female players accuse U.S. soccer federation of wage discrimination

24

Replies

  • navigator2navigator2 Posts: 22,450 AG
    This woman writer pretty much sums it up in a brief paragraph.
    When the US National Women's Soccer League started up in 2013, Julie Foudy wrote for ESPN that “professional sports, for men and women, are not about who deserves them or who has earned the right to play professionally; professional sports leagues are governed by one simple principle -- what the market will bear.”

    http://www.businessinsider.com/womens-small-soccer-salaries-are-fair-2015-7


    Adam Smith wrote a thing or two about these things a long time ago. :grin
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • navigator2navigator2 Posts: 22,450 AG
    .
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,877 Admiral
    No one cares about that fact because it is irrelevant to the OP. However it does seem they are the whiniest too.

    LOl explain how is it not relevant
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,436 AG
    Finfinder wrote: »
    LOl explain how is it not relevant

    The OP is about monetary performance not physical performance.
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,877 Admiral

    a ticket scalper is irrelevant

    Do you think there union is going to loose the court case ? Im not saying they should get the exact same as men's but they have a great case in the percentages. They also help the men since TV revenues are bundled. Its all part of there leverage for negotiating a new contract. US soccer screwed the pooch when they said prior to negotiations don't even think about getting the same as men. I think based off accomplishment's they should get better pay and now they have gender war as propaganda to achieve that.
  • H20dadH20dad Posts: 1,518 Captain
    Why do they have men and women's and not just one soccer team?
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,436 AG
    Finfinder wrote: »
    a ticket scalper is irrelevant

    A ticket scalper is a truer free market expression of an event's worth than most any other metric.
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,877 Admiral
    navigator2 wrote: »
    This woman writer pretty much sums it up in a brief paragraph.



    http://www.businessinsider.com/womens-small-soccer-salaries-are-fair-2015-7


    Adam Smith wrote a thing or two about these things a long time ago. :grin

    Does that mean that since the Gators football performance has been lacking in recent years, they should be relegated to the ACC. :grin
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,436 AG
    Finfinder wrote: »
    a ticket scalper is irrelevant

    Do you think there union is going to loose the court case ? Im not saying they should get the exact same as men's but they have a great case in the percentages. They also help the men since TV revenues are bundled. Its all part of there leverage for negotiating a new contract. US soccer screwed the pooch when they said prior to negotiations don't even think about getting the same as men. I think based off accomplishment's they should get better pay and now they have gender war as propaganda to achieve that.

    So you are admitting that they will win due to politics and not merit... merit being revenue generated by their product.
  • gregglgreggl Posts: 21,594 Officer
    it's a fixed number of players. there aren't normal market forces at play.
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,436 AG
    Huh? The market forces are the people willing to shell out the doh to watch...
  • riverdiverriverdiver Posts: 2,024 Captain
    Finfinder wrote: »
    So your are saying the rest of the world discriminates more than the US. That's a bunch of bull, the reason is because they are the best women athletes in the world. Don't make this difficult.

    The US women soccer team is the best women's soccer team in the world. Whether or not they're the best athletes in the world is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the conversation.

    Walk up to 20 randomly picked people on the street, and ask them how much the woman's soccer team gets paid. I'd venture a guess very few of them even know the woman's soccer team gets paid, or even cares if they get paid. Other than amongst hard core soccer fans, you'd be hard pressed to find out what the men make, much less the women.

    There's no widespread interest in women's sports, except in pockets of population and during big events, which fits many "sports". Who discusses curling when the Winter Olympics isn't active? Does the WNBA even exist anymore? Should female surfers or poker players get a boost in appearance fees, just because they're women?

    If there's an interest, people will come, which leads to more money, which leads to higher pay. NFL players make good money. XFL players didn't. MLB players make good money. Professional softball players don't. That's just life.
  • riverdiverriverdiver Posts: 2,024 Captain
    A ticket scalper is a truer free market expression of an event's worth than most any other metric.

    Exactly. Try scalping tickets to a professional bass fishing weigh in or a college women's volleyball match, and see how much response you get.
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,877 Admiral
    So you are admitting that they will win due to politics and not merit... merit being revenue generated by their product.

    Yes, did I ever deny that? You are trying to argue with me when I agree some of what you say ( I guess that's better than conversing with Fight Club conspiracy forum dude. :)

    In terms of what they accomplished on the filed its not even close, its a game, kind of goes against some things we are taught.
  • riverdiverriverdiver Posts: 2,024 Captain
    greggl wrote: »
    it's a fixed number of players. there aren't normal market forces at play.

