It’s undisputed that the WNBA is posting record numbers this season. It’s also not questioned that a lot of that has to do with No. 1 overall pick and Embrace Debate lighting rod Caitlin Clark. But what is worth some discussion is how much Clark is boosting those numbers, and how the numbers for games without her are doing. And this past weekend provided interesting data points there.
Unsurprisingly, the two weekend games featuring Clark and the Indiana Fever did particularly well. Indeed, Friday’s Phoenix Mercury game against the Fever drew 1.34 million viewers on Scripps Sports’ ION, the largest WNBA audience for that network (which began its Friday night package last year) to date. And Sunday’s Fever game against the Minnesota Lynx (and USWNT Olympic coach Cheryl Reeve, which added to the storylines) drew 1.57 million viewers on ESPN, the seventh-largest WNBA audience since 2002.
As Jon Lewis noted at Sports Media Watch, the 10 largest audiences since 2002 have all come this year. And they’ve all featured Clark. But Lewis also added that there’s been significant success for WNBA games not involving Clark (and in some cases, not directly adjacent to her games). Here’s more on how that showed up this weekend from his piece:
Earlier in the day, ABC averaged 1.02 million for Mercury-Sun, marking the second time this season that a WNBA game has topped the million mark without Clark on the court. Unlike the first such game — Sparks-Aces on May 18 (1.34M) — Connecticut’s blowout win did not air directly adjacent to Clark and the Fever. The game aired at 1 PM ET on ABC, concluding more than an hour earlier than Fever-Lynx began on ESPN.
…In total, 15 WNBA games this season have averaged at least one million viewers — surpassing tied as the most in any WNBA season.
…Rounding out the weekend slate, ABC averaged 961,000 for Liberty-Sky on Saturday afternoon — the 18th game this season to average at least 900,000 viewers — and CBS scored 676,000 for a battle of cellar-dwellers between the Sparks and Wings later in the day. ION scored 460,000 for Lynx-Storm in the second half of its Friday doubleheader.
What does this all mean? Well, maybe the main discussion is what this means for those who, like Pat McAfee, have complained about the “rookie class” discussion. McAfee infamously objected to that on his ESPN/YouTube show in June, saying “Call it for what it is—there’s one white b—- for the Indiana team who is a superstar.” That drew a lot of blowback for him, including from Venus and Serena Williams at the ESPYs. But, putting aside the hyperbole on both sides, the ratings suggest McAfee had a point, but didn’t fully cover the situation.
As mentioned off the top, a lot of the current WNBA rise is about Clark. And attempts to downplay that aren’t great. That doesn’t mean that Clark should instantly be selected to the U.S. Olympic team or be automatically granted rookie of the year (but there are better arguments there than team winning percentage).
But, at the same time, the “rookie class” discussion (and discussion of the WNBA in general beyond Clark, including veterans) has more merit than McAfee and others ascribed to it. The WNBA rise (and women’s sports rise in general) has a lot to do with Clark, but it’s not solely and exclusively about her.
And the ION number there is notable on that front too. Yes, Clark helped with this particular result. But ION is also starting to see benefits from a consistent night/network slot, which has been cited by many as important recently.
All in all, Clark certainly can (and should) be cited as a key WNBA ratings factor. And she is a larger factor than anything else at this point in time. But she isn’t the only thing affecting those ratings.