The Feud That Warned Us—Candace Parker vs. Geno Auriemma, and the Media Criticism Pattern

At this point, I think it’s time to take a closer look at who Candace Parker is as a public figure, based on her history in the media. And I can’t help but wonder if her long-running tension with Geno Auriemma foreshadowed what we’re seeing from her now.

In 2016, when Parker was left off Team USA, her initial public response was measured: she expressed surprise and disappointment, said she believed she played well in camp, and felt she was still in her prime. Years later, though, her tone shifted.

Courtesy of Getty Images

By 2021, Parker became far more direct. She publicly stated that she and Auriemma don’t like each other, which is a strong thing to say without many specifics ever being fully explained from either side. What we do know is that Auriemma was not the only person responsible for the 2016 roster decision, which raises a key question: why did Parker single him out so sharply?

One possibility is that the tension wasn’t just about one roster decision, but about the broader history surrounding the sport. The Tennessee–UConn rivalry has always carried emotional weight, and it’s widely known that Pat Summitt and Geno Auriemma had their own complicated dynamic over the years. It’s not hard to imagine how that history could shape perceptions and relationships long after the games are over.

Courtesy of KnoxNews

Now, we’re seeing Parker in the podcast and media space, and the pattern feels familiar. Her early criticism drew attention when it centered on Angel Reese. At the time, I gave Parker the benefit of the doubt, assuming she might simply be harder on Reese because they play the same position, and that people shouldn’t dismiss Parker’s legacy based on a few comments.

Courtesy of Getty Images

But her more recent remarks about Paige Bueckers, suggesting Paige isn’t a two-way player, hit differently. Paige has long been viewed as a two-way player, and Parker’s framing felt like an outlier. That’s when it started to feel like this isn’t only about basketball.

Parker herself has said that the decision to leave her off Team USA had little to do with her on court play. So when her critiques of current players don’t seem supported by the numbers or the on-court reality, it creates a disconnect that’s hard to ignore. On top of that, the contrast in who does and doesn’t receive negative criticism stands out. We haven’t seen that same energy aimed at Caitlin Clark or Aliyah Boston, and the imbalance is beginning to look more like bias than analysis.

What makes this even more complicated is that Auriemma has never publicly addressed his personal feelings about Parker. He has, however, strongly rejected the idea that he alone controlled the 2016 decision. Meanwhile, the personal edge in Parker’s public comments, once easy to dismiss as old drama, now feels like it’s showing up in other places.

And that’s the real point: what we brushed off for years as a feud between a star player and a head coach may have been telling us something bigger about Parker’s approach to criticism, conflict, and narrative. Maybe we ignored it too long. Maybe it was revealing the whole time.