Home/WNBA

Caitlin Clark’s meteoric rise has taken the sports world by storm, generating record-breaking attendance and unprecedented media attention for the WNBA. Yet not everyone is singing her praises. In a controversial interview, Washington Mystics co-owner Sheila Johnson raised concerns about the media’s fixation on Clark. Her comments ignited a debate about recognition, fairness, and what it means for the growth of the league. But as the numbers roll in, the reality paints a different picture—one that calls into question whether Johnson’s stance aligns with the undeniable momentum Clark has sparked.

Media personalities were quick to respond to Johnson’s interview with CNN, where she downplayed Clark’s singular influence. Rachael DeMita, speaking on her YouTube channel, criticized Johnson’s remarks as out of touch: “I don’t even know that lady’s name. I would have never known that lady until she goes on CNN and goes on a four-minute rant. That was honestly just one of the stupidest things that I’ve ever heard, and I can’t believe somebody like that is owning a sports team.”

DeMita’s frustration resonated with many fans who see Clark’s achievements as both historic and necessary for the WNBA’s evolution. While much of the criticism surrounding Clark has centered on what she said in the TIME interview,  like Sheryl Swoopes’ comment on Caitlin having a “great marketing team” on Gil’s Arena.

ADVERTISEMENT

Article continues below this ad

Johnson’s argument focused on Clark receiving disproportionate recognition. “This year, something clicked with the WNBA, and it’s because of the draft of players that came in. It’s not just Caitlin Clark, it’s [Angel] Reese,” Johnson said. “We have so much talent out there that has been unrecognized. And I don’t think we can just pin it on one player.” Her belief that media attention should be spread evenly across the league came with a suggestion: “Why couldn’t they have put the whole WNBA on that cover and said, ‘The WNBA is the League of the Year’?”

But the numbers tell a different story,. The “Caitlin Clark Effect” is not a media creation but a quantifiable boost to the league’s growth. In her rookie year alone, Clark delivered three games with attendance exceeding 20,000 fans, a feat that Washington’s Mystics haven’t seen since their sold-out game against the Charlotte Sting in 1999. Viewership metrics have also skyrocketed. CNN reported a 48% increase in WNBA attendance—the highest in two decades—directly tied to Clark’s presence on the court.

But What do WNBA legends think about Clark’s contributions to the WNBA ?

Clark: A catalyst for growth, not competition

ADVERTISEMENT

Article continues below this ad

Even WNBA legend Sue Bird recognizes Clark’s role as a catalyst for the league’s growth. On her A Touch More podcast, Bird explained: “Some of it is just because it’s Caitlin Clark. You can’t remove that from the equation… But she’s a little bit of a catalyst because now that you’re seeing brands invest in her, they know that she’s going to be seen in the WNBA. And so those brands are now also going to invest in the WNBA. And it’s going to just break the door open for all this investment to come in, and that’s ultimately how the league will grow.”

What’s your perspective on:

Does Caitlin Clark's rise overshadow other talents, or is she the boost the WNBA needs?

Have an interesting take?

USA Today via Reuters

Johnson’s legacy as the only Black woman with ownership stakes in three major sports teams—the Mystics, Wizards, and Capitals—has been monumental. Her influence within sports and business is undeniable, with Forbes placing her net worth at $1 billion. But her dismissive stance on Clark’s impact risks alienating fans and undermining the very growth she claims to champion.

ADVERTISEMENT

Article continues below this ad

Clark’s success is not about overshadowing others but about elevating the league as a whole. As Sue Bird pointed out, Clark’s media magnetism benefits the entire league by attracting sponsorships, increasing viewership, and drawing attention to every player on the court.

Sheila Johnson’s $1B legacy is built on breaking barriers, but her statements on Caitlin Clark’s interview seem out of step with the WNBA’s current trajectory. In an era where women’s sports are finally capturing the spotlight, Clark’s rise is not a threat to others—it’s an opportunity for everyone to thrive.

Have something to say?

Let the world know your perspective.

0
  Debate

Debate

Does Caitlin Clark's rise overshadow other talents, or is she the boost the WNBA needs?