He said what everyone was thinking—but no one dared to say out loud. Angel Reese FURIOUS After Dan Patrick’s SHOCKING Comments Go Viral — “This Isn’t Over”

It started like any other sports segment.
Dan Patrick, the veteran sportscaster known for his smooth voice and no-nonsense takes, sat at his mic delivering commentary on the meteoric rise of Caitlin Clark in the WNBA. But by the time he was done, the internet was on fire—and Angel Reese wasn’t having it.

During a recent episode of The Dan Patrick Show, the legendary broadcaster laid out what many have danced around for months: Caitlin Clark didn’t just arrive in the WNBA—she changed it. And for Patrick, the numbers weren’t up for debate. They were undeniable.

“They didn’t have this much support before,” Patrick said, referencing WNBA ticket sales, national broadcasts, and the explosion of fan interest that followed Clark from her final NCAA tournament appearance into the pros.
“This isn’t a coincidence. This is star power.”

But while Patrick was busy connecting the dots with cool precision, Angel Reese’s name wasn’t far behind—not because he brought her up first, but because the internet did. Again.

Because every time Caitlin Clark makes headlines, every time she lands another sponsorship, shoe deal, or TV slot, the narrative suddenly shifts from celebration to interrogation:

“But what about Angel Reese?”

And Dan Patrick, whether knowingly or not, had had enough.

Clark: The Quiet Revolution

Patrick’s commentary drew a hard line.

Caitlin Clark, he argued, is doing what few athletes in any league ever do: redefining the product simply by showing up.

Before her first professional tip-off, WNBA teams were moving games to larger arenas. Season ticket sales were hitting historic highs. ESPN and other major networks cleared space to broadcast rookie preseason games—unheard of even a year ago.

“She didn’t just join the WNBA,” Patrick said. “She detonated into it.”

And yet, despite Clark’s clear commercial impact, the attention she draws has been met with resistance—not by fans or execs, but by a subset of players and influencers who claim the narrative is too focused, too flattering, too one-sided.

In Patrick’s words, “When greatness shows up, you don’t question it—you ride the wave.”

But not everyone is riding it.

Reese: The Villain Role, or the Real Issue?

Angel Reese, whose on-court talent and off-court personality have made her one of the most recognizable faces in women’s basketball, has long occupied a different space than Clark.

Reese has the charisma, the edge, the social media presence. She leans into the “bad guy” role, often reminding fans and media alike that she’s not here to be palatable—she’s here to be dominant. She draws comparisons to players like Draymond Green or Dillon Brooks: unapologetically combative, marketable by controversy.

And it works—to a point.

Dan Patrick didn’t say Reese wasn’t talented. He didn’t say she wasn’t important. But he did suggest that her rise in the spotlight has more to do with the tension she brings than the ticket sales she drives. And that’s where the fuse was lit.

Within hours of Patrick’s clip hitting social media, Angel Reese fans were in uproar. Some accused Patrick of minimizing Reese’s role in elevating the game. Others said he was buying into a “white media narrative” that promotes players like Clark while downplaying the contributions of Black athletes like Reese.

Reese herself responded with a cryptic tweet—just four words:
“Don’t get it twisted.”

But for many, the message was clear.

The Caitlin Clark Effect

Patrick’s core argument boiled down to one thing: impact.

He compared Clark’s arrival to Tiger Woods in golf and Wayne Gretzky in hockey—athletes whose mere presence bent the industry around them.

“You didn’t see people asking, ‘But what about Phil Mickelson?’ when Tiger Woods won his first major,” he said. “When someone changes the game, you let them.”

He wasn’t taking a shot at Angel Reese. He was defending Clark’s spotlight—a spotlight he says has been earned, not gifted.

Still, in a sports culture increasingly centered around identity, perception, and online debate, the nuance didn’t matter.

The clip was sliced, captioned, and spread.

“Dan Patrick says Angel Reese doesn’t matter.”
“Media biased against Reese—again.”
“Why does Caitlin Clark get all the praise?”

Suddenly, a segment meant to explain a basketball phenomenon became a lightning rod for everything from race and representation to branding and fairness.

The Divide That Keeps Growing

This isn’t the first time the Reese vs. Clark debate has ignited Twitter/X.

It began in college, where their rivalry took center stage in the 2023 NCAA Tournament. Reese famously taunted Clark with a “you can’t see me” gesture after LSU defeated Iowa in the championship game. The moment went viral, sparked cultural debates, and cemented the two players as yin and yang in the public eye.

Since then, their paths have only diverged further.

Clark has become the face of the WNBA’s next era—earning endorsement deals with Nike, Gatorade, and State Farm. She’s on magazine covers, late-night shows, and billboard campaigns.

Reese, meanwhile, has leaned deeper into branding through attitude—often challenging the narrative that puts Clark at the center of attention.

So What Now?

Whether Dan Patrick meant to or not, he stirred the pot. His segment didn’t attack Angel Reese—it questioned the reaction to Clark’s dominance. But in doing so, he struck a nerve that speaks to something much deeper in women’s sports:

Who gets to be the hero? Who gets to be the face? And who controls the narrative?

Caitlin Clark isn’t asking to be crowned. She’s playing ball. And as Patrick noted, the math doesn’t lie:

Ticket sales surged the day she was drafted

National interest soared before her first WNBA minute

And yes, even opposing teams upgraded arenas to accommodate the crowds she drew

That’s not media spin. That’s market reality.

Everything else?

Patrick called it “noise.”