Something is rotten in the WNBA — as the Sophie Cunningham 'point' situation shows how the league is its own worst enemy

The WNBA and its associated entities continue to be their own worst enemies when it comes to maximizing their product.

Any time a good wave comes barreling in, they’d rather watch it crash on the shore than get on and ride it.

It’s been obvious since sensation Caitlin Clark was drafted first overrall by the Indiana Fever in 2024.

While there’s a never-ending push to help athletes make more money and grow the league into a sustainable enterprise with a large footprint, the WNBA and the player’s union seem most adept at stifling a good moment.

The latest is the one around the Indiana Fever’s Sophie Cunningham that has launched a thousand memes and imitators.

The image of 29-year-old Cunningham — showing her pointing at opponent DeWanna Bonner after a scuffle in a late June match-up between the Fever and the Phoenix Mercury — went crazy viral.

The intense gesture lasted 22 seconds but, weeks later, it is still very much ensconced in the ether.

STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE LATEST NEWS BY SUBSCRIBING TO MORNING REPORT NEWSLETTER

Cunningham has posed with young fans eager to reenact the point. When she visited a Special Olympics basketball team, one of the players excitedly mimicked the Fever shooting guard, gushing, “I like when you do this!”

It’s been a boon to Brand Cunningham, which has been soaring since the veteran emerged as the Fever team enforcer last year, when she handed down a hard foul against Jacy Sheldon.

She was rightfully ejected for the borderline assault — but Cunningham’s stock both on and off the court has never been hotter.

Then came the point, which has pushed her to new heights. She was a ring girl at the July 11 UFC fight between Paddy Pimblett and Benoit Saint Denis, and writer Chuck Klosterman even predicted that she’d run for Vice President of the US before 2050.

Too bad the player’s union is throwing cold water on her moment — which is also the league’s moment. They say the viral image cannot be licensed by their business partners.

According to journalist Darren Rovell, the union reportedly called it “derogatory.”

In what world is a prolonged, silent point derogatory? Maybe if she added a crotch grab at the end, one could make that argument. But this was cheeky and antagonistic.

When you organically have an image that not only resonates with a mainstream audience, but also captures the zeitgeist, you seize on it.

However, the WNBPA policy “is not to create any apparel that features a confrontation between members of the union.” As Julia Roberts’ “Pretty Woman” character said: “Big mistake.”

Cunningham can create her own merch so long as there is no WNBA or team logo on it — and I hope she does.

For a league that is constantly touting its physical toughness, they’re pretty damn soft. The people making the decisions are far too into feelings when they should be pushing to be bigger and better.

They’re constantly sniffing for micro-aggressions or catering the progressive politics that the league has long embraced, allowing it to overshadow the actual product.

Just last week, Toronto coach Sandy Brondello referred to Angel Reese as a “protected species,” which is a common phrase in Bordello’s native Australia.

Still, the league injected a racial element onto the label, and Brondello was handed down a one-game suspension.

And then there was the unforced error committed by WNBA commissioner Cathy Engelbert, who agreed to sit down with legendary interviewer Dan Patrick a few weeks ago. There was expectation that she would be asked about a June 24 incident when the Mercury’s Alyssa Thomas put her fist on Clark’s throat. No foul was called at the time, but Thomas was later suspended for a game after public outrage.

It was a particularly fraught moment for the league. Even a group of GOP lawmakers sent Engelbert a letter about protecting Clark — which was just as ridiculous.

Two hours after the agreed meeting with Patrick, league public relations said it would be a no-go.

“I thought this was going to be a good thing for the WNBA because people still want answers here … ” Patrick said. “And yes, would the questions be tough? Yes, yes. And I’m sure that had something to do with [Engelbert canceling]… So, it’s just disappointing.”

It was classic backwards WNBA.

For years, they have been clamoring for the spotlight. They want the money. They want the viewership.

Finally, people are tuning in and becoming invested. But the league doesn’t want the scrutiny that comes with it. Nor do they want to embrace all the opportunities if it means splitting from their bizarre fealty to equity.

Who suffers? The players they claim to want to elevate.