The New York Liberty shocked the WNBA world when they announced the firing of head coach Sandy Brondello, just one season removed from delivering the franchise its long-awaited championship.

While the news sent immediate shockwaves, digging deeper into the days and weeks leading up to the decision reveals that there may have been subtle hints—particularly from the team’s two biggest stars, Breanna Stewart and Sabrina Ionescu—that something wasn’t quite right. Their comments, at the time overlooked or dismissed, now seem oddly telling in hindsight.

Stewart, the reigning MVP and face of the Liberty’s championship push, had always been vocal in her praise of Brondello’s leadership. Yet in her last media availability before the firing, her tone was less celebratory and more measured. She spoke about “the need for consistency” and “finding ways to align long-term vision with what’s happening on the floor.”

At the time, many assumed she was referring to the team’s adjustments heading into the offseason, but in retrospect, those comments almost sound like a subtle critique of the coaching direction. Stewart didn’t outright question Brondello, but her carefully chosen words left just enough room for interpretation.

Ionescu, the young star and emotional heartbeat of the Liberty, also made remarks that now seem significant. In a post-practice session, she emphasized that the team “had more to give” and that they were still “figuring out the identity that fits everyone best.”

On the surface, that’s not unusual player talk—every team talks about growth and chemistry. But insiders now point to those comments as signaling dissatisfaction with the system. Ionescu had her best statistical season under Brondello, but there were persistent whispers about friction regarding her role in late-game situations and the balance between her playmaking and Stewart’s dominance.

What stands out most is how both players stopped short of fully endorsing Brondello when asked directly about coaching. Normally, players in those spots will give a glowing response, praising leadership and stability, but both Stewart and Ionescu danced around those questions. Stewart redirected to talking about “player accountability,” while Ionescu leaned on “the team’s process” rather than crediting the staff.

At the time, it wasn’t flagged as unusual—but now, in the wake of Brondello’s ousting, it feels like an early crack in the foundation.

League analysts believe those subtle shifts in tone could have been an indication that the Liberty front office was already testing the waters. If your franchise stars aren’t fully backing the coach, it becomes easier to justify a shake-up.

Jonathan Kolb, the Liberty’s GM, has been outspoken about building a dynasty, not just a one-off title team, and there’s a belief that he is heavily influenced by the voices of Stewart and Ionescu. If their comments hinted at concerns, the writing may have been on the wall for Brondello long before the official announcement.

Of course, Stewart and Ionescu have not openly admitted to playing a role in Brondello’s dismissal, and it’s possible their words were misinterpreted in hindsight. Players often speak vaguely during media scrums, and sometimes comments gain new meaning only after a shocking development occurs.

Still, the timing and wording of their statements can’t be ignored. Both seemed cautious, deliberate, and slightly detached in their public remarks about the coach who had just delivered them a title.

Now the Liberty face a new challenge: navigating the narrative. If fans begin to believe their stars quietly nudged Brondello out, the team risks internal and external backlash. Winning cures everything, but if next season starts rocky under a new coach, those pre-firing comments will likely resurface, fueling speculation about behind-the-scenes power struggles

.

For now, the odd tone of Stewart’s and Ionescu’s words remain one of the most intriguing subplots of this drama. Were they simply airing normal frustrations in a competitive environment, or were they signaling to management that change was needed?

The truth may never be fully known, but in hindsight, their comments feel like puzzle pieces that only made sense once the picture was complete.