Originally posted by Unregistered
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Equal pay
Collapse
X
-
Unregistered
- Quote
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostI mean if Lifetime can't even justify broadcasting games....
The question is do people watch womens WC because of patriotism to support the US or out of love and appreciation for the sport? Given dismal ratings for NCAA, NWSL, non WC games, etc., I would think its patriotism. It's not like there are millions of curling or biathlon fans who are dying to watch coverage of this year's final in Finland... people watch to support USA or out of curiosity. nobody watches womens soccer because they just dont care. Therefore there is no reason to pay players a premium.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Look at the details of the latest lawsuit..it describes how the WNT was more profitable than the MNT and were significantly paid less during a certain period. It's not a cut and dry issue, hence the commercials and noise.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostLook at the details of the latest lawsuit..it describes how the WNT was more profitable than the MNT and were significantly paid less during a certain period. It's not a cut and dry issue, hence the commercials and noise.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostYet employers find legal (and illegal) ways to get around that all the time. The WNBA doesn't get paid at the same rates as the NBA. There are many ways to structure pay and this is just one example of that. It's similar to one sales person who brings in more revenue getting paid more than one who brings in less. They were champions already when they negotiated the last deal so they had leverage then. Get a better negotiator on their side next time. I agree the turf fields and other minor things are petty digs at the women.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostThe #1 womens TV network in US cannot even get 20k viewers on a Sat afternoon.
The question is do people watch womens WC because of patriotism to support the US or out of love and appreciation for the sport? Given dismal ratings for NCAA, NWSL, non WC games, etc., I would think its patriotism. It's not like there are millions of curling or biathlon fans who are dying to watch coverage of this year's final in Finland... people watch to support USA or out of curiosity. nobody watches womens soccer because they just dont care. Therefore there is no reason to pay players a premium.
Guess what the most watched soccer game of all tome in America?
Yeah, the 2015 final of the women’s World Cup, starring guess who, the USWNT. 23 million Americans chose to watch that game.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostWe’re not talking NWSL here.
Guess what the most watched soccer game of all tome in America?
Yeah, the 2015 final of the women’s World Cup, starring guess who, the USWNT. 23 million Americans chose to watch that game.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostLook at the details of the latest lawsuit..it describes how the WNT was more profitable than the MNT and were significantly paid less during a certain period. It's not a cut and dry issue, hence the commercials and noise.
I agree that the women should be paid more and given additional considerations. If they run their own organization there would less bureaucracy to get things done. Also the men would realize that they are being subsidized by the women and their on going success.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostWe’re not talking NWSL here.
Guess what the most watched soccer game of all tome in America?
Yeah, the 2015 final of the women’s World Cup, starring guess who, the USWNT. 23 million Americans chose to watch that game.
In the womens next contract they should just submit a copy of the mens contract verbatum. No negotiating and no bargaining.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostBut i bet commercials were not as expensive as they are for a regular world cup game that does not even include the US mens team. Brazil, Italy, England and even Mexico subsidize the US mens national team.
In the womens next contract they should just submit a copy of the mens contract verbatum. No negotiating and no bargaining.
11.8M watched the men's final in the US in 2018 despite the US not being in the game or even in the event at all. One would hope the figures would double for the UWMNT being in the final, no?
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View Postomfg. I just went thru the sources of revenue! please stop with these unsourced anecdotes about FIFA pies! if they exist they are not material to the overall revenue of USSF.
and look, yes, the women did a great job of getting some concessions in their last CBA, but let's face it, they started from such a crappy position (artificial turf anyone?) that just getting something was something. it's not like these women have a lot of free time to act as their own CBA advocates.
the broader issue is why is everyone up in arms about this? we have the most successful women's soccer team in history, winners of 3 world cups and 4 gold medals. girls make up, i dunno, half the soccer players in our country. equal pay for equal work isn't a difficult concept, and is actually the law.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostClearly not a lawyer nor a logical person. They cannot and should not receive equal pay if the revenue is not there. It’s why actors on certain shows get the big $$$ while others do not. And guess what? They do the same work. It’s always about demand and revenue. If they generated the same income, then of course they should receive the same pay, but since they do not, they shouldn’t. Equal pay just because they feel they’re entitled to it is not a thing. Is it really that difficult of a concept for you to understand?
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
-
Unregistered
Comment