Womens Soccer Championship.

[Cheeks]

What's bizarre is you making five posts in a row, none of which actually refute the points being made, simply because you don't think the women should be paid the same.

Your objective claims have been repeatedly refuted.  You have decided to shift goalposts and build strawmen in response.  You simply don't want to say that you may have been wrong.

Oh well.  It's been interesting.

What objective claims were refuted?  Forgetful said women's team had better attendance....simply untrue and I actually provided the data to show that was the case.  I wasn't wrong, so why should I state it.  The amount of shifting and half truths here have been interesting.  You guys don't like that tickets are cheaper for the ladies, yet STILL get outdrawn.....if you want to get paid the same, shouldn't you charge the same amount for the tickets...interesting.

I'd like to see where it is the women have outdrawn the men here in the US, since that is the standard being used by you guys for ratings.  The data I'm seeing doesn't indicate and it goes back to 2013.  Can someone provide some facts to this?

[Cheeks]

The team was criticized for pouring it on against Thailand which is ironic because they took their job of scoring goals and winning games seriously. Dare I write, showing such seriousness in the workplace would be the ultimate sign of professionalism.

America loves brash athletes. But once the guy made it political about the women's soccer team there are certain men of a certain vintage with a certain tint who take that brash attitude and now refer to it as bratty, childish, and/or unprofessional. The ruse is transparent.

Wrong.  People on twitter and other social media platforms were attacking the team for that display DURING that game, long before any one guy said a thing....long before.  You're normally very good with the facts, but you missed badly on this one.  No doubt that once the one guy said something (he could say cancer is a bad thing and people would complain) many people went into their camps, but let's not pretend for a moment that it started with him...it started during the game.  and after the game.

[forgetful]

What objective claims were refuted?  Forgetful said women's team had better attendance....simply untrue and I actually provided the data to show that was the case.  I wasn't wrong, so why should I state it.  The amount of shifting and half truths here have been interesting.  You guys don't like that tickets are cheaper for the ladies, yet STILL get outdrawn.....if you want to get paid the same, shouldn't you charge the same amount for the tickets...interesting.

I'd like to see where it is the women have outdrawn the men here in the US, since that is the standard being used by you guys for ratings.  The data I'm seeing doesn't indicate and it goes back to 2013.  Can someone provide some facts to this?

Pure BS. I said the women generate more revenue. I provided links proving it. You decided that "attendance" mattered more, I flat out said, I don't care about attendance, its about economics...e.g. revenue.

You shifted the goals posts like normal, and then accused others of being the one shifting them.

I did discuss audience in the US, in reference to potential US-based TV revenue, you shifted that to "attendance" at games, and in the process completely disregarded what actually matters, revenue.

You've provided zero evidence that the men generate more revenue since 2015 than the women...ZERO. Instead you post about attendance, and "the men are better," to justify the pay difference, which means you are ignoring the actual economic data.

[Pakuni]

Who is saying that.  It is about economics, and the men are better.   


If the men were to play the women, the through balls would kill the ladies.  The men are faster and would decimate the defense.  The men are also taller, in some cases much taller....corner kicks and other set plays would be a huge advantage for the men to score.

Who cares?. It's irrelevant because a) men and women don't compete against one another at this level and b) it has no bearing on the  revenue the respective teams generate. It has no bearing on the pay discussion.
The fact is the women generate more revenue for the USSF while being compensated less by the USSF. That's inherently unfair.

[Cheeks]

Pure BS. I said the women generate more revenue. I provided links proving it. You decided that "attendance" mattered more, I flat out said, I don't care about attendance, its about economics...e.g. revenue.

You shifted the goals posts like normal, and then accused others of being the one shifting them.

I did discuss audience in the US, in reference to potential US-based TV revenue, you shifted that to "attendance" at games, and in the process completely disregarded what actually matters, revenue.

You've provided zero evidence that the men generate more revenue since 2015 than the women...ZERO. Instead you post about attendance, and "the men are better," to justify the pay difference, which means you are ignoring the actual economic data.

Oh, I'm sorry....I must have you confused with the other guy here with the same Username of FORGETFUL who said this.

Well, the women draw bigger audiences, both on television and at the gate. So they are much more desirable for advertisers. Unless advertisers suddenly prefer to pay more for smaller audiences, it is pretty simple to see what generates more revenue for US media rights.

Gate still means attendance....right?  You said they draw bigger audiences at the GATE.  I called BS, because you are wrong....then you claim I am moving the goalposts.....yeah...uhm, who is moving the goalposts?  LOL.  Those are your words above...yes?  That is your post...yes?

In fact, the women have NOT outdrawn the men at the gate.  And yes, the TV rights and sponsorships ARE bundled, even though you think that is some kind of sinister plot to not give them credit. And finally, on an apples to apples comparison you are wrong on the ratings, as well.....but keep on hard charging.

