Kim Mulkey and Flau’jae Johnson Drag Kara Lawson Into Caitlin Clark Firestorm — An Old Team USA Wound Suddenly Looks Different

Kim Mulkey has already publicly questioned what happened to one of her own stars under Kara Lawson.

Flau’jae Johnson has already lived through a controversial Team USA experience with Lawson.

Now Caitlin Clark is coming off the bench at the World Cup, Lawson is refusing to abandon her veteran-first starting lineup, and Team USA just needed a fourth-quarter surge to survive Spain 76–66.

Put those stories together and it is easy to understand why one explosive accusation is spreading: Mulkey and Johnson have “exposed” Lawson’s treatment of Clark.

But the most important detail comes first.

There is no verified new statement from either Mulkey or Johnson accusing Lawson of deliberately sabotaging Caitlin Clark. What is real is their previous criticism surrounding Johnson’s experience playing for Lawson — and that history has suddenly become highly relevant as Lawson faces another enormous debate over how she handles a superstar guard.

Mulkey really did criticize Johnson’s experience with Lawson

This part isn’t invented.

Johnson played for Lawson on Team USA at the 2025 FIBA Women’s AmeriCup. Months later, after LSU defeated Lawson’s Duke team 93–77, Mulkey revealed that Johnson had struggled emotionally during that USA Basketball experience.

Mulkey said Johnson “didn’t have a good experience with USA Basketball with Kara” and added that the experience had cost Johnson confidence.

That is an extraordinary statement when viewed through today’s Clark controversy.

Not because it proves Lawson is sabotaging Clark.

It doesn’t.

But because it shows that criticism of Lawson’s management of high-profile offensive players did not begin with Caitlin Clark.

And Johnson’s Duke game made the history impossible to ignore

When LSU beat Duke in December 2025, Johnson hit a late three and appeared to direct words toward Lawson and the Duke bench.

Suddenly the backstory became public.

Johnson had previously played under Lawson.

Mulkey said that experience damaged her confidence.

Then Johnson faced Lawson again wearing LSU colors and played with obvious emotion.

That’s the historical connection now being resurrected by Clark supporters.

And the timing could not be more explosive.

Because Lawson is again coaching an enormously popular guard.

Again, that player is coming from the bench.

And again, people are asking whether Lawson’s system is maximizing her.

There is one enormous difference

Flau’jae Johnson’s experience cannot simply be copied and pasted onto Caitlin Clark.

Clark has not said Lawson destroyed her confidence.

Clark has not attacked Lawson.

Clark has not said she is unhappy with her role.

And Lawson has repeatedly praised Clark publicly.

After Clark’s extraordinary 14-point, 11-assist, zero-turnover performance against China, Lawson called her “terrific” and specifically praised the way Clark changed Team USA’s tempo.

That doesn’t sound like a coach trying to destroy a player.

But it creates another question.

If Lawson knows Clark changes the game, why is she so committed to keeping her outside the starting five?

Lawson has already answered that

She trusts her veterans.

Heading into the knockout rounds, Lawson was asked whether Clark might start.

Her answer essentially shut down the possibility.

Lawson said the starting group had done a good job getting Team USA off to strong starts and added that she liked where the team was.

Chelsea Gray remained the starting point guard.

Jackie Young remained in the lineup.

Kahleah Copper remained there.

Breanna Stewart and Napheesa Collier completed the veteran five.

Clark stayed on the bench.

So did Paige Bueckers.

So did Angel Reese.

And that is where the Mulkey-Johnson history suddenly became ammunition.

Because Lawson has done something similar before

A recent Ringer analysis of Lawson’s approach specifically pointed to Johnson’s 2025 AmeriCup experience as evidence that Lawson is not particularly influenced by popularity.

Johnson was arguably one of that team’s most recognizable players.

Lawson benched her anyway.

Now the most famous player in women’s basketball arrives.

Lawson benches her too.

That doesn’t automatically prove bias.

In fact, it may prove the opposite.

Lawson might simply be unusually willing to tell famous players that their popularity means nothing when she builds a lineup.

That can be admirable.

It can also become stubborn.

Clark’s production is what makes this situation different

Clark isn’t sitting at the end of the bench.

That’s crucial.

Through Team USA’s first four games, she averaged 8.5 points, 7.0 assists and 2.8 rebounds.

Even more strikingly, despite being called a reserve, she was leading Team USA in average playing time at approximately 21.5 minutes.

So Lawson isn’t actually refusing to use Clark.

She is refusing to give her the starter designation.

Those are completely different accusations.

Calling that “sabotage” goes far beyond the evidence.

Calling it an increasingly controversial hierarchy is fair.

Then Spain made everything worse

Team USA reached the World Cup final by beating Spain 76–66.

But the final margin hides how uncomfortable the game became.

Spain attacked early.

USA struggled.

The game was tied 58–58 entering the fourth quarter.

Only then did the Americans finally pull away, holding Spain to eight points in the final period. Stewart led USA with 16 points, while Copper had 13 and Young added 12.

Lawson deserves credit for that.

Her team won.

Her defense delivered when it mattered.

USA reached the championship game.

But Spain also reinforced the central question surrounding this roster.

Why does a team this talented keep experiencing stretches where the offense looks so ordinary?

That question matters more than whether Clark starts

The starter debate is emotionally powerful.

The closing-lineup debate is strategically important.

Suppose Clark comes into the World Cup final and completely changes the pace.

