- Joined
- Jan 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,520
- Reaction Score
- 16,990
An autographed Caitlin Clark rookie card has sold at auction for $84,000, setting a new record for the most expensive women's sports card.
OT: Caitlin Clark rookie card sells for record amount at auction
- Thread starter RSHERMVIKES
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2021
- Messages
- 789
- Reaction Score
- 3,978
Did if include a stick of bubblegum?
CL82
NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 59,134
- Reaction Score
- 220,351
Yes, And a package without the Caitlin Clark card and just bubblegum sold for $85,000.
(I kid, I kid.)
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,520
- Reaction Score
- 16,990
CL82- - - The bubble gum was chewed on by Caitlin Clark!
RockyMTblue2
Don't Look Up!
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 22,364
- Reaction Score
- 98,938
Well, we know Diana didn't buy it.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2021
- Messages
- 789
- Reaction Score
- 3,978
Diana wanted to buy the card but she was out-bid by Angel Reese.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2012
- Messages
- 2,222
- Reaction Score
- 10,292
I heard Dijonai Carrington was outbid as well.Diana wanted to buy the card but she was out-bid by Angel Reese.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2023
- Messages
- 250
- Reaction Score
- 987
The Clark Effect
Let me get this out of the way. up front. I think Caitlin Clark is a very talented basketball player. Is she the best ever as ESPN has pushed? No. But she is certainly very good. #1 in the 2024 WNBA draft. Whether she makes it into the GOAT category remains to be seen since she has only completed one season in the WNBA. Her long-range bombs beyond the ark in college are what caught everyone's attention but she has also showed a fairly complete game in the WNBA. All the kudos deservedly go to Caitlin. I also commend Caitlin for at least appearing as far as I can tell on the videos and other interviews on tv (mostly ESPN) to remain true to herself amidst all of the publicity surrounding her.
Now moving from her and her playing abilities to the publicity elephant surrounding her, it is really unreal. She is appearing on a segment on 60 Minutes tonight. A WNBA rookie on 60 Minutes? Maybe I just woke up from a 20 year nap but that's a first as far as I can tell.
So, what is going on? Does the WNBA really need a twenty-something who can shoot a 3-pointer save it? Who is pushing this publicity? The WNBA? Disney and their sub ESPN and some sports commentators called her the "savior of women's basketball" Really? Hard to believe those words. OK. Start the deluge. Hit me with the numbers. There will be those that show the attendance numbers when she is on the floor. Granted, but is that because they came to see someone with unbelievable basketball skills and floor generalship? I can name at least ten other WNBA players with better skills. Or is it that the fans are there merely to see how many 3 pointers from mid-court she could make? Or are people who don't know anything about basketball or specifically womens basketball being swept up in a media publicity head storm?
You can agree or disagree but whatever the case, the publicity is unfathomable and what I refer to as The Clark Effect. Now the question: Do you think it's a positive, a negative or a non-issue for the WNBA and why?
Let me get this out of the way. up front. I think Caitlin Clark is a very talented basketball player. Is she the best ever as ESPN has pushed? No. But she is certainly very good. #1 in the 2024 WNBA draft. Whether she makes it into the GOAT category remains to be seen since she has only completed one season in the WNBA. Her long-range bombs beyond the ark in college are what caught everyone's attention but she has also showed a fairly complete game in the WNBA. All the kudos deservedly go to Caitlin. I also commend Caitlin for at least appearing as far as I can tell on the videos and other interviews on tv (mostly ESPN) to remain true to herself amidst all of the publicity surrounding her.
Now moving from her and her playing abilities to the publicity elephant surrounding her, it is really unreal. She is appearing on a segment on 60 Minutes tonight. A WNBA rookie on 60 Minutes? Maybe I just woke up from a 20 year nap but that's a first as far as I can tell.
So, what is going on? Does the WNBA really need a twenty-something who can shoot a 3-pointer save it? Who is pushing this publicity? The WNBA? Disney and their sub ESPN and some sports commentators called her the "savior of women's basketball" Really? Hard to believe those words. OK. Start the deluge. Hit me with the numbers. There will be those that show the attendance numbers when she is on the floor. Granted, but is that because they came to see someone with unbelievable basketball skills and floor generalship? I can name at least ten other WNBA players with better skills. Or is it that the fans are there merely to see how many 3 pointers from mid-court she could make? Or are people who don't know anything about basketball or specifically womens basketball being swept up in a media publicity head storm?
You can agree or disagree but whatever the case, the publicity is unfathomable and what I refer to as The Clark Effect. Now the question: Do you think it's a positive, a negative or a non-issue for the WNBA and why?
