Anonymous wrote:They should recruit men who claim to be women

Cannot speak to national teams, but you are starting to see this a few times a year on higher aged teams that are higher level teams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is a better product for female soccer players and their parents to watch on TV. USMNT or USWNT?

For our family it's USWNT by a lot.

+1

Anonymous wrote:What is a better product for female soccer players and their parents to watch on TV. USMNT or USWNT?

For our family it's USWNT by a lot.

One can enjoy both women’s tennis and men’s tennis at Wimbledon knowing the lowest ranked man in the tournament could beat most if not all of the women. One can enjoy a lightweight boxing match knowing the boxers wouldn’t stand a chance against the best heavy weight. One can enjoy March Madness basketball knowing their alma mater would lose to an NBA team. If they play with skill and heart, and they entertain, who cares?

What is a better product for female soccer players and their parents to watch on TV. USMNT or USWNT?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a window around u11 where the girls are on average bigger, stronger, and faster. After that, they rapidly become uncompetitive against boys.

Say what? Then the boys U11? Not a chance…I watched U9 boys crush u11 girls this entire soccer reason during scrimmages

Nah, girls can compete with boys until puberty hits. You see that in all sports.

No...i'm sorry this isn't true. My sons have scrimmaged girls teams (a year up) and crushed them every single time. Both are the top teams at a big club. Some select girls can yes, but not most.

True, although the gap is significantly smaller before puberty. From the definitive review "Evidence on sex differences in sports performance" (https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00615.2024):
"Statement 2: The Male-Female Performance Gap Is Evident before Puberty
The evidence supporting this statement comes from performance data of elite youth athletes before puberty and studies that establish sex differences in anatomical and physiological development of systems that are associated with physical performance before puberty. For example, among the best prepubescent athletes in the United States, the male-female performance gap is ∼3%–5% in track and field running events (Fig. 4) and ∼5%–10% in jumping events (11, 13). The magnitude of the male-female performance gap is smaller in swimming (∼1%–5%) than in track and field (12)"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pointing out that some boys teams beat some girls teams does not make you more of a man, actually it makes you less. The funny thing is that you don't even get that. Go back to your mothers basement, where you can't land a date, or to your wife that does not desire you. In fact, I would be willing to bet that those boys teams you mentioned would also pound you into the turf like the little baby you appear to be.

Cool story bro. Advocating for adult women who can’t beat teenage boys to be paid millions like their male professional counterparts doesn’t make you a wiser, better or more kind person. It’s just an insult to intelligence and also basic economics. See Thomas Sowell for additional learning.

Ah, the TRUE colors emerge again. Only a matter of time before these comments or the thread is nuked. BUT some points to counter you -- it's a scrimmage where they practice things. Score doesn't matter. Also, in the U.S., economically, it's been the USWNT carrying all the water.

The "economically" is just a false statement. It's what the entire lawsuit was about. The men's team, even when very poor, brings in more revenue.

Except when they don't (which happens at times) ... "U.S. women’s soccer games have generated more revenue than U.S. men’s games over the past three years.

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."

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/19/us-womens-soc...venue-than-mens.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which 2-3 women’s leagues have a better showing? Does the men’s soccer teams have more gold metals or world cups? I can name all the USWNT starters and barely a few USMNT starters. And half the ones I can name didn’t post to the Gold Cup because even they don’t care about this team. The men’s team is mid and a laughable outside the Americas. The USWNT stars are STARS and world known. The USMNT is almost a joke. The men flop around like toddlers. Men don’t flop around like toddlers. But, given some of the comments on here, clearly there are a lot of men that flop around like toddlers on this thread.

And yet the USMNT would smash the USWNT. You have to isolate the men's and women's game completely for anything you are saying here to hold water.

"Which 2-3 women's leagues have a better showing?" Not sure what this means, but MLS has more than double the average attendance of NWSL and MLS isn't even a good league. Women's leagues around the world are not even close to competing with average attendances for matching men's leagues.

USWNT are stars in the women's game...yes. But this isn't saying what you think its saying. A kid in London or Rome doesn't have the slightest clue who is on the USWNT...but they know who Pulisic and McKinnie are.

I hate to feed the troll, but the bolded is just dumb. Of course European kids know the Americans playing for European teams. You really think the same isn't true on the women's side? You realize US played the Lionesses at Wembley last year?

Sorry the growth of the women's game seems to bother you so much.