Caitlin Clark has become the WNBA’s most valuable commercial asset, driving the league’s growth on multiple fronts. Her arrival has led to a significant increase in television audiences, game attendance, media rights deals, sponsorships, and franchise valuations. This immediate impact has sparked the interest of investors willing to invest millions in teams.
Clark has contributed much more than highlight plays. His presence has injected hope into the league, generating a loyal fan base that follows him since his college days.
The WNBA’s main goal should be to convert these new fans into league-wide followers, not just of a specific player or team. The key lies in capitalizing on this opportunity, showcasing the high level of play offered night after night.
The WNBA has received a boost similar to the one golf experienced with the arrival of Tiger Woods. Now, the league must focus on capitalizing on this moment.
However, recent statements suggest a possible complacency on the part of the league. A conversation between WNBA commissioner Cathy Engelbert and Minnesota star Napheesa Collier has generated controversy.
The central theme was the contracts of the rookies, which, with an approximate value of $75,000 annually, seem to undervalue talents like Clark, Angel Reese, and Paige Bueckers, who also attract a considerable audience. Collier recounted that, when asked how this situation was planned to be solved, Engelbert responded that Clark should be grateful for generating $16 million off the court thanks to the platform offered by the WNBA, and that the players should be grateful for the media rights agreement that the commissioner had achieved.
Collier also addressed other topics, such as the quality of refereeing and the fines imposed by the league to silence criticism. Although these points are valid, the statements about Clark turned out to be especially controversial.
Clark’s fans were already showing some concern about the treatment the player was receiving in the WNBA, and these statements only confirmed their fears. The hard fouls, the derogatory comments, and the critical media coverage have generated a tense atmosphere.
While Clark hasn’t complained publicly, her fans perceive that she isn’t entirely welcome in the league. The commissioner’s words, suggesting that Clark should be grateful, only reinforce this perception and seem outdated.
It’s important to remember that Clark already had national sponsorship campaigns while in college, and that, in her third year, she was more popular than any WNBA player. Her commercial success is undeniable.
It is incomprehensible that the WNBA commissioner expresses an opinion on who should be grateful to whom, and that she also does so in an unprofessional manner. It is the league that should be grateful to Clark for the boost she has given to the business.
In response to Collier’s statements, Engelbert stated that she was “heartbroken” by the way the conversation had been characterized, but did not deny what was said nor address the main issue.
The worst thing that could happen for the future of the WNBA is that new fans feel that the league not only doesn’t appreciate their favorite player, but also treats her with hostility. This would only harm the growth of the sport.
