For years, WNBA players have voiced their discontent about salaries, arguing that their pay doesn’t match the dedication and skill they bring to the court. However, if salaries were strictly based on net revenue, many players would earn close to nothing.

Despite this, the WNBA and its players now have a golden opportunity to attract more viewers and potentially increase salaries, thanks to the arrival of Caitlin Clark, the most popular female college basketball player of all time.

Clark’s entry into the WNBA for the upcoming season has generated immense excitement and anticipation. Yet, instead of rallying behind this new star, some of the league’s top players and legends have displayed an astonishing level of jealousy towards Clark, risking the chance to boost the league’s popularity and financial success. One clear example of this jealousy comes from Lexi Brown, a WNBA player known more for her controversial comments on the Gilbert Arenas podcast than her on-court performance.

During a recent podcast episode, Brown implied that she could have achieved similar stats to Clark if she had been given the same level of control over her college team. This sentiment highlights a deep-seated envy, transforming into delusion as Brown, who has averaged less than two points in multiple WNBA seasons, suggests she is on par with Clark as a scorer.

Another notable instance involves WNBA legend Diana Taurasi, who expressed a preference for Paige Bueckers over Caitlin Clark as the number one draft pick. Taurasi’s choice seems illogical, considering Clark’s superior college performance and her team’s victory over Bueckers’ UConn in the NCAA tournament. Taurasi’s comments reflect a bitterness that overshadows the obvious financial benefits Clark could bring to any team, given her mainstream popularity.

Similarly, Brianna Stewart, another prominent WNBA player, refused to acknowledge Clark as the best female college player of all time, citing Clark’s lack of an NCAA championship. This stance is ironic, considering Stewart’s frequent complaints about WNBA salaries.

Instead of supporting Clark, whose presence could help achieve Stewart’s goal of higher pay, Stewart’s jealousy prevents her from embracing Clark’s potential as the league’s new face. Chiney Ogwumike, more recognized as a sports analyst than a player, also downplayed Clark’s accomplishments by refusing to label her the greatest female college basketball player ever.

This widespread reluctance among WNBA players to acknowledge Clark’s greatness starkly contrasts with the opinion of most NCAA women’s basketball fans, who view Clark as the GOAT. Perhaps the most egregious example of envy comes from WNBA legend Cheryl Swoopes, who criticized Clark by falsely claiming that Clark’s records are illegitimate due to extended eligibility. Swoopes’ unfounded criticisms further reveal an underlying jealousy, suggesting she doesn’t want Clark to become the WNBA’s new face.

Despite these negative reactions, Clark’s undeniable talent and popularity present the WNBA with an unprecedented opportunity to grow its fanbase and improve players’ salaries. However, the persistent jealousy among some players threatens to undermine this potential. By failing to support Clark, these players may sabotage the league’s best chance to achieve greater financial success and recognition./

In conclusion, the WNBA stands at a crossroads. The league’s future could be brightened by embracing Caitlin Clark and the excitement she brings. However, this opportunity risks being squandered if the league’s players and legends allow their jealousy to overshadow the potential benefits Clark offers. The question remains: will the WNBA seize this chance to grow, or will it let envy stand in the way of progress?