Stephen A. Smith has long been one of the most prominent voices in sports media, and recently he once again found himself in the middle of controversy — this time involving Angel Reese.

Following what he and many observers consider one of her “latest stunts,” Smith criticized Reese in a way that drew attention not only to her on‑court behavior, but also to how she manages her public brand — especially in comparison to Caitlin Clark.

The situation that sparked Smith’s comments involved Reese posting a bold New Year’s Eve outfit on social media. According to reports, the look was criticized by many, drawing both praise and backlash.

Reese ended up deactivating her Instagram temporarily in response to the negative comments. For Smith, that moment represented more than just a fashion misstep; it was, in his view, emblematic of a pattern of behavior that sometimes undermines Reese’s on‑court credibility.

Smith has said that while he admires Reese’s athletic gifts and potential, some of her publicity moves seem calculated for attention rather than being grounded in basketball. He contrasted Reese’s behavior with how Caitlin Clark handles her branding. In Smith’s words, Clark “has handled her brand extremely well.”

By contrast, Smith said, Reese sometimes makes people “scratch their head” at what she’s doing. For Smith, visibility is important, but so is consistency and letting one’s performance carry one’s reputation without needing theatrics.

One dimension of Smith’s critique revolves around how clothes, posture, or fashion‑related posts can lead to objectification or criticism — especially for women, and even more so for Black women in sports.

Smith pointed out that when Reese dresses or behaves in a way some deem provocative, that can invite scrutiny: not always fairly, but inevitably. He didn’t say Reese has no right to dress or express herself, but suggested she should be aware of the consequences of public scrutiny.

In his discussion, Smith also raised the comparison angle: fans and media often draw direct contrasts between Reese and Clark, particularly because of their rivalry, both in college and now in the WNBA.

This comparison covers not just athletic performance, but persona, media presentation, branding decisions, and public behavior.

For Smith, some of Reese’s moves tend to make those comparisons harder, or invite criticism that might have been avoidable if her image strategy were more in line with how Clark is perceived to handle such things.

Smith’s critics argue that much of what he complains about reflects a double standard. They point out that female athletes, especially Black female athletes, are often held to contradictory expectations — if they are assertive, expressive, or bold, they are “too much”; if they are quieter or modest, they are “not in the spotlight.”

Reese herself has addressed this tension, saying that people tell her she doesn’t fit the box others want her in — “too hood,” “too ghetto,” according to some of the criticisms directed at her.

Smith also addressed, in other remarks, the rivalry between Reese and Clark more broadly, such as in the wake of some physical plays and confrontations during games. He has emphasized that competitiveness and “heat” are part of basketball. Some fouls, confrontations, and trash‑talk are expected.

 However, Smith suggests that when those moments are paired with off‑court attention‑seeking behaviors, they can complicate the narrative, possibly diluting or overshadowing purely athletic accomplishments.

The debate touches on several sensitive issues: agency, race, gender, branding, and media expectations. On one hand, Reese has a right to express herself however she wishes; fashion, attitude, confidence, personality — these are part of modern sports culture.

On the other hand, public figures often pay a price for bringing attention to themselves in ways that some consider provocative or controversial. Smith’s position seems to be that Reese should expect that price and perhaps be more strategic in how she handles that side of being a public athlete.

Reese’s fans and many observers argue that her visibility (fashion, social media, personality) is not only her choice, but something authentic that connects with fans.

They see her as someone who breaks molds, challenges expectations, and gives voice to people who want to see diversity of style and expression in sports. They also contend that criticism of her for dressing boldly or for making certain posts often reflects deeper societal biases, including sexism and racial bias.

Smith’s critique, then, is seen by supporters as either tone‑deaf or unfairly centering what they view as superficial elements over substance. They claim that Reese’s on‑court achievements (double‑doubles, rebounding, presence as a rising star) should be enough, and that off‑court expression is a legitimate dimension of being a modern athlete.

As the WNBA continues growing in visibility, the tension between athletic performance and public persona is unlikely to fade. For athletes like Reese and Clark, who are both high profile and heavily scrutinized, every action — a post, a gesture, an outfit, a social media decision — becomes fodder for commentary, not just about basketball but about image, identity, race, gender, and expectations.

In the end, what this controversy underscores is that being a star in women’s basketball today means balancing multiple roles — athlete, public figure, brand — in a landscape where some watch more closely than others, and some expectations are unspoken but powerful.

Whether Reese adapts her strategy or doubles down on her bold self‑expression, the scrutiny will keep coming. And whether Smith’s critique is accepted or rejected, it reflects a broader cultural debate: who gets to define what’s acceptable or admirable in sports, especially for young women of color.