Caitlin Clark’s WNBA Move: Debunking Pay Cut Myths

Kaitlyn Clark will not experience a pay loss if she joins the WNBA, and anyone who claims otherwise is being purposefully ambiguous.


Good morning, winners. Welcome back to Morning Win. Thank you for spending your time with us today. We value your presence.

I’m sad to announce that today’s topic centers on the recurring notion that Kaitlin Clark, and women’s basketball players in general, are taking a pay reduction by moving to the WNBA.

I believe we’ve had this conversation before, several times. Despite considerable evidence to the contrary, this erroneous story persists, particularly on some corners of the Internet.

The most recent offender is Darren Rovell, who quickly brought up the unsubstantiated rumour of her claimed wage cut when announcing her WNBA debut in order to diminish Kaitlynn Clark and her achievements.

Their rationale goes as follows: According to On3 Sports, Clarke’s zero (name, image, likeness) is presently worth $910,000. As the WNBA’s top draft pick, she will earn $75,000 every year. According to Rovell, Clark’s zero evaluation is roughly equivalent to her Iowa wage, resulting in a substantially smaller WNBA compensation.

However, this argument is inherently faulty and shows a fundamental misinterpretation of the facts.

Clark does not have a current assessed pay, which represents the value of their endorsement contracts. His actual wage at Iowa is nil, as the university does not pay student-athletes.

His endorsement relationships include national brands such as Nike, Gatorade, Buick, State Farm, and others. It’s ridiculous to suppose they’d cut relations with Clark just because she no longer plays for Iowa. Some of these brands have already agreed to continue working with them.

If Clark’s primary source of revenue is Iowa’s NIL Collective, which is funded by school boosters, Rowell’s claim may be valid. However, sources indicate that he does not get any compensation from the NIL Group of Iowa; its revenue is primarily derived from the same national brands stated before.

Rowell’s and others’ arguments in this regard have been baseless since the outset. A quick Google search should clear things up.

This talk is not only intellectually dishonest; it is beginning to appear malevolent. It’s as if people like Rovell are out to undermine young women’s careers in professional basketball and devalue the WNBA.

Although the WNBA has issues, it is still a young league. The inclusion of a national talent such as Caitlin Clarke will undoubtedly help its growth and appeal. Instead of undervaluing her efforts, Rowell and others should appreciate her success and watch her thrive.

Leave a Comment