Suppose Bueckers starts slicing through France’s defense.

Suppose Aliyah Boston is dominating inside.

At that point, Lawson’s job isn’t to protect her veterans’ status.

It isn’t to reward Clark’s popularity either.

Her job is to recognize what is working.

That is the standard against which Lawson should be judged.

Mulkey’s old criticism gives the debate a sharper edge

Because Mulkey wasn’t talking about playing time in some abstract sense.

She talked about confidence.

That is what makes her Johnson comments resonate.

A coach’s job with a superstar isn’t simply determining how many minutes that player receives.

It is figuring out how to put that player in situations where her strengths matter.

For Johnson, Mulkey clearly believed something went wrong.

For Clark, the evidence is considerably more complicated.

Lawson appears to trust her.

Just differently than Clark’s fans want.

Clark is being used as a change-of-pace weapon

This might actually be Lawson’s entire plan.

Gray starts.

USA establishes a controlled half-court game.

Then Clark enters.

Suddenly the ball advances earlier.

Defenders have to extend farther.

Transition accelerates.

Pick-and-rolls begin higher.

Teammates start running because Clark can find them before the defense is organized.

Lawson herself identified Clark’s ability to change tempo after the China game.

That suggests the reserve role may not be punishment.

It may be deliberate deployment.

But Italy exposed the danger

USA beat Italy only 55–52.

Clark was awful individually.

One point.

One assist.

0-for-6 shooting.

So Clark supporters cannot pretend Lawson simply refused to use an unstoppable superstar that night.

Clark struggled.

But so did almost everybody else.

Team USA’s offense became painfully stagnant, and the near-upset immediately raised questions about whether Lawson’s approach was creating enough movement and pace.

That game transformed the Clark debate.

It stopped being about fame.

It became about offensive identity.

This is where Johnson’s story and Clark’s story intersect

Not through proven sabotage.

Through philosophy.

Lawson appears to demand that star players fit Team USA rather than demanding Team USA fit around its stars.

Johnson experienced that.

Clark is experiencing it.

Bueckers is experiencing it.

Reese is experiencing it.

On a national team containing this much talent, that philosophy makes sense.

Nobody gets to arrive and immediately own the offense.

But Clark is unusual.

Her game changes what an offense can become.

Clark’s passing isn’t simply another skill

It changes behavior.

Teammates run harder because the pass might arrive.

Defenders pick her up farther from the basket because of her range.

Bigs receive the ball earlier in transition.

Help defenders have to make decisions before they’re comfortable.

That’s why Clark can influence a possession without scoring.

Lawson has recognized that.

The unresolved issue is whether she trusts it enough when games become tight.

And that is why “sabotage” is actually too easy

If Lawson hated Clark, the story would be simple.

She doesn’t appear to.

If Lawson refused to play Clark, the story would be simple.

She hasn’t.

If Lawson criticized Clark publicly while protecting every veteran, the story would be simple.

Instead, she has defended Clark’s shooting struggles and praised her playmaking and tempo.

The real story is harder.

Lawson clearly values Clark.

She just doesn’t appear willing to reorganize Team USA around her.

That philosophical decision can still be wrong.

Mulkey’s history puts Lawson’s philosophy under a microscope

This is why Mulkey and Johnson belong in the conversation without pretending they said something they didn’t.

They provide precedent.

Johnson was a major offensive personality.

Lawson reduced her role.

Mulkey later said the USA Basketball experience hurt Johnson’s confidence.

Now Clark arrives with unprecedented attention.

Lawson again refuses to let star status determine her lineup.

Maybe that proves Lawson is fearless.

Maybe it proves she’s too rigid.

France will provide the strongest evidence yet.

Because Team USA has no more room for experimentation

The Americans are in the World Cup final.

France is waiting.

France beat Germany 86–64 in the other semifinal, with Gabby Williams producing 22 points, five rebounds, five assists and four steals.

This is also a rematch of the 2024 Olympic gold-medal game.

USA won that one 67–66.

One point.

France knows it can push the Americans.

Lawson’s rotation could decide gold

Forget the opening lineup for a moment.

Imagine five minutes remain.

USA trails by three.

Gray has struggled.

Clark is creating open shots.

Bueckers is moving beautifully without the ball.

Boston is winning the interior battle.

What does Lawson do?

That decision matters more than every social-media argument combined.

If she trusts the young lineup, nobody will care who started.

If she returns automatically to veteran hierarchy and USA loses, every previous controversy will come roaring back.

And Kim Mulkey’s old warning about Johnson will suddenly look much more significant.

That is the real pressure on Lawson

Mulkey and Johnson have not exposed a secret anti-Clark conspiracy.

There is no verified new statement from them accusing Lawson of sabotaging Caitlin Clark.

But Mulkey did publicly reveal that Johnson’s previous USA Basketball experience under Lawson damaged her confidence.

That history is real.

Lawson’s refusal to change her veteran starting lineup is real.

Clark’s extraordinary playmaking impact is real.

And Team USA’s ugly scares against Italy and Spain are real.

That’s enough controversy without inventing a conspiracy.

The championship against France now gives Lawson one final chance to settle it.

If Team USA wins gold, her refusal to let popularity dictate her lineup will look like discipline.

If USA loses while Clark, Bueckers or Boston sit during the possessions that decide the championship, the Flau’jae Johnson story will stop looking like an isolated piece of old history.

It will become Exhibit A in the biggest argument Kara Lawson has faced as Team USA’s coach.