- The Women's National Basketball Association is averaging 1.3 million viewers per game, tripling last season's average of 462,000 viewers.
OT: Clark 3
- Thread starter Pitt2006
- Start date
Ok genius, now tell me how much CC has done to improve every business aspect of the WNBA, interest, eyeballs, tickets, and so on. Someone smarter than you explains it like this; the league has gotten better incrementally, but with CC it has improved exponentially. Consult a dictionary if you don't know the difference.
lol. Yeah the Washington mystics sold out before Clark.But they have
Check the date 2023
WNBA regular season most-watched in 21 years
The WNBA once again had strong metrics this year as the league had its most-watched regular season in 21 years and its highest average attendance since 2018.www.espn.com
They sure are
According to data from Across the Timeline, the Indiana Fever are leading the league — by a wide margin — in both overall and average attendance. The Fever have brought in 82,857 fans to their five home games so far for an average of 16,571 fans per game.
Those 82,000-plus total fans have already broken last year's total home attendance in Indiana. The Fever hosted 81,336 fans across 20 home games in 2023, according to Across the Timeline.
Clark has also been responsible for several WNBA teams moving to larger venues in order to accommodate bigger crowds.
Just 5 home games into Caitlin Clark era, Indiana Fever break last year's attendance mark
It took Caitlin Clark a grand total of five home games to help the Fever break last year's home attendance mark.
www.kcci.com
Anyone who has watched Indiana, which I understand is well beneath most of the people posting in this thread, would say that it's easy to see why they were bad enough to get the number one pick in the draft. They are, indeed, a bad basketball team.
No just bad before Clark got there, bad now too.
Of course she is
Nobody is debating that , the novelty will wear off .
The folks screaming the most about how great she is -
Aren’t watching anyway .
Frankly that angel Reese - who is also very popular - has egged on this “rivalry” is also smart business .
Bunch of snowflakes don't want to admit that the overwhelming majority of the growth is due to 1 rookie. Its sad.
I’d say - let the season play out.
She’s got people’s attention -
But let’s see if it lasts
Of course it’s not going to last. She’s playing on a crap team and women’s hoops is not very popular overalll But the level of interest she’s brought to the game has been unprecedented
Yeah, it’s still a very poor product and this Clark effect can only last so long before people realize that this your typical wnba game is the talent equivalent of a low level boys high school basketball game.
I wouldn't say that exactly. WNBA teams could win WPIAL 6A Boys but depending on the teams, it would be competitive.
such an interesting conversation. i have a buddy who has coached wpial hoops for years and i've asked him this question many times and he disagrees. but that's just one man's opinion, we'll never know..
not here to bash the sport but man, it's freakin brutal. CC was on last night and i watched about 15 minutes. just soooo slow, everything they do, run, pass, screens, dribble, drive, it's like slow motion. a decent high school boy would dribble circles around these "women."
it truly is a terrible terrible product. many women sports i enjoy and are entertaining, this isnt one..
Lincoln Park would have beaten a WNBA team. However, lets say a random team of unathletic but disciplined D3 level players from say Bethel Park wins the WPIAL. They would lose to a WNBA team. The women's skills are as good or better and this hypothetical boys team wouldn't have the athleticism advantage over elite women.
So if it’s not going to last -
And likely resorts to the mean of annual more linear growth -
Why all the arguing ?
She’s still setting attendance records NO other women’s player has been associated with
In something hilarious, I would guess that her not getting picked for the national team will actually extend her hold on massive attendance because it will make people rally more around her. That clearly was not the intention but it will likely be a result.
This all said, I do not think people are going to stop wanting to see her live because there are not many games overall in the WNBA and she is just a very different style of player. She probably has 2-4 more years where people will want to see her even if the team sucks and she does not progress much.
WNBA Still On Track to Lose $50 Million Even with Clark Bringing 105% More in Attendance
The WNBA is reportedly still on track to lose some $50 million despite the huge influx in new fans brought to the league by Caitlin Clark.
www.breitbart.com
Yep. The most vocal people on social media about any particular subject aren’t paying customers who are moving the needle. Honestly social media should be ignored with stuff like this.
