In the world of professional sports, leadership is a critical factor, especially when a league stands at a major crossroads of development and faces unprecedented challenges. The WNBA is currently experiencing one of the most tumultuous periods in its history, with Commissioner Cathy Engelbert officially resigning. This event comes as the league grapples with a steep decline in ratings and widespread outrage from a significant portion of its fanbase following the elimination of superstar Caitlyn Clark from the playoffs. This isn’t just a high-level personnel change; it’s a clear signal that the WNBA is facing a serious crisis of trust and direction.

Caitlyn Clark’s departure from the playoffs ignited a strong reaction from the fan community. Many have declared a boycott, refusing to continue watching the league now that their favorite star is no longer on the court. They feel that with Clark, the WNBA had become “must-watch” entertainment, but without her, that allure has vanished. A common comment on social media is, “It’s been real, WNBA. I’m going back to watching football now.”

Before Clark’s arrival, the WNBA was a “niche” sport, largely ignored by mainstream media. She wasn’t just another rookie; she was a phenomenon, a catalyst who single-handedly brought millions of new eyes to a league that had long struggled for widespread recognition and consistent viewership. Her presence transformed the Fever from an obscure team with an average of 1,800 home fans per game to 17,000, almost a tenfold increase. This is the undeniable “Caitlyn Clark effect.”

Now, with the league’s undeniable star no longer on the court for the rest of the season, there’s a palpable sense that the WNBA is destined to revert to its pre-Caitlin Clark era—a period characterized by sparse attendance, limited media coverage, and an overall struggle for cultural relevance. The fear is that the meteoric rise in interest will dissipate just as quickly as it appeared, leaving the league once again relegated to the periphery of the American sporting landscape. One commentator starkly noted, “They’re going to come back and say, ‘See, we were right all along. It’s all the racists who followed Caitlin Clark who were watching the product, and now they’re gone, and we’re back with our diehards,’” implying that the league might try to justify the ratings drop by blaming Clark’s new fanbase.

Fans had already reached a boiling point, seething with anger over the relentless negativity and physical aggression Caitlyn Clark endured from her opponents. This animosity wasn’t confined to the competitive boundaries of the court; it extended off it, with some rivals unfairly casting aspersions on her burgeoning fanbase, labeling them as hateful or opportunistic. The cumulative effect of this palpable mistreatment, combined with her team’s playoff exit, has driven many of these newly converted followers back to their previous state of indifference toward the WNBA. After all, despite facing a constant barrage of criticism and physical challenges, she almost single-handedly propelled the league into an unprecedented spotlight. For that, she deserves immense credit.

The 2025 season was the most-viewed in the WNBA’s 28-year history, with stellar numbers. The Indiana Fever’s playoff game with Caitlyn Clark attracted over 1.8 million viewers, while the subsequent three playoff games combined drew only about 400,000. This means more people watched Clark play than the other three games combined. One of Clark’s games even drew 1.8 million viewers on ABC on an NFL Sunday, becoming the most-watched playoff game since Game 2 of the 2000 WNBA Finals and the most-watched WNBA playoff game on an NFL Sunday.

Despite these staggering numbers, some figures within the WNBA community expressed negative attitudes. Cheryl Swoopes, one of Clark’s most vocal critics, shockingly stated that she wasn’t even pleased that millions chose to watch the WNBA over the NFL. On her “Queens of the Court” podcast, Swoopes delivered a truly bewildering statement: “I was not excited about the playoffs starting. First of all, it is a football Sunday. And I don’t care how much we’ve grown and people are tuning in, and the eyes are going up. You’re going up against the NFL on a Sunday. A Sunday, frankly.” Swoopes’s dismissive stance not only demeaned the WNBA and Clark’s exceptional talent but also, crucially, the millions of new fans she single-handedly attracted to the league.

Clark’s impact extended far beyond the numbers. She sold out every single arena she played in this season. Before her arrival, WNBA players were often subjected to the indignity of crowded commercial flights, a stark contrast to the private charters their male counterparts enjoyed. However, with her rapid ascent and the subsequent influx of revenue and visibility, everything began to change for the better, even for her colleagues. The WNBA announced a plan to commit $50 million over the next two seasons so players can fly on chartered planes, right after Clark and the Fever were seen walking through a Dallas airport for a commercial flight. Many believe that Clark’s presence and voice were the catalyst for this change.

Despite generating all this undeniable benefit for the entire league, Clark was forced to navigate a treacherous landscape of animosity, envy, and thinly veiled resentment from some other players. Their sentiment, often expressed implicitly or explicitly, seemed to be: “We’ve been grinding in this league for years, so why is Caitlyn receiving all this disproportionate attention?”

Charles Barkley famously articulated his admiration and defense of Caitlyn Clark, echoing the sentiments of many who saw her unique value. Barkley even bluntly criticized the “pettiness” of some female players: “You women out there, y’all petty, man… Y’all should be thanking that girl for getting y’all those private charters, all the money and visibility she’s bringing to the WNBA. Don’t be petty like dudes. Listen to what she’s accomplished. Give her her flowers. Stop being petty.”

Now, a profound and deeply unsettling uncertainty clouds the WNBA’s immediate future. Without Caitlyn Clark’s unparalleled star power, a significant portion of the public is beginning to question with genuine concern whether the league, as it currently stands, is a fundamentally failed product—one that demonstrably cannot sustain itself or capture significant market interest without her singular magnetic presence. For many, especially the majority of new viewers, they simply no longer possess the intrinsic motivation to watch the other players. The game, for a considerable segment of the audience, no longer feels like legitimate, top-tier basketball entertainment. Clark injected an exhilarating, fast-paced dynamism and an electrifying precision with her three-point shooting that made women’s basketball genuinely thrilling and appointment viewing. Her absence leaves a void that no other player at this moment appears capable of filling.

In conclusion, Commissioner Cathy Engelbert’s resignation amid an unprecedented crisis of ratings, fan support, and internal division is a troubling sign. It forces the league to confront difficult questions about its identity, its value proposition, and how it will position itself in a future without the presence of a phenomenon like Caitlyn Clark. Whether the WNBA can weather this storm and find a sustainable path forward for its growth remains a major question mark.