    There's a fixed number of players in the NFL, NBA, and MLB. There's usually a fixed number of players in a Pro Redfish or BASS Elite tournament. There's a fixed number of players in Pro Bowling. There's a handful of people making a living as a Pro Skateboarder or Marathon runner.

    They all make money based on interest and advertising dollars. Women's sports in general draw less than men's sports, so they shouldn't pay equivalently.

    Once again, you interject your opinions based on your inability or unwillingness to hold a job, because you have a skewed viewpoint of what you think you're worth. No one is entitled to success. If someone wants to be a Pro Rodeo rider or Monster Truck racer, then they shouldn't complain if their income doesn't match what they'd ideally hope to make. Same way a career burger flipper shouldn't resent a Neurosurgeon because he/she makes more than they do.
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,877 Admiral
    riverdiver wrote: »
    The US women soccer team is the best women's soccer team in the world. Whether or not they're the best athletes in the world is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the conversation.

    Walk up to 20 randomly picked people on the street, and ask them how much the woman's soccer team gets paid. I'd venture a guess very few of them even know the woman's soccer team gets paid, or even cares if they get paid. Other than amongst hard core soccer fans, you'd be hard pressed to find out what the men make, much less the women.

    There's no widespread interest in women's sports, except in pockets of population and during big events, which fits many "sports". Who discusses curling when the Winter Olympics isn't active? Does the WNBA even exist anymore? Should female surfers or poker players get a boost in appearance fees, just because they're women?

    If there's an interest, people will come, which leads to more money, which leads to higher pay. NFL players make good money. XFL players didn't. MLB players make good money. Professional softball players don't. That's just life.





    for the last time I never said the MATH was in the girls favor ...... read the entire thread please

    Im pretty sure you are wrong on the TV rating on the women's the world cup. I also bet if you walked up to those same 20 people and asked, they could name as many or more players on the women's world cup teams past and present than the men's.

    The only women's sport I find interesting to watch is the world cup soccer and maybe Serena Williams who is probably the best women's tennis player of all time. Which is another can of worms because women tennis players do get paid the same as men.
  • gregglgreggl Posts: 21,594 Officer
    riverdiver wrote: »
    There's a fixed number of players in the NFL, NBA, and MLB. There's usually a fixed number of players in a Pro Redfish or BASS Elite tournament. There's a fixed number of players in Pro Bowling. There's a handful of people making a living as a Pro Skateboarder or Marathon runner.

    They all make money based on interest and advertising dollars. Women's sports in general draw less than men's sports, so they shouldn't pay equivalently.

    Once again, you interject your opinions based on your inability or unwillingness to hold a job, because you have a skewed viewpoint of what you think you're worth. No one is entitled to success. If someone wants to be a Pro Rodeo rider or Monster Truck racer, then they shouldn't complain if their income doesn't match what they'd ideally hope to make. Same way a career burger flipper shouldn't resent a Neurosurgeon because he/she makes more than they do.

    They have a union for a reason.
  • riverdiverriverdiver Posts: 2,024 Captain
    Finfinder wrote: »
    Yes, did I ever deny that? You are trying to argue with me when I agree some of what you say ( I guess that's better than conversing with Fight Club conspiracy forum dude. :)

    In terms of what they accomplished on the filed its not even close, its a game, kind of goes against some things we are taught.

    What does their success (or lack of) have to do with it?

    It's all about what they bring in money wise. The increased money to pay them has to come from somewhere...it certainly isn't coming from rabid interest and overwhelming ticket sales.

    Why should they automatically make more money because they can beat other female National teams, yet can't beat a group of 16U High school boys?

    Following your theory, a really good pro fishing guide should get a guaranteed raise because he puts clients on better fish. You're saying that those who compete in weightlifting, body building, pro timber cutting, or Scottish Games participants should get an automatic pay hike...just because they're good at what they do.

    Life works that way in Cuba..,not here.
  • gregglgreggl Posts: 21,594 Officer
    There should,not be any profit for the league if the players aren't profiting.
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,877 Admiral
    riverdiver wrote: »
    What does their success (or lack of) have to do with it?

    It's all about what they bring in money wise. The increased money to pay them has to come from somewhere...it certainly isn't coming from rabid interest and overwhelming ticket sales.

