Author Topic: "Equal pay" in soccer  (Read 14245 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #45 on: May 20, 2022, 09:24:54 AM »

Offline MarcusSmartFanClub

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1096
  • Tommy Points: 59

btw- We've been told that U.S. soccer is finally here for about 30 years. Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Cobi Jones, Alexi Lalas, etc, etc. They've all been chronic underachievers.

I mean, Team USA (men's) is ranked 15th in the world, and we've been in the top-10 in the last year.  Their all-time best ranking was 4th in the world.  We've got an established domestic league.  Soccer has surpassed the NHL in viewership.  So, the team itself probably is "here".

I was going to make the case that men's soccer isn't a top priority for US high schools/universities. The fact that soccer is now more popular than hockey makes the USMNT's lack of success even more noteworthy.

When I look at the rankings, the U.S. is situated next to countries that are much smaller and have less money. Colombia, Wales, Sweden, and Senegal. The USMNT's best finish was 3rd place, and that was in 1930. The U.S. has unbelievable infrastructure for sports on a relative basis. Despite the money that has been put into developmental soccer, we're still a second tier country on a competitive basis (not to be confused with $). Reminds me of the Karl Malone/Gary Payton Lakers.

As a former lacrosse player, I've heard the same logic about this sport. "Just wait, it will get better". I'm still waiting.

My point: USMNT is 2nd tier, while USWNT is 1st tier. I think your concern with profit sharing would hold more water if it was the other way around.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #46 on: May 20, 2022, 09:47:00 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley

My point: USMNT is 2nd tier, while USWNT is 1st tier. I think your concern with profit sharing would hold more water if it was the other way around.

Well, USMNT is 2nd tier, in a 1st tier sport.  UNWNT is 1st tier, in a 2nd tier sport.  2nd tier, at least in terms of revenue.

Think of it like this:  The Washington Mystics are in first place in the WNBA.  Let's say they go on some crazy streak, like the old Houston Comets did, and win 90% of their games and win four titles in a row.

Meanwhile, the Washington Wizards continue to suck, and end up in the lottery for four years.

Would it, under any circumstances, make sense to pool the Wizards' and Mystics' revenue, and give both the men and women an equal share of that?



I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #47 on: May 20, 2022, 09:50:39 AM »

Offline Kernewek

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3798
  • Tommy Points: 262
  • International Superstar
The Men's team is much, much better than it has been in the past, but I agree with you MSFC (hehe), the Women's team has been on a different level historically. Expectations are different.

Lacrosse is probably a bit too niche for the comparison to work, although I understand what you mean.
Man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time.

But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #48 on: May 20, 2022, 09:51:21 AM »

Offline MarcusSmartFanClub

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1096
  • Tommy Points: 59
If the men agreed to it, I see no issue. If you want to say they were pressured into this by woke culture, isn't that the fault of their lawyers/representatives?

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #49 on: May 20, 2022, 09:52:38 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
If the men agreed to it, I see no issue. If you want to say they were pressured into this by woke culture, isn't that the fault of their lawyers/representatives?

I'd be interested to see what the Union's pitch was.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #50 on: May 20, 2022, 10:02:45 AM »

Offline Amonkey

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2053
  • Tommy Points: 203
I supposed it's a little different because it goes across two different teams but is this that much different than a salary cap that ends up limiting what a top player makes? Or wasn't was one the latest CBA, not sure which league, that resulted in top players not making more but leads to more distribution to lower players (maybe NFL)? Something along of more insurance, especially mental help, retiring benefits and so forth for players that played 2 years in the league?

EDIT: Top players making less but lower level players making slightly more with additional benefits.
Baby Jesus!

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #51 on: May 20, 2022, 10:08:59 AM »

Offline Amonkey

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2053
  • Tommy Points: 203
I understand Roy's rationale for questioning the thought process and I think it's a good discussion. However, some posters are showing that fragility with some of their reasoning. Questioning the women's skill level as a whole where there is absolutely nothing to do with this, or saying that this will be hurt men's progress or the sustainability of the sport, or inserting politics into the conversation like it's a personal stance. That is just silly.
Baby Jesus!

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #52 on: May 20, 2022, 10:11:53 AM »

Offline Amonkey

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2053
  • Tommy Points: 203
If the men agreed to it, I see no issue. If you want to say they were pressured into this by woke culture, isn't that the fault of their lawyers/representatives?

