Nikola Jokic's Shoe Deal Throws Cold Water On Caitlin Clark White Privilege Narrative | Bobby Burack

The usual suspects in the sports media are up in arms over Caitlin Clark signing an eight-figure shoe deal with Nike. The likes of Mike Freeman and Jemele Hill are fuming that Clark, a white woman, secured a shoe deal over other black women in the WNBA.

"No Black WNBA players have a signature shoe. Here’s why that's a gigantic problem," read the USA Today headline before suggesting a systemically racist marketplace cost Las Vegas Aces star A'ja Wilson her own signature show. 

Wilson, in particular, has the accolades to warrant a shoe deal. We don't dispute that. Her résumé is extensive. She is a two-time WNBA champion, two-time league MVP, five-time All-Star, and an Olympic gold medalist.

However, the anti-white basketball brigade fails to acknowledge how the shoe business works. Shoe deals, like most endorsement deals, are contingent upon not accolades but marketability. 

Case in point: Nikola Jokić.

Jokić has been the best player in the NBA for the past four seasons, as supported by his soon-to-be third MVP in that span. He is the reigning NBA Finals MVP. Jokić is re-writing regular season and playoff record books. Yet until this past December, Jokić was the only NBA MVP since Kobe Bryant in 2008 not to have his own signature shoe.

According to reports, Nike had no plans to build a shoe around Jokić. Nike instead focused on signing rookie Victor Wembanyama, the face of the brand's new "Air Immersion Space" sneakers.

Jokić ultimately had to settle for a deal with the Chinese shoe company 361 Degrees, a brand that can hardly keep pace with Nike, Adidas, and Under Armour. 

Like A'ja Wilson, Jokic's résumé more than warrants a signature deal with a Big Three shoe brand. But also, like Wilson, he's not as marketable as other players with more lucrative endorsement deals.

If Nike, Adidas, or Under Armour thought they could make money on Jokić and/or Wilson – there would be a bidding war. There is not.

Here's why:

Jokić is foreign. He doesn't have the charismatic personality or jaw-dropping style of play compared to, say, Steph Curry, LeBron James, or Kevin Durant. A'ja Wilson is a WNBA player. Very few WNBA players crossover into the mainstream. She has not.

The lack of interest in a major shoe deal for Jokić throws cold water on the narrative that the marketplace favors white players. Get this: the last MVP before Jokić to not receive a signature show was Dirk Nowitzki, another white player.

Simply put, Nike didn't choose Caitlin Clark over Wilson because she's white. Nike chose Clark because she's the most preeminent female basketball player in at least two generations.

Race matters to the media. Shoe brands want to make money, at all costs and colors. LeBron James, Michael Jordan, and Steph Curry sell more shoes than any white athlete in this majority-white nation. 

Perhaps Caitlin Clark can soon challenge that trio.

Clark moves television ratings, merchandise, and ticket sales. Wilson, and other black women in the WNBA, do not. 

Caitlin Clark is Tiger Woods, Serena Williams, and Wayne Gretzky: a dominant athlete who transcends a niche sport. A'ja Wilson is Jokic: a dominant player whose stardom is limited to the confines of the sport in which they play.

So, while we regret interfering with a convenient narrative, systemic racism is not the reason black women in the WNBA don't have signature shoe deals. 

Blame the market, the projected return on investment.