There's no denying the WNBA has continued to grow, and some of the latest proof of that fact has arrived by way of NBA analyst Ric Bucher, who offers analysis for Fox Sports. On Sunday Bucher complained that the WNBA has fostered a "girls club" of female analysts who largely dominate coverage of the sport — and he doesn't understand why a professional women's sports league would do such a thing.
In a post shared on X and hashtagged #MediaCritique, Bucher both insulted coverage of the league as "safe and monotone" and said the league "deserves critical discussion from varied voices" — not just the "girls club protecting it from scrutiny." For Bucher, the problem must be that networks are afraid of actual critique (ostensibly the kind that a man could deliver) of the sport.
Bucher was taken to task by people who responded to his post (as one asked, "So…give white men more jobs… were you lobbying for women to get NBA jobs?") as well as by others around the media space, but some people agreed with him. Sports Illustrated insisted Bucher was "calling out the lack of gender equality in the WNBA's studio coverage" and that the league could use more debate.
No one in the WNBA is scared of being challenged by voices who want to debate and critque the game, but it's curious that there are men who feel they're the ones who are authorized to do so, or who feel comfortable challenging the way a women's league is discussed by women just because it's not how men discuss a men's league. On top of that, as that commenter pointed out, Bucher didn't seem too concerned about whether or not there's gender equality in NBA coverage.
It's also a little difficult to believe the comments were made in good faith. OutKick, which operates as an independent arm of Fox News Digital, has made no secret of the website's perpetuation of the so-called Caitlin Clark-Angel Reese rivalry, which many others have finally moved on from. This is relevant because Bucher's comments came on the same day the Fever and the Dream played, and one interpretation could be that what he really wants is the opportunity to offer "critical discussion" on those two teams, or even those two players.
To argue that WNBA coverage is only ever positive is a great indication that you're only paying to one segment of that coverage in the first place. Like every other professional sports league in the world, the W has plenty of professionals who analyze, critique, criticize, and praise it. It does make one wonder: is the problem actually the coverage that already exists, or is it just because it's women doing it?
Add us as a preferred source on Google