For the first time since December, the WNBA’s labor relations committee, team owners, league representatives, and players met in person to move the CBA talks forward. The three-hour meeting did not include an exchange of proposals, with both sides instead focusing on explaining the thinking behind their most recent proposals.

As you would expect, that decision drew clear disappointment from the players’ side. “They volunteered that they did not have a proposal prepared at the top of the meeting,” WNBPA president Nneka Ogwumike told Front Office Sports. “That kind of set the tone for the conversation because we were hoping to hear otherwise.”

Interestingly, ESPN managed to obtain details from the information presented to players during the meeting, offering a summary of the WNBA’s current stance. Reporter Ramona Shelburne shared those details on social media, and one specific point from her post quickly became a major source of backlash for the WNBA.

The WNBA framed its pitch around the idea of significantly boosting player pay in line with the league’s business growth and long-term financial health. The proposal included a $1.3 million max salary and an average salary of $530,000. Those figures were tied to a revenue model that deducts a percentage from combined team and league earnings.

The revenue model ultimately became the breaking point, leading the union to reject the proposal outright. Instead, the players countered with a $10.5 million team salary cap, a significant jump from the $5 million cap currently being offered by the WNBA, along with a revenue-sharing structure that would allocate 30 percent of gross revenue to players.

Of course, the league chose not to formally counter the proposal during the meeting or in the six weeks since the counter was made, labeling it highly unrealistic. However, those who attended in person or via Zoom were informed that the league would begin drafting a new proposal after reviewing the union’s feedback.

That said, one detail from the post shared by Ramona Shelburne quickly overshadowed the rest. Among the list of improvements promised in the last WNBA CBA offer, one line read “Free WNBA League Pass,” and it immediately caught the attention of fans. Fans seized on the detail, and social media was soon flooded with jokes.

Top Stories

PGA Tour Pro Loses His Cool After Being Denied Entry Into WM Phoenix Open Field

Giannis Antetokounmpo All but Confirms Warriors Trade With 6-Figure Decision: NBA Rumor

Patrick Cantlay & Scottie Scheffler Disapprove of Controversial Change Happening to PGA Tour Courses

U.S. Senator Announces Bad News For NFL Fans After Donald Trump’s Ruling on ESPN’s Billion-Dollar Takeover

Brooks Koepka’s Unscathed Return Upsets Viktor Hovland as PGA Tour Pro Refuses to Hold Back

Ohio High School Football Coach Dies at 90, After Serving Community for 32 Years

Here are some of the reactions that quickly took over social media.

Free League Pass Offer Sparks Backlash Against WNBA

“Players currently don’t even get free League Pass 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭,” one fan wrote, capturing the disbelief online. Journalist Tyler DeLuca echoed the sentiment, adding, “I’m sorry but ‘free WNBA League Pass’ at the end did make me laugh. I was so caught off guard.” These reactions felt completely justified.

Since the WNBA launched in 1997, women athletes have consistently fought for their rights. The league was built with activism at its core, and that spirit still defines it today. As players continue to push for what they believe is fair, it is striking that something as basic as league pass access was not included for them under the current CBA.

As one fan bluntly put it, “No way in hell this says free league pass as a CBA improvement 😭😭😭😭 wtf.” Another added, “Imagine sitting through a three-hour negotiation just to get to ‘free league pass.’” And it is a fair point. A league pass subscription can hardly be framed as a meaningful CBA improvement. If anything, it highlights how low the baseline still is, especially when there are other benefits being introduced now that feel like they should have existed from day one.

For example, the league is only now offering complimentary All-Star Game tickets to all players in its latest WNBA CBA proposal, which naturally raises the question of why this was not standard from day one. The same applies to the league now making it mandatory for teams to have physicians, trainers, strength and conditioning staff, physical therapists, and nutritionists, requirements that many believe should have been in place years ago.

But there were positives in the offer as well, with salaries representing the most significant improvement. The current supermax contract of $250,000 would jump to a $1.1 million base salary, a 4.4x increase, with the potential to rise close to a $1.3 million paycheck, which would be a 5.2x increase.

Average salaries would also see major growth, moving from $120,000 to $465,000, nearly a 3.9x jump, with the possibility of reaching $540,000, a 4.5x increase. Is it a fair rise? That depends on perspective, because when stacked against the league’s own projected salary estimates for 2031, the increases do not look as generous as they might initially seem.

One fan rightfully says, “The owners are being magicians, trying to get everyone to focus on the pay increase while ignoring how it increases. Their chart shows a projected 5% increase in 5 years. Why? Because the salary cap would not be based on gross revenue, so they can control the salary increases…”

According to the league’s projections, a $1.1 million supermax base salary in 2026 is expected to rise to $1.575 million by 2031, a 1.43x increase on a yearly basis. The maximum salary, projected at $1.3 million in 2026, could grow to between $1.87 million and $2.4 million by 2031, representing a 1.44x to 1.85x increase on a yearly basis, depending on revenue sharing.

Average salaries are also projected to rise from $465,000 to $655,000, a 1.41x increase, while the upper range could grow from $540,000 to between $780,000 and $1 million, translating to a 1.44x to 1.85x jump.

When broken down on a year-to-year basis, those increases do not look especially dramatic, especially given how much depends on the revenue-sharing framework. Under the current proposal, players would receive 70 percent of net revenue, with that figure expected to climb gradually from 65 percent to 80 percent across the length of the agreement.

Of course, the union has rejected the deal, citing concerns over a confusing revenue-sharing structure. That leaves a lingering question about whether the league can meaningfully improve upon the WNBA CBA offer it has already put forward. For now, only time will tell how these negotiations ultimately unfold.