Why is it allowed?

Deregulation.

To be honest, I am still trying to understand all the money flowing into commercialized sports.

I do not understand it. Or why it occurs.

It's simply entertainment, that's it. No different than events in the Roman colleseums.

We enjoy watching our gladiators - the elitest of athletes - doing things we only wish we could do or used to be able to do.

And we're entertained. And for that, billions of us will spend our discretionary time and/or money to witness these contests as they occur, sharing in a communal experience with those there in attendance and those who aren't through electronic media.

For instance I looked for a team to go see games and root for.

For the majority of Americans that isn't a realistic possibility, even for millions who do live in cities with teams. Generations have been born and died without ever attending a game of the teams they were obsessed with their entire lives.

That's why viewership is one of the most important metrics of any professional sport's popularity and profitability. And today's paradigm acknowledges the importance of being on non-traditional media as well as terrestrial tv and radio. Again, more possible streams of income than ever before.

36

I spent 20 minutes composing my post and watching tonight's play-in game, so I didn't see your post with the same information. I wasn't intentionally trying to be redundant.

Who actually watches the WNBA?

"The finals averaged 728,000 viewers across ABC and ESPN..."

2.45 million watched the WNBA draft two nights ago where Clark was chosen first. 18.9 million watched Caitlin play with her team in the NCAA Championship game two weeks ago. I think that interest in her has been both confirmed and substantiated and is only growing at the moment.

Hence, this thread.

Or LeBron.

Just off the top of my head, I'd say the W (that's what the hip kids are calling it... /s) commish underestimated the next media rights deal by magnitudes of 100s of Million$. This story is full of viewership numbers which have never been reached by any female athlete and her sport that are higher than every sport other than the NFL.

But the absolute proof that Caitlin will usher in a new era of womens basketball viewers from all key demographics and one very special demographic - the NBA can't match and would like more eyes from to view its games too - : Women 18 - 54.

And with bettors interested in everything she does (there's a bet site ad with Caitlin prop odds for her entire first season's totals shown in the story), bet sites themselves will likely sign onto W partnerships as the increasing popularity of the league will add to their own bottom lines with increased nightly handles.

And because of - and fueled by - betting, men basketball fans are definitely planning to tune in and watch this basketball savant move to the next level and then find themselves hooked by the competitiveness and talent of all the W's best players. Above, some were asking why the NBA is more lucrative than the W. It's percentage growth in value from here on out will dwarf the NBA's - maybe until a day comes where they become nearly equivalent?

The money is already being spent and the numbers of eyeballs wanting to see Caitlin keep on increasing. I live in Indianapolis. People here already realize that Elvis is entering the building and she plays a game that everyone wants to see, watch and enjoy. That last word is key: Everyone seems to enjoy watching Caitlin do her thing, and that is a power few individuals engender on the scale that she does. I'm calling it right now. Caitlin Clark will be the first female athlete billionaire - and it won't take her as long to get there as it did Tiger Woods.(Thanks inflation!)

OT

"We heard the speaker mention that we shouldn't be rushing this process. Members, we have had since 1864 to repeal this abhorrent law," ...

Talk about a mic drop line that instantly puts this entire absurdity into proper context.

#2

Just like Sammy Sosa used to say, "Keep it continue(!)" state GOPs everywhere.

Celebrations for the removal of womens' civil rights - through the use of an 1864 law written before women HAD any codified civil rights - is sure to be a attractive look to those women being affected now and those women who'll be impacted in the future should the GOP be empowered by voters to do so.

The league said Porter, who spent part of his time in the NBA and part of it in its developmental G League, privately told a sports bettor he was injured, removed himself from a game to control prop bets on his own play, and placed his own wagers on NBA games.

According to the results of a league investigation, Porter, 24, gave a confidential tip about his health to a person he knew to be a sports bettor before the Raptors' game on March 20 against the Sacramento Kings. A third individual, connected to both Porter and the original recipient of Porter's health information, placed an $80,000 parlay bet to win $1.1 million, a wager that hinged on the prediction that Porter would underperform against the Kings.

Gambling has now been mainstreamed by American professional sports in the way it's been in Europe for decades. But incidents like this seem inevitable in our have-it-all-now culture. And heaven forbid a prominent athlete becomes indebted in legal gambling to the point Porter reached above.

It's really going to be up to the gaming industry to be the vigilance police as they were in this incident. If it hadn't been for the open publication of betting results (the day's total payouts on the Porter parley bets were the highest on any parley offered that night) no one but for the book and the bet placer would have known what was happening.

the Don't Doctrine just isn't working.

Did you bother to actually READ the statements you're commenting on? They're not about Biden whatsoever. They're about the fact that if Putin isn't deterred in Ukraine, then he'll launch attacks on other countries - likely NATO members too - and/or other anti-America countries won't fear US reprisals should they attack other nations in their spheres of influence such as China trying to retake Taiwan.

This is more about what happens AFTER a nation ignores any admonition by the US to NOT act. It's showing them why they shouldn't have acted in the first place by making the cost of their hubris unsustainable.

The problem today in the US is Putin Republicans stopping Congress from following up on the very means to defeat such threats once they manifest themselves.

OT

#16

All American major sports players associations have implimented required fiscal educational programs and employ personnel to assist and keep players informed on managing their income as do their agents, should they retain one.

But again, some players will ignore sound advice and end up broke or in debt after making millions during their careers, especially shorter careers.

