Caitlin Clark is a budding young star in the Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA), fresh off an outstanding college career. A talented young woman, Clark is bringing much-needed publicity to the beleaguered enterprise, which was founded only in 1996 and played its first game one year later. Since its inception, the league has never turned an overall profit. Revenue for 2023 was estimated at between $180-$200 million. Compare that to the $10 billion (2022) for its male counterpart, the National Basketball Association.
If not for “wokeness,” it’s likely the WNBA would not exist.
This explains why WNBA compensation is low compared to almost any other professional team sport. Players earn well under $100,000 annually. Caitlin Clark’s base salary is only $76,000. However, for a chosen few like Clark, there are high-paying contracts from clothing endorsements for shoes and other apparel. She is only one of several WNBA players to merit such contracts. Clark has generated a massive amount of public interest in a flailing venture.
By succeeding, Clark has been on the receiving end of sheer hatred. Not just because she is successful but because she is a white woman succeeding in a predominantly black league. There have already been incidents where other players have tried to physically hurt her on the floor.
Caitlin Clark. YouTube screen grab.
For example, in a June 1 game between the Indiana Fever and the Chicago Sky, Chicago’s Chennedy Carter scored a basket late in the third quarter. As Clark’s team was inbounding the ball, Carter left the player she was guarding, ran up to Clark, and knocked her to the ground while seemingly calling her a bitch. Carter drew a well-deserved foul. When subsequently asked about the incident, Clark graciously responded, “Yeah, that’s just not a basketball play. But you know, I’ve gotta play through it; that’s what basketball is about at this level.”
When asked about her attack on Clark after the game, Carter responded, “I ain’t answering any Caitlin Clark questions.”
Apparently, under the unwritten WNBA DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) rules, white players are not allowed to outshine black league members.
Sports commentator Dylan Gwinn observed:
Clark is correct that Carter’s hit was not a basketball play. She’s wrong to say that the hit is somehow representative of basketball “at this level.” No, unprovoked assault is not a part of basketball in the WNBA, NBA, or any other level of basketball. Clark has been repeatedly victimized by hard fouls throughout the initial ten games of her professional career. The fact that the WNBA allows their biggest star to be viciously hit is beyond embarrassing. They should be motivated by the fact that all the newfound interest in their extremely bad league disappears if Clark is hurt.
Carter has a long history of behavioral issues on and off the court that should have precluded her from continuing in the league, especially after this latest incident:
2020—Carter was drafted number four by the Atlanta Dream but suspended and traded in her second year after threatening a teammate who criticized her for failing to cheer on her teammates.
2021—Carter played 24 games for the Los Angeles Sparks before being benched for conduct issues and released in the offseason.
2023—Carter was forced to play the season in Turkey where she subsequently signed with the Chicago Sky for the 2024 season.
2024—Assaulted Caitlin Clark during the June 1 game. Surprisingly the WNBA did nothing about Carter’s assault.
What is most disturbing is that in, her first game appearance on June 4 following the Clark incident, Carter received a standing ovation in Chicago, a dying black city.
Caitlin Clark knows what to expect from players with a thug mentally, which could be why she commented that “this is what is expected at this level of play.”
Former WNBA player Sheryl Swoopes, who is black, is a strong Clark critic whose animus toward Clark may well be shaded by jealousy. Earlier this year, Clark broke the NCAA women’s career scoring record on February 15, leading Iowa to a third-place national finish in the yearly tournament. She also broke Swoopes’s 1993 record for scoring in tournament play when she played for Texas Tech, receiving only 177 points to Clark’s 191.
Could a wounded ego explain why Swoopes erroneously claimed that Clark had an extra year of eligibility and took as many as 40 shots per game, both prejudicially wrong claims? There was no extra year and Clark had taken half the shots per game claimed by Swoopes.
Many in and out of basketball said Swoopes comments were racist. Swoopes, however, contends that blacks cannot be racist. In Swoopes case, she is anti-white. Defending her racism, Swoopes responded:
“For people to come at me and say that I made those comments because I’m a racist. First of all, black people can’t be racist, but that’s the furthest thing from my mind… I grew up in a very small Texas town — predominantly white. My best childhood friend is white. Went to a predominantly white college. Won a National Championship and pretty much everyone on the team was white. We’re sisters to this day. That’s not part of my DNA,” she added.
Doesn’t that sound like “some of my best friends are black?” The truth is that anyone can be a racist if they focus on skin color before everything else.
There are other racist critics who seem annoyed that a white basketball player is successfully breaking black court records. This includes racist sports commentator Jemele Hill complaining about Clark’s excessive coverage and black leftist sports columnist Mike Freeman writing at USA Today that black WNBA players are being discriminated against for signature shoe deals.
Since we live in strange times, perhaps the oddest part of this story is that of Charles Barkley and LeBron James coming to Clark’s defense.
Despite having issues with Charles Barkley and LeBron James over other comments they’ve made, on this point they seem to understand that color is irrelevant. All that matters is whether you can play.
Not all, but too many black WNBA women are not only biased but are also completely ignorant about how a business operates, including the business of women’s basketball. Success in the free market is based on satisfying the desires of the consumers. In the entertainment industry, which includes professional sports, you must market a product that the public wants to see. The public expresses its approval or disapproval by buying tickets and related apparel. It is only natural that manufacturers wishing to sell more of their products will seek out athletes whom the public favors.
Caitlin Clark created record-breaking college basketball ratings and is selling tickets in the struggling WNBA. She is disciplined, heterosexual, and professional, refusing to get down in the gutter with her detractors. Most sports shoes and apparel manufacturers would prefer a successful and mature woman, no matter her skin color. If Clark continues to bring viewers and fans, eventually the profitable business will reward even the less prominent players.
The ignorance of some black WNBA players appears to be a large part of the reason why the league remains unprofitable after 30 years. It’s almost as if they prefer failure on their terms versus success as a market-based venture. What will happen when “white money” subsidizing their failed WNBA venture watches how Caitlin Clark’s success has been treated and says, “I have had enough”?
Comments are closed.