Indiana Fever guard Caitlin Clark has once again found herself in the middle of a controversy, and this time, it’s a debate over whether her historic accolade as Time magazine’s Athlete of the Year truly belongs to her or should’ve been shared with, well, the entire WNBA.
The ruckus began when Sheila Johnson, co-owner of the Washington Mystics, decided to rain on Clark’s parade by suggesting the award should have celebrated the collective efforts of the WNBA instead of highlighting a single player. Enter Dan Patrick, the veteran sportscaster, who swooped in like a seasoned pro guarding the rim to defend Clark and deliver a sly verbal block to Johnson.
“I don’t know who this person (Sheila Johnson) is,” Patrick quipped during his show on Tuesday, his tone dripping with sarcasm sharp enough to cut a net. “But if you’re going to celebrate the WNBA, why not celebrate it with everyone in the league, right? Oh, wait. It’s called Athlete of the Year, not League of the Year. Big difference.”
Patrick didn’t stop there, though. Comparing Clark’s meteoric rise and impact on the WNBA to some of the greatest trailblazers in sports history, he added:
“Caitlin Clark did for the WNBA what Wayne Gretzky did for hockey. What Tiger Woods did for golf. Should we have given Time’s honor to all golfers when Tiger burst onto the scene? Or every hockey player when Gretzky owned the rink? No. It’s about recognizing a singular talent who shifts the landscape, and that’s exactly what Clark has done.”
Caitlin Clark: WNBA’s Lightning Rod for Drama
Let’s not forget, Clark’s name seems to summon drama like a buzzer-beater summons gasps. Whether it’s her jaw-dropping performances, her Iowa legacy, or even her Olympic snub, Clark stays in the headlines. For context, earlier this year, Patrick himself had agreed with Clark being left off Team USA’s Paris Olympics roster.
“Look, I don’t think she’s one of the top 12 players in the U.S. right now,” Patrick admitted in a June segment of his show. “Do you want popularity? She’s number one. But if you want to win gold, there are better players at the moment.”
Ouch, Dan. But he didn’t stop there.
“How do you look at another player and say, ‘Sorry, we’re taking you off for the popular girl’? Caitlin’s got a long career ahead of her, and honestly, she probably needs a break after going 10 months straight without rest.”
Fair point, though it sounds like Patrick’s current defense of Clark is his way of saying, “Even I wouldn’t go this far, Sheila.”
Sheila Johnson’s Perspective: Missed Opportunity or Misguided Critique?
Johnson’s comments, however, reflect a broader debate about individual recognition versus team success in a league that thrives on community spirit. While it’s fair to argue that the WNBA’s rise is a collective effort, dismissing Clark’s singular contribution feels like sideline shade.
The Fever guard didn’t just bring attention to herself—she brought eyeballs to the league, packing arenas and boosting ratings like nobody’s business. Love her or hate her, the stats, the swagger, and the spotlight she commands are undeniable.
Conclusion: Can’t We All Just Celebrate?
So, should we celebrate Clark’s achievement or dilute her moment with calls for collective recognition? Patrick’s response is clear: give credit where it’s due.
“Let’s just acknowledge greatness when we see it,” Patrick said. “Caitlin Clark changed the game. Period. And if that’s not worth celebrating, I don’t know what is.”
Love her or not, Clark continues to live rent-free in the heads of fans, critics, and apparently Mystics co-owners. For now, she’s not just Indiana Fever’s star—she’s the league’s lightning rod, whether Sheila Johnson likes it or not.