#12

I can't think of a fairer way to divide revenue between employees and employers than a negotiated 50/50 split. There have been years where revenue targets were not reached and the players were required to giveback money to the owners that was placed in escrow and work under a lowered salary cap.

Ten years ago, NBA players received 57% of defined revenues. In the last CBA, players actually took a haircut - though it hardly seems like it as today's top players will make $50+ million per season.

13

That was in reference to the Indiana Pacers. Herb Simon - his brother Mel is now deceased - also owns the Indiana Fever.

#11

I don't know any other way for it to be read/understood. He's saying "Maybe the NBA's problem is that they pay too much."

The NBA pays 50% of it's defined revenues in salaries to its players as negotiated in the CBA. Franchise values continue to rise as do overall revenues making the owners even more wealthy than the billionaires they all happen to be.

In 1983, Mel and Herb Simon - shopping center magnates - paid $10.5 million. Today the team is rated by Forbes to be worth right at $3 billion - though always gauge current values to whatever was paid when the last francise was sold. Obviously, debt (if any), player valuations, arena contracts/maintenance costs, andlocal broadcasting contracts impact current values among other factors.

I wonder where the buyers are coming from?

Trump supporters I'd guess based on all the reporting in recent days of them pledging to continue supporting TS until the election. Many individual investors believe that they're simply using TS stock to give more money to DJT than campaign donation laws allow. Some are in it on the delusion that it will be profitable, but there are many more who appear to know exactly what they're doing by purchasing TS stock - Sticking it to Trump detractors.

#8

See post 4. It's simple economics, not gender bias.

And because actual operating costs between the leagues aren't as disparate as are the differences in revenues generated, currently the WNBA players make far less of an overall percentage than do NBA players. Also the calculation of what qualifies as league-wide, player shareable revenue is different as well.

As mentioned above, this is likely to change when a new CBA is negotiated after this season.

As political jokes go, it's one that managed to remind the public that (a) Trump's latest business venture is following the same failing trajectory as so many of his other business ventures; (b) Trump's tax plan is designed to benefit those with the most wealth; and (c) Biden's tax plan is rooted in the idea that millionaires and billionaires can afford to pay more, while leaving rates intact for those making under $400,000.

That's a lot of checked boxes in 21 words.

It shocks the hell out of me how major media outlets post hyperbolic articles based on incomplete information that is readily available.

For Mikhail Khodorkovsky - the longtime Putin critic who was once Russia's richest man until a clash with the Kremlin landed him 10 years in prison - it is not surprising that Russia is seeking to do everything it can to undermine the United States. "For Putin, it is absolutely natural that he should try to create the maximum number of problems for the U.S.," he said. "The task is to take the U.S. out of the game, and then destroy NATO. This doesn't mean dissolving it, but to create the feeling among people that NATO isn't defending them."

"The Americans consider that insofar as they are not directly participating in the war [in Ukraine], then any loss is not their loss," Khodorkovsky said. "This is an absolute misunderstanding."

A defeat for Ukraine, he said, "means that many will stop fearing challenging the U.S." and the costs for the United States will only increase.

One proposal submitted in February 2023 to the Foreign Ministry by the deputy head of Moscow's Institute for the Commonwealth of Independent States, which maintains close ties to Russia's security apparatus, laid out Russia's options more bluntly still.

The academic, Vladimir Zharikhin, called for Russia to "continue to facilitate the coming to power of isolationist right-wing forces in America," "enable the destabilization of Latin American countries and the rise to power of extremist forces on the far left and far right there," as well as facilitate "the restoration of European countries' sovereignty by supporting parties dissatisfied with economic pressure from the U.S."

Other points in the policy proposal, which was also provided to The Post, suggested that Moscow stoke conflict between the United States and China over Taiwan to bring Russia and China closer together, as well as "to escalate the situation in the Middle East around Israel, Iran and Syria to distract the U.S. with the problems of this region."

And for those asking why our support of Ukraine is so important when our countries are geographically so far apart, isn't the answer now rather obvious?

"We need to continue adjusting our approach to relations with unfriendly states," states the 2023 document, which was provided to The Washington Post by a European intelligence service. "It's important to create a mechanism for finding the vulnerable points of their external and internal policies with the aim of developing practical steps to weaken Russia's opponents."

The document for the first time provides official confirmation and codification of what many in the Moscow elite say has become a hybrid war against the West. Russia is seeking to subvert Western support for Ukraine and disrupt the domestic politics of the United States and European countries, through propaganda campaigns supporting isolationist and extremist policies, according to Kremlin documents previously reported on by The Post.

Using much tougher and blunter language than the public foreign policy document, the secret addendum, dated April 11, 2023, claims that the United States is leading a coalition of "unfriendly countries" aimed at weakening Russia because Moscow is "a threat to Western global hegemony." The document says the outcome of Russia's war in Ukraine will "to a great degree determine the outlines of the future world order," a clear indication that Moscow sees the result of its invasion as inextricably bound with its ability - and that of other authoritarian nations - to impose its will globally.

the DOJ dropped the investigation after smearing him for a couple years, because they had no evidence.

They have plenty of evidence - don't know where you heard that BS. Do you think Gaetz nuked McCarthy over his Ethics investigation because there was "no evidence"? It's just the opposite. There's all kinds of evidence, allegedly the problem is that key witnesses/victims don't want to give open testimony and most of those involved are either participants or have other credibility issues themselves.