A lot of attention has been flocking toward the WNBA over the last few days following Paige Bueckers’s Rookie of the Year (ROTY) win—and specifically how Commissioner Cathy Engelbert celebrated the moment.

While many are congratulating Bueckers on what was undeniably an impressive rookie season, a segment of Caitlin Clark’s fanbase is harshly criticizing the contrast in treatment between how Clark was honored and how Bueckers was honored. Their objections raise questions about equity in recognition, fairness of league practices, and what fans expect of their stars.

The moment itself was highly publicized. Bueckers, who had an excellent first season with the Dallas Wings—averaging 19.2 points, 5.4 assists, 3.9 rebounds, and 1.6 steals over 36 games—received 70 of 72 first-place votes.

 The trophy presentation came during a surprise unveiling on The Jennifer Hudson Show. As Bueckers walked through the show’s “Spirit Tunnel,” Commissioner Engelbert stopped her mid‑walk, made a lighthearted joke, and then handed over the ROTY trophy in a live on‑television moment. That reveal included cheering, staging, chants from production, and visible fanfare.

For many fans of Caitlin Clark, this spectacle provoked discomfort—because they say Clark did not receive a similarly celebratory moment when she won Rookie of the Year last year. The way Clark was notified, via a phone call, is brought up as a contrast to the audience, staging, and fanfare Bueckers received.

The complaint isn’t simply about differences in statistics or merit (though there are plenty of comparisons there too), but about how much effort the league put into honoring the moment, and whether some players are getting more show than others for similar or comparable achievements.

Among the arguments from Clark’s fans is a recurring question: “Why now? Why the extra stage, the in‑person ceremony, the Spirit Tunnel, the chants, etc.?” Some feel that Clark’s award announcement last season was handled more perfunctorily—even though she had also delivered a historic rookie season.

 One social media user wrote: “The WNBA commissioner decided to put in a little more effort on this year’s Rookie of the Year announcement,” referencing the contrast.

Another wrote: “Cathy didn’t even FaceTime Caitlin last year … just a team call on speaker wow.” Many fans also pointed out the difference in merchandise and presentation—shirts, promotional materials, etc.—that accompanied this year’s celebration versus what was offered last year.

Another aspect that has stirred critique is the Dallas Wings’ overall performance. Some Clark fans argue that “team success” should matter in evaluating such awards or at least in how much extra spotlight a winner gets.

Bueckers’s team “won” far fewer games, and Clark’s rookie season included a strong team performance. It is argued that having fewer wins should reduce the spectacle or pomp associated with the award—if not the merit itself.

Some fans feel that treating Bueckers’s award so theatrically while she played for a team with limited wins suggests unequal treatment when star power (or media friendliness) is involved.

To be clear, many also recognize that Bueckers’s rookie statistics and achievements are outstanding. She set records (including a 44‑point game), ranked high in multiple categories, and made an immediate impact. The fan concern is less about denying credit and more about consistency: are all players rewarded similarly when their merits are similar?

From the league’s perspective (or at least through public reactions), there may be reasons why the presentation differed this time. Bueckers’s season had concluded when the award was announced, while Clark’s came at a time when her team was still active or playoff‑oriented.

Timing, television schedules, media partnerships (like The Jennifer Hudson Show), and marketing considerations could all influence how and when these recognitions are staged. These logistical or promotional differences might explain part of the disparity.

Another justification is that the WNBA is more aware now of how presentation moments can build stars, attract new fans, and generate media buzz. The league might be increasing investment in celebratory moments, recognizing the value in spectacle and narrative.

Bueckers’s surprise ROTY presentation might simply reflect that shift. But Clark supporters argue that a shift in league behavior doesn’t justify the unequal treatment of two players who delivered comparable performances.

The “10 games” reference comes from fans referencing how poorly Bueckers’s team did (Dallas Wings’ season record or number of wins) in contrast with the attention she got. There are tweets or posts along the lines of: “She couldn’t even win 10 games, yet she’s getting this big presentation.”

Or, “Why is there so much shine when the record says …” This kind of criticism merges team outcome criticism with perceived favoritism in how league officials handle recognition.

For many in Clark’s camp, the “double standard” they perceive goes beyond just these award moments. It feeds into broader concerns: media coverage bias, marketing focus, endorsement deals, narratives built around players, and fan perception.

They argue that if visibility is earned (which they agree Bueckers has earned a lot of it), then equal or similar ceremonial treatment should follow, regardless of which rookie is involved.

When one star gets a show, the other should get something comparable. The criticisms also touch on feelings that Clark has been over‑scrutinized and maybe under‑celebrated in certain public moments, despite being a major driving force for viewership growth and fan engagement.

On the flip side, there are also comments from neutral observers or Bueckers fans who believe Clark’s fans are being overly sensitive in this instance. They argue that Bueckers’s award was earned, that the moment was well deserved, and that comparing every detail of presentation may amplify grievances rather than help the conversation.

They note that league operations, media tie‑ups (like with talk shows), and schedules make equal staging difficult.

Also, some fans argue that while Clark’s rookie season was spectacular, the league showing less public fanfare in her moment doesn’t necessarily mean disrespect—it might reflect different circumstances.

In any case, the harshest criticism seems to be directed at Commissioner Engelbert for what many see as inconsistency. Some social media users called it unfair or said it sends a bad message to new players about what “star treatment” looks like, depending on media or popularity.

The frustration expressed isn’t just with Bueckers; it’s with how and why decisions of public honors are made, and how they are broadcast. It touches on fairness, perception, and how much merit alone should drive recognition, vs the spectacle surrounding it.

As the debate continues, one thing remains central: fans want clearer standards. When the WNBA awards ROTY, many expect that the league not only give the award based on performance, but also treat the presentation in a manner that respects the achievement equally.

Whether that means same‑type announcement, similar fanfare, or just consistency in staging—many Clark supporters believe those standards matter.

The controversy also highlights the wider evolution of women’s professional sports, where personality, media narrative, branding and presentation play big roles, often side by side with athletic performance.

Stars like Clark and Bueckers are not just judged on their stats, but also their story, their presence, how their moments are framed. In such an environment, every decision by the league, especially its leaders, is examined for bias, intent, or fairness.

In summary, Clark’s fans feel justified in their criticism: yes, Bueckers earned the award, but the disparity in how it was handed out versus how Clark was honored last year is what stings. They see a mismatch between performance and presentation, and want more transparency and equality in how these moments are handled.

Whether the league will adjust in response remains to be seen—but one thing is clear: fans are paying attention, and they believe that how you celebrate achievement matters just as much as the achievement itself.