Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

US Soccer's Astonishing Stupidity

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TN1965
    replied
    US Soccer president asks men, women to equalize FIFA money (yahoo.com)

    The head of the U.S. Soccer Federation asked the unions of the women’s and men’s national teams to agree to equalize FIFA's World Cup prize money on their own.

    USSF President Cindy Parlow Cone sent an open letter Friday making the request, which called for the men’s national team to allow the USSF to reallocate a portion of FIFA’s World Cup payments to the federation to the women’s team.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by gh View Post
    the judge partially agreed: thew out the unequal pay part but left intact a civil rights claim:
    From what I read they negotiated a different CBA than the men, but then sued to get the men's CBA after the fact, which they had rejected for themselves. If true, no wonder the judge threw it out.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    the judge partially agreed: thew out the unequal pay part but left intact a civil rights claim:

    https://www.insidethegames.biz/artic...-equality-case

    Leave a comment:


  • guru
    replied
    Comments regarding "skill" aside, US Soccer was on pretty firm ground regarding pay equality, considering the womens team has been paid more in total and per game, not to mention the fact US Soccer heavily subsidizes the NWSL. Today the federal judge agreed.

    https://www.espn.com/espnw/sports/st...espn:frontpage

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve View Post
    I continue to object to any protest by Women's Tennis for equal pay, as they only play 2 of 3 sets instead of 3 of 5. If they want equal pay, play equal # of sets.
    Well, then we should be paying the marathon runners 420 times what the 100m sprinters get..

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve View Post
    . . . as they (women) only play 2 of 3 sets instead of 3 of 5.
    Sounds like the women are just a bit smarter on this one . . .

    Leave a comment:


  • 18.99s
    replied
    Originally posted by bambam1729 View Post
    The problem with that, Tuariki, is that apparently the money available from the men's World Cup is something like 10 times more than from the women's World Cup, so even a mediocre (at best) men's US team can see more money from the World Cup (assuming they qualify) than the women's team.
    The US men's team didn't qualify for the last World Cup, and the net result was that the US women's team brought in slightly more revenue than the men, according to this article:

    https://www.espn.com/sports/soccer/s...ht-latest-next
    From 2016 to 2018, women's games generated approximately $50.8 million in revenue, compared to $49.9 million for men's games. Here's the sneaky caveat: The men average higher attendance, but the women have played more games, which leads to more revenue. The women have also done more promotional and media tours than the men in that span.

    Leave a comment:


  • 18.99s
    replied
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve View Post
    I continue to object to any protest by Women's Tennis for equal pay, as they only play 2 of 3 sets instead of 3 of 5. If they want equal pay, play equal # of sets.
    TV stations don't want the women to go up to 5 sets, and would prefer if the men dropped to 3.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve View Post
    I continue to object to any protest by Women's Tennis for equal pay, as they only play 2 of 3 sets instead of 3 of 5. If they want equal pay, play equal # of sets.
    that would be a logistical nightmare at the major tourneys; suspect we'll see men drop to 3 sets before women bump up

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve View Post
    I continue to object to any protest by Women's Tennis for equal pay, as they only play 2 of 3 sets instead of 3 of 5. If they want equal pay, play equal # of sets.
    It's 2020 (clearer vision pun!). Why don't they?

    Leave a comment:


  • dukehjsteve
    replied
    I continue to object to any protest by Women's Tennis for equal pay, as they only play 2 of 3 sets instead of 3 of 5. If they want equal pay, play equal # of sets.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    Originally posted by Atticus View Post
    I'll have to politely demur. Our advantage is Title IX and the excellent farm system high schools and colleges provide.
    Also, there is tremendous national pride in women's soccer in dozens of nations* and it's spreading.

    * Germany, Brazil, Sweden. Japan, China, England, France, Australia, Canada, etc.
    They do have teams.....certainly far better than they use to have...but sports scholarships don't exist in those countries and interscholastic sports, at least in Britain, aren't much of a thing. Schools at secondary and university level don't play each other. So your pool of players is drastically smaller.

    I wouldn't say tremendous pride....at least in England...my soccer friends in England were rather dismissive of the England women's team. Nice they play but that is about it.

    As for Brazil I don't think they care about the women's team much. Let alone tremendous pride...and forget the rest of South America and Africa.

    Given that the Brazilian men’s national team has achieved unrivaled global success, influenced soccer governance, and defined the “beautiful game,” one might think that the women’s national team’s recent downturn would trouble the federation, but that’s far from the case. The program has largely been left to struggle without any help.
    • While the men’s team has won five World Cups, the women’s best showing was a runner-up finish in 2007.
    • In the 2011 World Cup, they fell to the United States in the quarterfinals.
    • In 2015, a promising team was knocked out by Australia in the Round of 16.
    • This year, CONMEBOL, the governing body of soccer in South America, scheduledCopa América, the men’s South American national team tournament, at the same time as the World Cup. They did the same thing in 2015, too. This year, the finals for both tournaments take place the same day: July 7th.
    • Women’s professional soccer players in Brazil still don’t earn a living wage. Top players for the men’s league can make upwards of $125,000 per month, while women have yet to surpass $500.
    https://www.sbnation.com/2019/6/9/18...ld-cup-history
    Last edited by Conor Dary; 03-13-2020, 04:08 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
    They are lightyears ahead of the rest of the world because the rest of the world doesn't take women's soccer seriously.
    I'll have to politely demur. Our advantage is Title IX and the excellent farm system high schools and colleges provide.
    Also, there is tremendous national pride in women's soccer in dozens of nations* and it's spreading.

    * Germany, Brazil, Sweden. Japan, China, England, France, Australia, Canada, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    I keep referring back to the IAAF's decision to have financial gender parity in prize money. All of the same arguments AGAINST that exist, but they did the right thing and mandated it. Other sports should take the hint. I do see that the WNBA and like entities can't follow that model, because the gross revenue does not exist, but national federations for sports like soccer certainly can.

    Leave a comment:


  • bambam1729
    replied
    Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
    In terms of what the players should be paid IMO should in large part depend on the revenue generated by the respective teams.
    And looking in from afar it seems to me that the USA Women's team gets bigger crowds and more people watching their games on TV than the USA men. However, maybe I am wrong.
    The problem with that, Tuariki, is that apparently the money available from the men's World Cup is something like 10 times more than from the women's World Cup, so even a mediocre (at best) men's US team can see more money from the World Cup (assuming they qualify) than the women's team. I don't know the details closely but I know that is part of the argument US Soccer is using against their demands.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X