Reply to U.S. Soccer Is Offering The Same Contracts For Its Men's And Women's Teams

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "U.S. Soccer Is Offering The Same Contracts For Its Men's And Women's Teams"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The link to MLS/SUM is why the MLS is where it is today.  No it is not EPL or anywhere near that level.  But it is a league that can do reasonably well financially going forward.  For Americans it is sort of a AAA level league.

[b]But, the ties to MLS/SUM meant that the women’s team was largely ignored except as a cash cow.[/b]  This non-interest in women’s soccer pervaded USSF.  All efforts were on trying to get more money to MLS.  The problem with this approach is that the US is not South America, Asia or Europe with respect to how we treat women and girls.  By the mid 90s, Title IX had been in place for 25 years.

I was following pretty closely the debacle that was the start up of the Development Academy league - helping with the application of my kids’ club.  Club directors were surprised and disappointed when the USSF belatedly announced that for the first year the DA would be “boys only”.  Then 1 year became 2; and then 3 which is when several big clubs got together and formed the ECNL.

The USSF leadership was so removed from youth soccer in the US that they had no idea every youth club not directly tied to a MLS team had both a boys side and a girls side.  The Boys had the DA which was essentially free to play in as a top national league.  The girls had nothing.  When pressed on the issue the official position of the USSF was that the women were doing okay as is.  Really.  In 2017 - 12 years later, as part of the women’s team contract the USSF said it would start a girls DA.  Everyone knows the USSF spends as little time and effort as possible on girls and women and happily discriminated against them because they did so; openly and blatantly.  Not 50 years ago.  5 years ago and only when pressed to get the women’s team to sign a deal.

So - literally everyone involved in US Soccer knows what the USSF has done in the past.  The question is whether that changes right now or not.  Could it change?  Sure.  Will it change?  I am not optimistic now.  This “offer” was stupid in my view and signals the likelihood that everything will continue to be swayed towards helping MLS/SUM.

The only alternative that I see that allows the current team structure to remain the same is to add another $20 million into the salary pot and expand the recipients.  Basically it would be saying; “we are too stupid and/or lazy to actually work at this, but here’s lots more money so please sign.”  I would not say that approach is impossible.

[/quote]

What?? A cash cow? LOL

[quote] When the Wall Street Journal audited the federation’s financial reports, it found that the U.S. women’s soccer games earned more than the men’s games, in total, during three years after the women’s team won the World Cup in 2015.

Specifically, from 2016-18, the women’s team brought in $50.8 million in revenue, while the men’s team brought in $49.9 million. That’s a difference of less than 2% in the women’s favor.

Looking year by year, 2016 was actually the only year in which the women’s team generated more revenue from games — $24.11 million, compared to $22.24 million for the men. In 2017, both teams brought in about the same revenue at $14.61 million, and in 2018, the men’s team brought in $13 million compared to the women’s $12.03 million.

This pattern marked a reversal from prior years: In 2014 and 2015, the men’s team earned $8.31 million and $11.71 million more than the women’s team, respectively.[/quote]

https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/jul/11/does-us-womens-soccer-team-bring-more-revenue-get-/[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics