuse, racism/bigotry, stalking, and death threats to trying to silence anyone though or telling people how to act. Rebuking racism et all isn't silencing anyone or instructing people how to behave. It's telling them that their behavior sucks and they need to hold themselves accountable.

If someone is being racist, and I condemn them for it and say that I want nothing to do with them, I'm not silencing them or telling them how to act. I'm just telling them that they're an ass hole and I have no reason to tolerate their abuse.

It's a good system I think.

I mean the NBA banned two owners for racism. Private entities don't have to tolerate stuff that harms their employees and brand. I'm not sure how the WNBA publicly supporting all of their players against this stuff will hurt growth. The people who would be offended by this aren't going to watch or support anyway over the long run.

Oh yes, to be clear, my point isn't saying she should have said something. She made a follow up tweet to clarify her stance.

What I'm saying is that I don't think the players are happy with a statement in an interview or a tweet. I think they want a campaign of messaging around this, that's the divisiveness I'm referring to between league management and players.

NBA built up during periods when players were not protected from racism. They focused on rapid growth and only more recently have turned towards social stances and messaging. Yet even they have hopped off issues that hurt their growth too much (china, etc). I think the WNBA are trying to do something different, where they hold up the messaging as a core part of the league.

[Ice Man]

My take -- which could well be wrong -- is that the NBA can afford to get away with "woke" messaging like racism is bad, Black Lives Matter, and get out and vote, because its product is already established. A lot of sports fans don't like that political message but they have accepted that is what the NBA does. The WNBA, however, does not have that luxury. It will struggle to achieve broad acceptance if it retains a "woke" brand. I think that was in the back of Ms. Engelbert's mind when she made that comment.

Again, just a guess/amateur political analysis. I might be off target. But I'm sure not off target in acknowledging that political affiliations affect how people view the WNBA.

[zimpy27]

My take -- which could well be wrong -- is that the NBA can afford to get away with "woke" messaging like racism is bad, Black Lives Matter, and get out and vote, because its product is already established. A lot of sports fans don't like that political message but they have accepted that is what the NBA does. The WNBA, however, does not have that luxury. It will struggle to achieve broad acceptance if it retains a "woke" brand. I think that was in the back of Ms. Engelbert's mind when she made that comment.

Again, just a guess/amateur political analysis. I might be off target. But I'm sure not off target in acknowledging that political affiliations affect how people view the WNBA.

I agree with you.

But I also wonder if the players prefer money over the social platform.

[MrDollarBills]

This is a really good discussion.

My take -- which could well be wrong -- is that the NBA can afford to get away with "woke" messaging like racism is bad, Black Lives Matter, and get out and vote, because its product is already established. A lot of sports fans don't like that political message but they have accepted that is what the NBA does. The WNBA, however, does not have that luxury. It will struggle to achieve broad acceptance if it retains a "woke" brand. I think that was in the back of Ms. Engelbert's mind when she made that comment.

Again, just a guess/amateur political analysis. I might be off target. But I'm sure not off target in acknowledging that political affiliations affect how people view the WNBA.

I think you and zimpy27 are right. This is the gods honest truth, people do react to "political" stuff in different ways, often negatively, and it would be foolish for the league as a business to not consider this stuff.

The thing however that separates the WNBA from the NBA is that the league is already inherently "political" or "woke" (I hate that term so much), because:

1) This is a league made up of women/non binary players, a historically oppressed group.

2) 90% of the league is Black, a historically oppressed group.

3) This is the world's premiere openly LGBTQ pro sports league. Again, a historically oppressed group.

The WNBA cannot run from what makes the league the league. It's always going to be polarizing.

Maybe these factors will put a cap on the WNBA's earning potential long term, because people suck. But I don't think the answer here is for the league's leadership to look the other way while this stuff is happening either.

There's not much the league can do about the social media stuff. I would hope that for every death threat or harassment situation that has happened, they are working with the FBI to arrest the criminals who are doing that. Being a racist and bigot isn't justifiable cause for being thrown in prison, but making death threats and stalking women definitely are.

I think in the meantime, the league needs to keep cultivating the fans who are in this for hoops and enjoy the players and how unique they are. If Billy Bob from west chucklef*ck gets mad because Cathy says to stop being racist and doesn't want to support the league....so be it. The league's make up isn't going to change and I think that's where the product's true strength lies.