What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Women's Soccer not equal to Men's (1 Viewer)

Juxtatarot said:
Do you or anyone else have stats on this?
Click to expand...
Not exactly revenue generation, but attendance was higher in 2019 per THIS.  I have to believe revenue has a strong correlation to attendance.  I feel like in general the USWNT would have a lot more sponsorship type revenue than the men's team too...

I was discussing this with the wife last night - it's really the only example I can think of where IMO the women deserve more than the men in athletics.  Talking US NATIONAL TEAMS only - not Soccer in general.

 
Fat Nick said:
I was discussing this with the wife last night - it's really the only example I can think of where IMO the women deserve more than the men in athletics.  Talking US NATIONAL TEAMS only - not Soccer in general.
Click to expand...
The entire problem continues to be a simple one that US Soccer created and now can't figure out how to get out of with out screwing some one.

US Soccer pays the club salaries for the women who play on the national team.  They obviously don't do this for men as they could never afford that.

US Soccer considers this club pay part of the national team remuneration.  The women don't.

US Soccer never should have been involved in the club game to this level.  Let women's pro soccer sink or swim on its own and then pay the women the exact same they do for the men for national team service.

The only negotiation left would be to figure out how to deal with the fact that FIFA gives significantly more money for the men, than the womens world cup in terms of prize money.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NewlyRetired said:
US Soccer pays the club salaries for the women who play on the national team.  They obviously don't do this for men as they could never afford that.

US Soccer considers this club pay part of the national team remuneration.  The women don't.
Click to expand...
Have the women's representatives ever actually explained how they came to this conclusion?  I can't imagine there's a decent argument there.

 
supermike80 said:
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/u-soccer-says-women-dont-151500639.html
Click to expand...
The end of this article kinda cracks me up.....

The USWNT has qualified for the 2020 Toyko Olympics. The men are still looking to get a spot. The USWNT is favored to win and knows it — just look at Morgan's US Beat Everybody fashion line, made in collaboration with teammates Kelley O'Hara and Allie Long. It's time U.S. Soccer sees what the rest of the world does: it is a different skill to play for the U.S. women's team, because they win. That deserves more than just equal pay. It deserves respect.

First off, the women's Olympic tournament is a senior event. The men's tournament is a U23 event. So I'm not sure why its even brought up. Its irrelevant.

I certainly want everyone to be paid fairly for the work they do. But the "they win" argument is just so silly. This is a legal case. "They win" is just an emotional ploy to drive public support (while ignoring the facts). The American women had a HUGE head start on the rest of the world due to title 9 and the availability of college soccer. (which is the system that primarily drives development of players in this country)   Most other countries are just now starting to invest in the sport for the women.

On the other side, the men are in the exact opposite position. We're just now starting to see professional US soccer academies (which is what churns out the players in all the countries that are better than us) pay dividends in the form of star players that contribute to the national team. 

There's no doubt that the women are significantly better than the men (relative to their competition) but its an apples and oranges comparison. 

The women have alleged that the US soccer federation has engaged in shady accounting/reporting practices to downplay the revenue they bring in (compared to the men). THIS is by far their best legal argument if they can prove it.  If we're looking at this without emotion, percentage of net revenue should be the driving force of relative compensation.  Maybe US soccer has a moral obligation to invest beyond that in the growth of the women's game (hence the paying of club salaries to prop up a domestic league that couldn't otherwise afford to keep the US stars playing at home) but that's really not an issue that should be decided in court.

And yes, the FIFA tournament prize money discrepancy is the giant elephant in the room here.  Not much US soccer can do about that.  Women's soccer support is huge in the US during a big event (WC and to a lesser extent, the Olympics). But the rest of the world doesn't seem to care. (which is part of why the US women are able to dominate nearly all their opponents in the first place).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TLEF316 said:
Have the women's representatives ever actually explained how they came to this conclusion?  I can't imagine there's a decent argument there.
Click to expand...
They have.  The legalese is beyond me but the general idea is that the two should be viewed as separate contracts because they define different types of work. 

I notice that US Soccer does not fight this stance as much I expected (largely because they themselves caused it) and instead have use the PR disaster tactic of saying stupid things like the men should get paid more because they play in more hostile environments.

 
TLEF316 said:
The women have alleged that the US soccer federation has engaged in shady accounting/reporting practices to downplay the revenue they bring in (compared to the men). THIS is by far their best legal argument if they can prove it.  If we're looking at this without emotion, percentage of net revenue should be the driving force of relative compensation.  Maybe US soccer has a moral obligation to invest beyond that in the growth of the women's fame (hence the paying of club salaries to prop up a domestic league that couldn't otherwise afford to keep the US stars playing at home) but that's really not an issue that should be decided in court.
Click to expand...
One of the big problem from a public relations stand point is that the general person the street thinks attendance drives revenue.   The national teams play so few games per year that game day revenue is in the noise compared to other revenue (merchandising, tv and the big one of sponsorships).

The huge issue for everyone, and probably where people can get shady, is that the sponsorship and tv deals are bundled for US Soccer as a whole.  They don't sell the large sponsorship packages for the men vs the women vs the youth, which would obviously make things a lot easier to decide who brings in what part of the pie.

It will never happen for various political reasons, but I sometimes think things would be fairer if US Soccer was split in two, a male side and a female side.  The big reason that will never happen is the WC is such a behemoth for the men, and hosting in 2026 is likely to fund the federation for close to 2 decades going forward and everyone wants a piece of that pie.

 
NewlyRetired said:
One of the big problem from a public relations stand point is that the general person the street thinks attendance drives revenue.   The national teams play so few games per year that game day revenue is in the noise compared to other revenue (merchandising, tv and the big one of sponsorships).

The huge issue for everyone, and probably where people can get shady, is that the sponsorship and tv deals are bundled for US Soccer as a whole.  They don't sell the large sponsorship packages for the men vs the women vs the youth, which would obviously make things a lot easier to decide who brings in what part of the pie.

It will never happen for various political reasons, but I sometimes think things would be fairer if US Soccer was split in two, a male side and a female side.  The big reason that will never happen is the WC is such a behemoth for the men, and hosting in 2026 is likely to fund the federation for close to 2 decades going forward and everyone wants a piece of that pie.
Click to expand...
For sure. If they're selling joint sponsorship packages, they're in a very tough spot in terms of distributing the revenue. Because A) you can't determine what drove the decision of the sponsor (men vs women) and B) There are obviously other needs for the $$ other than just paying the senior teams (youth teams, administrative costs of the federation, etc).

I do wonder just how much the women's team alone would generate in terms of sponsorships. Around the time of the big tournaments? I'm sure they'd do just fine. Other times? Who the heck knows. Obviously they get the benefit of having a big world-wide senior event every 2 years (as opposed to every 4 years from the men, if they qualify). They'd have to lock all the major sponsors into LONG term deals (not sure what the terms are now) to avoid the river running dry during the off-years.

Also, if they separated the 2 sides, I have to imagine the women would suffer from losing their portion of the Gold Cup Revenue. I have to imagine that brings in big bucks for the federation as a whole (since we always host it). The women don't have anything close to an equivalent event.

These are the things that we SHOULD be talking about regarding this case. Instead its "We win more than the men" vs whatever bumbling comeback argument the idiots of the federation puke out on a monthly basis.

 
CGRdrJoe said:
https://www.denverpost.com/2019/07/29/us-women-soccer-paid-more-than-men/
Click to expand...


I remember when that article came out and this is the line that always cracked me up....

Molly Levinson, a spokeswoman for the players in matters involving the lawsuit, called the letter “a sad attempt by USSF to quell the overwhelming tide of support the USWNT has received from everyone from fans to sponsors to the United States Congress.

How in the world is "overwhelming tide of support" even remotely relevant?  Its a legal case. It doesn't matter who the (mostly uneducated) public or congress is rooting for.

I get that twisting the facts to paint a good picture is part of the law, but the idea that the base salary and especially the club salary "dont count" is just absurd. The women's CBA provides them with additional $$ and benefits that make up for the fact that their club careers aren't nearly as lucrative or stable as the men. Health benefits too. Pretty sure Alex Morgan is still getting paid right now by US Soccer even though she's off having a baby.  

Again, I get that's what lawyers are paid to do, but its ridiculous to ignore this stuff and then be like "but their per game bonuses are bigger even though we win MOAR!!!!11". 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
US Soccer got themselves into an unwinnable position here due to the lack of any fore site.

The right thing to do, tunnel vision financially, would be to stop paying the club salaries.  But can you imagine the PR disaster (including with sponsors) if the women's league then has to fold because of them pulling financial support?

 
EYLive said:
How much do the women get paid by US Soccer?
Click to expand...
It is a complicated formula based on number of games, results, prize money etc all of which vary year to year.  Outside of that, I think the club salary is around $60k.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pull the club salaries.  Let women’s soccer fold. Pay equal for the National team.

The women also want USSG to make up bonuses paid out for international competitions so they match men’s.  That’s ludicrous.  Those payouts don’t come from USSG.

 
supermike80 said:
I agree with this ruling 1000%. 
Click to expand...
There's been no ruling.  The article you linked is a fluff piece from InStyle magazine discussing a recent filing in the case.  There are decent arguments on both sides of this coin, none of which are explored in any depth in the link.  Its a complex conundrum that almost no journalist has been able to adequately capture, even the ones who know soccer, business and law.

 
jonessed said:
The women also want USSG to make up bonuses paid out for international competitions so they match men’s.  That’s ludicrous.  Those payouts don’t come from USSG.
Click to expand...
Mathematically this seems like the easiest one to handle.  Just make the %'s the same.  There is nothing US Soccer can do to make FIFA pay the same amount.

 
EYLive said:
Oof, hopefully, endorsements will bump that up.
Click to expand...
The US National Team players are, by rule of of the US Soccer contract, the highest paid players in their league.   They are being paid more than the league can afford which is the whole reason US Soccer is covering the salaries.

There are a couple of USWNT players who make good endorsement money but the vast majority do not.

They need to follow the men's model imo.   For decades US men had to travel overseas to make real money in the sport.  It is only recently that players can finally make huge money here at home in MLS.    The women should follow the same path.   Women's leagues in Europe are starting to grow.  They could likely make better money overseas and then let the league here at home grow organically if possible so that some day a couple of decades from now, maybe the US players could choose to stay at home and make a good wage.

None of this is easy and none of it can be fixed in any short amount of time.  The real fear is that if and when the US WNT players move over seas for club level, that the league here will fold just as every other women's soccer league has folded in the past.

 
NewlyRetired said:
The US National Team players are, by rule of of the US Soccer contract, the highest paid players in their league.   They are being paid more than the league can afford which is the whole reason US Soccer is covering the salaries.

There are a couple of USWNT players who make good endorsement money but the vast majority do not.

They need to follow the men's model imo.   For decades US men had to travel overseas to make real money in the sport.  It is only recently that players can finally make huge money here at home in MLS.    The women should follow the same path.   Women's leagues in Europe are starting to grow.  They could likely make better money overseas and then let the league here at home grow organically if possible so that some day a couple of decades from now, maybe the US players could choose to stay at home and make a good wage.

None of this is easy and none of it can be fixed in any short amount of time.  The real fear is that if and when the US WNT players move over seas for club level, that the league here will fold just as every other women's soccer league has folded in the past.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised women's soccer isn't more popular globally. Female basketball players had opportunities to make great money overseas 20 years ago. I think Becky Hammond played in Russia for the bulk of her income, the played in the off-season for the Liberty in the early years of the WNBA to stay close to home.

 
EYLive said:
I'm surprised women's soccer isn't more popular globally. Female basketball players had opportunities to make great money overseas 20 years ago. I think Becky Hammond played in Russia for the bulk of her income, the played in the off-season for the Liberty in the early years of the WNBA to stay close to home.
Click to expand...
Women's basketball isnt really popular overseas. The teams were/are basically vanity projects for the oligarchs that own them. They get the best players they can (almost always American players) and take a financial loss just for the bragging rights of owning the best team.

Folks overseas are fanatical about soccer but they really have no reason to give a crap about women's soccer when they basically have men's soccer of some type year round. The US only cares about it for like 3 weeks every other year and that's only because there's like a 75 percent chance we're gonna win the tournament

 
TLEF316 said:
Women's basketball isnt really popular overseas. The teams were/are basically vanity projects for the oligarchs that own them. They get the best players they can (almost always American players) and take a financial loss just for the bragging rights of owning the best team.

Folks overseas are fanatical about soccer but they really have no reason to give a crap about women's soccer when they basically have men's soccer of some type year round. The US only cares about it for like 3 weeks every other year and that's only because there's like a 75 percent chance we're gonna win the tournament
Click to expand...
If this is true, then do the women really deserve more money? Just because they're successful doesn't mean they pull in money in the long term.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Should You Be Socially Shamed & Obligated To "Save Women & Children First" In Current Society ? (9/30)
Replies
7
Views
771
jhib
jhib
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Fraud suit against Trump will move forward
2
Replies
86
Views
4K
MaxThreshold
MaxThreshold
GregR
Greg's Useless Trivia #50 - 100 questions (75 greatest hits, 25 new)
Replies
19
Views
3K
GregR
GregR

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top