Nancy Lieberman has never been shy about speaking her mind, especially when it comes to defending Caitlin Clark. Earlier this month, the former WNBA coach and Hall of Famer clapped back at ex-NBA guard Jeff Teague, who labeled Clark “good but not great.”
Now, she’s doubling down with an even stronger statement, comparing the 23-year-old phenom’s influence on women’s basketball to Michael Jordan’s impact on the NBA and Tiger Woods’ transformation of golf.
Why Does Nancy Lieberman Compare Caitlin Clark to Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods?
Speaking on the TFU Podcast, Lieberman acknowledged the work that legends like herself, Diana Taurasi, Sue Bird, and Tamika Catchings put into growing the women’s game. But then she made a crucial point about Clark’s unique ability to capture mainstream attention.
“I did my job. Taurasi did her job. Bird, Catchings…everybody had a hand in the growth of women’s basketball. But what Caitlin did in college, she got you watching. She got the average person watching.”
Lieberman emphasized how Clark’s appeal goes beyond die-hard fans. “She got mom and grandma watching. And she is doing economically, what Tiger Woods did to golf. He changed the attendance, he changed the ratings, he changed the purses.”
The Tiger Woods comparison carries significant weight. Just as Woods elevated golf into a mainstream spectacle that transcended traditional boundaries, Clark has helped transform women’s basketball into must-watch television.
The numbers back that up: her college games shattered ratings records, and the WNBA Draft averaged nearly 2.5 million viewers, the most in league history.
Lieberman didn’t stop there. She also drew parallels to Jordan’s arrival in 1984, noting the seismic shift that followed.
“I don’t know, were a lot of guys jealous to him, I am sure there was jealousy, I am sure a lot of white guys will be jealous of him because as a black man he changed the game. Michael Jordan in 1984, when he came into the league, Bird and Magic were turning the corner and MJ just flipped it on its head. The licensing agreement changed.”
Jordan redefined how the NBA marketed its stars and created a template for athlete branding that still exists today. Lieberman sees Clark as having that same transformative effect for the WNBA, changing how the league positions itself to the broader public.
“The attendance in the arenas that were half full, the league pushed his game on national TV all the time like they are doing with Caitlin Clark. It’s OK, it’s OK to be great. She is a great player, I know she has injuries this year. Larry Bird has injuries, Michael had injuries, I have injuries, Tiger Woods had injuries, but it can’t take away what she has done economically.”
Lieberman’s comparison might sound lofty, but a quick look at the Indiana Fever’s attendance figures and the league’s soaring valuations shows she’s building her case on solid ground.
How Has Clark’s Economic Impact Transformed the WNBA?
Lieberman’s assessment becomes even more compelling when examining Clark’s measurable impact on league economics. The Indiana Fever, Clark’s team, leads the WNBA in attendance with more than 300,000 fans over 18 home games. The season opener against the Chicago Sky drew 2.7 million viewers on ABC, setting the tone for what became a record-breaking year.
Clark’s presence has directly boosted WNBA economics in ways that mirror the Jordan and Woods effects Lieberman described. According to Sportico, the Fever’s valuation skyrocketed to $335 million in 2025, up 273% from the year before. The league as a whole doubled in value over the past year and now stands at $3.5 billion collectively.
Merchandise and ticket sales reflect the same trend. Jersey sales soared over 1,000% in 2024, while ticket sales climbed more than 250%. Clark’s brand impact was highlighted when her special-edition Kobe V Protro colorway sold out instantly earlier this year, demonstrating her crossover appeal beyond basketball.
Experts estimate Clark’s total economic impact on the league could approach $1 billion in 2025. Researcher Ryan Brewer projected that the city of Indianapolis alone could see an additional $41 million in revenue thanks to Clark’s games and related events.
Even Clark’s absence carries measurable weight. When it was announced she would miss this year’s All-Star Game in Indianapolis, ticket prices dropped by nearly half, providing clear evidence that her star power drives demand at every level of the basketball ecosystem.
Clark’s arrival coincides with major WNBA milestones that further validate Lieberman’s comparisons. The league recently signed an 11-year, $2.2 billion media rights deal with ESPN, NBC, and Amazon starting in 2026. Expansion teams are also on the way, including the Golden State Valkyries this year and new franchises in Toronto and Portland in 2026.
But even with all these developments moving forward, it’s Clark who is being credited with sparking the surge of mainstream interest that made such growth possible. Teams have moved Fever games into larger arenas to keep up with demand, while television networks have adjusted their programming to feature her more prominently.
Clark has taken her sport from the margins and pulled it into the center of national conversation. According to Lieberman, the only thing left is for people to get comfortable with recognizing true greatness when they see it.