    Why should they automatically make more money because they can beat other female National teams, yet can't beat a group of 16U High school boys?

    Following your theory, a really good pro fishing guide should get a guaranteed raise because he puts clients on better fish. You're saying that those who compete in weightlifting, body building, pro timber cutting, or Scottish Games participants should get an automatic pay hike...just because they're good at what they do.

    Life works that way in Cuba..,not here.

    no its NOT and Im not saying any of that. Yes they should make more money than they do right now. Why should the women get less allowance for a hotel room then the men?

    its a game their uniforms say United States of America on it they represent our country its played to win not played or ranked by profit ( or tie in the case of soccer LOL )

    we are not talking about professional sports leagues your example are irrelevant
  • gregglgreggl Posts: 21,594 Officer
    17mil in sponsors - they should be able to negotiate and raise their minimum wage to meet at least the US minimum wage.
  • grady30wagrady30wa Posts: 10,161 AG
    Finfinder wrote: »
    So your are saying the rest of the world discriminates more than the US. That's a bunch of bull, the reason is because they are the best women athletes in the world. Don't make this difficult.

    LOL. Sure it is.

    England's FA (Football Association) banned soccer for women until as recently as 1971.

    Let's put something in perspective...

    In 2006, worldwide, there were 265 million people who were actively involved in soccer. Roughly 10% of them (26 million) were women

    But look at the registered number of players worldwide (registered through a FIFA affiliate like US Soccer Federation or Deuscher Fussball-Bund (germany)...38 million worldwide (34.2 million males, 4.1 million females). There are 1.67 million registered females in the United States, and 4.19 million males.


    U.S. women make up 41% of total registered female soccer players worldwide, even though women worldwide account for only 10% of the total people who play soccer

    By comparison, U.S. men make up just 12.2% of total registered males soccer players worldwide.

    U.S. women have had success because the top countries (Spain, Germany, Italy, England, Brazil) put no emphasis on women's soccer.

    http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/bcoffsurv/emaga_9384_10704.pdf
    Schadenfreude. November 8, 2016
  • grady30wagrady30wa Posts: 10,161 AG
    H20dad wrote: »
    Why do they have men and women's and not just one soccer team?
    :grin
    Schadenfreude. November 8, 2016
  • grady30wagrady30wa Posts: 10,161 AG
    Finfinder wrote: »

    Im pretty sure you are wrong on the TV rating on the women's the world cup.

    750 million watched the 2015 Women's World Cup (60.7 million watched the final)
    http://www.fifa.com/womensworldcup/news/y=2015/m=12/news=record-breaking-fifa-women-s-world-cup-tops-750-million-tv-viewers-2745963.html

    3.2 billion watched the 2014 Men's World Cup (1 billion watched the final)
    http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/y=2015/m=12/news=2014-fifa-world-cuptm-reached-3-2-billion-viewers-one-billion-watched--2745519.html



    Men's final: 1 billion viewers (1,000,000,000)
    Women's final:60.7 million (60,700,000

    Understand the pay discrepancy now?
    Schadenfreude. November 8, 2016
  • gregglgreggl Posts: 21,594 Officer
    grady30wa wrote: »
    Understand the pay discrepancy now?

    what is their salary cap and minimum?
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,877 Admiral
    grady30wa wrote: »
    LOL. Sure it is.

    England's FA (Football Association) banned soccer for women until as recently as 1971.

    Let's put something in perspective...

    In 2006, worldwide, there were 265 million people who were actively involved in soccer. Roughly 10% of them (26 million) were women

    But look at the registered number of players worldwide (registered through a FIFA affiliate like US Soccer Federation or Deuscher Fussball-Bund (germany)...38 million worldwide (34.2 million males, 4.1 million females). There are 1.67 million registered females in the United States, and 4.19 million males.


    U.S. women make up 41% of total registered female soccer players worldwide, even though women worldwide account for only 10% of the total people who play soccer

    By comparison, U.S. men make up just 12.2% of total registered males soccer players worldwide.

