Womens Soccer Championship.

[LAZER]

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 guess my point is the system and the economics are ultimately a result of people's preferences and where they want to spend money.

[mu03eng]

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?

[jesmu84]

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?

Not disagreeing with any of that

[Cheeks]

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.

[forgetful]

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.

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.

[Jay Bee]

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?

[forgetful]

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?

90% of what you wrote is incomprehensible.

The other 10% is either completely reinventing what I said, or completely misunderstanding reality.

I didn't discuss who would beat who men vs. women. I simply indicated, to you and others claiming that it should be based off revenue (or what the market allows), that in such a case the women should make at least as much as the men, since they bring in equal or more revenue.

Other randomness you want to bring in, e.g. base pay, indicates you misunderstand or intentionally misrepresent reality. The men get base pay too, it is just a per game base pay. The women lump that across 20 games. So if the men and women both play 20 games, they earn $100k base salary. The women as base pay lump sum, the men as base pay of $5k per game.

The differences in pay between the men and women come as a result of bonuses for winning. The men get larger bonuses for winning games compared to the women. The men also get to fly chartered flights, play on better/safer practice facilities and numerous other unequal benefits that do not reflect the actual revenue contributions.

[Jay Bee]

So, can my buddy marry his dog or what?

[Cheeks]

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.

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.

Attendance has been higher....oh really.  Here are the 2018 numbers in which USWMNT dropped 22%....one game over 25K....despite cheap ticket prices.  Avg attendance was 14K.   https://worldsoccertalk.com/2018/12/13/uswnt-average-attendance-declines-22-percent-in-2018/

1/21/18 – Friendly – USA vs. Denmark – SDCCU Stadium – 17,526
3/1/18 – She Believes Cup – USA vs. Germany – Mapfre Stadium – 14,591
3/4/18 – She Believes Cup – USA vs. France – Red Bull Arena – 25,706
3/7/18 – She Believes Cup – USA vs. England – Orlando City Stadium – 12,351
4/5/18 – Friendly – USA vs. Mexico – TIAA Bank Field – 14,360
4/8/18 – Friendly – USA vs. Mexico – BBVA Compass Stadium – 15,349
6/7/18 – Friendly – USA vs. China – Rio Tinto Stadium – 13,230
6/12/18 – Friendly – USA vs. China – First Energy Stadium – 12,335
7/26/18 – Tournament of Nations – USA vs. Japan – Children’s Mercy Park – 18,467
7/29/18 – Tournament of Nations – USA vs. Australia – Pratt & Whitney Stadium – 21,570
8/2/18 – Tournament of Nations – USA vs. Brazil – Toyota Park – 18,309
8/31/18 – Friendly – USA vs. Chile – StubHub Center – 23,544
9/4/18 – Friendly – USA vs. Chile – Avaya Stadium – 14,340
10/4/18 – Women’s World Cup qualifier – USA vs. Mexico – WakeMed Soccer Park – 5,404
10/7/18 – WWCQ – USA vs. Panama – WakeMed Soccer Park – 7,532
10/10/18 – WWCQ – USA vs. Trinidad & Tobago – WakeMed Soccer Park – 3,996
10/14/18 – WWCQ – USA vs. Jamaica – Toyota Stadium – 7,555
10/17/18 – WWCQ – USA vs. Canada – Toyota Stadium – 6,986

14K for the best team in the world.  The men, who basically sucked in 2018, averaged 24K DESPITE all of the games being friendlies and NONE of them being World Cup Qualifiers.  Three of the games had over 32K....reminder....the women had zero over 26K.

If you want to look at the WC Qualifiers of 2017, the men's attendance crushed the women despite higher ticket prices and the team not performing well.

http://worldsoccertalk.com/2018/12/12/usmnt-average-attendance-2018-worst-since-2006/

So tell me again how EVERYTHING I said was false.  LOL.  Tell me again how ticket prices don't mean anything...when they are one of the levers that drive attendance.  And finally, the world stage matters entirely when a large chunk of the money people are bitching about is coming from that pot.

