Caitlin Clark’s rookie season has been a whirlwind of record-breaking performances, sold-out arenas, and a surge of new fans tuning in to the WNBA.

But this week, the league’s decision to spotlight Notre Dame standout Sonia Citron in a high-profile marketing campaign—seemingly at the expense of Clark—has left Clark’s passionate fanbase fuming and sparked a heated debate about the league’s priorities, marketing strategy, and understanding of its own audience.

The controversy began when the WNBA unveiled its latest “Rising Stars” campaign, a multi-million dollar initiative designed to showcase the league’s next generation of talent.

While the campaign featured several young players, it was Citron—who has yet to play a single WNBA minute—who was front and center in the promotional materials, social media posts, and even a national TV spot.

Clark, despite being the most talked-about rookie in years and the driving force behind the league’s recent ratings boom, was conspicuously absent from the campaign’s launch.

The backlash was immediate and intense. Clark’s fans, who have followed her journey from Iowa to the Indiana Fever and helped turn her into a household name, took to social media to express their outrage. “How do you leave Caitlin Clark out of a campaign about the future of the league?” one fan tweeted.

“She’s the reason half of us are even watching!” Others accused the WNBA of “overthinking” its marketing and failing to capitalize on the momentum Clark has brought to the sport. The hashtag #WNBAFail began trending within hours, with thousands of posts calling the move “tone-deaf,” “out of touch,” and “the dumbest decision yet.”

The league’s explanation did little to quell the anger. In a statement, a WNBA spokesperson said the campaign was intended to “highlight the diversity of talent entering the league and introduce fans to new faces who will shape the future of women’s basketball.”

The spokesperson added that Clark would be featured in future campaigns and that the league was “committed to celebrating all of our stars, both established and emerging.”

But for many fans, the damage was done. The perception that the WNBA was sidelining its biggest draw in favor of a player who has yet to prove herself at the professional level was seen as a baffling misstep.

The decision has also reignited a broader debate about how the WNBA markets itself and its players. For years, critics have argued that the league has struggled to build and sustain star power, often failing to capitalize on breakout personalities and moments.

Clark’s arrival was supposed to change that. Her games have drawn record crowds, her jersey sales have shattered records, and her highlights have gone viral on social media. She has brought new fans to the league, many of whom are tuning in for the first time because of her electrifying play and relatable personality.

By contrast, Citron, while a talented and promising prospect, has yet to make her mark in the WNBA. Her college career at Notre Dame was impressive, but she enters the league with far less name recognition and a much smaller following than Clark.

For many fans, the decision to put Citron at the center of a major marketing push—while Clark is still in the midst of a historic rookie campaign—feels like a missed opportunity to grow the league’s audience and reward the player who has done the most to move the needle.

Even some WNBA insiders have questioned the move. “Caitlin Clark is a once-in-a-generation talent,” said one league executive, speaking on condition of anonymity. “She’s the reason we’re seeing sellouts in cities that haven’t cared about the WNBA in years.

To not make her the face of every campaign right now is just bad business.” Others have pointed out that the league’s attempt to “spread the spotlight” may be well-intentioned, but risks diluting the impact of its biggest stars and confusing new fans who are just learning about the league.

The Fever organization has tried to stay above the fray, with head coach Stephanie White and Clark herself both declining to comment directly on the controversy. In a recent interview, Clark was diplomatic, saying only, “I’m just focused on helping my team win and enjoying my first season.

There are a lot of great young players in this league, and I’m excited to compete with all of them.” But those close to Clark say she is aware of the debate and grateful for the support of her fans.

Meanwhile, Citron has found herself in an awkward position, suddenly thrust into the spotlight and facing criticism through no fault of her own. In a statement, she thanked the league for the opportunity and expressed admiration for Clark and the other rookies.

“I have so much respect for Caitlin and everything she’s done for the game,” Citron said. “I’m just excited to be here and to learn from the best.”

As the debate rages on, the WNBA faces a critical test of its ability to connect with its audience and capitalize on the momentum generated by Clark’s arrival. The league’s rapid growth in attendance, viewership, and social media engagement has been driven in large part by Clark’s star power. Failing to recognize and harness that energy risks alienating the very fans who are fueling the league’s resurgence.

For now, Clark’s supporters are making their voices heard, demanding that the league put its brightest star front and center. Whether the WNBA will listen—and adjust its strategy accordingly—remains to be seen.

But one thing is clear: in a league where every marketing move is scrutinized and every new fan counts, sidelining Caitlin Clark in favor of an unproven rookie may go down as one of the most baffling decisions in WNBA history.

As the season continues, all eyes will be on how the league responds. Will the WNBA double down on its “Rising Stars” approach, or will it pivot and give Clark the spotlight she’s earned? For the fans who have made her the face of women’s basketball, the answer can’t come soon enough.