John Altavilla has some thoughts on the season and doesn't hold back on the 11 player roster:

Worst decision ever made: Look, we all have financial problems. People are out of work. Businesses and factories have closed. But the WNBA owners are supposedly in the business of running a professional league and their decision before the season to cut the rosters from 13 to 11 and not allow teams to replace injured players — unless they were cut by another team — was short-sighted, stupid and self-defeating. And that's being nice.

The decision cost good players jobs, made life impossible for the coaches and, frankly, hurt the overall quality of play because injured players were forced into action when they should have been rested.

This needs to change in the offseason.

First: The irony of a employee of a member of the news media dissing tough economic business decisions that (allegedly) adversely impact the business is not lost on me.

Second: "cost good players jobs." Name three. 'cause if they were that good, they'd have been on a roster, replacing the players who barely played (Larkins, Spencer on the Lib, for example.)

Third: "impossible for the coaches." Could we get specific here? Is coach T saying this is why the Sun didn't make the playoffs? If so, what were the imposibilities? How many of the 13 players (2 on "IR") did you play last year?

Fourth: " hurt the overall quality of play." I'm confused as to how you can say the overall quality of play has been hurt. On which court? Scoring is up, as is parity. Or, are we saying parity is bad? Or are turnovers up because players are playing so many extra minutes (you know, you can check that by looking at the numbers from last year -- I'm guessing the starters, on average, are playing similar minutes).

Fifth: "injured players were forced into action" Again, I'd love some specifics. 'Cause, with all the plethora of good players who'd lost their jobs, you'd think that the other 10 players on the roster would be pretty damn good. So why were injured players forced into action. (And, compared to past seasons, how has that been different?)

I have no doubt impact of the 11-player roster needs to be discussed, but the discussion may be simply tweaking (as in, when can you replace a player). Because John is correct: People are out of work. Businesses and factories have closed. This is about money and survival.

So, if the 11 player roster helps keep the W alive through this recession, suck it up, coaches, players, fans, reporters, or else....

Ditto with saying there will be only one assistant next year (which, I think, will probably have more impact on the game than adding 2 players who never play).

If these decisions mean the W has a future, I have to support it.

The same way I will support my Liberty, even if Blaze continues as the GM, by renewing my subscription.

'Cause tough decisions have to be made if I want to help make sure the league continues.

'sides, instead of talking about things that can't be controlled, better to talk about the things the league could do better. Things that don't depend on money as much as they depend on responsible and thoughtful thinking. And that's a looong laundry list.