Women's world cup

[Mudslinger]

Now they complain because other “mens” teams are playing on the same dat, not the same time but the same day. The women on this squad would ***** about being hung with a new rope.

[muzzyslinger]

Does anybody actually watch soccer?????

[rladner]

Pretty simple picture to me: the USWNT and USMNT are both paid by the USSF. The USWNT brings in more money to the USSF, yet is paid less. That's why there's a dispute.

I'm aware of who Pulisic is, but please, do explain what you consider to be the big picture.

Two points. First, link your source for funds please. Second, the only reason there MAY be an equal amount for the years you site is due to the fact the US failed to qualify on the men's side for the worldcup. Your numbers show it even, but if the men qualified it would not even be close. You have taken a small sample size. Expand that to 10 or 15 years and see what you have. Ticket sales on the men's side is far greater than women's in every country except the us. Which means all road games are more lucrative for the men. Viewership worldwide is greater for the men, which means greater advertising dollars. I love soccer, but would much rather watch men play over women. I've never been to a women's game, but lost track of how many men's games I've been to. I'm not alone.

Now they are crying about the fact that there are two other tournament finals on Sunday for men's teams. They don't conflict on time, but the women are upset about it. Why? If they have a better product then what's the problem? They are losing sympathy.

[Dale Moser]

Men compete at the highest possible level of their sport, the women’s team would get smoked by a good high school boys team, and has.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sir shovelhands]

Two points. First, link your source for funds please.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-wom...es-11560765600

or

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanlak.../#3d51d7777b68

Second, the only reason there MAY be an equal amount for the years you site is due to the fact the US failed to qualify on the men's side for the worldcup. Your numbers show it even, but if the men qualified it would not even be close.

Actually the men failing to qualify for the world cup in 2018 makes the comparison even MORE persuasive, since the numbers I quoted were from 2016 - 2018: there was no world cup for women to compete in (2015 was the last one).

You have taken a small sample size. Expand that to 10 or 15 years and see what you have.

True, the sample size is not huge. But consider if your boss told you that the last 3 years of producing as much revenue as a fellow employee who was paid 4x as much as you wasn't good enough to be paid similarly, you'd probably think

Ticket sales on the men's side is far greater than women's in every country except the us. Which means all road games are more lucrative for the men. Viewership worldwide is greater for the men, which means greater advertising dollars.

There's one problem with your argument, media agreements. The USSF makes agreements with American media companies like ESPN to cover their games for a share of the advertising profits. In other countries, the other team's federations do the same. When they play each other, whatever network people watch the game on decides which federation gets their money. To give a simplified example:

if the US (media agreement with ESPN) plays Brazil (media agreement with XYZ), and 200,000 americans watch on ESPN, and 1,000,000 brazilians watch on XYZ, the USSF only gets paid advertising dollars based upon having 200,000 viewers.

So no, the men don't benefit from foreigners watching.

I love soccer, but would much rather watch men play over women. I've never been to a women's game, but lost track of how many men's games I've been to. I'm not alone.

And..?

[rladner]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-wom...es-11560765600



or

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanlake/2019/07/02/uswnt-fight-for-equality-in-the-us-while-taking-on-the-world-in-the-world-cup/#3d51d7777b68

Actually the men failing to qualify for the world cup in 2018 makes the comparison even MORE persuasive, since the numbers I quoted were from 2016 - 2018: there was no world cup for women to compete in (2015 was the last one).







True, the sample size is not huge. But consider if your boss told you that the last 3 years of producing as much revenue as a fellow employee who was paid 4x as much as you wasn't good enough to be paid similarly, you'd probably think











There's one problem with your argument, media agreements. The USSF makes agreements with American media companies like ESPN to cover their games for a share of the advertising profits. In other countries, the other team's federations do the same. When they play each other, whatever network people watch the game on decides which federation gets their money. To give a simplified example:



if the US (media agreement with ESPN) plays Brazil (media agreement with XYZ), and 200,000 americans watch on ESPN, and 1,000,000 brazilians watch on XYZ, the USSF only gets paid advertising dollars based upon having 200,000 viewers.



So no, the men don't benefit from foreigners watching.







And..?

Sample size is very relevant because soccer usually runs a 4 year cycle. Usually world cup to world cup. My company has a one year cycle so that comparison isn't really apples to apples. Include a world cup for both. Also the men's world cup is far more lucrative. More teams.

Remember, the world cup is the most popular sporting event in the world......but on the men's side.

And advertising dollars are affected by viewership. Viewership in the US is still stronger for the men than the women.

[rladner]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-wom...es-11560765600



or

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanlake/2019/07/02/uswnt-fight-for-equality-in-the-us-while-taking-on-the-world-in-the-world-cup/#3d51d7777b68

Actually the men failing to qualify for the world cup in 2018 makes the comparison even MORE persuasive, since the numbers I quoted were from 2016 - 2018: there was no world cup for women to compete in (2015 was the last one).







