Players fight for a shrinking share as revenue talks fracture. A star guard unleashes blunt truths on the WNBA's financial priorities.
With the clock winding down on the WNBA’s collective bargaining agreement, Minnesota Lynx guard Courtney Williams has publicly voiced what many players have privately feared — that the league’s financial priorities in negotiations leave players fighting for a shrinking share of the game they power.
The current CBA is set to expire Jan. 9, and while the league and the Women’s National Basketball Players Association have agreed to multiple extensions to keep talks alive, negotiations remain strained. The WNBPA recently escalated matters by authorizing its executive committee to call a strike if necessary, a historic move in a league that has never experienced a work stoppage.
Against that backdrop, Williams’ comments cut directly to the heart of the dispute: revenue sharing.
Speaking this week on a livestream she co-hosts with teammate Natisha Hiedeman, Williams described the league’s proposal as fundamentally flawed and emblematic of why talks have stalled.
Williams said she was stunned by what she characterized as the league’s approach to allocating revenue.
“They want to pay themselves first, and whatever is left, they want us to split that with them, which leaves less than 15 percent of revenue for the players,” Williams said.
Her remarks align with reporting that the league has proposed a revenue-sharing model that would keep players below a 15 percent share — far short of the roughly 30 percent the WNBPA has pushed for. The gap has become one of the central fault lines in negotiations, even as the league has proposed dramatic salary increases, including maximum salaries exceeding $1 million.
For Williams, headline salary figures miss the broader issue of financial equity and power.
She pointed to the disparity between player compensation and coaching salaries, even at the top of the league.
“They still want to pay coaches more than they pay an A’ja Wilson or a Napheesa Collier,” Williams said. “They want to pay the coaches and all their expenses first.”
The comments resonated quickly across the league, particularly given the stature of the players Williams referenced. Napheesa Collier is the centerpiece of the Minnesota Lynx and one of the most accomplished players in the league, while A’ja Wilson remains the defining superstar of the modern WNBA era. That either could trail head coaches financially, even under a new CBA with higher maximum salaries, underscores why revenue share — not just base pay — has become a rallying point for players.
The league has forcefully pushed back on the union’s framing. In a statement responding to the strike authorization vote, the WNBA said it “strongly disagree[s]” with how the WNBPA has characterized negotiations and emphasized that it has proposed “significant immediate salary increases” along with a new uncapped revenue-sharing model tied to growth.
Still, Williams’ comments reflect a deeper mistrust that has been building throughout the process. Players have repeatedly argued that without a meaningful share of overall revenue, individual salary bumps fail to address the long-term imbalance between labor and ownership — especially as the league expands and visibility surges.
The dispute is already affecting league operations. Golden State completed its expansion draft in December, but incoming teams Portland Fire and Toronto Tempo remain in limbo, unable to plan their own expansion draft until a new CBA is finalized. The uncertainty threatens to complicate preparations for the 2026 season, even as the league prepares to celebrate its 30th year.
The WNBA has insisted it remains committed to reaching a deal quickly and delivering a full season, and NBA commissioner Adam Silver has said he is prepared to assist negotiations if necessary. Players, however, appear increasingly unconvinced that time alone will bridge the gap.
Williams’ willingness to speak so candidly reflects a shift in tone that mirrors the union’s strike authorization vote — less guarded, more confrontational, and rooted in a belief that leverage must be applied to force structural change.
With fewer than three weeks remaining before the current agreement expires, her words crystallize the central question facing the league: whether the WNBA can resolve its labor dispute in a way that satisfies players’ demands for equity without derailing a moment of unprecedented growth.
For now, the distance between the sides remains wide — and voices like Williams’ ensure that the stakes, and the scrutiny, will only intensify as the deadline approaches.
