The WNBA’s 30th anniversary was supposed to be a celebration of everything the league has built over the last three decades. And whether you like it or not, Caitlin Clark, who quite literally catalyzed the league’s growth, making it the No. 1 business in the nation in 2024, is a big part of it.

However, their promotional poster just ended up creating another controversy after they left Clark off it. So when Sophie Cunningham was asked about her teammate’s surprising omission, she didn’t exactly push back on the notion that jealousy might have played a role.

“It is a joke. This is why Cathy and the WNBA is getting lit up on social media because you are leaving out a generational—the best player to ever go to WNBA–on this roster,” Cunningham said on the latest episode of Show Me Something. “Honestly, if they were smart, they would market the s— out of some of us. They don’t.

“That should be (Caitlin Clark), that should be Kelsey Mitchell. That should be Aaliyah Boston. Like—why are we putting random players on there? I’m one of them.”

When the league unveiled its commemorative poster, it described it as a tribute to the stars who have “defined and shaped the game over the years.” Understandably, it included legends like Sheryl Swoopes, the first player the WNBA signed, Teresa Weatherspoon, Becky Hammon, and Lisa Leslie. It also had current players from Paige Bueckers, Breanna Stewart, and A’ja Wilson.

However, from a team like the Indiana Fever that has all 44 games on broadcast this year and is bringing in huge profits for the league, the only player on the poster was Cunningham.

“Why would you ever put me on it?,” Cunningham asked with eyes wide open in shock.

Considering everything that Clark has done for the league, which is most notably known as the ‘Caitlin Clark effect’, her omission was always going to raise some eyebrows. And it very much did.

Last month, Stephen A. Smith and Leslie openly questioned the anonymous GM’s poll that had Bueckers as the player whom they would want to start a franchise with. Their reason was easy: GMs want the business to boom. Caitlin Clark is the player who does that.

Even Rebecca Lobo, back in 2024 before Clark even picked the ball for the Fever, mentioned that she is a “tide that lifts all boats.” Clarkonomics certainly did that. But what’s interesting is that it could be a part of a much bigger pattern.

WNBA legends like Diana Taurasi, Sue Bird, and Candace Parker were also absent from the poster. Who would argue against a player who holds a record six Olympic gold medals and has played twenty of the WNBA’s thirty seasons? Yet, no Taurasi. Turns out, they have all had their fair share of beef with the commissioner over the years.

What’s even more mind-boggling is that players like Marina Mabrey, Rickea Jackson, Bridget Carlton, and Veronica Burton are on the poster. No shade to anyone, since these players are very important stars of their teams. However, when it comes to the growth of the league, the comparison doesn’t stand against Clark. Sophie Cunningham also couldn’t help but agree.

“If they’re really trying to make money, they are going to put people out there that—first of all, people want to see. That people are going to bring attention to, and they just don’t. I don’t know what they think when all that happened,” she added.

But the story, of course, doesn’t end here.

A few months ago, when the players were battling for a new CBA, Napheesa Collier alleged that commissioner Cathy Engelbert suggested Caitlin Clark should be “grateful” for the platform the league provides her to earn money from.

Ever since then, a growing section of fans has pushed the narrative that Engelbert has been reluctant to fully embrace Clark’s rise as the league’s biggest star. So, after the WNBA left the Indiana Fever guard off its poster, many saw it as yet another decision that fit that perception

Taken on their own, each incident tells a different story. But together, they’ve only fueled the belief among a section of fans that the league is plotting against its biggest star. Whether that’s true or not is open to interpretation, but it’s not hard to see why the latest poster controversy has only added more fuel to that narrative.