I think Clark might eventually become the best ever. I don't just dismiss that. She improved a lot after the olympic break. And she actually managed to become first team all wnba as a rookie. How good will she be when she is 25? Or 27? The potential is pretty scary. And at the very least, I think her trajectory today is that she will be the best guard ever. Injuries, lack of development. There are things that could derail her.
To answer your last question. Is she good for the WNBA? Absolutely. She might be bad for unrivaled though. If the media rights deal improves too much; there may be no need for that league.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 2,817
- Reaction Score
- 14,880
I have to say, the most eye-opening thing in your post was, “Is she the best ever as ESPN has pushed?” We must be living in alternate universes! ESPN has consistently minimized Clark from day one! They had to be dragged, kicking and screaming to the Rookie of the Year acknowledgement! I’d like to hear the ten players with better skills. I would also be willing to bet those ten players weren’t picked up 92 feet fro m their basket, didn’t get brutalized on court consistently, and didn’t have the refs swallowing their whistles while they were!
Look, I’m not even a W fan, I only follow it to assuage my jonesing for UConn basketball! Our girls are the main focus of my basketball interest! However, I have to say, I’ve never seen the level of hate and jealousy accorded to this young lady both on and off the court! Minimize her contributions as you will (not you personally) her popularity, has resulted in charter flights, huge attendance numbers, and a new tv contract that is likely to raise the minimum salary in the W from around $70 thousand, to somewhere between $200-$300 thousand!
She has set or broken multiple rookie and WNBA records, has just finished what many are calling the greatest rookie season ever, She alone has been the recipient of 17% of all flagrant fouls, she has been openly mocked on court, nearly had her eye put out by what seems to me to be a deliberate jab into her eye by a player who has engaged in vitriolic attacks on her both on court and off, and throughout all of this, has never once blamed or accused anyone of anything! Does she have some faults? Of course, she tends to push off, some say she sometimes flops, her turnovers are high (though to be fair, most players who are being face-guarded 92 feet would as well).
Anyway, Paige and the rest of our girls are my main focus but I do hate to see unfairness and that is what I’ve seen regarding Clark!
Look, I’m not even a W fan, I only follow it to assuage my jonesing for UConn basketball! Our girls are the main focus of my basketball interest! However, I have to say, I’ve never seen the level of hate and jealousy accorded to this young lady both on and off the court! Minimize her contributions as you will (not you personally) her popularity, has resulted in charter flights, huge attendance numbers, and a new tv contract that is likely to raise the minimum salary in the W from around $70 thousand, to somewhere between $200-$300 thousand!
She has set or broken multiple rookie and WNBA records, has just finished what many are calling the greatest rookie season ever, She alone has been the recipient of 17% of all flagrant fouls, she has been openly mocked on court, nearly had her eye put out by what seems to me to be a deliberate jab into her eye by a player who has engaged in vitriolic attacks on her both on court and off, and throughout all of this, has never once blamed or accused anyone of anything! Does she have some faults? Of course, she tends to push off, some say she sometimes flops, her turnovers are high (though to be fair, most players who are being face-guarded 92 feet would as well).
Anyway, Paige and the rest of our girls are my main focus but I do hate to see unfairness and that is what I’ve seen regarding Clark!
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2021
- Messages
- 1,755
- Reaction Score
- 8,850
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2023
- Messages
- 250
- Reaction Score
- 987
We are getting way off topic here and I don't want to veer into a Clark Haters vs Clark Lovers squabble. Let's leave it that there are those who think she is the greatest and there are those who think she has more to go before bestowing her with that title. I am neither. I really want, however, to see that the talent existing past and present throughout the WNBA is given all the recognition it deserves and not overshadowed by a concentration on one.
But to respond to The Deacon's challenge: Let's start with just UConn past and present: Bueckers, Taurasi, Stewart, Moore, Bird. There's more past and present but let's leave it at UConn for now as we are veering off what I was trying to address in "The Clark Effect" which was not to denigrate or put down Clark in any way but to find out who exactly is behind all of the publicity. If ESPN was not pushing, Cuango, then who? The WNBA? And has the all of the media excitement surrounding her benefitted the WNBA or has it backfired by taking away from other teams and players?
But to respond to The Deacon's challenge: Let's start with just UConn past and present: Bueckers, Taurasi, Stewart, Moore, Bird. There's more past and present but let's leave it at UConn for now as we are veering off what I was trying to address in "The Clark Effect" which was not to denigrate or put down Clark in any way but to find out who exactly is behind all of the publicity. If ESPN was not pushing, Cuango, then who? The WNBA? And has the all of the media excitement surrounding her benefitted the WNBA or has it backfired by taking away from other teams and players?
