For the sake of clarity, I will not pretend to be a longstanding fan of the WNBA or someone with deep knowledge about women’s basketball, pro or college. I say this in no way as a value statement, but because I don’t want to pretend I bring decades of insight and context, other than what I can offer as a sports fan and sports academic. To be honest, I’d say the same thing about pro hockey or boxing. My perspective is fairly distant, and I don’t want to be perceived as an interloper.
That said, it would be hard not to have some opinion about WNBA rookie Caitlin Clark, the recent Iowa gad who captured the national fancy during her sharpshooting run in college and being the first overall pick by the Indiana Fever in this year’s WNBA draft. As the all-time leading scorer in NCAA basketball history, Clark’s ascent came in conjunction with overall increased interested in women’s college basketball, as evidenced by a significant boost in TV ratings. Many have credited Clark for this rise, and certainly her outstanding play was part of it. How much credit is part of the increasingly dramatic and divisive storyline at a moment when women’s basketball is taking a more significant seat at the head sports table.
That tension came to a head last week when, towards the end of Indiana’s game against the Chicago Sky when Chicago guard Chennedy Carter shoved Clark to the ground on essentially a dead ball – meaning the ball wasn’t in play. Adding insult to injury, Clark’s rookie rival Angel Reese stood and cheered what was clearly a cheap shot, a move that lit up social media like a Taylor Swift sighting. Carter refused to talk about it after the game, and Clark toned it down, reminding the press she grew up playing with two brothers. But the moment was a spark that ignited an argument that was long brewing under the surface.
Here’s just a sampling of what I’ve heard since then – and in the days leading up to it, when there seemed an unusual intensity about how Caitlin Clark had played in the first three weeks of her professional career. I’ve heard people say that Caitlin Clark is only getting so much attention because she is white and isn’t nearly as good as advertised. I’ve conversely heard people say that Clark’s teammates aren’t passing her the ball because they secretly want her to fail because she’s white. I’ve heard sports media personality Stephen A. Smith get into an argument with ESPN basketball analyst Monica McNutt about whether he has ignored women’s sports for years before now pretending he’s a supporter. And I’ve heard Angel Reese publicly remind reporters that she and others are just as responsible for the growth of women’s basketball as Caitlin Clark. That’s just a sampling of the increasingly sharp elbows thrown around the concept of a player that appeared to be, not long ago, the central heroic figure at the heart of a triumphant storyline about equity and progress in sports. But as was said prophetically in the movie Anchorman, that escalated quickly.
It will take volumes and insight far more keen than mine to deconstruct this moment, one where it can be hard to decipher good intent from business strategy, where broadcasters who never mentioned a female athlete other than Serena Williams are now offering their hot takes on the WNBA and longtime supporters of women’s basketball are dealing with both the joy of recognition along with the angst of growing pains. But I’ll offer two quick thoughts. One, it is remarkable how much sports, and women’s basketball in particular, is viewed through the prism of race and gender. This says far more about us as a people than those in or around the game, most of whom are far more capable of working in a multi-racial and ethnic workplace than the outsiders looking in. Second, it’s clear that Caitlin Clark isn’t just a basketball player right now. For much of America, she’s a Rorschach Test. Meaning, a lot of folks aren’t seeing a ball player judged on her merits. They’re revealing much more about themselves independent of the WNBA or women’s hoops, which, for the record, is on quite a roll.
Of course, I may not be the most qualified to offer that judgement. As I said before, I won’t pretend to be something I’m not.
Keith Strudler is the director of the School of Communication and Media at Montclair State University. You can follow him at @KeithStrudler
The views expressed by commentators are solely those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views of this station or its management.