I'd be interested to see what the Union's pitch was.

I suppose it's a way to ensure the success of both teams. It promotes the success of the sport and instead of competing with each other, the growth of the sport becomes mutually beneficial. The bigger the women's team is, the better it is for men's.
Baby Jesus!

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #53 on: May 20, 2022, 02:02:37 PM »

Offline Kuberski33

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7078
  • Tommy Points: 533

btw- We've been told that U.S. soccer is finally here for about 30 years. Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Cobi Jones, Alexi Lalas, etc, etc. They've all been chronic underachievers.

I mean, Team USA (men's) is ranked 15th in the world, and we've been in the top-10 in the last year.  Their all-time best ranking was 4th in the world.  We've got an established domestic league.  Soccer has surpassed the NHL in viewership.  So, the team itself probably is "here".

I was going to make the case that men's soccer isn't a top priority for US high schools/universities. The fact that soccer is now more popular than hockey makes the USMNT's lack of success even more noteworthy.

When I look at the rankings, the U.S. is situated next to countries that are much smaller and have less money. Colombia, Wales, Sweden, and Senegal. The USMNT's best finish was 3rd place, and that was in 1930. The U.S. has unbelievable infrastructure for sports on a relative basis. Despite the money that has been put into developmental soccer, we're still a second tier country on a competitive basis (not to be confused with $). Reminds me of the Karl Malone/Gary Payton Lakers.

As a former lacrosse player, I've heard the same logic about this sport. "Just wait, it will get better". I'm still waiting.
The Men's program is progressing. Our best WC finish post 1930 was 2004. That team could have actually beaten a much more talented German team to advance to the Semi Final's - the winning goal was controversial - we hung with them the whole way. However that team had no one playing at top level European clubs and only a couple of guys fighting to crack the lineups of mid and lower tier clubs.  The rest came from MLS.

Now you've got several players (Weston McKennie, Dest, Pulisic, Gio Reyna, Steffen, etc) playing and in some cases starring for top tier clubs. And a bunch more on track to possibly join them over the next couple of years.  MLS teams have figured out how to make money from player development (FC Dallas and their academy have been funneling talent to Europe for the past few years - McKennie among them) so we are on the ascent.

Also realize most of the top leagues and clubs in the world have been in business for over 100 years. MLS has been around for about 25.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #54 on: May 20, 2022, 02:54:00 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533

btw- We've been told that U.S. soccer is finally here for about 30 years. Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Cobi Jones, Alexi Lalas, etc, etc. They've all been chronic underachievers.

I mean, Team USA (men's) is ranked 15th in the world, and we've been in the top-10 in the last year.  Their all-time best ranking was 4th in the world.  We've got an established domestic league.  Soccer has surpassed the NHL in viewership.  So, the team itself probably is "here".

I was going to make the case that men's soccer isn't a top priority for US high schools/universities. The fact that soccer is now more popular than hockey makes the USMNT's lack of success even more noteworthy.

When I look at the rankings, the U.S. is situated next to countries that are much smaller and have less money. Colombia, Wales, Sweden, and Senegal. The USMNT's best finish was 3rd place, and that was in 1930. The U.S. has unbelievable infrastructure for sports on a relative basis. Despite the money that has been put into developmental soccer, we're still a second tier country on a competitive basis (not to be confused with $). Reminds me of the Karl Malone/Gary Payton Lakers.

As a former lacrosse player, I've heard the same logic about this sport. "Just wait, it will get better". I'm still waiting.
The Men's program is progressing. Our best WC finish post 1930 was 2004. That team could have actually beaten a much more talented German team to advance to the Semi Final's - the winning goal was controversial - we hung with them the whole way. However that team had no one playing at top level European clubs and only a couple of guys fighting to crack the lineups of mid and lower tier clubs.  The rest came from MLS.

Now you've got several players (Weston McKennie, Dest, Pulisic, Gio Reyna, Steffen, etc) playing and in some cases starring for top tier clubs. And a bunch more on track to possibly join them over the next couple of years.  MLS teams have figured out how to make money from player development (FC Dallas and their academy have been funneling talent to Europe for the past few years - McKennie among them) so we are on the ascent.

