Author Topic: "Equal pay" in soccer  (Read 14242 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

"Equal pay" in soccer
« on: May 18, 2022, 10:59:27 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58548
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
The unions for the United States men's and women's national soccer teams have ratified new collective bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer that include an equal split of World Cup bonuses, the federation and the two unions announced on Wednesday.

The two CBAs will go into effect on June 1 and will last until the end of 2028. The U.S. National Soccer Team Players Association (USNSTPA), which represented the men's players, had been operating without a CBA since the end of 2018. The deal for the U.S. Women's National Team Players Association (USWNTPA) expired at the end of 2021, though it had been extended.


The agreements are a promise kept by U.S. Soccer Federation president Cindy Parlow Cone, who had vowed that new CBAs would need to address the equal pay issue of World Cup bonuses. The CBAs also put into effect the much-celebrated financial settlement between the USWNT and the federation, which was announced in February after years of legal jostling.

Quote
The respective unions will receive 90% of the FIFA bonuses paid at the 2022 and 2023 World Cups and 80% of the bonuses at the 2026 and 2027 editions. All of the funds paid out from those bonus pools will be split evenly among the two national teams. FIFA has announced that the entire bonus pool for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar will be $400 million, while the bonuses for the women's tournament in Australia in 2023 will be $60 million. In the previous World Cup cycle, the last-place men's team won more prize money than the first-place women's team.

"There are tough conversations, but at the end of the day, it is the right thing to do," Zimmerman said. "It's something that [the U.S. women's team players] deserve. It's something that they have fought for so hard, and, to be honest, sometimes it does feel like we had just kind of come alongside of them and had been a little late.

"It's not easy to look back and think about this whole journey and where it started for them and how we entered. And that's why it's even more important for us to feel like we are getting involved. It's never too late to get involved."

The new CBAs achieve equality in other areas, as well. The men's and women's teams will have identical performance-based bonuses for games and competitions. The women's team will no longer have guaranteed salaries for some players and will have the same pay-to-play payment structure as the men's team has always had.

Both unions also will participate in revenue sharing, including 10% of commercial revenue between $55 million and $75 million and 15% of any commercial revenue above $75 million. Both teams also will receive an equal cut of ticket revenue, with the teams receiving $5.06 of each ticket sold through the end of 2026 and $5.75 of each ticket during the final two years of the deal.

To me, this is an odd deal for the men's union to agree to.  I think equality in terms of percentages being equal makes all kinds of sense, but isn't pooling revenue always going to benefit the team that brings in less of it?  If you're the revenue driver, why agree to such a change? 


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 #1 on: May 18, 2022, 11:23:31 AM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7143
  • Tommy Points: 979
While it may be true that internationally speaking men’s soccer is the primary revenue driver, that is less clear in the US.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/07/10/us-viewership-of-the-womens-world-cup-final-was-higher-than-the-mens.html

Domestically, women’s soccer is very popular, and accordingly the men benefit from this as well, as they contribute to the overall popularity of the sport.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2022, 11:34:42 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58548
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
While it may be true that internationally speaking men’s soccer is the primary revenue driver, that is less clear in the US.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/07/10/us-viewership-of-the-womens-world-cup-final-was-higher-than-the-mens.html

Domestically, women’s soccer is very popular, and accordingly the men benefit from this as well, as they contribute to the overall popularity of the sport.

But doesn't the international revenue that men's soccer generates dwarf what women are paid? 

But, I guess I don't know all the risks involved for the men's team.  For instance, their international revenue may drop to very little if they fail to qualify for the World Cup in the future.  But, for years when they do qualify, they're likely to continue to bring in significantly more money for finishing last than the women do by finishing first.


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 #3 on: May 18, 2022, 11:38:49 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
While it may be true that internationally speaking men’s soccer is the primary revenue driver, that is less clear in the US.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/07/10/us-viewership-of-the-womens-world-cup-final-was-higher-than-the-mens.html

Domestically, women’s soccer is very popular, and accordingly the men benefit from this as well, as they contribute to the overall popularity of the sport.

