Spirit Coach

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gender based sports should be extinguished. All sports at all youth levels (pre-HS) should be based on a combo of weight and age. In HS, college, and pros top teams would be based on who’s the best. This would eliminate all the non-value added discussion on equal pay, transgender males playing in female leagues, etc. No, boy’s/men’s gymnastics or girl’s/women’s basketball, etc. Just one top team per sport per school or pro team/city. If a female is good enough to make the top team then they make it. Same (vice-versa) with sports geared to female body types. There can be B and C teams (or JV teams or minor league teams) with a mix of genders based on ability. Propping up a gender just because of their gender is neither natural nor fair. It’s about talent, ability, priority, and work ethic. Same as in the corporate world. Until this is done, these pointless arguments will persist.

There are some high school sports that do this. Golf team is co-ed at my kids HS. Best player is female

Except in golf, size and speed are irrelevant. Not so with many other sports where most boys will have a physical advantage. The reality is, boys U15 and up will be bigger and stronger and can injure many girls the same age. So shall we put the majority of girls only in rec programs or tell them they should pursue the arts and knitting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gender based sports should be extinguished. All sports at all youth levels (pre-HS) should be based on a combo of weight and age. In HS, college, and pros top teams would be based on who’s the best. This would eliminate all the non-value added discussion on equal pay, transgender males playing in female leagues, etc. No, boy’s/men’s gymnastics or girl’s/women’s basketball, etc. Just one top team per sport per school or pro team/city. If a female is good enough to make the top team then they make it. Same (vice-versa) with sports geared to female body types. There can be B and C teams (or JV teams or minor league teams) with a mix of genders based on ability. Propping up a gender just because of their gender is neither natural nor fair. It’s about talent, ability, priority, and work ethic. Same as in the corporate world. Until this is done, these pointless arguments will persist.

There are some high school sports that do this. Golf team is co-ed at my kids HS. Best player is female

Except in golf, size and speed are irrelevant. Not so with many other sports where most boys will have a physical advantage. The reality is, boys U15 and up will be bigger and stronger and can injure many girls the same age. So shall we put the majority of girls only in rec programs or tell them they should pursue the arts and knitting?

You tell them the same thing you tell all the males that did not make the top team too. Sports are not about fairness and equity. Sports are about athletic superiority as a team and individually. Why should a female get to play on a “varsity” or “pro” team over a male just because of their chromosome mix? It is very biased and unfair.

[Anonymous]

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How come nobody ever took issue with US Soccer using Sunil Gulati's travel agency for all its needs?

I asked around about this a few times, and people of all sorts of soccer-political stances shrugged it off. Not saying it was definitely "right," but there just wasn't enough to fill a story.

The NWSL needs to go. The way to have a women’s league is through MLS. You do not have to duplicate facilities and a lot of staff. The money saved can be used to raise salaries.

A couple of teams already have such arrangements - Portland Timbers/Thorns, Houston Dynamo/Dash. Then a couple of USL/NWSL organizations - North Carolina, Louisville. Before things fell apart in Utah, the Royals and RSL were united.

I tend to agree that MLS teams and NWSL teams should share facilities/staff/marketing. Maybe not every city that has MLS can sustain an NWSL team. If you are a female pro player in the US and not a USNT player the pay from being a pro player sucks.

Right now though I don’t think MLS would want to touch women’s soccer with a ten foot pole. Politics/failed law suits have made it a really toxic asset!

[Anonymous]

Alternatively “pro” women’s teams could be subsidized through a fee on girls youth soccer. There are millions of girls who play youth soccer in US. A small fee could potentially double the salaries of “pro” women players. Unclear if teams could continue as for profit entities under this model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Alternatively “pro” women’s teams could be subsidized through a fee on girls youth soccer. There are millions of girls who play youth soccer in US. A small fee could potentially double the salaries of “pro” women players. Unclear if teams could continue as for profit entities under this model.

Hahahaha so Parents are forking out any from 2500 to 3500 a year and now you want to add a tax to subsidize grown a55 women?

LMFAO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NWSL needs to go. The way to have a women’s league is through MLS. You do not have to duplicate facilities and a lot of staff. The money saved can be used to raise salaries.

The MLS has an average salary of 400k and 75% of the NWSL make under 31k. I just do not see the MLS getting involved. They are too afraid of a lawsuit. I wonder why WNBA players do not sue the NBA?

What cause would the WNBA have to sue the NBA?

The pay difference. Five WNBA teams have direct NBA counterparts and normally play in the same arena.

Lol. Are you serious?

Well it’s what the USWNT players are suing about. So why would NWSL players not sue to be paid the same as the MLS players?

I thought we were talking about the NBA and WNBA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alternatively “pro” women’s teams could be subsidized through a fee on girls youth soccer. There are millions of girls who play youth soccer in US. A small fee could potentially double the salaries of “pro” women players. Unclear if teams could continue as for profit entities under this model.

Hahahaha so Parents are forking out any from 2500 to 3500 a year and now you want to add a tax to subsidize grown a55 women?

