As the 2024 WNBA season unfolds, one trend is becoming impossible to ignore:
When Caitlin Clark isn’t playing, the ratings drop — fast.

While the Indiana Fever rookie has brought a surge of attention and record-breaking viewership, games without her often struggle to hold the same national interest. So what’s really going on here?

Is it just the “Clark effect,” or does this point to a deeper issue within the WNBA’s marketing, visibility, and star power ecosystem?

Let’s break down the real reasons why WNBA ratings plummet without Caitlin Clark — and what the league must address going forward.

 The Star Power Vacuum

Before Caitlin Clark entered the league, the WNBA lacked a truly mainstream star — someone who transcended the sport and brought in casual fans, not just diehard basketball followers.

Yes, legends like Diana Taurasi, Breanna Stewart, and A’ja Wilson are elite players. But few outside the core fanbase knew their names. Clark, on the other hand, is a once-in-a-generation marketing asset, thanks to her record-breaking NCAA career, fiery style, and humble Midwest personality.

When she plays, people tune in. When she doesn’t? The spotlight fades.

 Inconsistent National Coverage

The WNBA has struggled for years with limited TV deals, scattered game schedules, and games buried behind streaming paywalls.

Caitlin Clark’s games — often aired on ABC, ESPN, or Prime-time slots — give the league national exposure it rarely enjoys. But when the Fever aren’t playing, fans are left wondering:

Where do I even watch these other games?

Without Clark driving prime placement, viewers lose interest or can’t find the games at all.

The Social Media Gap

One of the biggest drivers of viewership in modern sports is viral content — and Caitlin Clark delivers. Every step-back three, logo shot, or heated scuffle ends up trending on TikTok, X (Twitter), and Instagram within minutes.

Other players in the league are incredible talents, but they haven’t been packaged or promoted in the same viral-friendly way. When Clark’s not on the court, the buzz dies down — not because the games lack quality, but because the content pipeline dries up.

A League Dependent on One Player?

This is perhaps the most uncomfortable truth:
The WNBA may be too reliant on Caitlin Clark for exposure right now.

Ticket sales spike in every city the Fever visit

TV ratings surge when she’s featured

Media coverage, merchandise sales, and highlight reels revolve around her

That’s great for short-term growth — but dangerous if the league doesn’t capitalize on the moment to promote other stars. What happens if Clark gets injured? What happens if she burns out?

 The League’s Missed Marketing Moments

Where is the bold advertising push around players like A’ja Wilson, Sabrina Ionescu, or Arike Ogunbowale? Why aren’t their stories and personalities showcased weekly on national outlets?

Instead of building a constellation of stars, the WNBA seems to have leaned almost entirely into the “Caitlin Clark Show” — and it shows in the ratings when she’s not there.

The solution isn’t to rely less on Clark. It’s to elevate more players to her level of visibility.

Final Thoughts: Clark Is the Spark — Not the Whole Fire

Caitlin Clark has done more for the WNBA’s visibility in three months than most marketing campaigns could do in three years. But a healthy league can’t survive off one face alone.

The real reason ratings tank without her?
The league hasn’t built up the rest of its roster to shine just as brightly.

There’s time to change that — but it’ll take strategy, investment, and the courage to push beyond the comfort zone of one superstar.