It begins.
No sooner had former Iowa women’s basketball sensation Caitlin Clark become the WNBA’s top draft pick than the lefties among us began to whine mightily about the “unfairness” of her standard rookie contract.
“Pay her what she’s worth!” they demanded. “Discrimination against women!” they howled.
My how quickly things change.
As reported on Monday, Clark, the biggest name in women’s basketball, is set to sign an eight-year deal worth up to $28 million with Nike, the biggest name in sportswear, according to people close to the situation. As the Wall Street Journal correctly noted, “Clark lifted her sport to new heights and unprecedented TV ratings as she became a household name across America.”
In other words, if the Nike deal goes down as planned, Clark will be “paid what she’s worth.”
The deal didn’t sit well at all with USA Today sports columnist Mike Freeman, who fired off an editorial on Monday, deriding the “ugliness” of the deal.
What so much of this comes down to is a lack of respect for the Black women of the WNBA. A lack of respect for Black Americans overall isn’t something new to the marketing world. This is old hat. That doesn’t change the ugliness of it.
The “ugliness” of a once-in-a-generation, transformative player who can lift the visibility of a league struggling for attendance that hasn’t turned a profit in its 27 years of play?
“If she does” sign the Nike deal, wrote Freeman, “Clark would join only three other WNBA players with signature shoes: Breanna Stewart, Elena Delle Donne, and Sabrina Ionescu. You may notice a pattern there.”
The “pattern” Freeman referred to was all of the above players are white.
But black players have had shoe deals before. To Freeman’s credit, he acknowledged that between 1995 and 2011, every signature shoe in the WNBA belonged to a black player.
Most notably, Sheryl Swoopes, the preeminent WNBA player of her era, became the first woman to receive a signature basketball sneaker when she signed with Nike in 1995. Swoopes went on to be named the league’s MVP three times (2000, 2002, 2005) and won four straight championships as a member of the Houston Comets.
Will Caitlin Clark achieve Swoopes’s level of success in the league? Only time will tell, but at this moment, she transcends women’s basketball, which gets the attention of corporate sponsors big time.
While there have been plenty of WNBA players who have excelled on the court, the league has continued to struggle since its inception. As a result, a corporation investing $28 million is first going to consider its potential return on investment. In this case, even woke Nike.
Freeman pointed to A’ja Wilson as the prime example of a WNBA star who doesn’t have a shoe deal, which he suggested is because she’s black.
Wilson’s pedigree goes even beyond… She’s been in the league since 2018. She’s a two-time champion, won the MVP twice, and is a five-time All-Star. She’s an Olympian. FIBA World Cup MVP.
Wilson won a championship at South Carolina and was player of the year there. She’s so revered in her home state there’s a statue of her outside the arena.
Wilson also just made Time Magazine’s 100 Most Influential People in the World list. Oh, and she’s a New York Times bestselling author.
Genuine kudos A’ja Wilson. As is the case with Caitlin Clark, she deserves all the recognition and financial remuneration she can garner.
The Bottom Line
To Freeman’s credit, he wrote that Clark deserves the success she’s realizing, but said “Wilson deserves it more and has for some time. She is, after all, the best overall player in the world.”
That might be the case, but again: “Clark lifted her sport to new heights and unprecedented TV ratings as she became a household name across America.” That can only be a good thing for the entire WNBA.
RELATED:
Caitlin Clark Triggers the Far-Left, As Racial Grievance Politics Dominate SNL Appearance
South Carolina Coach Staley Makes Classy Remarks About Iowa, Caitlin Clark After National Title Win
Biden Denounces Caitlin Clark’s WNBA Contract, Accidentally Caricatures Democrat Party Tenets
