World Cup: 2019 FIFA Women's World Cup - III (USA wins 4th Womens World Cup)

[KevFu]

Yeah, it was the most cringe thing I've ever watched.

Funny, how people went postal at Alex Morgan saying there's a double-standard.
US Women get drunk and rowdy after winning: Cringeworthy.
Washington Capitals do it and everyone laughs and thinks it's awesome.

I remember people talking trash on the Canadian women’s hockey team for their drinking after winning Olympic Gold one year.

I wonder if there's any reason why both Canada and US have a women's soccer program that far outshines the men's teams.

US women, obviously atop the mountain right now but their men's team couldn't even qualify for the last WC.

Canadian women, usually top 5 or top 10 although they keep falling short on the grand stage. Our men's team, on the other hand, is only now showing signs of potential after 30+ years without a single World Cup game.

The correct answer, as someone else mentioned is how developed and established the programs are.

The women were in with the first wave of nations (along with Germany, Norway, Brazil especially) who started investing hard into the program. The men’s program is 60 years or so behind as tobwhen they started serious investment into the infrastructure of the game compared to most of the other heavyweights in the game.

This, for the most part. Except it’s really more “cultural” than it is “investment.” If you look at the early years of the women’s game and the top contenders…

USA, Canada, Japan, and I’m assuming Norway and Sweden (but I admit ignorance on those two), have societies that have been open to women playing sports for decades, and the rest of the world is not like that. Only just now, HALF of Europe is welcoming women’s soccer as a thing that exists (The other half isn’t and tons of places around the globe still don’t).

US Soccer didn’t really “invest” in women’s soccer as a conscious decision to be good at it. The effect of Title IX was that “Every NCAA school had women’s soccer as a fully funded sport.” We produced more great soccer players than anyone else as a side-effect to colleges spending money of FOOTBALL and having to spend it on a women’s sport to match.


Brazil was a world power for a while, DESPITE lack of investment and lack of acceptance of women playing. It was because Brazil loves soccer and has 300 million people, that they could put together a team of 23 great players despite no investment. That’s what Marta’s speech this World Cup was about. She said: Our nation doesn’t fund women’s soccer, or provide opportunities for women’s soccer, so all girls watching this now, you have to PRODUCE YOURSELF as a World Cup athlete. No one is going to help you.

The US men suck and the US Women are awesome because:
- The rest of the world has developed a high quality system for developing soccer talent.
- US Soccer has not, they let the NCAA develop players for them.
- That broken model can’t compete with the European model on the men’s side.
- That broken model CAN compete on the women’s side because Europe had not applied their development to their women by 2015. Only just now are they starting.

I can’t speak with expertise on Canada soccer, other than to say that US colleges recruit Canada, so I’d imagine the Canadian women are competitive for the same reason the US Women are. And the Canada men aren’t very good for the same reason the US men aren’t very good. And USA is 1 in women, 30 in men vs Canada's 5 in women's, 78 in men's due to the sizes of our countries. USA is picking from 10 times the amount of "players who succeed despite a bad system" as Canada.


As Europe applies it’s development model to the women’s side, the US Women are going to become “one of many good teams” instead of “one of a three or four.” And I’d expect Canada to being falling in the world rankings from 5 to about 12 in the next four years. In 20 years, the USA women will be 5th, Canada 20th. In 50 years, the women’s rankings will look a lot more like the men’s.

 

[Gecklund]

Our US men have historically been a bunch of *****ebags. Dempsey, Donovan, and Howard. They aren't a real team. We'd just build teams off talent like oh your American and play really good okay we will make it work. Mind you all these players were the man at their hs or college. No coincidence Pulisic is going to be our best player ever and developed in Germany where he had to fight for everything. Not these other clowns "I've been playing soccer my whole life, I'm so cool" The women know their roles and play for each other. Perfect example is Morgan and Rapinoe both tied for golden ball. Morgan draws the penalty but Rapinoe take the PK because she gives them the best chance to score/win. You think that clown Dempsey would do that?

CL and WC have proven time and time again you don't need the most talent to get deep. Just play as a team and have heart. Usmnt has neither. It's these guys job and they get paid pretty well for it and losing to nations where they get guys off the street.

Dempsey was the best PK taker possibly in US history, so no I don't think he would let someone take the penalty and I think he would take the penalty if someone else drew it.

 

[Baxterman]

... I seriously wonder how big of a snowflake you have to be to get offended at ... wait for it... an athlete not being a skilled public speaker.