One final question for you, if the women are paid the same moving forward and suddenly the interest wanes, or the interest for the men pick up, should both be paid the same no matter what?  Your argument, as flawed as it is, is that they are doing the same or better (proven wrong) so in the future if they aren't, they should get a pay cut...right?  I'd say the same thing for the men, by the way.

[Cheeks]

Who cares?. It's irrelevant because a) men and women don't compete against one another at this level and b) it has no bearing on the  revenue the respective teams generate. It has no bearing on the pay discussion.
The fact is the women generate more revenue for the USSF while being compensated less by the USSF. That's inherently unfair.

Except they don't.  The sponsorship money is bundled in, as someone that sold sponsorships for both college and professional teams for years, bought it for years for companies....attendance is part of the value proposition, as are tv ratings.  There is ZERO way of discerning how much revenue was provided by either entity because the sponsor had to buy both properties.  FACT.

There is nothing inherently unfair about it when the emotional nonsense is eliminated.

[forgetful]

Except they don't. 

Prove it.

[Jockey]

Maybe “somebody” would go away if you guys would QUIT arguing with him.

Some of you don’t understand that is ALL he wants to do. Even if you agree with him, he will still argue.

He is simply a troll who makes this site unreadable at times.

[muwarrior69]

Secret donating 500K to women team.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/secret-deodorant-donates-529g-us-womens-soccer-team-gender-pay-gap

[Cheeks]

Maybe “somebody” would go away if you guys would QUIT arguing with him.

Some of you don’t understand that is ALL he wants to do. Even if you agree with him, he will still argue.

He is simply a troll who makes this site unreadable at times.

Sorry that you see arguing as correcting the record.   We are a major sponsor of USMNT, USWMNT and the Mexican National team.  I happen to know a bit more about how the sausage is made.

Some of you want to believe everything the media says about this stuff which is bizarre.  The media is wrong so many times it is sad to watch.  I’ve been reading for the last 3 months how NFL Sunday Ticket might be going to ESPN +, cuz the media said so....including highly regarded sports media as recently as last week.  Of course I knew they were wrong for months because we worked through the deal, but it took Goodell to quash that fake news a few days ago.....i’m Guessing the fake news will continue regardless.

In my next lifetime I hope I can be in the media and be as wrong as they are and still be paid, must be some accountability.

[Cheeks]

Prove it.

Admit you are wrong on the attendance part that you said was 100% truthful....one step at a time. 

What you are asking to be proven cannot be...that is the point....some media members have even tried to be upfront and stated it isn’t cut and dry and very complicated because of how things are sold, measured, etc.  I give them credit for trying at least.  Some of the others have been so agenda driven it is laughable...facts be damned.

[forgetful]

Admit you are wrong on the attendance part that you said was 100% truthful....one step at a time. 

What you are asking to be proven cannot be...that is the point....some media members have even tried to be upfront and stated it isn’t cut and dry and very complicated because of how things are sold, measured, etc.  I give them credit for trying at least.  Some of the others have been so agenda driven it is laughable...facts be damned.

My 1 statement regarding attendance was based on these numbers: Women total attendance in 2018: 253,151; Men total attendance in 2018: 169,141.

The attendance statement was in relation to the fact that the women generate more ticket revenue then men.

All are facts. I didn't care about per game attendance, because it isn't germane to total revenue.

You have provided zero evidence in support of your stance; you make a claim that is contrary to actual data/evidence and just say everyone else is wrong, because you know better. Then claim others have an agenda. Do you realize how absurd you are?

I'm done with this discussion.

[Cheeks]

My 1 statement regarding attendance was based on these numbers: Women total attendance in 2018: 253,151; Men total attendance in 2018: 169,141.

The attendance statement was in relation to the fact that the women generate more ticket revenue then men.

All are facts. I didn't care about per game attendance, because it isn't germane to total revenue.

You have provided zero evidence in support of your stance; you make a claim that is contrary to actual data/evidence and just say everyone else is wrong, because you know better. Then claim others have an agenda. Do you realize how absurd you are?

I'm done with this discussion.

Lol.  OMG.  So if the women played 100 matches and 1000 people came out to each one and paid $20 per, but the men had 10 matches at 20000 per and people paid $100 per....that doesn’t matter.  You would view that as better performance?  This is awesome. 

Sorry ace, it matters.  What you charge, how many per game, etc.  I provided the links.  Tomorrow when I get to office I’ll dig up what USSF sends to sponsors on attendance.  US men are down something like 11%, the women’s attendance was down 23% if I recall, but will double check.  The men have outdrawn the women....keep moving those goalposts.

[WellsstreetWanderer]

They were extremely professional and have been great, great representatives for our country.

Seems like maybe you think women need to be controlled and told how to act.

  If drunken, profanity laced outbursts are ok with you in your house, fine .  But don't dump your biases on me. We don't know each other and I would never presume to judge. I want better role models for my daughters. Up to now I was proud of them. My wife and I were disappointed by their actions. Nuff said

[Pakuni]

  If drunken, profanity laced outbursts are ok with you in your house, fine .  But don't dump your biases on me. We don't know each other and I would never presume to judge. I want better role models for my daughters. Up to now I was proud of them. My wife and I were disappointed by their actions. Nuff said

Were you equally disappointed by every celebration by a men's team ever?

[Golden Avalanche]

  If drunken, profanity laced outbursts are ok with you in your house, fine .  But don't dump your biases on me. We don't know each other and I would never presume to judge. I want better role models for my daughters. Up to now I was proud of them. My wife and I were disappointed by their actions. Nuff said

We don't know each other and I would never presume to judge, but holding the celebration of a Championship team against the individuals as some sort of character deficiency is the absolute most ludicrous set of words I've ever witnessed said or written by a human being above the age of 18.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

  If drunken, profanity laced outbursts are ok with you in your house, fine .  But don't dump your biases on me. We don't know each other and I would never presume to judge. I want better role models for my daughters. Up to now I was proud of them. My wife and I were disappointed by their actions. Nuff said

Joe Buck?

[Cheeks]

The attendance statement was in relation to the fact that the women generate more ticket revenue then men.

All are facts. I didn't care about per game attendance, because it isn't germane to total revenue.

How do you know the women generate more ticket revenue than the men since their ticket prices are lower and you have no idea how many tickets were given away for free?

Yet you say ALL ARE FACTS.....NOPE.  You have no way of knowing.

[Pakuni]

How do you know the women generate more ticket revenue than the men since their ticket prices are lower and you have no idea how many tickets were given away for free?

Yet you say ALL ARE FACTS.....NOPE.  You have no way of knowing.

If only someone would look into this.
Oh, wait, they did.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-womens-soccer-games-out-earned-mens-games-11560765600

[Cheeks]

If only someone would look into this.
Oh, wait, they did.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-womens-soccer-games-out-earned-mens-games-11560765600

Except it is wrong.  Read the entire article and others that admit to the bundling portion and how therefore it cannot be determined.  Furthermore, they didn’t analyze ticket pricing, etc. 

The media for the last three months has said NFL Sunday Ticket deal was up....Mike Florio again last week, two weeks prior John Olerund, etc....they were wrong.  The media is wrong all the time, but feel free to take them at gospel if you wish.

[Cheeks]

Who cares?. It's irrelevant because a) men and women don't compete against one another at this level and b) it has no bearing on the  revenue the respective teams generate. It has no bearing on the pay discussion.

If it is irrelevant then people should stop saying the women’s team is better.  More correct would be to say the women’s team performs better against other women’s teams then the men’s team does against other men’s teams.

It absolutely should have a bearing on the pay discussion.  Yes or no, is it easier for the women’s team or the men’s team to excel in the world considering the number of countries that play and the level of competency of those other programs?   We all know there are many many many more high level men’s teams than women’s teams.  Easier to advance on the ladies side, why shouldn’t that be part of the calculus?

[rocket surgeon]

They were extremely professional and have been great, great representatives for our country.

Seems like maybe you think women need to be controlled and told how to act.

yeah, dropping our flag on the ground without any cognizance that is totally disrespectful...yeah great great representatives for who's country?  that was brutally bad, but i guess in your world, no biggie...figures.  let's start with teaching some of your "soccer heroes" how to respect this country.  if that is controlling, oy vey

[Cheeks]

Were you equally disappointed by every celebration by a men's team ever?

I thought the women were better, shouldn’t they act better?   

[Pakuni]

If it is irrelevant then people should stop saying the women’s team is better.  More correct would be to say the women’s team performs better against other women’s teams then the men’s team does against other men’s teams.

It absolutely should have a bearing on the pay discussion.  Yes or no, is it easier for the women’s team or the men’s team to excel in the world considering the number of countries that play and the level of competency of those other programs?   We all know there are many many many more high level men’s teams than women’s teams.  Easier to advance on the ladies side, why shouldn’t that be part of the calculus?

Six days ago, you wrote:
"What statement does it make....we’re not going to base compensation on value, revenue coming in, etc, but because it makes everyone feel better?  Economics be damned?

Now, after you've been show the women are bringing in more revenue, you literally are saying "Economics be damned, we're not going to base compensation on value, revenue coming in, etc, teh menz should be paid more because they try."
What a clown show.

[jesmu84]

yeah, dropping our flag on the ground without any cognizance that is totally disrespectful...yeah great great representatives for who's country?  that was brutally bad, but i guess in your world, no biggie...figures.  let's start with teaching some of your "soccer heroes" how to respect this country.  if that is controlling, oy vey

So I understand correctly, flag code is important and upholding the flag code is a reflection of one's respect for the country?