Scholarship table
Again, no one is saying any individual is sexist, so it has nothing to do with why individual people are not supporting women's sports. We are saying that the system the status quo makes it much easier for male athletes to make money/fame/recognition/etc than female athletes.
I still think the men would win. And rather easily. But if you're going to put up the best women's team, why not against the best men's team? Germany, brazil, etc.
Yeah it's fair, I'm probably trying to make the argument way too hard that the genders aren't as disparate physically as they really are.At the same time, just because the men are "better" physically, doesn't mean that the entertainment product they provide is better. There is a lot to appreciate in the women's game that may not be as prevalent in the men's game and vice versa.....just because one team can beat the other doesn't mean the product produced by the winning team is better. Soccer is a great example, the bunker and boom team might win a game, does that mean it's the better and/or more entertaining team?
No. That is what you want to pretend the argument to be. The argument I made was:1. The women generate more revenue for the US Soccer Federation.2. The women's national team draws a larger audiences than men's national team.3. The women are more marketable, well known, and recognizable. In all regards, the women's team has justified equal or higher pay, yet simply because of their gender they are being paid less. Who would beat who in a game is immaterial when the actual revenue generating games are separate and distinct entities.
If only that was true, which most of it isn’t.Furthermore, ever seen the average ticket price for the men vs the women....hmm. That’s also part of the revenue number.As far as attendance, EVERY year the last 10 years the men outdrew the women until this past cycle, despite worse performances and despite much higher ticket costs.And as far as the world stage....the men’s final last year drew 1 billion for one game. The women’s entire tournament MAY have 1 billion viewers.
2. You talk attendance at games, and pick an arbitrary 10-year window. I don't care about what happened in 2009. I care about recent results.
So you would love pay for performance... er... revenue.. which we don't know what it is... or.. er.. something... but, you definitely only care about recent results..You must hate the big base pay the ladies get as compared to the fellas... why are they promised these funds?? Seems wrong (to you).----The thing is... these are two different sports. Stop comparing them. One is men's soccer. One is women's soccer. Very different. That fact can seen by an overwhelming consensus that men's teams would whip the crap out of women's teams.So, if we're going to say women's soccer should be paid as much as men's soccer... should we not say water delivery guys (no offense, ZFB) should be paid the same as dentists? And... people should be able to marry animals?
Every bit of it was true. 1. Average ticket price doesn't matter. Total revenue does. The women have generated more revenue from ticket sales. One of their complaints is them not charging more for tickets. People will pay to see their product.2. You talk attendance at games, and pick an arbitrary 10-year window. Since 2015, the women have larger attendances and revenue. I don't care about what happened in 2009. I care about recent results.3. The world stage doesn't matter when we are talking US-media distribution rights. It also doesn't matter when we are talking licensing deals that are specific to the US-product. Nike has confirmed that the highest selling jersey and licensing products in the US are the women's jerseys and products. The US soccer federation isn't benefiting from the Men's world stage. Especially when the men's team can't make the cut for many of the tournaments. So, everything you said was either false, or deliberately misrepresented.
I guess my point is the system and the economics are ultimately a result of people's preferences and where they want to spend money.
TAMUI do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.
And where do people's preferences come from?
False, every bit of what you wrote was not true and further nonsense that certain people cannot get their head around the facts.Ticket prices don't matter? My God....does money grow on trees in your world? Of course ticket prices matter.
Their believing eyeballs.
No, money is the important factor. Women's ticket revenue since 2015: $50.8MMen's ticket revenue since 2015: $49.9MWomen bring in more money...FACT!
Women's World Cup viewership for in US, higher then Men's.https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/10/us-viewership-of-the-womens-world-cup-final-was-higher-than-the-mens.htmlFACT!
Honest question because I think much of the reporting on this issue is confusing: isn't World Cup money from FIFA part of the revenue stream received by USA Soccer? If it is -- and that's my understanding -- you're disregarding a huge amount of the revenue at issue. But it's quite possible that I'm misunderstanding the USA Soccer revenue streams.
It should have to do with the importance of paying genders more equally for doing similar jobs.
Should we pay all truck drivers the same? NoMen soccer players are much better at soccer than women. To ignore that is bizarre.
Eh, this is apples and oranges. Of course more Americans watched the championship game that an American team was playing in. If you compare this year's championship viewers to the last World Cup the American men played in, the men draw significantly more viewers. The women's championship game had 14 million viewers last week, and the last men's game in 2014 had nearly 25 million.I bet viewership of this year's women's final was a lot lower in Croatia than last year's men's final. Think that's driven by sexism?https://www.cbsnews.com/news/world-cup-2014-record-u-s-tv-ratings-sure-sign-of-soccers-rapid-growth-here/
I don't know what you mean by believing eyeballs, but this brings up a good point. I prefer watching men's sports to women's sports. I think a big part of the reason for that is because growing up I was inundated with men's sports and didn't even know women's sports existed at the professional level until junior high. By that time, my preferences were already decided.
There was an argument that the revenue numbers didn't take into consideration domestic TV-deal revenue. The point is, that the women draw larger TV audiences, so they would contribute more to that revenue picture.The men's team didn't even make the 2018 World Cup, so their value there was zero. It is reasonable to assume that the men may not make the World Cup in any given cycle, whereas the women have a high probability of winning. Thus their value in terms of TV market is higher.Regarding the 2014 comparison. This years Women's World Cup final was at 10 AM on a Sunday. The 2015 Women's final is the highest audience ever in the US (men's or women's) in terms of audience. So the fact is, that the women bring more to the table in terms of US soccer federation revenue from domestic TV deals.
I'll stick with my opinion on Gold. He'll be in foul trouble within the first eight minutes.