Also realize most of the top leagues and clubs in the world have been in business for over 100 years. MLS has been around for about 25.
And in the time since MLS was founded in the 90's, there have been like 4 women's leagues, all but one of which has failed, and the remaining one NWSL, makes like no money and is basically still in existence because of funding from the US National Team (and had massive scandal after scandal over the last year or so). 

The simple reality is, women's soccer doesn't make money because almost no one cares about it, watches it, or goes to games.  Sure, every 4 years people will watch the World Cup (just as they do the Olympics), but no one, even in the US, watches professional women's soccer on a regular basis.   The money just isn't there because the viewers and fans just aren't there.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #55 on: May 20, 2022, 05:19:29 PM »

Offline Amonkey

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2053
  • Tommy Points: 203

btw- We've been told that U.S. soccer is finally here for about 30 years. Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Cobi Jones, Alexi Lalas, etc, etc. They've all been chronic underachievers.

I mean, Team USA (men's) is ranked 15th in the world, and we've been in the top-10 in the last year.  Their all-time best ranking was 4th in the world.  We've got an established domestic league.  Soccer has surpassed the NHL in viewership.  So, the team itself probably is "here".

I was going to make the case that men's soccer isn't a top priority for US high schools/universities. The fact that soccer is now more popular than hockey makes the USMNT's lack of success even more noteworthy.

When I look at the rankings, the U.S. is situated next to countries that are much smaller and have less money. Colombia, Wales, Sweden, and Senegal. The USMNT's best finish was 3rd place, and that was in 1930. The U.S. has unbelievable infrastructure for sports on a relative basis. Despite the money that has been put into developmental soccer, we're still a second tier country on a competitive basis (not to be confused with $). Reminds me of the Karl Malone/Gary Payton Lakers.

As a former lacrosse player, I've heard the same logic about this sport. "Just wait, it will get better". I'm still waiting.
The Men's program is progressing. Our best WC finish post 1930 was 2004. That team could have actually beaten a much more talented German team to advance to the Semi Final's - the winning goal was controversial - we hung with them the whole way. However that team had no one playing at top level European clubs and only a couple of guys fighting to crack the lineups of mid and lower tier clubs.  The rest came from MLS.

Now you've got several players (Weston McKennie, Dest, Pulisic, Gio Reyna, Steffen, etc) playing and in some cases starring for top tier clubs. And a bunch more on track to possibly join them over the next couple of years.  MLS teams have figured out how to make money from player development (FC Dallas and their academy have been funneling talent to Europe for the past few years - McKennie among them) so we are on the ascent.

Also realize most of the top leagues and clubs in the world have been in business for over 100 years. MLS has been around for about 25.
And in the time since MLS was founded in the 90's, there have been like 4 women's leagues, all but one of which has failed, and the remaining one NWSL, makes like no money and is basically still in existence because of funding from the US National Team (and had massive scandal after scandal over the last year or so). 

The simple reality is, women's soccer doesn't make money because almost no one cares about it, watches it, or goes to games.  Sure, every 4 years people will watch the World Cup (just as they do the Olympics), but no one, even in the US, watches professional women's soccer on a regular basis.   The money just isn't there because the viewers and fans just aren't there.

What a weird way to inject something that is not really relevant to the conversation. Based on my understanding, MLS, NSWL and other club leagues have nothing to do with this issue. The issue isn't whether women's league is watchable or not. The split of the money is related to FIFA earnings, so more related to national league. I am not sure how women's league is run but I don't think your last paragraph has anything to do with the issue. Also, the same exact thing can be said about men's team and the World Cup, except that when US doesn't qualify, Americans are left with the recognizable faces/countries with a majority that don't play in the MLS.

Also, part of the goal of FIFA as an organization and a 'non-profit' is to promote the sport and distribute the wealth towards less developed organizations and countries with soccer. At least that is the idea (besides the corruption) is to take the pie from bigger countries like Germany and reinvest in Guam and other countries for the good of the sport. Why all of a sudden take such a strong stance against women when the goal is still the same?
Baby Jesus!

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #56 on: May 22, 2022, 08:44:05 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533

btw- We've been told that U.S. soccer is finally here for about 30 years. Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Cobi Jones, Alexi Lalas, etc, etc. They've all been chronic underachievers.