    U.S. women have had success because the top countries (Spain, Germany, Italy, England, Brazil) put no emphasis on women's soccer.

    http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/bcoffsurv/emaga_9384_10704.pdf


    Again and again and again I'm not arguing the math jebus however you obviously are not a sports fan nor are athletic. By your standards the men's team should even show up to play.


    the optics are bad


    USWNT, USMNT pay gap

    from sport illustrated

    Payment situationUSWNT
    (2013-present)USMNT
    (2015-18)Friendlies (per player, vs. teams not in FIFA's top 25, excluding Mexico)$1,350 for a win$9,375 for a win;
    $6,250 for a tie;
    $5,000 for a loss Friendlies (per player, vs. teams ranked 11-25, excluding Mexico)$1,350 for a win$12,500 for a win;
    $6,250 for a tie;
    $5,000 for a lossFriendlies (per player, vs. teams ranked 1-10 and Mexico)$1,350 for a win$17,625 for a win;
    $8,125 for a tie;
    $5,000 for a lossWorld Cup roster bonus$15,000 per player WCQ match bonus;
    $15,000 per player WC roster bonus$68,750 per playerWorld Cup qualifiersN/A$12,500 per player per win; $6,000 per player per draw; $4,000 per player per lossWorld Cup qualificationN/A$2,500,000 split among team player poolWorld Cup per game paymentN/A$6,875 per player, regardless of resultWorld Cup first round points bonusN/A$218,750 to team player pool per point earnedWorld Cup second round advancement bonusN/A$4,500,000 split among team player poolWorld Cup fourth place bonus$10,000/playerN/AWorld Cup third place bonus$20,000/player$1,250,000 to team player poolWorld Cup second place bonus$32,500/player$6,250,000 to team player poolWorld Cup champion bonus$75,000/player$9,375,000 to team player poolPlayer in World Cup training camp, not game rosterN/A$2,500Per Diem$50/domestic venue; $60/international $62.50 domestic;
    $75 internationalSponsor appearance fee$3,000/appearance$3,750/appearanceAttendance ticket revenue bonus$1.20/ticket$1.50/ticketPost-World Cup victory tour (number of games dependent on WC outcome; tour dependent on WC finish)$1.8M for team player pool for finishing first in World Cup;
    $6,750 per player for finishing second;
    $6,250 per player for finishing thirdN/A


    [h=3][/h]
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,877 Admiral
    Finfinder wrote: »
    a ticket scalper is irrelevant

    Do you think there union is going to loose the court case ? Im not saying they should get the exact same as men's but they have a great case in the percentages. They also help the men since TV revenues are bundled. Its all part of there leverage for negotiating a new contract. US soccer screwed the pooch when they said prior to negotiations don't even think about getting the same as men. I think based off accomplishment's they should get better pay and now they have gender war as propaganda to achieve that.


    Grady what part of this that I wrote 2 pages ago makes you think I don't understand what going on with this issue.
  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    grady30wa wrote: »
    750 million watched the 2015 Women's World Cup (60.7 million watched the final)
    http://www.fifa.com/womensworldcup/news/y=2015/m=12/news=record-breaking-fifa-women-s-world-cup-tops-750-million-tv-viewers-2745963.html

    3.2 billion watched the 2014 Men's World Cup (1 billion watched the final)
    http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/y=2015/m=12/news=2014-fifa-world-cuptm-reached-3-2-billion-viewers-one-billion-watched--2745519.html



    Men's final: 1 billion viewers (1,000,000,000)
    Women's final:60.7 million (60,700,000

    Understand the pay discrepancy now?

    And the US women have played in the final at least 3 times. The men zero. So the women have earned something where the US men haven't.
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
  • riverdiverriverdiver Posts: 2,024 Captain
    greggl wrote: »
    17mil in sponsors - they should be able to negotiate and raise their minimum wage to meet at least the US minimum wage.

    Minimum wage? The women on the US team aren't making minimum wage.

    As for your "$17 million in sponsors", there was $17 million in tv time paid to the network for advertising in the 2015 woman's cup.

    Sounds impressive.

    However, advertiser revenue paid to the network covering the men's cup was $529 million.

    Most people don't care about men's soccer. Even less care about women's soccer, WNBA, professional bowling, or the national spelling bee. World Cup compeitition is like the Olympics..interest rises while it's happening, the day it's over it's forgotten.

    How much do you think the vast majority of the US Winter and Summer Olympic teams make?
  • riverdiverriverdiver Posts: 2,024 Captain
    cpr wrote: »
    And the US women have played in the final at least 3 times. The men zero. So the women have earned something where the US men haven't.

    Yet they still can't beat High School 16U boys teams.

    Looks like a real possibility they're beating teams from countries that care even less about women's soccer than the US does.
Sign In or Register to comment.