Leaving Clark off Team USA is a comical blunder of industrial self-sabotage—but also not that surprising. Let’s start with the unsurprising part. Team USA women’s basketball is a formidable juggernaut. Since Atlanta 1996, they have won the gold medal at seven straight Summer Games, and they will be heavy favorites again in France. This is a program with a legacy and a system—and though they have snubbed stars before (Candace Parker, Nneka Ogwumike) they’re not used to this sort of furious blowback from the public. They’re used to winning, and from a winning standpoint, it’s hard to argue: Team USA’s chances are going to be fine without Caitlin Clark. They are also going to be fine if they start a pinball machine at point guard.
But if Olympic basketball is also a business—and it is a business, like any element of the Olympics—then passing over a player who’s become a stadium-filling sensation is a strange and stubborn choice. Here was a low-risk opportunity to add a talented, already-on-the-roster-bubble rookie who would introduce a massive wave of new fans to the Olympic theater. These fans might not have followed prior U.S. teams, but so what? Clark’s inclusion would have lifted attention around the U.S. team in an extremely crowded Olympic calendar.
Think about it. Even if she seldom played a minute, Clark’s presence in Paris would have increased attention, coverage, eyeballs, merchandise, sponsorship opportunities…please stop when you think any of this is bad. By not including her, Team USA is fumbling an opportunity to ride a genuine grassroots phenomenon and raise the profile of its entire program. It’s daffy.