Who was offended?

 

[Baxterman]

Funny, how people went postal at Alex Morgan saying there's a double-standard.
US Women get drunk and rowdy after winning: Cringeworthy.
Washington Capitals do it and everyone laughs and thinks it's awesome.

I remember people talking trash on the Canadian women’s hockey team for their drinking after winning Olympic Gold one year.

Everyone laughs and thinks it is awesome? That isn't what happened at all. Just like with the US women many people thought it was great. And just like the US women some people thought it was cringeworthy.

There were people with opinions on both sides for both celebrations.

The only double-standard is people creating a story out of nothing ignoring facts to create a story out of nothing.

 

[John Price]

We live in an age of social media and hashtags which is stronger than it was 4 years ago. Hopefully this movement spurns change.

 

[Burner Account]

What’s the story? What’s the debate? What is there to be opinionated about?

 

[KevFu]

What’s the story? What’s the debate? What is there to be opinionated about?

The story is a convoluted mess and people are debating aspects of the convoluted mess. The real important part is the USWNT legal action against US Soccer, and that story and that debate. I mentioned it either earlier in this thread, or on the BOH OT thread:

Every agrees that Men's Sports are more popular than Women's Sports, generate more revenue, and that's why Men get paid more than women in sports:

IF US Men's Soccer makes $200 million in revenue, gets 40% in compensation and collects $80 million,
while the US Women make $20 million in revenue, get 40% in compensation and collect $8 million

$80 million vs $8 million is really EQUAL, because they both get 40%.

But in order for that system to remain fair/equal, IF the women DID generate $200 million in revenue, they need to get their $80 million.


And that's the USWNT lawsuit: They have the financial data from 2016-2018 that says:

The men generated $49.9 million in revenue, and got compensated X
The women generated $51.7 million in revenue, and got compensated FAR, FAR, FAR LESS THAN X.

They have the data that shows:
They've sold out bigger venues at bigger prices, but US Soccer still makes them play in smaller venues for lower prices.
US Soccer spent way more money promoting men's ticket sales than the women's ticket sales.

And they claim US Soccer does those things to suppress women’s revenue, so they can maintain the "We pay the women less because they generate less revenue" argument.

And they have other things too, like 17 men's charter flights, 0 women's. Things like that.

 

[Gecklund]

We live in an age of social media and hashtags which is stronger than it was 4 years ago. Hopefully this movement spurns change.

While I agree that both teams should be paid well, I don’t agree with equal when the men’s team is bringing in so much more money. It’s still a business and still about making money. If the women are paid equal to the men, the US federation is likely taking a loss (not 100% on this) because the revenue from the women’s team is just less.

 

[Jussi]

While I agree that both teams should be paid well, I don’t agree with equal when the men’s team is bringing in so much more money. It’s still a business and still about making money. If the women are paid equal to the men, the US federation is likely taking a loss (not 100% on this) because the revenue from the women’s team is just less.

They're not?

The men generated $49.9 million in revenue, and got compensated X
The women generated $51.7 million in revenue, and got compensated FAR, FAR, FAR LESS THAN X.

 

[Burner Account]

The story is a convoluted mess and people are debating aspects of the convoluted mess. The real important part is the USWNT legal action against US Soccer, and that story and that debate. I mentioned it either earlier in this thread, or on the BOH OT thread:

Every agrees that Men's Sports are more popular than Women's Sports, generate more revenue, and that's why Men get paid more than women in sports:

IF US Men's Soccer makes $200 million in revenue, gets 40% in compensation and collects $80 million,
while the US Women make $20 million in revenue, get 40% in compensation and collect $8 million

$80 million vs $8 million is really EQUAL, because they both get 40%.

But in order for that system to remain fair/equal, IF the women DID generate $200 million in revenue, they need to get their $80 million.


And that's the USWNT lawsuit: They have the financial data from 2016-2018 that says:

The men generated $49.9 million in revenue, and got compensated X
The women generated $51.7 million in revenue, and got compensated FAR, FAR, FAR LESS THAN X.

They have the data that shows:
They've sold out bigger venues at bigger prices, but US Soccer still makes them play in smaller venues for lower prices.
US Soccer spent way more money promoting men's ticket sales than the women's ticket sales.

And they claim US Soccer does those things to suppress women’s revenue, so they can maintain the "We pay the women less because they generate less revenue" argument.