LMFAO

Yes but I would charge fee to every 6 yo girl playing rec too. Not just you crazy travel parents.

[Anonymous]

No subsidies for pro sports teams please. A city can provide incentives if they think tourism and entertainment taxes will increase due to the team being in their city, else let the teams and leagues proposer or die on their own. As far as HR policies, every league and team should hire a good HR executive to put policies and governance in place to avoid these problems. Cost of business. If you can’t afford it, maybe that tells you all you need to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Alternatively “pro” women’s teams could be subsidized through a fee on girls youth soccer. There are millions of girls who play youth soccer in US. A small fee could potentially double the salaries of “pro” women players. Unclear if teams could continue as for profit entities under this model.

What!?!?

The money should actually flow in the other direction for development purposes.

NWSL needs to sort out its own problems and become a viable league before youth soccer is asked to subsidize a pro league.

[Anonymous]

Down goes another one: https://www.espn.com/soccer/washington-spirit/story/4508896/nwsl-fallout-continues-as-washington-spirit-exec-best-resigns-amid-ongoing-controversy-source

[Anonymous]

New ownership in the works….let’s pray for a fresh reset. I hope the decision makers do not entertain the investor group. We need a clean slate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/10/29/todd-boehly-nwsl-washington-spirit/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gender based sports should be extinguished. All sports at all youth levels (pre-HS) should be based on a combo of weight and age. In HS, college, and pros top teams would be based on who’s the best. This would eliminate all the non-value added discussion on equal pay, transgender males playing in female leagues, etc. No, boy’s/men’s gymnastics or girl’s/women’s basketball, etc. Just one top team per sport per school or pro team/city. If a female is good enough to make the top team then they make it. Same (vice-versa) with sports geared to female body types. There can be B and C teams (or JV teams or minor league teams) with a mix of genders based on ability. Propping up a gender just because of their gender is neither natural nor fair. It’s about talent, ability, priority, and work ethic. Same as in the corporate world. Until this is done, these pointless arguments will persist.

This would be the end of any women playing professional soccer or basketball.

[Anonymous]

Well - there is a lot on the USSF plate currently and I would say it is 50/50 if it can survive next year. It does have an entirely new leadership team so there is some hope. The biggest drag on immediate change is the deal with SUM does not expire until the end of next year.

But - that does not make up for 30 years of discrimination against women and girls to say - hey moving forward we won’t discriminate.

And - other very big issues: The men’s national team has not had a contract since the end of 2018. Now - the popular players are not MLS guys and their commitment in playing on the national team is very different. (World Cup stuff - no problem. Everything else has to fit around their club schedules.) The USSF needs a deal with the men’s side.

Youth clubs all pretty much hate the USSF and would happily see it die. They are pretty sick of the MLS first policy that has routinely and regularly screwed them.

Refs gave up on the USSF 10 years ago.

If the USSF can keep it together through next year - maybe moving forward they can do some deals with the national teams and the women/girl’s sides. Maybe. Very maybe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well - there is a lot on the USSF plate currently and I would say it is 50/50 if it can survive next year. It does have an entirely new leadership team so there is some hope. The biggest drag on immediate change is the deal with SUM does not expire until the end of next year.

But - that does not make up for 30 years of discrimination against women and girls to say - hey moving forward we won’t discriminate.

And - other very big issues: The men’s national team has not had a contract since the end of 2018. Now - the popular players are not MLS guys and their commitment in playing on the national team is very different. (World Cup stuff - no problem. Everything else has to fit around their club schedules.) The USSF needs a deal with the men’s side.

Youth clubs all pretty much hate the USSF and would happily see it die. They are pretty sick of the MLS first policy that has routinely and regularly screwed them.

Refs gave up on the USSF 10 years ago.

If the USSF can keep it together through next year - maybe moving forward they can do some deals with the national teams and the women/girl’s sides. Maybe. Very maybe.

Male players are discriminated against as well, but in different ways. It’s about those in charge (coaches and owners) and those not (players). Men get yelled at and belittled all the time but they’ve been raised to accept that. As far as the sexual quid pro quo, that’s different obviously and any coach or owner proven to have done that should be handled appropriately both civilly and depending on the scenario criminally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well - there is a lot on the USSF plate currently and I would say it is 50/50 if it can survive next year. It does have an entirely new leadership team so there is some hope. The biggest drag on immediate change is the deal with SUM does not expire until the end of next year.

But - that does not make up for 30 years of discrimination against women and girls to say - hey moving forward we won’t discriminate.

And - other very big issues: The men’s national team has not had a contract since the end of 2018. Now - the popular players are not MLS guys and their commitment in playing on the national team is very different. (World Cup stuff - no problem. Everything else has to fit around their club schedules.) The USSF needs a deal with the men’s side.

Youth clubs all pretty much hate the USSF and would happily see it die. They are pretty sick of the MLS first policy that has routinely and regularly screwed them.

Refs gave up on the USSF 10 years ago.

If the USSF can keep it together through next year - maybe moving forward they can do some deals with the national teams and the women/girl’s sides. Maybe. Very maybe.

Can the USSF split into two? Men’s and Women’s?