Here’s a comprehensive deep dive into Indiana Fever star Sophie Cunningham’s recent, outspoken reaction to the WNBA’s announcement of expansion to Detroit and Cleveland—an analysis that explores her motivations, the ensuing backlash, and what this moment reveals about the growth trajectory and culture of women’s pro basketball today.
Earlier this week, the WNBA officially revealed plans to add three new franchises by 2030, including Cleveland (scheduled for 2028), Detroit (2029), and Philadelphia (2030). These three will follow Toronto and Portland, which are set to debut in 2026, and the Golden State Valkyries, who began play in May 2025 apnews.com+15reuters.com+15people.com+15. WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert described the expansion as a response to unprecedented demand for women’s basketball espn.com+6reuters.com+6nypost.com+6.
At a shootaround before the Fever’s Commissioner’s Cup championship game on July 1, veteran guard Sophie Cunningham—who joined Indiana this season via trade—did what many athletes dread: she publicly questioned the league’s choice of locations, expressing skepticism about Detroit and Cleveland as viable expansion markets. Cunningham emphasized that players should have a bigger voice in where the league expands, and suggested Miami, Nashville, and Kansas City as more promising contenders nypost.com+6reuters.com+6espn.com+6.
She clearly stated: “I don’t know how excited people are to be going to Detroit or [Cleveland].” That drew immediate backlash from officials in both cities—and sparked a broader conversation among fans and former players.
Detroit, a city with WNBA history through the Detroit Shock—which won titles and drew massive crowds—was quick to defend itself, posting: “Detroit is a sports town. We’re sure we’ll see the same excitement for the WNBA returning,” and highlighting top-five attendance and a record 22,076 fans for Game 3 of the 2003 WNBA Finals reuters.com+15people.com+15washingtonpost.com+15. Cleveland’s official account pointed to Fever superstar Caitlin Clark, who praised the city after the 2024 NCAA Final Four, noting that “your teammate doesn’t seem to think Cleveland is too bad” en.wikipedia.org+8the-sun.com+8power1051.iheart.com+8.
The AP, ESPN, Reuters, Washington Post, and People all covered Cunningham’s remarks and the swift city responses apnews.com+3people.com+3nbcmiami.com+3. Even WNBA icon Lisa Leslie weighed in, calling for players to receive more guidance on public messaging and implying that Cunningham’s comments reflected a knowledge gap about the league’s history in those cities wfmj.com+9si.com+9washingtonpost.com+9.
What’s striking is that Cunningham didn’t mince words: she questioned both the fan enthusiasm and the timing of expansion, wondering if the pace was too fast the-sun.com+6espn.com+6apnews.com+6. She specifically said Miami “would have been a great one, everybody loves sports,” with Nashville and Kansas City offering great arenas and markets apnews.com+7people.com+7the-sun.com+7.
In the immediate aftermath, social media buzzed. On r/wnba, a Reddit user noted “Some decent points mixed in with some unnecessary shade lol,” while others criticized Cunningham for trashing cities without justification reddit.com+1reddit.com+1. Opinions were split—some saw her as speaking truth to power, others as crossing a line. The r/indianafever subreddit was less kind; one commenter said, “Trashing other people’s cities is just really rude,” and another described the comments as “tone deaf.” reddit.com+1people.com+1.
Let’s walk through what this all means—for Cunningham, the WNBA, and its national growth.
Sophie Cunningham’s reputation underwent a significant shift this season. No longer just a role player from her 2019–24 tenure in Phoenix, she’s emerged as both a physical enforcer and a staunch teammate under coach Stephanie White in Indiana. Her viral clash in defense of Caitlin Clark, and the subsequent rise in social media followers and jersey sales, helped recast her as a prominent voice in the league reuters.com+4the-sun.com+4youtube.com+4en.wikipedia.org+1espn.com+1. Now at 28, Cunningham appears poised to influence off-court discourse in addition to her on-court presence.
Her candid critique of expansion plans arguably reflects a player-first mindset—an insistence on ensuring that the venues align with athlete preferences, not just franchise dollars or market size. She said, “You want to listen to your players… Where are they going to get excited to play and draw fans?” emphasizing the role of athlete morale and sustainability in long-term growth reddit.com+15reuters.com+15people.com+15.
She also brought up concerns about overexpansion—echoing long-held worries in professional sports about diluting talent or hastily introducing franchises without strong ecosystem support: “You want to make sure that you’re not expanding our league too fast” apnews.com+1si.com+1. While fans often call for more teams, Cunningham reminds that sustainable expansion requires strong ownership, media infrastructure, and engaged fanbases.
From Cleveland’s perspective, the city leaned on both emotion and history in its rebuke. By highlighting Caitlin Clark’s enthusiastic comments about the fan energy at the Final Four, the city underlined that national-level sports conversation matters. Their X account reinforced that Cleveland is “proud to have been chosen to host a WNBA team” and that “any player who comes here will feel that legendary passion” abcnews.go.com+7apnews.com+7washingtonpost.com+7. They framed the expansion choice as well-deserved and rooted in civic pride.
Detroit’s response was even more rooted in cold, hard stats: the Shock’s top-five WNBA attendance for five straight seasons, the record Final‑Four crowd, and 775,000 attendees for the 2024 NFL Draft—all underscored that past success and passionate support aren’t easily erased apnews.com+1abcnews.go.com+1espn.com+5people.com+5washingtonpost.com+5. Both cities used official channels to signal that Cunningham’s doubts were misplaced—or at least premature.
WNBA legend Lisa Leslie’s comment, “Uggghhhh! I need to call a meeting with all the players of the @wnba,” was sharper than most; she conveyed frustration and perhaps a call for crisis management training si.com. That moment encapsulates the tension: players are becoming not just athletes but public advocates, and with that platform comes greater scrutiny.
But this isn’t just drama—it connects to broader trends and pressures facing the WNBA right now:
The league’s expansion fever is real. The Valkyries debuted in 2025, followed by Toronto and Portland in 2026. Now, three additional franchises will bring the total to 18 teams by 2030 en.wikipedia.org+11reuters.com+11en.wikipedia.org+11. Fees have soared—from $50 million for Golden State to $115/$125 million for Toronto and Portland, and a staggering $250 million for Cleveland, Detroit, and Philadelphia en.wikipedia.org. Financially, the league is thriving—but investors expect returns.
WNBA backers point to NBA synergy as a key benefit: all new expansion teams are tethered to NBA franchises with shared arenas—a model believed to reduce costs and boost marketing . Detroit’s team, owned by Pistons owner Tom Gores and partners including Chris Webber and Grant Hill, will play at Little Caesars Arena en.wikipedia.org+1en.wikipedia.org+1. Similar setups are planned for Cleveland and Philadelphia.
Critics worry about talent dilution—adding multiple teams reduces the pool of elite players, potentially lowering on-court quality. Cunningham’s comment that expansion might be “too fast” taps into this unease—especially with calls for more roster spots to accommodate rising interest .
More broadly, this moment symbolizes a shift: WNBA players, empowered by rising visibility (thanks to stars like Clark), feel emboldened to question league direction. That’s healthy when it’s about advocating for player welfare. But it demands maturity in messaging—Cunningham’s misstep lies not in her critique per se, but in how it was communicated, touching raw civic nerves.
What might happen next? Cunningham could face internal pressure—public rebuttals from cities and iconic voices like Leslie amount to a PR teachable moment. The Fever and league may consider media training for athletes who increasingly serve as public ambassadors. Conversely, if Cunningham and her peers persist in having their voices heard, the WNBA will need to balance transparency with diplomacy—and ensure players are prepared for the weight of public judgment.
For Detroit and Cleveland, this exchange has proven timely. They’ve reaffirmed their historical credentials and readiness for pro women’s basketball. Civic pride has been revived, and local excitement will likely increase with every press cycle.
In the bigger picture, this episode illustrates that expansion isn’t just about franchise fees and arenas—it’s a cultural process, involving players, fans, local governments, media, and civic identity. For Southern cities like Miami, Nashville, or Kansas City—Cunningham’s preferred alternatives—it’s a reminder that expansion interest is intense, but without the same built-in infrastructure or immediate social cache.
In conclusion, Sophie Cunningham’s candor has surfaced deeper questions: Who gets to decide where the WNBA grows? How do cities without recent pro women’s basketball histories win hearts? And how do players, now celebrity-level figures in Clark, Leslie, and Cunningham, balance authenticity with public relations responsibility? It’s a debate that signifies not disruption, but evolution—women’s pro basketball is expanding in every sense: geographically, financially, athletically—and players are determined to be at the center of its narrative.
Whatever the outcome, this moment marks a turning point. Expansion is no longer a league directive from above—it’s a national conversation involving cities, investors, athletes, and fans. Cunningham may have stirred the pot—but when women’s basketball plays the expansion game, the voices on and off the court are all part of the playbook.