And they have other things too, like 17 men's charter flights, 0 women's. Things like that.

I get this one. My question was more for the other poster.

 

[Baxterman]

What’s the story? What’s the debate? What is there to be opinionated about?

I get this one. My question was more for the other poster.

Are you asking me about the celebration post?

 

[Burner Account]

Are you asking me about the celebration post?

I quoted you earlier asking for clarification but maybe you didn’t see it

 

[Baxterman]

I quoted you earlier asking for clarification but maybe you didn’t see it

Sorry I did not see it.

My point was that it wasn't the case that everyone crapped on the US womens team for their drunk celebrating and not everyone celebrated Ovechkin for his actions.

I have an issue with people trying to create a double standard by misrepresenting what actually happened.

I guess the story is the Ovechkin and Morgan both had a good time celebrating, the debate is that some people liked it and some people didn't and the opinion part is that don't just present one part of the story as happening to fit a specific narrative.

 

[MXD]

We live in an age of social media and hashtags which is stronger than it was 4 years ago. Hopefully this movement spurns change.

That's... let's just say it's a very, very slippery slope to tie income/compensation to performance in International Events.

 

[Gecklund]

They're not?

Well I’d like to see more than just a random person saying that. I’d like to see the actual facts.

 

[John Price]

While I agree that both teams should be paid well, I don’t agree with equal when the men’s team is bringing in so much more money. It’s still a business and still about making money. If the women are paid equal to the men, the US federation is likely taking a loss (not 100% on this) because the revenue from the women’s team is just less.

If what that guy said about the US riding coattails of successful countries is true then why the hell should that happen. Equal pay is definitely a fair discussion.

 

[Gecklund]

If what that guy said about the US riding coattails of successful countries is true then why the hell should that happen. Equal pay is definitely a fair discussion.

It’s not even close to that. You gotta understand this is just some guy online. USMNT sells out multiple stadiums and sells out pretty much every game in the States and the only team that they don’t always have a majority at is against Mexico. Equal profit percentage is fine and if the women’s team is bringing in more money then yes they should get more money. I don’t believe that’s the case though.

 

[bluesfan94]

It’s not even close to that. You gotta understand this is just some guy online. USMNT sells out multiple stadiums and sells out pretty much every game in the States and the only team that they don’t always have a majority at is against Mexico. Equal profit percentage is fine and if the women’s team is bringing in more money then yes they should get more money. I don’t believe that’s the case though.

It is the case though. Or at the very least, closer than the pay. From WaPo:
For the current World Cup cycle, the women’s team is likely to have higher revenue, since they won the championship while the men failed to qualify.

That said, in fiscal 2016 and 2017, the women’s team generated more cash than expenses, bringing in net revenue of $8 million and $1 million, respectively. The men’s team in fiscal 2015 and 2016 posted net revenue of $350,000 and $2.7 million, respectively.

 

[Uncle Rotter]

I remember people talking trash on the Canadian women’s hockey team for their drinking after winning Olympic Gold one year.

I remember those people too. I believe they're called "Americans".

 

[KevFu]

I think people are viewing this from the familiar concept of pro sports, and overlooking the differences of international soccer.

In hockey, Team A has more revenue because they sold more tickets, probably at higher prices than Team B, in their 41 home games to sell.

But that’s the difference with national team soccer. They don’t have the same inventory.

The men sell:
- 8 WCQ home games (CONCACAF takes a massive slice)
- 5 Gold Cup Matches (CONCACAF takes a massive slice)
- 24 home friendlies

The women sell:
- 5 WCQ/Gold Cup games, maybe (CONCACAF slice, OR CONCACAF may fear this is a money loser and put it all on the host. I don’t know)
- 39 home friendlies
- 24 SheBelieves Cup / Tournament of Nations Games

Women’s attendance isn’t as big as the men’s, but for the friendlies, it is close: 20,000 women, vs 23,000 men.

 

[Jussi]

Well I’d like to see more than just a random person saying that. I’d like to see the actual facts.

Those numbers are from the lawsuit. They are facts from KevFu's post earlier on the page.

 

[Gecklund]

Those numbers are from the lawsuit. They are facts from KevFu's post earlier on the page.

If they’re the real numbers no one would have a problem linking where they are from.

 

[NorCalhockey]

Funny, how people went postal at Alex Morgan saying there's a double-standard.
US Women get drunk and rowdy after winning: Cringeworthy.
Washington Capitals do it and everyone laughs and thinks it's awesome.

