Battle of the sexes: USA Soccer Edition

[BulldogDX55]

For strictly national team play, yes. For all of US pro soccer, not even close in favor of the men.

Press (X) to doubt.


The women only compete in one paying event every four years. The men compete in at least 3 that I can think of off the top of my head. The women don't generate revenue. Men don't watch it near as much as they watch other men compete. Do we not remember Secretary of Defense Tim Howard? Way more Americans watched that than this past world cup.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/19/us-w...than-mens.html

"That’s according to audited financial statements from the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) obtained by The Wall Street Journal. In 2016, women’s games generated $1.9 million more in revenue than men’s games. From 2016 to 2018, women’s games generated approximately $50.8 million in revenue, compared with $49.9 million for men’s games."

That is actually correct looking at a recent four year period. Basically, looking at a four year period, in a period in which the women win the world cup and the men don't even qualify, the women actually do outpace the men in revenue. Of course if the men qualify for the world cup, that alone exceeds the revenue the women could pull in in a four year period.

Sure, but that still means the generated more, and for that reason they deserve more.

[THE Bruce Dickinson]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/19/us-w...than-mens.html

"That’s according to audited financial statements from the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) obtained by The Wall Street Journal. In 2016, women’s games generated $1.9 million more in revenue than men’s games. From 2016 to 2018, women’s games generated approximately $50.8 million in revenue, compared with $49.9 million for men’s games."



Sure, but that still means the generated more, and for that reason they deserve more.

I don't doubt that's true. The men failed to make the last World Cup and the women won theirs. It's not totally surprising that the women out earned the men. I believe this is the first time in history that has ever happened. The part about the argument that doesn't compute is that the women are given a larger percentage of the revenue they generate domestically than the men. The men just make a ton more money because there is exponentially more money that FIFA distributes, not the USSF. Also, the women don't have health insurance through US Soccer because they failed to get it through their collective bargaining agreement.

[dantheman4248]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/19/us-w...than-mens.html

"That?s according to audited financial statements from the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) obtained by The Wall Street Journal. In 2016, women?s games generated $1.9 million more in revenue than men?s games. From 2016 to 2018, women?s games generated approximately $50.8 million in revenue, compared with $49.9 million for men?s games."



Sure, but that still means the generated more, and for that reason they deserve more.

Soccer plays most things in 4 year rotations. Why only look at a sample of 3 years unless they have an agenda. That's the thing about stats, you can practically make them say whatever you want when you're good enough at them.

This would be a non-issue if they were each paid as a group in percentage of revenue generated that was the same. The women have a higher slice of their pie in that regard. So that will never happen, but it's what would ultimately be fair (and could in the long run be better for future women as women sports more and more gain popularity. America has the best female athletes and we love winners. Keep winning and the money will roll in.)