​Former Fox Sports analyst Emmanuel Acho sparked one of the season’s most provocative takes during his Speakeasy show, arguing that the WNBA would be better off without Indiana Fever star Caitlin Clark. “The W, at this juncture in time, would be better without Caitlin Clark, because she is a bigger distraction than she is an additive,” Acho contended. He added that Clark “has gotten the WNBA over the necessary threshold they needed. Now people are watching. Now we realize, oh, there’s talent in the W — talent that’s actually even greater than Caitlin Clark… Caitlin got the necessary eyes there. But now that the eyes are there, we don’t necessarily need her anymore.”
Shortly after, ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith weighed in, delivering a sharp rebuttal to Acho’s stance. “Absolutely, positively insane,” Smith said of the take. “Caitlin Clark is the cash cow. I don’t care what numbers you see the WNBA making; they’re nothing compared to the numbers Caitlin Clark generates for the WNBA. That’s just the truth. You know, she comes into the league, and two weeks later, after years and years of flying commercial, they get chartered— they get chartered flights the moment she arrives into the league. You’re talking about salaries that range anywhere from $100,000 to, if they’re lucky, $300,000 in the WNBA. Caitlin Clark is making over $16 million because of the endorsements she gets off the court. When she goes to an arena, she packs the house. And when they talk about their bloated attendance numbers, they feed off of her and her contribution.”
Smith’s comments echoed a broader recognition within the sport that Clark’s economic and audience impact on the league is immense. WNBA legend Lisa Leslie spoke to a similar reality at the start of the 2026 campaign, noting, “Never in the history of the WNBA have we had a player force teams to get into larger arenas. I’ve never seen that happen. If you’re the GM, you’re obviously supposed to be bringing in money. That’s revenue. I’m going with Caitlin Clark.” Clark’s on-court performance has been colossal, but many would argue that her off-court influence—her ability to draw national attention, boost attendance, and drive sponsorship and media interest—may be even more consequential for the league’s growth.
Ultimately, the discussion centers on Clark’s unique position in the sport: a superstar who has elevated the WNBA’s profile to levels not previously seen, while also prompting debate about the long-term implications of that exposure. The reality, as many observers argue, is that the WNBA has benefited from Clark’s emergence, and there isn’t a credible scenario in which the league is better off without her star power. The broader consensus remains that her presence has driven unprecedented visibility, increased engagement, and meaningful financial impact for teams and the league as a whole.