The Caitlin Clark discourse continues to be a hot-button issue in the sports world. Caitlin was drafted no. 1 overall by the Indiana Fever and had massive expectations placed on her. Her introduction into the WNBA, where she has shown flashes of offensive greatness but has ultimately struggled, has brought out the worst of the media's coverage and fans' engagement of the sport. Almost immediately, the discussion became toxic. Fans and media personalities have criticized how Clark has been treated in the WNBA. Clark is a rookie who just finished her college season a couple of months ago. The WNBA is a physical and competitive league full of grown women.
Clark's fans expected her to pick up where she left off in college. People familiar with the league would say it is a rough transition, and it has been a rough transition for Caitlin Clark. But, the same arguments are being brought up. Fans and media are saying the other players are jealous of Clark. That they should ease up, even saying they should let her win. Her exclusion from the Team USA women's basketball team has sparked even more debate. Her supporters argue she should be on the team for marketing reasons so that the women's game can grow. The idea that she should have special treatment just because of her popularity and the eyes she brings to the game is valid. However, it is ultimately against the very idea of how sports fundamentally have worked. The decision-makers for USA basketball have put merit over the potential eyeball.
Caitlin Clark's Special Treatment Is Anti-Sports
Sports have long been, at least on the outside, a place of meritocracy. Athletes have to earn their spot and overcome challenges to become successful. Much of the Catilin Clark talk comes down to fans and media personalities wanting to push her to the front of the line instead of simply following her journey. The journey great athletes go on is what endears them to us and makes them truly great. It pays off to a story about an individual you have witnessed from beginning to end. When fans and media try to skip those steps in the name of marketing and "growing" the game, it not only robs us of an incredible story but also robs Caitlin Clark of her own experiences.
Clark is a competitor at the end of the day. She wants to compete at the highest level. It doesn't matter if she is fouled hard or targeted (something that happens to rookies). The argument that Clark should be given this special treatment is an insult to her and goes against what sports has always been about. Michael Jordan failed for years and was broken down by the Detroit Pistons until what? He overcame the obstacle in front of him and became undeniable. If Caitlin Clark is so great, why not let her carve her story out and see if she can reach the lofty heights everyone expects? The bumps in the road are supposed to make us care about the journey and the person we are following, not lobby for the road to be paved and smoothed out specifically for her.
The Caitlin Clark Argument Comes Down To Marketing Vs Merits
The argument against just letting Caitlin play everything out and earn her way to her stardom is one of marketing. ESPN personalities Stephen A. Smith and Shannon Sharpe are firmly in the follow-the-money camp. They have routinely said that merit doesn't matter when it comes to Caitlin Clark. Worse, they preach to various women on ESPN that if they want the game to grow, then Clark needs special treatment. This line of thinking is especially prevalent when discussing Clark being left off of Team USA for the Olympics. Her supporters say that even though she doesn't deserve a spot and isn't ready for that level of basketball, she should have a spot on the team because of the potential eyeballs she will bring that will make everyone a lot of money, and so on.
It's undeniable that there may be some uptick in interest in women's Olympic basketball if Caitlin Clark is on the team. Would it have been wise to include her in the marketing possibilities? Yes, it would have. Does she deserve a spot based on her ability? Absolutely not. The decision not to include Clark isn't a diss to her, but Team USA is sticking to the mission at hand and assembling the best team they possibly could. In four years, Caitlin Clark will be more than deserving of a spot on the team. But she hasn't earned it yet. You cannot blame the WNBA or Team USA for throwing away the competitive nature of the sport. Clark herself is OK with the decision. She will do what a competitor does, get in the lab, and work to make the team the next time.
Read More: Stephen A. Smith Goes Off On Peter Rosenberg In Unhinged Rant After Caitlin Clark Criticism
Is The Game Really Being Grown?
Caitlin Clark has brought a ton of eyes to the WNBA on the surface, but is she growing the game? The "we want it now" nature of the discourse around her means there really isn't any patience from fans or media regarding her impact. There is a feeling that she isn't bringing new fans to the WNBA, but new fans that solely follow her and are interested in her for good and bad reasons. Her popularity should be an organic force of growth, not a toxic flood of people who don't really want the actual basketball. The most prominent voices that have hopped on the WNBA train, Stephen A. Smith, and Shannon Sharpe, are clearly not interested in the basketball being played. If that's Clark's fans' attitude, then there won't be any meaningful growth for the league; it'll just be for her.
The WNBA has a talented crop of rookies that have come in with Caitlin Clark. Angel Reese, Cameron Brink, Rickea Jackson, and Aaliyah Edwards, to name a few, have all taken the league by storm and are promising in their own right. Combined with the already cemented stars, like A'ja Wilson, Sabrina Ionescu, and Breanna Stewart, the league is in a good place to grow into something special. It's not going to get there if it rests solely on one Caitlin Clark's shoulders, and it's unfair to put the success of an entire sports league on her.