But doesn't the international revenue that men's soccer generates dwarf what women are paid? 

But, I guess I don't know all the risks involved for the men's team.  For instance, their international revenue may drop to very little if they fail to qualify for the World Cup in the future.  But, for years when they do qualify, they're likely to continue to bring in significantly more money for finishing last than the women do by finishing first.
The last cycle when the Men didn't make the World Cup and the Women won, the women had a very slight edge in revenue generation, but it was very small.  Any 4 year cycle in which the men make the World Cup they will generate significantly more revenue than the women, even if they don't win a game in the World Cup.  Because of that over time the Men have and will continue to generate significantly more revenue than the women, so yeah it is weird that the men would so whole heartedly agree to this.
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 #4 on: May 18, 2022, 11:40:35 AM »

Offline SDceltGuy

  • NCE
  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 332
  • Tommy Points: 49
It isnt equal work/job.  Percentage of revenue would be 'fair' way to do it.  Same thing for the unwatchable WNBA. 

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #5 on: May 18, 2022, 11:44:29 AM »

Offline Smartacus

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2112
  • Tommy Points: 318
Quote
The unions for the United States men's and women's national soccer teams have ratified new collective bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer that include an equal split of World Cup bonuses, the federation and the two unions announced on Wednesday.

The two CBAs will go into effect on June 1 and will last until the end of 2028. The U.S. National Soccer Team Players Association (USNSTPA), which represented the men's players, had been operating without a CBA since the end of 2018. The deal for the U.S. Women's National Team Players Association (USWNTPA) expired at the end of 2021, though it had been extended.


The agreements are a promise kept by U.S. Soccer Federation president Cindy Parlow Cone, who had vowed that new CBAs would need to address the equal pay issue of World Cup bonuses. The CBAs also put into effect the much-celebrated financial settlement between the USWNT and the federation, which was announced in February after years of legal jostling.

Quote
The respective unions will receive 90% of the FIFA bonuses paid at the 2022 and 2023 World Cups and 80% of the bonuses at the 2026 and 2027 editions. All of the funds paid out from those bonus pools will be split evenly among the two national teams. FIFA has announced that the entire bonus pool for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar will be $400 million, while the bonuses for the women's tournament in Australia in 2023 will be $60 million. In the previous World Cup cycle, the last-place men's team won more prize money than the first-place women's team.

"There are tough conversations, but at the end of the day, it is the right thing to do," Zimmerman said. "It's something that [the U.S. women's team players] deserve. It's something that they have fought for so hard, and, to be honest, sometimes it does feel like we had just kind of come alongside of them and had been a little late.

"It's not easy to look back and think about this whole journey and where it started for them and how we entered. And that's why it's even more important for us to feel like we are getting involved. It's never too late to get involved."

The new CBAs achieve equality in other areas, as well. The men's and women's teams will have identical performance-based bonuses for games and competitions. The women's team will no longer have guaranteed salaries for some players and will have the same pay-to-play payment structure as the men's team has always had.

Both unions also will participate in revenue sharing, including 10% of commercial revenue between $55 million and $75 million and 15% of any commercial revenue above $75 million. Both teams also will receive an equal cut of ticket revenue, with the teams receiving $5.06 of each ticket sold through the end of 2026 and $5.75 of each ticket during the final two years of the deal.

To me, this is an odd deal for the men's union to agree to.  I think equality in terms of percentages being equal makes all kinds of sense, but isn't pooling revenue always going to benefit the team that brings in less of it?  If you're the revenue driver, why agree to such a change?

To avoid awkward conversations at dinner parties where they are being grilled about their bonuses despite their team's poor performance and the success of the woman's team.

There is nothing logical about this. The only thing that you could argue is that the Men's Team is simply hooked up to the World Cup revenue faucet and are not actually driving revenue or engagement on their own merit. The Woman's Team feels that they are just as entitled to these profits as the men since they are bringing more attention to US Soccer as a whole despite playing in the side tournament.

