Wetzel: Collier comments reflect WNBA’s core problem: How it sees Caitlin Clark

Caitlin Clark and his army of fans are the most precious commercial asset of the WNBA. Not the most useful player (at least not yet) … but a commercial asset.

The arrival of Clark in the spring of 2024 sent the television ratings, attendance, media rights, sponsorships and league franchise assessments. Dourned overnight, billionaires were fighting to pay $ 250 million for their own teams.

Clark offered more than the salient logo-3. She gave hope to the League.

The WNBA goal n ° 1 should be to take this massive base of fans who followed Clark from Iowa and transform them into fans of the whole league … Not just a player or a team.

No matter how or why new customers are coming. Everything should be to seize the opportunity to make them regulars by selling them on the strong product which already takes place in the night.

The WNBA received a winning lottery ticket not seen in sport since Tiger Woods arrived on the PGA Tour.

The league should stop trying to light it on fire.

The latest self-sabotage evidence comes from a conversation between the WNBA commissioner, Cathy Engelbert and the minnesota star, Napheesa Collier.

The specific subject was the recruit contracts, which, at around $ 75,000 per year, undervalue Clark and other young talents such as Angel Reese and Paige Bueckers who brought smaller – but always precious – fans and the attention of their own college.

“I … asked how [Engelbert] Planned to repair the fact that players like Caitlin, Angel and Paige, who clearly lead massive income for the League, do so little during their first four years, “said necklace at a press conference.” Her answer was: “Caitlin should be grateful to win $ 16 million on the field because without the platform that the WNBA gives it, it would do nothing.” “”

Necklace later added that Gelbert had said to him: “The players should be on their knees by thanking their lucky stars for the media rights agreement that I obtained them.”

Necklace relayed the conversation as part of a screed against Engelbert on the quality of the function of the league fines to silence criticism and other questions. All valid points, especially in front of negotiations for a new work agreement. However, a diatriber on the fact of an officer, no matter how pretty the ruthless delivery is. Entertaining, yes, but it would be faded.

Collar is however very intelligent. Clark’s comments that she attributed to Engelbert had to be a determined grenade.

Clark fans were already wary of the reception she received in the WNBA, and they have a good reason.

Difficult faults. Dark comments. Commentary on disdainful media. The Olympic Games. Part of this can be rejected as the reality of competition sports. No one owes a bridge of flowers. A part, however, is probably based on politics, pride, jealousy, or rivalry, or … fill the white. Sometimes everything about Clark seems to be a discord circus.

Although Clark herself has never complained, many of her fans perceive – and perception quickly becomes reality – that Clark is not fully welcome in the league.

In turn, they are not either.

The fact that the WNBA commissioner says that Clark should be grateful because without the League, she would not “just” confirm the suspicion. He also plays on an old trope that female athletes should be grateful just for the chance to play. Is it 1972?

Everything is ridiculous, of course. Clark was doing national approval campaigns when she was still in college. During her junior season, she was more popular than any WNBA player. She arrived rich.

Maybe Gelbert was not aware.

That the WNBA commissioner would have an opinion on who should be grateful to whom, and even less that it expresses it in a non -professional way to another active player is almost unfathomable.

It is not Clark who should thank the WNBA for its approvals. It is the League that should thank her for the business boom. This should count her blessings that she and the other young charismatic stars adorn her league.

“I am discouraged by the way Napheesa characterized our conversations and our leaders of the League,” said Engelbert as part of a press release. “But even when our prospects differ, my commitment to players and to this work will not vacillate.”

It is not a denial of what Collier said that Gelbert said. He also does not solve the main problem.

The worst thing that could happen for female basketball affairs is that all new fans think that the League does not only appreciate their favorite player, but is openly hostile and condescending for them.

This is precisely how you do not develop a sport. They could connect for the Caitlin games (or the Angel and Paige games), but they now have a motivation not to support, look at or worry about anything or someone else.

WNBA is suddenly not a business that covets them as a life customers.

It is the enemy.