Clark is the most popular player in the league and is a major factor in the attendance numbers but she is not responsible for charter flights or the new tv contract.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 2,817
- Reaction Score
- 14,880
Right! I beg to differ! The unbelievable surge of attendance, ($) and viewership, ($) is largely attributable to her. Look at the top games this season, in terms of attendance and viewership and you will find her team is mysteriously featured in most of them! Attendance+viewership=money and that is why the league suddenly decided it could afford charter flights! As for the new tv deal, why do you think the networks suddenly decided there was a profit potential in an organization that had never once made a profit or generated any viewership? Oh,oh, I know! They looked at the numbers that were being generated (mostly because of Clark but also to a lesser extent by Reese and others) and suddenly realized that maybe there was some money to be made after all! Clark’s popularity also helped people who never watched the W to discover A’ja Wilson, Phee Collier, and others who had played in obscurity before. What has Clark gotten back? Well, let’s just say it begins with H and ends with E!
I’d like to be a fly on the wall if all those tv execs that just ponied up all that money were suddenly told “Clark has had enough and has announced that she is going to go play in Europe”! Let’s just say the EMTs would have their hands full!
Last edited:
There is a lot of talk that the new tv contract is not sufficient. And it may have been a good deal after the 2023 season. But it is not a good deal after the 2024 season. And I think Clark might deserve a lot of the credit for that change of opinion.
The premise of your questioning seems to assume that the Clark phenomenon is a top-down or publicity-driven phenomenon. IMO, that is completely wrong. Clark’s popularity is overwhelmingly driven by Clark and her persona, and the reaction that casual and former non-WBB fans have to her long-range shooting and long-range/crazy passing. The story that Minneapolis sports curmudgeon Pat Reusse tells about encountering Clark in 2022 is instructive. That story repeated over and over among previous non-Clark fans, until an army was formed.
Reusse: Caitlin Clark hype has been percolating for years - and I saw it coming
Welcome to Target Center, you bandwagon jumpers. The Caitlin Clark crowd already was making its presence felt in the skyways and corridors outside the arena on Friday five hours before the scheduled 5:30 p.m. tipoff for her Iowa Hawkeyes and improved Penn State. Inside, Brenda Frese's Maryland...
www.aol.com
The Clark phenomenon is not the result of some clever marketing or promotion campaign. Playing for a non-blue blood college program and skepticism from some WBB elites/WBB talking heads also helped fuel Clark’s popularity. The non-insider WBB market is ultimately much larger than the insider market, if you can just get outsiders to pay attention and give them something they like. Insider skepticism of Clark also helped to strengthen the fervor for Clark. People know what they like, even if experts or greats (Diana T) disagree.
The comparison to Ionescu is also instructive. As the Wall Street Journal pointed out in the last week, Sabrina was Caitlin Clark before Clark. Sabrina was the face of college basketball, supported by Nike and Nike U (Oregon). Sabrina had a Nike shoe contract before playing a professional game.
While in college, Sabrina had unbelievable buildup and promotion, including celebrity and male BB endorsement. Sports and basketball-consuming audiences got healthy doses of Oregon/Sabrina and others were exposed to her existence as well. The Gospel of Sab was a thing to behold. And the basketball cognoscenti loved and embraced her. Geno couldn’t have been more complimentary after Oregon clobbered UConn in Storrs. And Sabrina deserved the hype. She was great. She was also robbed of crowning media attention when the 2020 tournament was canceled, with Oregon a national title favorite. Perhaps she could have broken out to the casual or occasional WBB fan, or to the WBB haters/skeptics, of which there are many in the MBB community.
Notwithstanding the hype, accolades and success, Sabrina barely moved the needle in college. Her style of play, deliberate, with great substance, didn’t wow the unknowing or unfamiliar upon a casual or accidental glimpse. You can lead a horse to water, but can’t make it drink. Her Final Four appearance in 2019 drew less than 1.5 million viewers, the smallest WBB Final Four audience since at least 2008. For all her greatness, Sabrina was still a creature of the small and static WBB world. That world has now changed, due to the presence and efforts of many, with Clark being at the top of the list.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2017
- Messages
- 767
- Reaction Score
- 2,804
Obviously not a Gamecocks fan.
I do concur that The Ducks had a good chance of winning but that is not a opinion shared by all.