I remember people talking trash on the Canadian women’s hockey team for their drinking after winning Olympic Gold one year.





This, for the most part. Except it’s really more “cultural” than it is “investment.” If you look at the early years of the women’s game and the top contenders…

USA, Canada, Japan, and I’m assuming Norway and Sweden (but I admit ignorance on those two), have societies that have been open to women playing sports for decades, and the rest of the world is not like that. Only just now, HALF of Europe is welcoming women’s soccer as a thing that exists (The other half isn’t and tons of places around the globe still don’t).

US Soccer didn’t really “invest” in women’s soccer as a conscious decision to be good at it. The effect of Title IX was that “Every NCAA school had women’s soccer as a fully funded sport.” We produced more great soccer players than anyone else as a side-effect to colleges spending money of FOOTBALL and having to spend it on a women’s sport to match.


Brazil was a world power for a while, DESPITE lack of investment and lack of acceptance of women playing. It was because Brazil loves soccer and has 300 million people, that they could put together a team of 23 great players despite no investment. That’s what Marta’s speech this World Cup was about. She said: Our nation doesn’t fund women’s soccer, or provide opportunities for women’s soccer, so all girls watching this now, you have to PRODUCE YOURSELF as a World Cup athlete. No one is going to help you.

The US men suck and the US Women are awesome because:
- The rest of the world has developed a high quality system for developing soccer talent.
- US Soccer has not, they let the NCAA develop players for them.
- That broken model can’t compete with the European model on the men’s side.
- That broken model CAN compete on the women’s side because Europe had not applied their development to their women by 2015. Only just now are they starting.

I can’t speak with expertise on Canada soccer, other than to say that US colleges recruit Canada, so I’d imagine the Canadian women are competitive for the same reason the US Women are. And the Canada men aren’t very good for the same reason the US men aren’t very good. And USA is 1 in women, 30 in men vs Canada's 5 in women's, 78 in men's due to the sizes of our countries. USA is picking from 10 times the amount of "players who succeed despite a bad system" as Canada.


As Europe applies it’s development model to the women’s side, the US Women are going to become “one of many good teams” instead of “one of a three or four.” And I’d expect Canada to being falling in the world rankings from 5 to about 12 in the next four years. In 20 years, the USA women will be 5th, Canada 20th. In 50 years, the women’s rankings will look a lot more like the men’s.

Regarding the bolded part: it's not just Canadians who benefited from US colleges; other female soccer athletes also attended American colleges with strong soccer programs. The coach of the Dutch team that played the US in the WWC2019 Finals is a Tarheel. I think Lucy Bronze (best female right back in the world) also attended college in the US. Basically, Title IX has a multiplier effect because not only did it foster elite American soccer players, but women from other countries were/are reaping the benefits as well. But for sure, the world is catching up, so if US Soccer thinks they can rely solely on the NCAA to continue churning out more World Champions, the rest of the world is saying....not so fast! Europe, especially, is investing more into their female soccer programs (not just the national level, but also club teams) so I say US women - party your hearts out because who knows when the US will next lift a World Cup trophy.

 

[East Coast Bias]

I think people are viewing this from the familiar concept of pro sports, and overlooking the differences of international soccer.

This is part of it. But people are mistaking this for even a global men vs woman thing.

This isn't a men's vs women's pay on a global scale thing. This is literally how US SOCCER operates. That's it. Not how the Norwegian FA operates, or FIFA, or the English FA, or how tv ratings are in Brazil for two WCs. It's none of that.

This is way more important BECAUSE of the difference in interest, money and success of men's and women's games. It's more important for them than the USMNT. This pay is the majority of their pay. US Men play for pride b/c they already have a healthy income stream from their clubs. The women don't - they don't make shit at the club level. So while they play for pride, they literally need to play for income. International is their best chance at making money.

 

[Jussi]

If they’re the real numbers no one would have a problem linking where they are from.

What, you too lazy to google them yourself?

I found this in like 10 seconds:

What critics get wrong about the U.S. women's soccer pay debate

But the women’s team has actually generated more revenue than the men’s since the 2015 USWNT’s World Cup win sparked a new level of American interest in the women’s game. According to financial reports from the U.S. Soccer Federation reviewed by the Wall Street Journal, USWNT games generated more total revenue than the USMNT games from 2016 through 2018: $50.8 million in revenue vs. $49.9 million for the men.