Michael Jordan Example Used To Logic-Check ESPN Analyst After Controversial Caitlin Clark Opinion Sparks Passionate Debate

The bar has officially been raised! We already know that 2024 was the golden year for women’s basketball. The WNBA delivered its most-watched regular season in 24 years and finished with its highest attendance in 22 years. And a huge reason for that was Caitlin Clark, obviously. She basically turned every court she touched into a headline. Now, with Paige Bueckers stepping in, the expectations are higher. She’s got talent, legacy, and that UConn spotlight.

Now, Bueckers might not have broken Clark’s records just yet, but she did manage to outdo another legend, Diana Taurasi. The 2025 draft night officially topped Taurasi’s historic one in terms of viewership. ESPN just announced that the draft averaged 1.25 million viewers. That makes it the second-most-watched WNBA Draft ever. First place still belongs to the 2024 spectacle, where 2.4 million tuned in for Clark, Angel Reese, and Cameron Brink.

Sure, it was a 49% drop from last year, but Monday’s draft was still the most-watched program on TV among men 18–34, men 18–49, and all adults 18–34. Peak viewership was 1.46 million. That’s not exactly a fall-off.  In fact, it’s pretty massive when you recall that before 2024, it never touched even a million mark.

However, this dip in numbers from 2024 isn’t new. Last year’s WNBA season saw a drop when Clark’s team got bounced from the playoffs. This year’s NCAA tourney had the same vibe. Compared to Clark’s senior run, viewership took a hit.

USA Today via Reuters

The 2025 NCAA women’s title game—UConn vs. South Carolina—still pulled 8.5 million viewers, peaking at 9.8 million. Not bad at all. It’s actually the third most-watched final in ESPN history. But still trailing far behind the 2024 South Carolina vs. Iowa game (18.9 million) and the 2023 LSU vs. Iowa clash (12.3 million). And guess who starred in both? Yes, Caitlin Clark.

But we also need to remember that UConn and South Carolina are national powerhouses with built-in fan bases. People are gonna watch regardless. Casual fans are going to be tuning in for Paige. They want to see what she’d do. And while her presence alone isn’t breaking Clark-level records yet, it’s still generating buzz.

The Draft saw a 119% increase in viewership compared to 2023—aka the last pre-Clark season. Now, while it will be interesting to see what kind of broadcast draw Bueckers will be as a pro, the online debate has taken another route. ESPN PR dropped a graphic on Twitter to highlight the growth in viewership. But the numbers compared 2025 to 2023, not 2024. Which left a lot of fans scratching their heads.

ESPN analyst, Elle Duncan, jumped in to clear the air. “So we all know last year was pretty anamolous [anomalous] with CC being who she is. So to track actual growth, since she isn’t gonna ever be drafted again or play in college again we use 2023 metric to track actual growth and progress- 2023 was record setting as well!” she wrote.

Well, that didn’t sit right with everyone. Fans came swinging, pulling out the ultimate Michael Jordan reference.

Fans question ESPN’s handling of Caitlin Clark’s impact

One user said, “So your logic is faulty & misleading. That logic would then have to apply to other NBA/WNBA stats such as MJs historic years of scoring & ChPs,which would not be counted because they were “anomolous” due to the crazy variance from other NBA players. How do they just erase Caitlin’s draft year?”

We know that Michael Jordan literally changed the sport with two separate three-peats, six championships, and that 1998 Finals Game 6 that pulled in 35.89 million viewers—still the most-watched NBA game of all time. That kind of history just can’t be written off. And the same goes for Clark. The Clark effect even outshone the ‘Michael Jordan effect.’ Fans feel like what she did was a movement-level impact. You’ve got a record-breaking season, packed arenas, and more eyeballs on women’s basketball than ever. Sure, it was “anomalous” in the sense that it broke all kinds of norms, but that’s kind of the point.

Another fan chimed in, not even arguing the comparison itself, but the way it was presented. They suggested that why not just say, “2025 ratings are down from 2024 but up from 2023.” That way, you acknowledge 2024’s wild ride without making it seem like it never happened. And contrastingly enough, this comes after the WNBA itself was being called out for not giving this year’s draft class the same spotlight as last year’s. So yes, these debates and comparisons will become a regular thing, especially now, when the W is literally on the come-up and under a microscope.

Then there was this fan who brought JuJu Watkins into the chat. “So, if when Juju enters the draft and she (for argument’s sake) breaks the anomaly Caitlin set in 2024, we calling that an anomaly also or part of the “actual growth”?,” they said.  We know that Watkins is basically the future, and she’s not just in the shadows. In fact, her showdown with Bueckers last December pulled over 2.23 million viewers, making it one of the biggest women’s college hoops games of the year.

So if JuJu enters the 2027 draft and somehow goes toe-to-toe with Clark’s draft numbers, are we not comparing that with 2024 draft numbers, too, is what fans are asking. Another user echoed the confusion around Elle Duncan’s statement, where she said Clark will never “occupy those spaces” again, meaning the draft as they wrote, “None of the players from 2023 will play in college again or be drafted again, so how is cc any different? I have no idea how anybody takes the w media seriously.”

With another attack on media, particularly ESPN, another opined, “No help needed, y’all just making it clear ESPN’s not a trustworthy source.” And this isn’t the first time. ESPN was already under fire last year for snubbing Clark from their list of the top five greatest NCAA women’s players. The excuse was that she had no national title.

But fans weren’t buying it, especially since the same network was happily using her name and face to hype the segment. That kind of move felt straight-up disingenuous to a lot of people. Despite it all, the actions tell that the media—and honestly everyone—knows CC brings viewers in the numbers only she can bring. And ESPN is not shy about giving her that platform.