On Wednesday, the USA TODAY published a highly controversial article written by Nancy Armour that suggested Caitlin Clark’s flopping is “dangerous” because it riles up her “white nationalist” fans. That wasn’t all. There were several sections that raised eyebrows, including a reference to Emmett Till, and the sports world hasn’t stopped talking about it since.
It didn’t take long for Crissy Froyd, the reporter who was fired from USA TODAY for her Dianna Russini criticism in the aftermath of the Mike Vrabel scandal, to chime in on the Armour controversy.
Crissy Froyd Calls Out USA Today’s Hypocrisy
Froyd, like many others reacting to the article on social media, was appalled by what she was reading, calling the work “horrendous.” She couldn’t believe the article was even written, let alone published by an editor for anyone and everyone to read.
“This is horrendous,” Froyd wrote. “I can’t believe they allowed this to even be said by Nancy Armour, let alone PUBLISHED. And, Lark-Marie Anton made clear to FOS that USA TODAY stands beside her because her piece was clearly labeled ‘Opinion.’ Seems there’s a double standard…”
This is horrendous. I can’t believe they allowed this to even be said by Nancy Armour, let alone PUBLISHED.
And, Lark-Marie Anton made clear to FOS that USA TODAY stands beside her because her piece was clearly labeled “Opinion.”
Seems there’s a double standard… https://t.co/6OGtpIIXLg
— Crissy Froyd (@crissy_froyd) July 23, 2026
Froyd wasn’t done with her criticism. But she’s rightfully fired up since this involves the same company that let her go for a tweet that was critical of Russini.
Froyd also didn’t appreciate what she called a “no-pology” from Armour.
“Nice no-pology, Nancy Armour,” Froyd added. “I guess USA TODAY is letting you keep your job after this and allowing you to make a statement on your own behalf while also not releasing one of their own about this? Interesting.”
Nice no-pology, Nancy Armour.
I guess USA TODAY is letting you keep your job after this and allowing you to make a statement on your own behalf while also not releasing one of their own about this?
Interesting. https://t.co/s8DyIKYrNu
— Crissy Froyd (@crissy_froyd) July 23, 2026
For context, USA TODAY parted ways with Froyd after she sent the following tweet shortly after Russini resigned from The Athletic: “I’m sure you were told to submit this or that you’d get fired instead. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. We know who you really are and what you’ve been up to for years. It does so much detriment to women in sports who have done things the right way.”
REDRAFT THE ENTIRE NFL: PFN’s FREE NFL Ultimate Redraft Simulator
One key difference between Froyd and Armour as it relates to USA TODAY’s handling of the controversies is that Armour is likely a full-time employee, whereas Froyd was only an independent contractor. USA TODAY made this clear in their statement when Froyd was let go.
“USA TODAY Sports has ended its contractor relationship with Crissy Floyd effective immediately,” USA TODAY’s chief communications and brand officer Lark-Marie Antón said in a statement. “Her recent statements do not reflect our commitment to professionalism or uphold our principles of ethical conduct.”
In the aftermath of the Armour-Clark controversy, Antón put out a statement supporting Armour: “Nancy is a Sports columnist, and her column is clearly labeled Opinion. Please note that the column has been updated for clarity, and Nancy has addressed the matter… We will not be commenting further.”
Amid the backlash, Armour put out a statement that read: “In my recent column, I made an inartful comparison with the murder of Emmett Till. I intended to connect the issues the WNBA is currently facing with its All-Star Game being hosted in Till’s hometown of Chicago. I obviously did not provide enough context for that.
“However, this point stands: There is a history in this country of perceived threats to white women being weaponized against African-Americans, and the danger that poses to Black players in the league. Players have been abused online and have reported receiving death threats. That has to be taken more seriously. I sincerely regret that my lack of appropriate context is overshadowing that important conversation and the actions that need to be taken by the WNBA to address it directly — for the benefit of ALL players.”
Still, Froyd’s not wrong in pointing out that the two controversies were handled quite differently by the same publication, which she justifiably found “interesting.”