I mean, Team USA (men's) is ranked 15th in the world, and we've been in the top-10 in the last year.  Their all-time best ranking was 4th in the world.  We've got an established domestic league.  Soccer has surpassed the NHL in viewership.  So, the team itself probably is "here".

I was going to make the case that men's soccer isn't a top priority for US high schools/universities. The fact that soccer is now more popular than hockey makes the USMNT's lack of success even more noteworthy.

When I look at the rankings, the U.S. is situated next to countries that are much smaller and have less money. Colombia, Wales, Sweden, and Senegal. The USMNT's best finish was 3rd place, and that was in 1930. The U.S. has unbelievable infrastructure for sports on a relative basis. Despite the money that has been put into developmental soccer, we're still a second tier country on a competitive basis (not to be confused with $). Reminds me of the Karl Malone/Gary Payton Lakers.

As a former lacrosse player, I've heard the same logic about this sport. "Just wait, it will get better". I'm still waiting.
The Men's program is progressing. Our best WC finish post 1930 was 2004. That team could have actually beaten a much more talented German team to advance to the Semi Final's - the winning goal was controversial - we hung with them the whole way. However that team had no one playing at top level European clubs and only a couple of guys fighting to crack the lineups of mid and lower tier clubs.  The rest came from MLS.

Now you've got several players (Weston McKennie, Dest, Pulisic, Gio Reyna, Steffen, etc) playing and in some cases starring for top tier clubs. And a bunch more on track to possibly join them over the next couple of years.  MLS teams have figured out how to make money from player development (FC Dallas and their academy have been funneling talent to Europe for the past few years - McKennie among them) so we are on the ascent.

Also realize most of the top leagues and clubs in the world have been in business for over 100 years. MLS has been around for about 25.
And in the time since MLS was founded in the 90's, there have been like 4 women's leagues, all but one of which has failed, and the remaining one NWSL, makes like no money and is basically still in existence because of funding from the US National Team (and had massive scandal after scandal over the last year or so). 

The simple reality is, women's soccer doesn't make money because almost no one cares about it, watches it, or goes to games.  Sure, every 4 years people will watch the World Cup (just as they do the Olympics), but no one, even in the US, watches professional women's soccer on a regular basis.   The money just isn't there because the viewers and fans just aren't there.

What a weird way to inject something that is not really relevant to the conversation. Based on my understanding, MLS, NSWL and other club leagues have nothing to do with this issue. The issue isn't whether women's league is watchable or not. The split of the money is related to FIFA earnings, so more related to national league. I am not sure how women's league is run but I don't think your last paragraph has anything to do with the issue. Also, the same exact thing can be said about men's team and the World Cup, except that when US doesn't qualify, Americans are left with the recognizable faces/countries with a majority that don't play in the MLS.

Also, part of the goal of FIFA as an organization and a 'non-profit' is to promote the sport and distribute the wealth towards less developed organizations and countries with soccer. At least that is the idea (besides the corruption) is to take the pie from bigger countries like Germany and reinvest in Guam and other countries for the good of the sport. Why all of a sudden take such a strong stance against women when the goal is still the same?
It isn't a strong stance against women.  I actually watch women's soccer (and not just during the world cup).  I think doing something like this could have negative long term consequences that actually makes the sport worse.  I'd be much more ok with it, if they pooled the money and then used it to grow the game, rather than just to compensate the players on the women's team by giving them more money.  I mean think about that, the women are only getting paid more because their male counterparts are giving them money that the men earned.  That just isn't a sustainable model nor are the optics very good when you spin it that way. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #57 on: May 22, 2022, 09:00:36 PM »

Offline MarcusSmartFanClub

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1096
  • Tommy Points: 59

btw- We've been told that U.S. soccer is finally here for about 30 years. Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Cobi Jones, Alexi Lalas, etc, etc. They've all been chronic underachievers.

I mean, Team USA (men's) is ranked 15th in the world, and we've been in the top-10 in the last year.  Their all-time best ranking was 4th in the world.  We've got an established domestic league.  Soccer has surpassed the NHL in viewership.  So, the team itself probably is "here".

I was going to make the case that men's soccer isn't a top priority for US high schools/universities. The fact that soccer is now more popular than hockey makes the USMNT's lack of success even more noteworthy.

