Yesterday, I was listening to sports radio. "Perhaps other more established WNBA players feel like they are being undervalued compared to Clark and resent the unfairness of it," the caller attempted to justify and excuse the WNBA's cheap shots against Caitlyn Clark. There are those who contend that Clark is not "better than" many other WNBA players and that they should be paid more and given more attention than she does.
Some people do not realize or fully appreciate that professional and collegiate sports are entertainment businesses, which is why they make these faulty arguments. Fan interest is what drives the revenue, whether it be through television, fans in the stands, sales of retail gear, audiences for advertisements, etc. No matter how good some players are, if not enough fans are interested in their exploits, they won't make premium money. For example, the Dec. 23, 2023, Camelia Bowl football game between N. Illinois and Arkansas State had double the television ratings of a typical UFL game, yet the UFL teams are probably much better than MAC/Sun Belt college teams (UFL players get paid peanuts).
Consider this hypothetical. . . What if "pro" sports didn't have an audience? What if the sports leagues were funded by ultra-wealthy people who treated them as very high-stakes poker games? They all toss $40 million into the pot before the season and then divide it after the season based 100% on on-field or on-court results. In that case, the best and "most valuable" players would get paid the most. In basketball, role players that are elite defenders and do all the little and/or dirty things well (set picks, grind for rebounds, make the right passes at the right time, etc.) would get paid more than dudes that constantly chuck up shots at a 0.34% success rate and play soft defense.
In the real world, it doesn't work that way. If role players are going to get paid premium money, they also have to be interesting to fans. When I was a kid, I didn't like the Lakers, but I had begrudging respect for Kurt Rambis. Lakers fans loved Rambis because he did the dirty work. Truth be told, he also had a "brand." He wore black, taped-up, horn-rimmed glasses and a mustache. He arrived to the locker room carrying a bowling bag. I don't think it was an act, but if it was, it was a brilliant act! Rambis didn't make as much money as Magic Johnson, Kareem, and Worthy, but he did make more money than Byron Scott, Michael Cooper, and AG Green.
Speaking of actors, in the history of show business, there were hundreds of amazingly talented actors and actresses that made little money because they weren't that popular—not good-looking enough, didn't have a sexy voice, etc. That's life on the stage.
And sorry, not sorry: those amazing female character actresses that played off Broadway were a million times closer to being Lawrence Olivier, in terms of talent and skill, than Angel Reese is to being Jason Tatum. The WNBA players really aren't that good. Again, sorry, not sorry. So when an entertainment mega-star comes along to generate wealth for the WNBA entertainment business, the established "stars" in that league should relish the opportunity to grow that business. But that would require them to get some perspective on how the entertainment industry works.
