Same Game, Different Paycheck
Why WNBA players should not get the same cut as NBA players.
Check out this podcast episode here.
Let’s talk about why pro women athletes are paid less. It’s much more complicated than talent or effort. If you’ve ever seen a headline about the gender pay gap in sports and thought, “Wait… why is that still a thing?” - you’re not alone.
I started really thinking about this gap when I watched the U.S. Women’s National Soccer team win the World Cup… AGAIN, with packed stadiums and record viewership. Then I found out they were making less than the men’s team. And by the way, the men’s team didn’t even qualify that year.
This opened the door to a bigger question: Why are women in pro sports still paid so much less- even when they’re just as talented or even better?
Let’s take a look at the numbers. The average NBA player’s salary is around $10 million. The WNBA? Around $120,000. That’s not just a gap—it’s a canyon.
But here’s where it gets complicated. The Women’s NBA has historically operated at a loss, and that’s a key part of the pay gap conversation that is often left out. The NBA is footing the bill for the WNBA. This lack of profit is why the salaries don’t match.
So it is NOT just discrimination or sexism—it is kindergarten-level economics. But economics don’t exist in a vacuum. They are shaped by visibility, marketing, media coverage, and investments.
In July of 2024, the WNBA locked in an 11-year, $2.2 billion media rights deal with Disney, NBCUniversal, and Amazon Prime Video. This deal will begin in 2026 and will bring roughly $200 million per year, a 250% jump from their previous broadcast deals.
This deal means over 125 games per season will be shown nationally across ABC, ESPN, Peacock, and Prime Video. While the WNBA still needs strategies for sustainable growth, this deal is a huge step in the right direction. More airtime = more ads, more fans, more revenue.
And the players? They’re speaking up. At the 2025 All-Star Game, they wore shirts that said ‘Pay Us What You Owe Us’—and one of their key demands is a 50/50 revenue share, just like the NBA players get. Which is an outrageous demand in my opinion.
The NBA is a multi-billion-dollar machine. In 2023, it brought in over $10 billion in revenue. When they give players 50%, that’s still billions left over for operations, marketing, and growth. The WNBA, even with this new TV deal, is just now reaching a $200 million revenue stream annually—and still relies heavily on NBA support to operate. It’s not yet profitable. So if you gave half of that to the players right now… where does the rest come from? Who covers team travel, marketing, arena fees, insurance, and staff salaries?
It’s not that the players don’t deserve more. They do. But the infrastructure has to catch up with the demand. The TV deal is a step in that direction—but not a magic wand.
Right now, WNBA players get around 10–20% of league revenue, depending on how you measure it. So even if 50% isn’t realistic yet, what is realistic? 30%? 35%? Better profit-sharing based on viewership bonuses? Those are real conversations the league and the players' union are starting to have.
The call for a 50/50 revenue split might not be immediately possible—but it is powerful. It’s a rally cry that says: ‘We know our worth. We know what we’re building. And we want a future that reflects that.’
This isn’t just stats. It’s about representation. More games on major platforms = more kids watching women as stars. That’s culture in action. That means future women in sports feel like they belong—from locker rooms to TV screens.