As far as Clark, I’m guessing she’s not one of the twelve best. Just a guess though on my part. And any pub is good pub and the fact that she didn’t make the team is attention enough.
You’re 50% of the way there!
It’s not just this issue. Social media should be ignored for all stuff.
Well I was trying to play nice as it does go both ways. But since you asked: Case in point, I could have said “stuff like this and with the representation crowd” who are most vocal on social media. If these loud voices were paying customers, Leslye Headlands Star Wars would be killing it right now. Instead these voices are catered to and they don’t watch anyway.
I have no idea who Leslye Headlands is and I don't care.
I was just making a point that social media is stupid.
And I was too by commenting on the Clark outrage. People (and corporations) should start thinking for themselves instead of being preached to by influencers on social media and ESPNs first take—neither of whom intend on spending money or care about results/bottom line.
The WNBA is like olympic sports in college. They only exist because they are subsidized by the sports people want to see.
I see they have sponsorships on their jerseys. Is that true? Just wondering how they can become self sustaining, make up that 50 mil, and not subsidized by the NBA cash cow.
i dont know. i watched about 7 minutes of a game last week cause Clark was on. then i realized after 7 minutes that i'd rather watch anything else than this awful product so i changed the station..
I think that pretty much sums up most of the reason why then need the nba to pick up the bills to even exist.
Simple. They need to turn the added attention and the added television viewers into larger media contracts. Every person in America could be watching the WNBA this year and it wouldn't increase the amount of money they make from television this year, because the terms of the contract were determined years ago. But it would put them in a very good place when it was time to negotiate their next television deal.
It looks like they get about $60 million per year on their current deal. That deal runs to the end of next season. If they keep getting good ratings the rest of this season and next season then that $60 will probably increase by enough to make up that $50 million all by itself.
No, a reasonably talented 6A team would beat a WNBA team. So would 5A and 4A teams.
We will never know, but, I'd take my chances with the boy's teams. I've seen too many instances where boys outclass women no matter how good they are.
A random 4A soccer team would beat an NPSL team. I’m no authority on women’s hoops so I’ll abstain, but I’d think that a random like a Lebo or NA would beat an NPSL team, so would they w/ a WNBA team?
The NBA subsidizing the WNBA might explain a lot. Of course players are jealous of Clark making millions while they get 70K a year. But if the success of the league mattered they might be smart enough to see the cash cow as the best thing to ever happen. But it doesn't matter! The NBA will keep writing checks and they can treat Clark like garbage.
Can't believe I'm posting a response on a WNBA thread but here goes...But they have
Check the date 2023
WNBA regular season most-watched in 21 years
The WNBA once again had strong metrics this year as the league had its most-watched regular season in 21 years and its highest average attendance since 2018.
The WNBA average attendance last year (6,615) was lower than EVERY YEAR from 1997 to 2017. It has bounced back the last few seasons from pre-pandemic levels. 2023 was lower than 2018 and about the same as it was in 2019 (6,528).
Total attendance this year is up 156%, averaging 9,255 per game. And it's entirely because of Caitlin Clark. Games that CC plays in average 15,591 fans, but only average 7,645 when she's not in action.
TV viewership has also tripled compared to last year. The lowly Indiana Fever average 16,683 per game, 4,000 higher than the next highest team (New York Liberty). It's all about CC. So nobody in the history of the WNBA has had the impact that CC has created. Not in TV viewership, not in attendance, not in merchandise sales, not in social media.
Attendance has been falling for many years until a modest uptick coming out of Covid. Total attendance was up last year because of an expanded schedule. This year it exploded.
The fact that the oldest of what is probably their three best players is 23 doesn't help either.
Social Media Destroys Angel Reese For Hitting Caitlin Clark In The Head
Social media was on fire after Chicago Sky player Angel Reese hit Caitlin Clark in the head.
www.outkick.com
Similar threads
