Lowest Paid NFL Player’s 2024 Salary Is Nearly 2X Bigger Than Caitlin Clark’s 4-Year WNBA Contract With the Indiana Fever

It’s a happy day for Caitlin Clark! After a stellar run with the Iowa Hawkeyes, she became the No. 1 overall pick in the WNBA draft. As the point guard prepares to start her professional career with the Indiana Fever, her rookie salary figures paint an intriguing picture.

Clark is unanimously considered one of the greatest collegiate basketball players of all time, and the title is not being merely thrown around. The 22-year-old overtook Steph Curry to become the leading player of all time across men’s and women’s college scores. So, with such shining statistics, the two-time AP Player of the Year would be expected to rake in some big figures; however, here is when things get interesting.

The rookie signed a four-year contract with the Fever worth a total of $338,056. Let’s put this figure against the rookie pay of men’s basketball and football to get a better perspective. The lowest salary for an NFL rookie is $750,000. As for the 1st overall pick in the 2023 draft, Bryce Young got a four-year contract with the Carolina Panthers worth $37,955,071. The San Antonio Spurs drafted last year’s 1st pick in the NBA, Victor Wembanyama, with a four-year deal worth $55.2 million.

The average pay disparity between the NBA and WNBA is no secret, with men earning $10 million and women earning $116,000 as average annual pay. However, even the mascots of the NBA have a significantly higher figure than the top woman rookie player. For context, Denver Nuggets’ Rocky earns $625,000 annually against Clark’s four-year pay of $338,056.

While the statistics clearly show the skewed status quo of the differences in pay among women and men athletes, it is important to look at the reasons that are quoted behind the striking contrast.

Why do most sports pay women significantly less than men?

Controversy and dissatisfaction with the gender pay gap have often been the subject of debate in all major sports leagues. However, there are some major factors that lie behind this contrast. Whether they still fit into the present era or not is also an issue that often goes uninspected. Let’s take Caitlin Clark’s current case as an example.

Starting with the revenue, which is directly tied to the viewership problem. Looking at annual money generated in 2023, the NBA raked in over $10 billion, while the WNBA roped in 2% of the former amount, about $200 million, as per Bloomberg. This can be cited as a reason for the wage gap between men and women players in the sport; but there is a catch.

In the men’s league, about 50% of the entire income generated is shared with the players, whereas the women’s league pays its players 50% of the “incremental revenue,” which is the additional money after a revenue target is met. Moreover, though the WNBA’s revenue saw an increase of approximately $100 million, its translation to players’ share in base salaries saw a decrease of 1.8% in 2022 from 2019.

Now, this brings us to the root of low revenue: viewership. Women categories in male-dominated sports are considered to be less exciting and dynamic than their male counterparts. But, Clark’s performance this year broke the myth. The NCAA women’s finals drew in 4 million more viewers than the men’s final game. It was also reported that her jerseys were sold out within one hour of her draft announcement. This historic milestone reflected the shift in the audience’s preferences and how the traditional notions need a serious revision.

Similar rising trends were noticed in the women’s soccer league, and because of institutional efforts, they have achieved equal pay between genders. While the revenue, viewership, and popularity trends are still worth proper analysis, Caitlin Clark’s draft figures point towards the need for a deeper look into the matter.