When I look at the rankings, the U.S. is situated next to countries that are much smaller and have less money. Colombia, Wales, Sweden, and Senegal. The USMNT's best finish was 3rd place, and that was in 1930. The U.S. has unbelievable infrastructure for sports on a relative basis. Despite the money that has been put into developmental soccer, we're still a second tier country on a competitive basis (not to be confused with $). Reminds me of the Karl Malone/Gary Payton Lakers.

As a former lacrosse player, I've heard the same logic about this sport. "Just wait, it will get better". I'm still waiting.
The Men's program is progressing. Our best WC finish post 1930 was 2004. That team could have actually beaten a much more talented German team to advance to the Semi Final's - the winning goal was controversial - we hung with them the whole way. However that team had no one playing at top level European clubs and only a couple of guys fighting to crack the lineups of mid and lower tier clubs.  The rest came from MLS.

Now you've got several players (Weston McKennie, Dest, Pulisic, Gio Reyna, Steffen, etc) playing and in some cases starring for top tier clubs. And a bunch more on track to possibly join them over the next couple of years.  MLS teams have figured out how to make money from player development (FC Dallas and their academy have been funneling talent to Europe for the past few years - McKennie among them) so we are on the ascent.

Also realize most of the top leagues and clubs in the world have been in business for over 100 years. MLS has been around for about 25.
And in the time since MLS was founded in the 90's, there have been like 4 women's leagues, all but one of which has failed, and the remaining one NWSL, makes like no money and is basically still in existence because of funding from the US National Team (and had massive scandal after scandal over the last year or so). 

The simple reality is, women's soccer doesn't make money because almost no one cares about it, watches it, or goes to games.  Sure, every 4 years people will watch the World Cup (just as they do the Olympics), but no one, even in the US, watches professional women's soccer on a regular basis.   The money just isn't there because the viewers and fans just aren't there.

What a weird way to inject something that is not really relevant to the conversation. Based on my understanding, MLS, NSWL and other club leagues have nothing to do with this issue. The issue isn't whether women's league is watchable or not. The split of the money is related to FIFA earnings, so more related to national league. I am not sure how women's league is run but I don't think your last paragraph has anything to do with the issue. Also, the same exact thing can be said about men's team and the World Cup, except that when US doesn't qualify, Americans are left with the recognizable faces/countries with a majority that don't play in the MLS.

Also, part of the goal of FIFA as an organization and a 'non-profit' is to promote the sport and distribute the wealth towards less developed organizations and countries with soccer. At least that is the idea (besides the corruption) is to take the pie from bigger countries like Germany and reinvest in Guam and other countries for the good of the sport. Why all of a sudden take such a strong stance against women when the goal is still the same?
It isn't a strong stance against women.  I actually watch women's soccer (and not just during the world cup).  I think doing something like this could have negative long term consequences that actually makes the sport worse.  I'd be much more ok with it, if they pooled the money and then used it to grow the game, rather than just to compensate the players on the women's team by giving them more money.  I mean think about that, the women are only getting paid more because their male counterparts are giving them money that the men earned.  That just isn't a sustainable model nor are the optics very good when you spin it that way.

I guess we're going to have to take your word for it. Kind of impossible to prove that one thing "could" or couldn't have a massive impact on the USMNT.

Want to make male soccer great in this country? Get the best male athletes to play soccer somehow.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #58 on: May 22, 2022, 09:19:30 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533

btw- We've been told that U.S. soccer is finally here for about 30 years. Clint Dempsey, Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Cobi Jones, Alexi Lalas, etc, etc. They've all been chronic underachievers.

I mean, Team USA (men's) is ranked 15th in the world, and we've been in the top-10 in the last year.  Their all-time best ranking was 4th in the world.  We've got an established domestic league.  Soccer has surpassed the NHL in viewership.  So, the team itself probably is "here".

I was going to make the case that men's soccer isn't a top priority for US high schools/universities. The fact that soccer is now more popular than hockey makes the USMNT's lack of success even more noteworthy.

When I look at the rankings, the U.S. is situated next to countries that are much smaller and have less money. Colombia, Wales, Sweden, and Senegal. The USMNT's best finish was 3rd place, and that was in 1930. The U.S. has unbelievable infrastructure for sports on a relative basis. Despite the money that has been put into developmental soccer, we're still a second tier country on a competitive basis (not to be confused with $). Reminds me of the Karl Malone/Gary Payton Lakers.

As a former lacrosse player, I've heard the same logic about this sport. "Just wait, it will get better". I'm still waiting.
The Men's program is progressing. Our best WC finish post 1930 was 2004. That team could have actually beaten a much more talented German team to advance to the Semi Final's - the winning goal was controversial - we hung with them the whole way. However that team had no one playing at top level European clubs and only a couple of guys fighting to crack the lineups of mid and lower tier clubs.  The rest came from MLS.

Now you've got several players (Weston McKennie, Dest, Pulisic, Gio Reyna, Steffen, etc) playing and in some cases starring for top tier clubs. And a bunch more on track to possibly join them over the next couple of years.  MLS teams have figured out how to make money from player development (FC Dallas and their academy have been funneling talent to Europe for the past few years - McKennie among them) so we are on the ascent.

Also realize most of the top leagues and clubs in the world have been in business for over 100 years. MLS has been around for about 25.
And in the time since MLS was founded in the 90's, there have been like 4 women's leagues, all but one of which has failed, and the remaining one NWSL, makes like no money and is basically still in existence because of funding from the US National Team (and had massive scandal after scandal over the last year or so). 

The simple reality is, women's soccer doesn't make money because almost no one cares about it, watches it, or goes to games.  Sure, every 4 years people will watch the World Cup (just as they do the Olympics), but no one, even in the US, watches professional women's soccer on a regular basis.   The money just isn't there because the viewers and fans just aren't there.

What a weird way to inject something that is not really relevant to the conversation. Based on my understanding, MLS, NSWL and other club leagues have nothing to do with this issue. The issue isn't whether women's league is watchable or not. The split of the money is related to FIFA earnings, so more related to national league. I am not sure how women's league is run but I don't think your last paragraph has anything to do with the issue. Also, the same exact thing can be said about men's team and the World Cup, except that when US doesn't qualify, Americans are left with the recognizable faces/countries with a majority that don't play in the MLS.

Also, part of the goal of FIFA as an organization and a 'non-profit' is to promote the sport and distribute the wealth towards less developed organizations and countries with soccer. At least that is the idea (besides the corruption) is to take the pie from bigger countries like Germany and reinvest in Guam and other countries for the good of the sport. Why all of a sudden take such a strong stance against women when the goal is still the same?
It isn't a strong stance against women.  I actually watch women's soccer (and not just during the world cup).  I think doing something like this could have negative long term consequences that actually makes the sport worse.  I'd be much more ok with it, if they pooled the money and then used it to grow the game, rather than just to compensate the players on the women's team by giving them more money.  I mean think about that, the women are only getting paid more because their male counterparts are giving them money that the men earned.  That just isn't a sustainable model nor are the optics very good when you spin it that way.

I guess we're going to have to take your word for it. Kind of impossible to prove that one thing "could" or couldn't have a massive impact on the USMNT.

Want to make male soccer great in this country? Get the best male athletes to play soccer somehow.
well paying them less than they earned isn't a good way to do that.  And telling women they are only worth what they are because men gave up their salary, isn't doing that either.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #59 on: November 30, 2022, 02:38:25 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Interesting to look at how this will affect the Men's and Women's teams this year:

Quote
The USMNT had a big day on Tuesday, beating Iran 1-0 to advance to the Round of 16 at the World Cup in Qatar. It was also a big day for the USWNT. Their World Cup may not kick off until 2023, but they're finally being paid like the world-class athletes they are.

Making it to the knockout round of the World Cup guarantees the USMNT a prize of at least $13 million. And since World Cup payouts are being split down the middle between the USMNT and USWNT due to the landmark equal pay agreement struck between the USWNT Players Association and the U.S. Soccer Federation earlier this year, each team is now guaranteed to receive $6.5 million.

That's the biggest World Cup payout the USWNT has ever received. For some context, $6.5 million is more than the prize money they got from winning the 2015 and 2019 World Cups combined. (They earned $2 million for winning in 2015 and $4 million for winning in 2019.) The USWNT are finally being paid the same as their male counterparts, which shows the USSF values their talent, effort and play just as much as the men.

Obviously, the quote above implies that this result is the one that justice demands.  I'm still surprised that the men agreed to it, as it was very much against their best financial interest.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes