Caitlin Clark, the 22-year-old WNBA star who made waves during her record-breaking rookie season with the Indiana Fever, has recently sparked a massive debate surrounding race and privilege in sports. She shattered six rookie records for points and assists, set four franchise records, and made her mark in history with the most assists in a single game—19. Her performances have captivated fans across the country, and her impact on the game is undeniable.

Yet, amid all her accolades, Clark found herself in the middle of a controversy after addressing her race and its possible role in her success. In a Time interview, she acknowledged her privilege as a White athlete in a league that has historically been shaped by the contributions of Black players. She emphasized the importance of elevating Black women and credited basketball legends like Lisa Leslie and Maya Moore for paving the way for players like herself.

While Clark’s recognition of her privilege might seem commendable, her comments have not come without criticism. The notion of “White privilege” in sports, particularly in the context of her unprecedented rise to stardom, has stirred controversy. Some argue that her success, while certainly earned through hard work, has also been bolstered by race in ways that are difficult to ignore. Others, like three-time WNBA MVP A’ja Wilson, have pointed out that Black women in the sport still face significant hurdles, with their contributions often overlooked despite their talent.

It’s clear that race is an unavoidable part of the conversation when it comes to women’s sports. The WNBA, a league often subsidized by the NBA, is continually scrutinized for its financial struggles, projected to lose $50 million this year. However, with Clark’s meteoric rise and newfound attention, the league’s losses have reportedly been reduced to $40 million—still a significant deficit. It begs the question: Is the WNBA really a viable business model, or is it simply a marketing platform for the NBA to champion diversity?

But it’s not just financial concerns that have left many people frustrated with Clark’s comments—it’s her shift toward what some perceive as a “victimhood mentality.” While her talent is undeniable, her acknowledgment of “White privilege” in an already racially charged environment feels like a move to appease certain groups, rather than letting her accomplishments speak for themselves. Critics argue that by focusing on privilege and race, Clark distracts from the hard work and sacrifice that have made her a star.

Her comments have even led to a larger discussion about how the WNBA’s current trajectory might be affecting its potential for success. The WNBA, despite some notable players and increased visibility, has never turned a profit. It remains a “zombie” league—constantly struggling to find its place in a sports landscape dominated by men’s leagues. With a market that predominantly caters to male fans (around 80% of sports fans are men), it’s tough for the WNBA to carve out a significant niche without the backing of corporate sponsors and the NBA itself. The league remains highly dependent on financial support, which raises the question: Can the WNBA ever be truly successful on its own?

Despite the attention Clark has drawn and the praise she has received for her skills, her comments about race and privilege have complicated her image. Some fans, especially those on the conservative side, feel alienated by what they see as a politically charged message. They argue that her focus on race and privilege detracts from her basketball accomplishments and is a turnoff to potential fans who just want to see great basketball, regardless of race.

As a result, the controversy has only fueled the fire of disillusionment for many who were already skeptical of the WNBA’s future. While there is a real desire to see women’s sports succeed, many feel that the WNBA’s focus on political and social issues is pushing fans away rather than bringing them in.

The WNBA can’t seem to escape these narratives of race, privilege, and politics. If it continues down this path, it may miss the opportunity to capture a wider audience, especially those who want to support women’s sports without the constant political undertones. Caitlin Clark, for all her talent and achievements, may have just alienated a portion of her fanbase with her comments. In a league that is already struggling, can it afford to lose any support?

It’s a sad reality for a league with such immense potential. Instead of just focusing on playing basketball and letting her success speak for itself, Caitlin Clark has waded into the complex waters of race, privilege, and victimhood. And in doing so, she might have lost more than just fans—she may have lost the chance to elevate the sport on her own merit, free from the baggage of politics.

In the end, sports should be about competition and celebrating athletic talent. Caitlin Clark is undeniably talented, but her recent comments on race and privilege may have overshadowed the true reason why people should be paying attention to her in the first place: her undeniable skill on the court.