Doyel: Why can't some of women's basketball's biggest names enjoy Iowa star Caitlin Clark?
The dominance of Iowa guard Caitlin Clark has reached the point of ridiculousness. She sells out almost every arena she enters in a sport where that just doesn’t happen. She’s expected to score 30 points or get a triple-double or hit the game-winner – or all three – and against defenses hellbent on stopping her, she scores 30 or gets a triple-double or hits the game-winner (or all three) anyway.
It’s ridiculous, what she makes routine.
And it’s ridiculous, what her dominance has summoned in others.
She is under attack from some of the biggest names in a sport she is taking to new heights, the attacks ranging from subtle to sneering to downright stupid, the noise around her growing so loud and unreasonable and unfair, we're left to wonder why. Instead of just enjoying the greatest women’s college basketball player of all time, and the most important player in the history of the sport at any level – yes, she is – we’re having to sift through the wreckage of others, asking questions about race and place.
Caitlin Clark deserves better, but then, this is what happens in America, where the only thing we love more than celebrating a heroine is tearing her down.
Doyel in December: Caitlin Clark to Fever would change this city, that franchise, forever
Is criticism of Caitlin Clark racist?
First, the most divisive issue this story has created, another racial wedge in a country that has enough of them:
What’s happening to Caitlin Clark is not racism. Not necessarily, anyway. There’s no way to know, which means we don’t get to pretend we do know.
The thing about racism, about any important issue, is we don’t get to pick and choose the examples to present our case. Look, you’re right, people do that. Look at COVID. People find examples of the vaccine not working, or of healthy young people collapsing of a heart attack – as if that doesn’t happen anyway – and highlight those needles while ignoring the haystack: Millions died of the coronavirus until the worldwide vaccine rollout brought the pandemic under control.
This is what we do on topics that demand better, like ignoring the way a politician thinks, talks and behaves because we’d rather see our side win. Sorry for bringing that up? No. I’m just sorry that society has deteriorated to the point where people would rather win than be right.
Same with the issue of Caitlin Clark and race. It’s true, some Black luminaries in women’s basketball have undercut her, but so has LSU coach Kim Mulkey. So let me ask a question:
When Sheryl Swoopes and Dawn Staley say something overtly negative or merely petty about Clark, if that’s because they’re racist, what motivation do we assign Mulkey – who is white – for her broadside attack? And whatever motivation we assign her, why can’t we assign it to Swoopes and Staley as well?
If you’ve been on the “Swoopes and Staley are racist” bandwagon, have you asked yourself those two questions? Will you ask them, now? Don’t bother telling me your answer. This is a conversation you and about 50 million other Americans, on this topic and others, need to have with yourself.
USA Today's Nancy Armour: Absurd conspiracy theories about Super Bowl, Taylor Swift, election
Sheryl Swoopes, Kim Mulkey, Dawn Staley enter chat
OK, so the negativity coming Clark’s way.
It has been building since early January, when Caitlin Clark beat Michigan State with a game-winner from about 30 feet to cap her 40-point night. That was the midpoint of a five-game stretch where Clark had three triple-doubles.
Afterward, South Carolina’s Staley – one of the most decorated players of all-time, and perhaps even better as a coach – went on Twitter to “congratulate” Clark by noting a controversial call that had gone Iowa’s way a few minutes earlier.
“Heckava shot,” Staley wrote, “but give the game ball to the ref for the shooting foul call.”
Don’t tell me: Hey, she congratulated her! No, this was Staley finding a subtle way to undermine Iowa’s win – and therefore, Clark’s game-winner.
A week later, LSU’s Mulkey was talking about her team’s balanced offense when she lobbed the following grenade in the direction of Iowa City.
“Nobody’s taking 40 shots a game like you see across the country,” Mulkey said. “We’re not that kind of team.”
And Clark’s not that kind of player. Career average: 19.7 shots per game.
When the masses are determined to bring someone down, facts don’t matter – but they do spread. Which brings us to Sheryl Swoopes’ clumsy, catastrophic attempt at a Clark takedown. On a podcast last week with former NBA player Gilbert Arenas, Swoopes said among other things: “Caitlin Clark right now probably takes about 40 shots a game (and) when she comes to the league, regardless of what team she goes to that has vets on that team, she probably ain't gonna get 40 shots a game.”
