In the high-stakes world of sports media, where narratives are crafted as carefully as game plans, Angel Reese’s podcast, “Unapologetically Angel,” was supposed to be her sanctuary. It was launched as a platform for the WNBA star to control her own story, showcase her vibrant personality, and solidify her brand beyond the basketball court. Fans tuned in expecting unfiltered girl talk, behind-the-scenes insights, and perhaps a fortification of Reese’s status as a premier face of the league. However, a recent episode featuring NBA legend Shaquille O’Neal has turned that ambition on its head, sparking a firestorm of debate about mentorship, respect, and the undeniable shadow of Caitlin Clark.

What was anticipated to be a meeting of minds between a dominant big man of the past and a rising star of the present quickly devolved into one of the most awkward and talked-about hours in sports podcasting history. Instead of cementing Reese’s stardom, the episode seemed to inadvertently highlight her biggest rival, leaving fans and critics alike wondering: Was this tough love, or was it a masterclass in public humiliation?

The “Caitlin Clark Hour” Phenomenon

From the moment the microphones went live, the dynamic in the room felt skewed. Reese, known for her confidence and “Chi-Town Barbie” persona, found herself playing defense on her own turf. The elephant in the room—or rather, the sharpshooter in the conversation—was Caitlin Clark. Despite the show being Reese’s vehicle, the dialogue aggressively pivoted toward the Indiana Fever sensation, a recurring theme that internet trolls have cruelly dubbed “The Caitlin Clark Hour.”

Shaq, never one to mince words, wasted little time in lavishing praise on Clark. Sitting directly across from Reese, he labeled Clark “The Truth,” a moniker of high esteem in basketball circles. He didn’t stop there. In a comparison that would sting any competitor, Shaq likened Clark’s game-changing three-point ability to that of Steph Curry.

“I love Steph Curry ’cause I never seen that before,” Shaq told a visibly tight-lipped Reese. He went on to admit that he had initially been a “hater” of Clark, doubting her ability to translate her logo-range shooting to the pros. But, he confessed, she had proven him wrong. “If I say ten times you’re not going to hit the shot and you hit the shot, that means you’re the truth.”

For Reese, who has battled for her share of the spotlight against Clark since their collegiate days at LSU and Iowa, hearing her “mentor” gush over her rival’s unique talent was clearly a bitter pill to swallow. Viewers noted Reese “gritting her teeth” and looking visibly uncomfortable as her own guest heralded the very player who often eclipses her in media coverage.

The “Antawn Jamison” Insult

If the praise for Clark was a jab, what followed was a haymaker. In a moment that left basketball heads scratching their heads and Reese’s fans fuming, Shaq offered a comparison for Reese’s own game that felt less like a compliment and more like a ceiling.

“You know who you are? You’re the female Antawn Jamison,” Shaq declared.

For the uninitiated, Antawn Jamison was a solid, productive NBA player who scored 20,000 career points. However, he is not a Hall of Famer, nor is he remembered as a game-changer or a cultural icon. He was a scorer with an unorthodox style—specifically, a unique flip shot. By comparing Reese to Jamison, Shaq was essentially telling her: You are good, you will get stats, but you are not a generational talent like Curry (Clark). You are a role player with a weird shot.

“Antawn Jamison ain’t cracking nobody’s top 200 in NBA history,” one commentator noted, analyzing the interaction. “And this woman thinks she’s one of the greatest WNBA players.”

The critique didn’t end with historical comparisons. Shaq took aim at Reese’s actual mechanics, dismissing her layup package as “flip shots” and basic moves. He told her to stop worrying about what people say, but the delivery felt dismissive of the skill set that got her to the league. It was a moment of “mansplaining” that seemed to strip away the validity of her rookie success, reducing her to a player who just “does flip shots.”

The “Creepy” Commentary

The awkwardness reached a fever pitch when the conversation veered away from basketball skills to aesthetics. In a segment that many viewers flagged as inappropriate, Shaq commented on Reese’s shorts. He implied that her choice of attire was a marketing tool, suggesting that wearing shorter shorts would help bring attention to the WNBA.

Social media reacted swiftly, with many calling the remarks “creepy” and “unnecessary.” Reese, usually quick with a comeback, appeared caught off guard, reacting with a silence that spoke volumes. It was a jarring reminder of the different standards women in sports face, where a conversation about field goal percentage can instantly pivot to legwear. For a podcast titled “Unapologetically Angel,” the host looked surprisingly boxed in, unable to steer the ship away from these uncomfortable waters.

The Mastermind Reveal: “Dummies.com”

If fans hoped Shaq would apologize or clarify his comments after the backlash, they were sorely mistaken. In true O’Neal fashion, he doubled down. appearing on his own podcast shortly after the episode aired, Shaq claimed that the entire spectacle was a calculated move to generate views.

“Everything I do is planned,” Shaq boasted. “I knew everything I said, you dummies was going to click.”

He referred to the audience as “dummies” for feeding into the drama, thanking them for making the content go viral. He framed his harsh critiques as a strategy to boost the podcast’s numbers, essentially admitting that he used Reese’s platform—and her humiliation—as a tool for engagement. “Thank you very much, dummies.com,” he quipped.

This revelation adds a cynical layer to the entire affair. It suggests that Reese’s embarrassment was collateral damage in a quest for clicks. Whether Reese was in on the “plan” remains ambiguous, but her on-screen body language suggested genuine discomfort rather than a staged performance.

A Narrative Lost?

The fallout from this episode serves as a cautionary tale about narrative control in the digital age. Angel Reese launched her podcast to define herself. Yet, the algorithm and the guests seem to have other plans. By inviting a personality as overpowering as Shaq, Reese risked exactly what happened: being overshadowed on her own show.

The recurring theme of Caitlin Clark appearing in conversations where she isn’t even present is a testament to Clark’s immense gravity in the sport right now. But it is also a stumbling block for Reese. Every time her platform is used to discuss Clark’s greatness, or to compare Reese unfavorably to her, it reinforces the hierarchy that Reese is desperately trying to disrupt.

Shaq may claim it was all “marketing genius,” but for Angel Reese, the cost of going viral might have been too high. She was left looking like a passenger in her own vehicle, forced to listen to the praise of her rival and the critique of her own game, all while the world watched and clicked. As she tries to navigate her sophomore season and her growing media empire, Reese faces a tough challenge: How to reclaim the mic and ensure that “Unapologetically Angel” is actually about Angel.