A final note on the WNBA marketing thing:

One of my concerns is that the issue of orientation seems to be lurking around this thing, and not in a good way. I don't mind that the WNBA wants to market players' personalities, but it does bother me when it will only promote (those who appear to be) cute straight women.

Sue Wicks told the Village Voice last year, "I can't say how many players are gay, but it would be easier to count the straight ones." Even if she was exaggerating, it's certainly true that the WNBA has lots of lesbian players and fans.

And the WNBA still seems terrified to acknowledge this. Wicks herself was the best example of the problem -- she was one of the best and most popular players in the biggest market in sports, and yet, from a commercial standpoint, she was practically invisible.

(Sue admitted beying annoyed about this, and she tried to convince the league to change its ways. For the most part, she stayed behind the scenes: after she came out, she got tons of interview requests from reporters wanting to cover a controversy, but Sue usually turned them down. Some of the New York fans, however, refused to remain quiet, and thus the Lesbians for Liberty thing last year and the resulting Sports Illustrated press.)

The conventional wisdom is that if the WNBA ever acknowledged (much less celebrated) the lesbian players, coaches, and fans, it would ruin the league's chances of appealing to mainstream America. I respond: the people who are really put off by lesbians are never gonna watch the WNBA anyway.

Plus, sometimes you gotta lead.