The other things Swoopes said? Pure poison meant to undercut Clark’s march toward the all-time scoring record in women’s college basketball. Entering Iowa’s game Thursday against Penn State, Clark has 3,462 career points, 65 short of Kelsey Plum’s record of 3,527 set at Washington from 2013-17.
“Kelsey Plum set that record in four years,” Swoopes said, the last factual statement you’ll read from her in this story. “Well, Caitlin should’ve broke that record in four years. But because there’s a COVID year, and then there’s another year, and – you know what I mean? She’s already had an extra year to break that record. So, is it truly a broken record? I don’t know. I don’t think so. But yeah, that’ll go in the record books … and I don’t think it should.”
Kelsey Plum at Washington: four years, 139 games, 3,527 points.
Caitlin Clark at Iowa: three-plus years, 123 games, 3,462 points.
Swoopes also taunted Clark: “And here’s the other thing that you don’t want to talk about is the defense. Like, you gotta guard somebody.”
Given Swoopes’ brutal miscalculations of Clark’s playing career and shooting frequency, you think she has any insight into Clark’s defensive ability? Me neither.
Enough with the tiny, tiny people in this story. Let’s talk about the giant.
Caitlin Clark: best, most important women's college player ever
About something you read earlier, and most likely disagreed with, about Caitlin Clark:
… the most important player in the history of the sport at any level.
Listen to me: She’s the No. 1 player on the list of importance, and it’s not even close.
Doyel in 2023: Coaches at IU, Purdue loving 'the Caitlin Clark effect'
Doyel in 2022: First look at Caitlin Clark was eye-opening, and a little disappointing
Didn’t say she’s “the best ever,” though I’m not saying she isn’t. Let’s see what happens in the WNBA, and with luck, we’ll see it firsthand around here. The Indiana Fever pick first in the 2024 WNBA Draft, and unless Clark does take a COVID year – jeez, Swoopes, really? – she’ll be playing the next 10-15 years in Downtown Indianapolis.
As far as her playing ability, here’s what we know: Clark's about to become the all-time scoring leader in women’s basketball, and she’s going to Maravich that record by putting it out of reach. Speaking of … she's also going to pass Pete Maravich’s college mark, male or female, of 3,667 points.
Here, Sheryl, now you can say it: Maravich did it in just three years!
True. Maravich was a gunner at LSU, averaging 38.1 shots per game – almost 40 – and making 43.8% from 1967-70. He also averaged 6.4 rebounds and 5.1 assists.
Clark has career averages of 7.0 rebounds and 8.0 assists, and shoots 46.9%. She has led the Big Ten in defensive rebounding twice, and is about to lead the country in assists for the fourth consecutive year. Assuming this season is her last, Clark will finish her career at Iowa as the No. 1 scorer in men’s and women’s history, in the top five (men and women) in assists, and with career totals of more than 3,700 points, 1,000 assists, 900 rebounds and 200 steals.
Caitlin Clark is, without question, the greatest female college player of all time, and in the conversation for greatest college player ever, male or female.
Her significance is even more obvious. I can hear an argument for former Tennessee coach Pat Summitt as the most important person in women’s basketball history, given what she started from scratch in 1974, but as far as players go? It’s Clark.
Iowa sells out games and/or breaks attendance records everywhere it goes, and while the Hawkeyes are No. 2 in the country, the overflowing crowds are a Caitlin Clark thing. She doesn’t get credit for the attendance at places likes South Carolina, LSU, Connecticut or Tennessee, no, but overall interest in the women’s game has never been higher. Are those schools deserving of some credit? Of course.
But so is Caitlin Clark, and she’s the only player who belongs on this list. It’ll be the same way when she gets to the WNBA, as far as sellouts and attendance records. Is it fair of me to talk about what I think will happen with Caitlin Clark in the WNBA? Maybe not.
But just watch.
As for everyone else – Swoopes, Staley, Mulkey, the lemmings following their lead – try to enjoy what you’re watching. Women’s basketball has been knocking on the door of mainstream fan interest for years, yes, but Caitlin Clark kicked the door off its hinges. People are flooding inside to see her, not to hear skeptics try to edit the history we’re watching.
Find IndyStar columnist Gregg Doyel on Twitter at @GreggDoyelStar or at www.facebook.com/greggdoyelstar.
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Attacks on Iowa's Caitlin Clark aren't racist, but they're predictable