In summary, women's attendance historically and even recently has NOT been better than the men despite being the best team in the world, despite lower ticket prices.   Ratings, historically have been much worse and the comparison of a World Cup year for one team vs the same year when the men don't even have a World Cup tournament is ridiculous.  Finally, take a look at MLS attendance vs the women's professional leagues, let me know how that compares as well. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

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.

And where do people's preferences come from?

[Cheeks]

And where do people's preferences come from?

Their believing eyeballs.

[forgetful]

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.

No, money is the important factor.

Women's ticket revenue since 2015: $50.8M
Men's ticket revenue since 2015: $49.9M

Women bring in more money...FACT!

Women's jerseys selling at record amounts compared to men and women.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/nike-sells-record-number-of-usa-soccer-jerseys-due-to-womens-world-cup-2019-6-1028317598

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.html

FACT!

[Pakuni]

Their believing eyeballs.

Woeful understanding of human psychology.

[StillAWarrior]

No, money is the important factor.

Women's ticket revenue since 2015: $50.8M
Men's ticket revenue since 2015: $49.9M

Women bring in more money...FACT!

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.

[MUBBau]

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.html

FACT!

How does this relate to USWNT v USMNT? It's comparing France and Croatia to the USWNT.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

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.

I don't think they receive any money from FIFA if I read their audited financials correctly.

https://www.ussoccer.com/governance/financial-information

But again, this shouldn't just be about revenue generation.  It should have to do with the importance of paying genders more equally for doing similar jobs. 

[skianth16]

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.html

FACT!

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/

[Jay Bee]

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? No

Men soccer players are much better at soccer than women. To ignore that is bizarre.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Should we pay all truck drivers the same? No

Men soccer players are much better at soccer than women. To ignore that is bizarre.

The women are better than the men are in their respective competitions.  To ignore that is bizarre.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Their believing eyeballs.

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.

[forgetful]

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/

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.

[StillAWarrior]

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.

TAMU, as I've said before, I have a lot of respect for you and enjoy our discussions of these issues.  I tend to learn a lot from you, and I appreciate that.  Two thoughts:

1)  It's also possible that you simply enjoy watching men more.  There's nothing wrong with that.  Some sports, I like watching men more.  Other sports, I like watching women more.  I will not deny that there is institutional sexism out there, but it doesn't necessarily have to be the reason for your preferences.

2)  At times, this conversation has gotten side-tracked because of different interpretations of the word "sexism."  I vaguely recall you and I having a similar discussion of the term "racism."  Some hear it and interpret it as implying malice.  Others use it very technically and don't intend to imply malice.  I think that a big part of the problem with those two words is that they have become weaponized and are so frequently used to imply malice that many people (myself included) become defensive when they hear those words applied to situations they are discussing.

[4everwarriors]

Crean sucks

[Galway Eagle]

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.

 isn't it possible that there's at least a tiny element of you prefer watching men's sports to imagine yourself in there? You can identify with them. You can't really do that with women's sports. I'm sure everyone here used to play hoops in the alley (or drive way) and imagine they were hitting a game winning shot. Or in a shoot out in soccer/hockey before coming in and watching the game with their dad or brother or friends. When you're dreaming that stuff you aren't hitting the shot in the women's league. And as people grow up I think there's still a bit of that element in watching sports.

I could be wrong and someone's gonna tell me they had no imagination or inclination to play sports and just chose to watch men's on a whim.

[Its DJOver]

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.

Not qualifying for 2018 was an extreme fluke, and after 2022 when the tournament expands, the odds of the men not qualifying will be the same as the odds that the women don't qualify.

Once again I don't think that there is one right answer to the pay question, because while the 2015 and 1999 Finals are the two most watched games in American history, it's undeniable that the overall spike in popularity in the sport stems from the men hosting in 1994. 

Not a perfect analogy, but the best I can think of; where would the X-games and extreme sports in general be without Tony Hawk?  They're still pretty far down as it stands, but you can argue that they would be virtually dead without him.