Personally I think this argument is laughable but the members of the USMNT are so beaten and defeated by the superior global national men's teams -not to mention by today's political climate- that they are either unable or unwilling to fight for their dignity. The counter argument that they should make would be that the Woman's Team would have no more success in the Men's tournament and the Men's Team would have world's more success in the Woman's tournament but who really is going to try to make that argument in the court of public opinion?

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #6 on: May 18, 2022, 12:07:10 PM »

Offline angryguy77

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7187
  • Tommy Points: 590
It's insulting to the woman. They need to be awarded profit based on the successes of the Men's team.

However, it it leads to the destruction of soccer in the US, I'm all for it.
Still don't believe in Joe.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #7 on: May 18, 2022, 12:13:39 PM »

Offline Kernewek

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3798
  • Tommy Points: 262
  • International Superstar
Looks like this thread is going to go well.
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 #8 on: May 18, 2022, 12:20:12 PM »

Offline GetLucky

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1760
  • Tommy Points: 349
Quote
The unions for the United States men's and women's national soccer teams have ratified new collective bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer that include an equal split of World Cup bonuses, the federation and the two unions announced on Wednesday.

The two CBAs will go into effect on June 1 and will last until the end of 2028. The U.S. National Soccer Team Players Association (USNSTPA), which represented the men's players, had been operating without a CBA since the end of 2018. The deal for the U.S. Women's National Team Players Association (USWNTPA) expired at the end of 2021, though it had been extended.


The agreements are a promise kept by U.S. Soccer Federation president Cindy Parlow Cone, who had vowed that new CBAs would need to address the equal pay issue of World Cup bonuses. The CBAs also put into effect the much-celebrated financial settlement between the USWNT and the federation, which was announced in February after years of legal jostling.

Quote
The respective unions will receive 90% of the FIFA bonuses paid at the 2022 and 2023 World Cups and 80% of the bonuses at the 2026 and 2027 editions. All of the funds paid out from those bonus pools will be split evenly among the two national teams. FIFA has announced that the entire bonus pool for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar will be $400 million, while the bonuses for the women's tournament in Australia in 2023 will be $60 million. In the previous World Cup cycle, the last-place men's team won more prize money than the first-place women's team.

"There are tough conversations, but at the end of the day, it is the right thing to do," Zimmerman said. "It's something that [the U.S. women's team players] deserve. It's something that they have fought for so hard, and, to be honest, sometimes it does feel like we had just kind of come alongside of them and had been a little late.

"It's not easy to look back and think about this whole journey and where it started for them and how we entered. And that's why it's even more important for us to feel like we are getting involved. It's never too late to get involved."

The new CBAs achieve equality in other areas, as well. The men's and women's teams will have identical performance-based bonuses for games and competitions. The women's team will no longer have guaranteed salaries for some players and will have the same pay-to-play payment structure as the men's team has always had.

Both unions also will participate in revenue sharing, including 10% of commercial revenue between $55 million and $75 million and 15% of any commercial revenue above $75 million. Both teams also will receive an equal cut of ticket revenue, with the teams receiving $5.06 of each ticket sold through the end of 2026 and $5.75 of each ticket during the final two years of the deal.

To me, this is an odd deal for the men's union to agree to.  I think equality in terms of percentages being equal makes all kinds of sense, but isn't pooling revenue always going to benefit the team that brings in less of it?  If you're the revenue driver, why agree to such a change?

To avoid awkward conversations at dinner parties where they are being grilled about their bonuses despite their team's poor performance and the success of the woman's team.

There is nothing logical about this. The only thing that you could argue is that the Men's Team is simply hooked up to the World Cup revenue faucet and are not actually driving revenue or engagement on their own merit. The Woman's Team feels that they are just as entitled to these profits as the men since they are bringing more attention to US Soccer as a whole despite playing in the side tournament.

Personally I think this argument is laughable but the members of the USMNT are so beaten and defeated by the superior global national men's teams -not to mention by today's political climate- that they are either unable or unwilling to fight for their dignity. The counter argument that they should make would be that the Woman's Team would have no more success in the Men's tournament and the Men's Team would have world's more success in the Woman's tournament but who really is going to try to make that argument in the court of public opinion?

Wait until you gentlemen learn about how every men's sports league in the United States (including the NBA) splits up their TV and luxury tax revenue. Every league in the world is shameful, in that case. I guess the current political climate has made half of the NBA (the winners, at that) give up their dignity to support the Sacramento Kings and the OKC Thunder. Better we go back to the days of 8 teams and hope the Celtics are on the top of the pile (thanks for hoarding profits and not paying the tax, Wyc!)

I'm personally all for reallocating the pie to keep all sports alive and well. As most are fond of saying when a male athlete speaks out about social causes that they disagree with, the top earners of all sports are making more money than they know what to do with. Doesn't it make sense to give up some of that excess to ensure children in your home country have heroes to look up to and a chance to play the sport they love growing up, just like you did? I personally looked up to Mia Hamm more than any male US soccer player at the same time.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #9 on: May 18, 2022, 12:31:08 PM »

Offline angryguy77

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7187
  • Tommy Points: 590
Quote
The unions for the United States men's and women's national soccer teams have ratified new collective bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer that include an equal split of World Cup bonuses, the federation and the two unions announced on Wednesday.

The two CBAs will go into effect on June 1 and will last until the end of 2028. The U.S. National Soccer Team Players Association (USNSTPA), which represented the men's players, had been operating without a CBA since the end of 2018. The deal for the U.S. Women's National Team Players Association (USWNTPA) expired at the end of 2021, though it had been extended.


The agreements are a promise kept by U.S. Soccer Federation president Cindy Parlow Cone, who had vowed that new CBAs would need to address the equal pay issue of World Cup bonuses. The CBAs also put into effect the much-celebrated financial settlement between the USWNT and the federation, which was announced in February after years of legal jostling.

Quote
The respective unions will receive 90% of the FIFA bonuses paid at the 2022 and 2023 World Cups and 80% of the bonuses at the 2026 and 2027 editions. All of the funds paid out from those bonus pools will be split evenly among the two national teams. FIFA has announced that the entire bonus pool for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar will be $400 million, while the bonuses for the women's tournament in Australia in 2023 will be $60 million. In the previous World Cup cycle, the last-place men's team won more prize money than the first-place women's team.

"There are tough conversations, but at the end of the day, it is the right thing to do," Zimmerman said. "It's something that [the U.S. women's team players] deserve. It's something that they have fought for so hard, and, to be honest, sometimes it does feel like we had just kind of come alongside of them and had been a little late.

"It's not easy to look back and think about this whole journey and where it started for them and how we entered. And that's why it's even more important for us to feel like we are getting involved. It's never too late to get involved."

The new CBAs achieve equality in other areas, as well. The men's and women's teams will have identical performance-based bonuses for games and competitions. The women's team will no longer have guaranteed salaries for some players and will have the same pay-to-play payment structure as the men's team has always had.

Both unions also will participate in revenue sharing, including 10% of commercial revenue between $55 million and $75 million and 15% of any commercial revenue above $75 million. Both teams also will receive an equal cut of ticket revenue, with the teams receiving $5.06 of each ticket sold through the end of 2026 and $5.75 of each ticket during the final two years of the deal.

To me, this is an odd deal for the men's union to agree to.  I think equality in terms of percentages being equal makes all kinds of sense, but isn't pooling revenue always going to benefit the team that brings in less of it?  If you're the revenue driver, why agree to such a change?

To avoid awkward conversations at dinner parties where they are being grilled about their bonuses despite their team's poor performance and the success of the woman's team.

There is nothing logical about this. The only thing that you could argue is that the Men's Team is simply hooked up to the World Cup revenue faucet and are not actually driving revenue or engagement on their own merit. The Woman's Team feels that they are just as entitled to these profits as the men since they are bringing more attention to US Soccer as a whole despite playing in the side tournament.

Personally I think this argument is laughable but the members of the USMNT are so beaten and defeated by the superior global national men's teams -not to mention by today's political climate- that they are either unable or unwilling to fight for their dignity. The counter argument that they should make would be that the Woman's Team would have no more success in the Men's tournament and the Men's Team would have world's more success in the Woman's tournament but who really is going to try to make that argument in the court of public opinion?

Wait until you gentlemen learn about how every men's sports league in the United States (including the NBA) splits up their TV and luxury tax revenue. Every league in the world is shameful, in that case. I guess the current political climate has made half of the NBA (the winners, at that) give up their dignity to support the Sacramento Kings and the OKC Thunder. Better we go back to the days of 8 teams and hope the Celtics are on the top of the pile (thanks for hoarding profits and not paying the tax, Wyc!)

I'm personally all for reallocating the pie to keep all sports alive and well. As most are fond of saying when a male athlete speaks out about social causes that they disagree with, the top earners of all sports are making more money than they know what to do with. Doesn't it make sense to give up some of that excess to ensure children in your home country have heroes to look up to and a chance to play the sport they love growing up, just like you did? I personally looked up to Mia Hamm more than any male US soccer player at the same time.

It's one thing to share revenue to help the overall health of the league, it's another to do it just for social justice. Men's soccer needs womans soccer as much as the NBA needs the WNBA.
Still don't believe in Joe.

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #10 on: May 18, 2022, 12:34:21 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58548
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
The unions for the United States men's and women's national soccer teams have ratified new collective bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer that include an equal split of World Cup bonuses, the federation and the two unions announced on Wednesday.

The two CBAs will go into effect on June 1 and will last until the end of 2028. The U.S. National Soccer Team Players Association (USNSTPA), which represented the men's players, had been operating without a CBA since the end of 2018. The deal for the U.S. Women's National Team Players Association (USWNTPA) expired at the end of 2021, though it had been extended.


The agreements are a promise kept by U.S. Soccer Federation president Cindy Parlow Cone, who had vowed that new CBAs would need to address the equal pay issue of World Cup bonuses. The CBAs also put into effect the much-celebrated financial settlement between the USWNT and the federation, which was announced in February after years of legal jostling.

Quote
The respective unions will receive 90% of the FIFA bonuses paid at the 2022 and 2023 World Cups and 80% of the bonuses at the 2026 and 2027 editions. All of the funds paid out from those bonus pools will be split evenly among the two national teams. FIFA has announced that the entire bonus pool for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar will be $400 million, while the bonuses for the women's tournament in Australia in 2023 will be $60 million. In the previous World Cup cycle, the last-place men's team won more prize money than the first-place women's team.

"There are tough conversations, but at the end of the day, it is the right thing to do," Zimmerman said. "It's something that [the U.S. women's team players] deserve. It's something that they have fought for so hard, and, to be honest, sometimes it does feel like we had just kind of come alongside of them and had been a little late.

"It's not easy to look back and think about this whole journey and where it started for them and how we entered. And that's why it's even more important for us to feel like we are getting involved. It's never too late to get involved."

The new CBAs achieve equality in other areas, as well. The men's and women's teams will have identical performance-based bonuses for games and competitions. The women's team will no longer have guaranteed salaries for some players and will have the same pay-to-play payment structure as the men's team has always had.

Both unions also will participate in revenue sharing, including 10% of commercial revenue between $55 million and $75 million and 15% of any commercial revenue above $75 million. Both teams also will receive an equal cut of ticket revenue, with the teams receiving $5.06 of each ticket sold through the end of 2026 and $5.75 of each ticket during the final two years of the deal.

To me, this is an odd deal for the men's union to agree to.  I think equality in terms of percentages being equal makes all kinds of sense, but isn't pooling revenue always going to benefit the team that brings in less of it?  If you're the revenue driver, why agree to such a change?

To avoid awkward conversations at dinner parties where they are being grilled about their bonuses despite their team's poor performance and the success of the woman's team.

There is nothing logical about this. The only thing that you could argue is that the Men's Team is simply hooked up to the World Cup revenue faucet and are not actually driving revenue or engagement on their own merit. The Woman's Team feels that they are just as entitled to these profits as the men since they are bringing more attention to US Soccer as a whole despite playing in the side tournament.

Personally I think this argument is laughable but the members of the USMNT are so beaten and defeated by the superior global national men's teams -not to mention by today's political climate- that they are either unable or unwilling to fight for their dignity. The counter argument that they should make would be that the Woman's Team would have no more success in the Men's tournament and the Men's Team would have world's more success in the Woman's tournament but who really is going to try to make that argument in the court of public opinion?

Wait until you gentlemen learn about how every men's sports league in the United States (including the NBA) splits up their TV and luxury tax revenue. Every league in the world is shameful, in that case. I guess the current political climate has made half of the NBA (the winners, at that) give up their dignity to support the Sacramento Kings and the OKC Thunder. Better we go back to the days of 8 teams and hope the Celtics are on the top of the pile (thanks for hoarding profits and not paying the tax, Wyc!)

I'm personally all for reallocating the pie to keep all sports alive and well. As most are fond of saying when a male athlete speaks out about social causes that they disagree with, the top earners of all sports are making more money than they know what to do with. Doesn't it make sense to give up some of that excess to ensure children in your home country have heroes to look up to and a chance to play the sport they love growing up, just like you did? I personally looked up to Mia Hamm more than any male US soccer player at the same time.

I think there's a distinction between league revenue sharing, versus revenue between two national teams.

I'm surprised that the male players are willing to give up a fairly significant amount of money in some years to support the women's team.  I just don't think most humans are that altruistic. 




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 #11 on: May 18, 2022, 02:45:57 PM »

Offline Amonkey

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2053
  • Tommy Points: 203
From my understanding, I thought it is a plan of revenue sharing through FIFA earnings and some through ads and ticket sales. So whichever team qualifies and advances in tournaments (World Cup, CONCACAF, International Competitions), the money paid off by FIFA gets distributed to both national teams.

To me, in some way that makes sense because the women's tournaments gets paid less, but the national team is more successful therefore they are contributing to the pie. Meanwhile, the men's team doesn't lose as much when they miss a World Cup. In terms of ads and ticket sales, I don't think the men's team is as big of a draw domestically as women's so that may also even out.

Another component is that for the most part, the men's national players are making money abroad so perhaps their loss is not as big of a detriment as a woman that may be at her best and winning but only making a portion of the men's.

I could be wrong about this but it does seem like a step in the right direction for USA's national team, mainly because the women's team is already so succesfull. I don't think the same method would work for other countries like Brazil and for FIFA as an entire organization.
Baby Jesus!

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #12 on: May 18, 2022, 09:33:45 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3141
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
It's insulting to the woman. They need to be awarded profit based on the successes of the Men's team.

However, it it leads to the destruction of soccer in the US, I'm all for it.
Newsflash: it will not
'23 Historical Draft: Orlando Magic.

PG: Terry Porter (90-91) / Steve Francis (00-01)
SG: Joe Dumars (92-93) / Jeff Hornacek (91-92) / Jerry Stackhouse (00-01)
SF: Brandon Roy (08-09) / Walter Davis (78-79)
PF: Terry Cummings (84-85) / Paul Millsap (15-16)
C: Chris Webber (00-01) / Ralph Sampson (83-84) / Andrew Bogut (09-10)

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2022, 09:11:22 AM »

Offline mef730

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4422
  • Tommy Points: 907
It's insulting to the woman. They need to be awarded profit based on the successes of the Men's team.

However, it it leads to the destruction of soccer in the US, I'm all for it.
Newsflash: it will not

+1. Watching the women's soccer team on the international stage is a hell of a lot of fun.

Mike

Re: "Equal pay" in soccer
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2022, 09:40:32 AM »

Offline MarcusSmartFanClub

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1096
  • Tommy Points: 59
Are men insulted by women asking for higher pay? It seems like there's an emotional take that "we're losing our power" and "getting replaced" that is underlying resistance to equal pay.

USWNT>USMNT

Also, the WNBA is not unwatchable. Some people might not like it, but it doesn't mean that others can't enjoy the game. I have daughters and we watch occasionally.