True, the sample size is not huge. But consider if your boss told you that the last 3 years of producing as much revenue as a fellow employee who was paid 4x as much as you wasn't good enough to be paid similarly, you'd probably think











There's one problem with your argument, media agreements. The USSF makes agreements with American media companies like ESPN to cover their games for a share of the advertising profits. In other countries, the other team's federations do the same. When they play each other, whatever network people watch the game on decides which federation gets their money. To give a simplified example:



if the US (media agreement with ESPN) plays Brazil (media agreement with XYZ), and 200,000 americans watch on ESPN, and 1,000,000 brazilians watch on XYZ, the USSF only gets paid advertising dollars based upon having 200,000 viewers.



So no, the men don't benefit from foreigners watching.







And..?

As for the "and"............ I think I provided that just before the "and". I'm in the majority with that.....sooo.......

[zztex]

Does anybody actually watch soccer?????

No

[justletmein]

Men compete at the highest possible level of their sport, the women’s team would get smoked by a good high school boys team, and has.

The women actually flop less though so more fun to watch.

[Dale Moser]

The women actually flop less though so more fun to watch.

True, but you don’t get payed like the best in the world if you’re playing a far less competitive level.

I actually enjoy watching the national teams, even though I’m not a soccer fan. I won’t watch this one though as long as they allow the idiocy on the team that rapino brings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sir shovelhands]

Sample size is very relevant because soccer usually runs a 4 year cycle. Usually world cup to world cup. My company has a one year cycle so that comparison isn't really apples to apples. Include a world cup for both. Also the men's world cup is far more lucrative. More teams.

Remember, the world cup is the most popular sporting event in the world......but on the men's side.

And advertising dollars are affected by viewership. Viewership in the US is still stronger for the men than the women.

Sure! Let's do the most recent 4 year cycle: 2016-2019. Which includes a world cup for both, 2018 for men, and 2019 for women. Except USMNT didn't even qualify for the 2018 cup. Man, I bet that widens the revenue gap even more since the women made it to the finals (and may soon win it).

As for viewership...I'll repeat: and? Ad sales are only a segment of revenue. The USWNT is still bringing in equivalent revenue. Your argument is moot.

[Bayouboy]

True, but you don’t get payed like the best in the world if you’re playing a far less competitive level.

I actually enjoy watching the national teams, even though I’m not a soccer fan. I won’t watch this one though as long as they allow the idiocy on the team that rapino brings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Same here. I find it harder every day to pull for them.

[Smart]

I'm not a fan of soccer unless it's Team USA in the World Cup and the Olympics. Much, much more the women than men. I guess as a super, super casual fan of soccer, I like to watch a team worth a **** if I'm going to watch it.



Rapinoe, the attention *****, was making me not a fan of World Cup soccer this time around, but then I catch the rest of the team singing their **** hearts out with their hands over their heart during the anthem and just playing the game like it should be played....and I ask myself.... should I quit on or ignore my country's team because one selfish *** attention ***** can't keep her **** mouth shut? I can ignore that fraud and hope for the best for the redm white and blue.... . I'll be tuning in for the final.


Then I can do without watching soccer for a long time again..

[Pedernal]

I'm not a fan of soccer unless it's Team USA in the World Cup and the Olympics. Much, much more the women than men. I guess as a super, super casual fan of soccer, I like to watch a team worth a **** if I'm going to watch it.



Rapinoe, the attention *****, was making me not a fan of World Cup soccer this time around, but then I catch the rest of the team singing their **** hearts out with their hands over their heart during the anthem and just playing the game like it should be played....and I ask myself.... should I quit on or ignore my country's team because one selfish *** attention ***** can't keep her **** mouth shut? I can ignore that fraud and hope for the best for the redm white and blue.... . I'll be tuning in for the final.

Exactly, let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

[Dale Moser]

I'm not a fan of soccer unless it's Team USA in the World Cup and the Olympics. Much, much more the women than men. I guess as a super, super casual fan of soccer, I like to watch a team worth a **** if I'm going to watch it.



Rapinoe, the attention *****, was making me not a fan of World Cup soccer this time around, but then I catch the rest of the team singing their **** hearts out with their hands over their heart during the anthem and just playing the game like it should be played....and I ask myself.... should I quit on or ignore my country's team because one selfish *** attention ***** can't keep her **** mouth shut? I can ignore that fraud and hope for the best for the redm white and blue.... . I'll be tuning in for the final.


Then I can do without watching soccer for a long time again..

I still hope they win, I’m just not gonna watch it. Also I fully realize that my not watching will change absolutely nothing.


On a semi related note, I stumbled across Wimbledon today to see that 15yo young American lady takin it to some euro chick....[emoji15]

Coco was bringing that smoke, and I’m here for all of it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk