Caitlin Clark is the most famous female college basketball player in history and was the No. 1 draft pick for the W.N.B.A. this year. But the public has been scandalized to discover what awaits this talented young woman as she enters pro sports: Her first-year salary will be only $76,535.
Her starting salary is far from that of the No. 1 N.B.A. draft pick, which is estimated at $10.5 million. In fact, as Axios reported, next year any random N.B.A. player is set to earn more than Clark’s entire team, the Indiana Fever, combined.
The outrage is refreshing.
Women in sports have been screaming about the athletic wage gap for years. Finally, people get it. On Wednesday even President Biden called on female athletes to be “paid what they deserve.”
He’s right. Sports are the ultimate expression of America’s values when it comes to many things, especially gender. The glass ceiling in women’s sports salaries has been accepted for so long that it’s easy to come up with plausible reasons that the best women are paid so much less than even the average man: lower demand for their games, suboptimal agreements between players and the league, inadequate broadcast deals.
But there are always reasons for blatant inequality. The question is whether America wants to continue to accept them. There’s not some craven force artificially keeping women’s sports salaries down; salaries follow the market. Ever since the dawn of professional women’s basketball, the league has been treated like the J.V. of the men’s game. When we invest in something as though it will never measure up, we effectively ensure it becomes that way. Let’s call it what it is: sexism.
Luckily, the fans see it differently. The W.N.B.A. now has a rising star player who is shattering TV viewership records everywhere she goes, and there are plenty of others ready to share her spotlight. Corporate sponsorships and better broadcast deals, and ultimately, better contracts, follow the fans. As we saw in soccer, where the U.S. women’s national team now makes the same as the men’s team, salary parity is achievable only when the public demands it and delivers the ratings to back it up. The more that goes into the pie, the easier it is for players and the league to get more in turn.
(And it’s not as if Clark were being sent off to the poorhouse. She is said to be closing an eight-figure contract with Nike, and her other endorsement deals are already worth millions.)
Women’s basketball finally has the thing the market wants: attention. And that’s translating to sales. The Fever’s ticket prices are up almost 200 percent from last season, and Clark’s games are already set to pack stadiums. Trickle-down Clarkenomics is on a thrilling rally.
The W.N.B.A. is only going to continue to soar — Clark is already a one-woman rocket booster for its success. But ultimately, Caitlin Clark can’t fix sexism. Only those of us watching can.
Her starting salary is far from that of the No. 1 N.B.A. draft pick, which is estimated at $10.5 million. In fact, as Axios reported, next year any random N.B.A. player is set to earn more than Clark’s entire team, the Indiana Fever, combined.
The outrage is refreshing.
Women in sports have been screaming about the athletic wage gap for years. Finally, people get it. On Wednesday even President Biden called on female athletes to be “paid what they deserve.”
He’s right. Sports are the ultimate expression of America’s values when it comes to many things, especially gender. The glass ceiling in women’s sports salaries has been accepted for so long that it’s easy to come up with plausible reasons that the best women are paid so much less than even the average man: lower demand for their games, suboptimal agreements between players and the league, inadequate broadcast deals.
But there are always reasons for blatant inequality. The question is whether America wants to continue to accept them. There’s not some craven force artificially keeping women’s sports salaries down; salaries follow the market. Ever since the dawn of professional women’s basketball, the league has been treated like the J.V. of the men’s game. When we invest in something as though it will never measure up, we effectively ensure it becomes that way. Let’s call it what it is: sexism.
Luckily, the fans see it differently. The W.N.B.A. now has a rising star player who is shattering TV viewership records everywhere she goes, and there are plenty of others ready to share her spotlight. Corporate sponsorships and better broadcast deals, and ultimately, better contracts, follow the fans. As we saw in soccer, where the U.S. women’s national team now makes the same as the men’s team, salary parity is achievable only when the public demands it and delivers the ratings to back it up. The more that goes into the pie, the easier it is for players and the league to get more in turn.
(And it’s not as if Clark were being sent off to the poorhouse. She is said to be closing an eight-figure contract with Nike, and her other endorsement deals are already worth millions.)
Women’s basketball finally has the thing the market wants: attention. And that’s translating to sales. The Fever’s ticket prices are up almost 200 percent from last season, and Clark’s games are already set to pack stadiums. Trickle-down Clarkenomics is on a thrilling rally.
The W.N.B.A. is only going to continue to soar — Clark is already a one-woman rocket booster for its success. But ultimately, Caitlin Clark can’t fix sexism. Only those of us watching can.
