Author | Gina K

I’m going to say something that I feel like gets completely lost whenever people start comparing Angel Reese and Caitlin Clark: these are two different basketball players with two completely different games, personalities, and images, and that is perfectly okay. Why does one woman have to be torn down in order for people to celebrate the other one?

Caitlin Clark deserves credit for what she brings to basketball. She can shoot from ridiculous distances, create plays, pass the ball, and bring excitement to the game. Nobody should have to pretend Clark isn’t talented just because they happen to like Angel Reese. But that same respect needs to go the other way.

Angel Reese can PLAY basketball.

Sometimes I feel like people look at Angel Reese and see the lashes, hair, fashion, makeup, modeling, endorsements, and personality before they see the actual basketball player. She’s almost treated like she’s the WNBA’s Barbie doll who just happens to play basketball on the side. That’s what bothers me. Being feminine, fashionable, outspoken, or interested in things outside of basketball doesn’t suddenly erase what somebody does on the court.

Reese has built her reputation around rebounding, toughness, physicality, positioning, and fighting for possessions. Those things might not always make the flashy highlight clips that a deep three-pointer makes, but anybody who actually understands basketball knows how important those parts of the game are. A team needs somebody willing to get underneath that basket and battle.

And there’s another part of this conversation that I think people are afraid to talk about: marketability and image. Caitlin Clark may receive more endorsement opportunities because companies might consider her image safer or easier to market to a broad audience. I’ve seen people criticize Angel Reese for dressing too risky or revealing, and whether that’s fair or not, companies absolutely pay attention to public image when choosing who represents their brands.

But I don’t think Angel Reese should have to completely change who she is just to be considered marketable. If she wants to dress sexy, glamorous, bold, or fashionable off the court, that’s her choice. At the same time, we can acknowledge that certain companies may choose someone like Caitlin Clark because they believe her public image fits their particular brand better. That doesn’t necessarily mean Clark is a better basketball player, and it doesn’t mean Reese isn’t deserving of opportunities. Endorsement decisions and basketball ability are two completely different conversations.

Honestly, I think the constant Caitlin Clark versus Angel Reese conversation has hurt both women. Everything becomes a competition. If Angel has a good game, somebody has to bring up Caitlin. If Caitlin does something amazing, somebody has to use it as an opportunity to insult Angel. Why can’t we acknowledge that they have different strengths?

Angel Reese doesn’t have to become Caitlin Clark to be considered a good basketball player.

That’s the whole point.

She has her own style of basketball. She has her own personality. She has her own fan base. And yes, she has created a brand for herself outside of basketball. Good for her! Male athletes have endorsements, clothing lines, commercials, podcasts, businesses, and entire brands built around their personalities, and nobody automatically assumes that means they aren’t serious athletes.

Angel Reese can be glamorous AND competitive. She can dress boldly AND dominate the boards. She can build a brand AND be a serious athlete.

Those things can exist at the same time.

Maybe instead of constantly asking why Angel Reese isn’t more like Caitlin Clark, people should start recognizing that Angel Reese was never supposed to be Caitlin Clark. She’s supposed to be Angel Reese.

What do you think? Is Angel Reese’s bold image affecting the way brands and basketball fans view her, or do you think she simply isn’t receiving enough credit for what she actually does on the court?