Star forward Napheesa Collier has made shocking claims that WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert made shocking remarks about Caitlin Clark behind closed doors, leaving the WNBA reeling.
If accurate, those are the kinds of comments that run the risk of undermining the confidence that players have in the leadership. Collier didn’t mince words in her farewell interview following the Minnesota Lynx’s season finale. She blasted Engelbert’s player relations strategy and referred to the league’s leadership as “dismissive” and “tone-deaf.”
Collier shared a claim that really set off the fire: Engelbert allegedly told her that Caitlin Clark “should be grateful” for the success of off-court endorsements, implying that the WNBA’s platform is the only reason they exist. That’s a daring claim. Many people find it to be insulting as well as contemptuous. By increasing women’s basketball’s national visibility, ticket sales, and viewership, Clark has emerged as a powerful brand in her own right. Her agency and the sincere bond she has developed with fans are undermined by the idea that the league is the only reason she is marketable.
Sophie Cunningham, Clark’s teammate, responded to the statement with frankness. She denounced the purported remark as “delusional,” implying that Engelbert’s leadership is misinterpreting itself. Other WNBA players and groups have also expressed surprise and annoyance, with some calling for responsibility.
But it’s not just about Clark. A league at odds with its own talent is depicted in Collier’s more comprehensive indictment. She criticized low pay for rising stars, ongoing officiating irregularities, and what she called a reflexive practice of imposing fines rather than tackling systemic problems. She asserted in the same speech that Engelbert had once used a harsh phrase that would have hurt even in typical labor disputes: that players should “be on their knees thanking their lucky stars” for a media rights deal.
She asserted in the same speech that Engelbert had once used a harsh phrase that would have hurt even in typical labor disputes: that players should “be on their knees thanking their lucky stars” for a media rights deal. In these situations, anger spreads quickly, and the response has not been subdued. Fans, analysts, and former players are wondering what the league’s perception of its stars would be if the commissioner really said those things.
How does it make sense of rhetoric that portrays players as nothing more than recipients? Perhaps more importantly, does this widen the already widening gap between the front office and the players?
Since there has been no definitive confirmation or refutation of the specific quotes, a large portion of the public is left to consider contradicting statements. As I read all of this, I’m struck by how shaky the bonds are between celebrities and the organizations that purport to support them. Nobody wants to believe that the most well-known players are ignored. However, it goes beyond a mistake and into tone-deafness territory when leadership is said to frame success as something for which players should just “be grateful.”
At this juncture, the WNBA must decide whether to act with true reflection or to tighten its grip. Words like “platform” and “exposure” are more than just stories to Clark, Collier, and the rest of the cast; they are lifelines. The league must view players as partners rather than assets if it hopes to establish long-term trust. Everyone is listening right now. Furthermore, nobody is easily forgiven.
