The WNBA dropped a 30th anniversary poster this week that was supposed to be a celebration. Instead, it became a firestorm.
The poster, posted on X and sold for $30 as part of the league’s anniversary merchandise, featured 20 past and present stars along with the logos of all 23 teams that ever played in the WNBA. Fans zoomed in immediately and noticed something weird. Caitlin Clark wasn’t on it. Sophie Cunningham was the player representing the Indiana Fever instead.
The backlash was fast and loud. People called it disrespectful. They said the league snubbed its biggest star. The poster went viral for all the wrong reasons from the league’s perspective. But according to sports business analyst Darren Rovell, the explanation is a lot less dramatic than fans assumed.
The real reason Clark is missing
Rovell, who used to work at ESPN, posted on X that Clark’s absence comes down to her own licensing restrictions. Clark signed an eight-year, $28 million deal with Nike in 2024 right after the Fever made her the No. 1 pick. That contract apparently gives Nike control over her likeness in a way that limits other licensees.
“The reason why Caitlin is not on this poster is—you ready?—Caitlin Clark herself. Other than Nike, Clark allows licensees like Wincraft, which makes this, to only use her name and number. Not her likeness,” Rovell wrote. He added: “Moving on. The ‘disrespect’ card was fun for a day.”
So it’s not that the league forgot her. It’s that Wincraft, the company producing the poster, didn’t have the rights to use her image. They could use her name and jersey number on other products, but not her face on this particular item. That’s a contractual detail, not a slight.
Fans weren’t buying it at first
Look, it’s easy to see why people got upset. Clark is arguably the most popular player in league history. She’s been drawing record crowds, boosting TV ratings, and turning the Fever into a national storyline. Seeing Sophie Cunningham on a commemorative poster while Clark was nowhere felt off. But the WNBA didn’t make a shady call here. They were working within the boundaries of Clark’s own deal.
Neither the league nor Clark has commented on the poster as of this writing. That might change if the noise keeps up, but for now the explanation is pretty straightforward. It’s business. The kind of thing that happens when a player’s marketing rights are split between a big sponsor and the league’s licensing partners.
Clark’s Nike contract was one of the richest in women’s sports history. It gave her financial security and a major platform. But it also put some guardrails on how other companies can use her image. That’s the trade-off. And in this case, it meant she wasn’t on a $30 poster celebrating the league’s 30 years.
Irony has a way of showing up in sports business. The player who changed everything about the WNBA’s visibility couldn’t be on its anniversary poster because of her own star power and the deal that came with it.
Leave a Comment