Women's World Cup EQUAL PAY!

EQUAL PAY! EQUAL PAY! Women's World Cup generated 73 MILLION in revenue and they players get 13% of that. Men's World Cup generated 4 BILLION, and the players only get 9%!!! CLOSE THE PAY GAP!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BOP

GregV814

Well-Known Member
How about them having the ability to put asses in the seats... do you wanna see a junior high jv team or the patriots play football?
 
Let me say that I FAR prefer to watch the women's games. They are much more aggressive and the game is much faster paced. I have NEVER attended a men's game but have seen some of the women's games. The ladies are far tougher than the grass fairy men...
It all comes down to butts in seats, and THAT simple factor will drive pay...
 

GregV814

Well-Known Member
Okay, fine. Put this team of semi women against a soccer team, maybe 3rd stringers men from Spain or Italy and show me equity.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

Let me say that I FAR prefer to watch the women's games. They are much more aggressive and the game is much faster paced. I have NEVER attended a men's game but have seen some of the women's games. The ladies are far tougher than the grass fairy men...It all comes down to butts in seats, and THAT simple factor will drive pay...
I like women's games as well. Mud wrestling comes to mind. (Hot) Beach volley ball. (Hot) Women's track and field. (Hot) Womens gymnastics. (Hot) Women's Swimming. (Hot) Playing doctor and nurse, now there's a fun one. (Hot, Hot, Hot) But women's soccer? Women's soccer is nothing. As a matter of question. Why aren't soccer teams comprised of men and women? Both men and women are equally as fast? Can kick the ball the same. Hit the ball with their heads the same. Brute physical strength is not required. Why the separation anyway? Now, for some real excitement, (not the sexual kind), what would really be interesting to watch, I might even tune in, would be to see men's soccer teams up against women's soccer teams. And if the women win, like on a continual basis, then they'd have something to really crow about. That, I think would be worth watching. Lots more men, and women, would be watching games like that. Imagine it now, close your eyes, think .... one side of a stadium filled with men, the other with women, (I am not accounting for the A-Z crowd here either). The cheers from one side after a score, or penalty call, would definitely be sounding different.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Why separate women from any sport?
Why have women's Tee's at the golf course?

Let's have equality and hire men at Hooters.

LMAO, I never go there so it doesn't matter to me, Just as I never watch women's soccer.
We could use more women in Nascar it would make for more wrecks and excitement.We will miss watching Danica wreck.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Again, Rosen has the best explanation I've seen for the gap:

The women's team collectively bargained for and won a pay structure that guarantees them salaries, severance pay, medical benefits, and some performance-based bonuses. The women's team wanted the security of salary-based pay rather than purely performance-based pay, and they wanted to guarantee a salary even for players who were on the roster but didn't play.
By contrast, the men are strictly pay-for-play. They do not receive a salary or additional benefits like health insurance or severance pay. Their pay structure is performance-based.
Because of the different pay structures, a straightforward comparison is difficult. The U.S. women earn a base salary of $100,000 annually, while the men are paid $5,000 per game, with bonuses for winning.

Why would the women agree to a different pay structure? In part, that probably has to do with how much players are earning elsewhere.

Professional soccer players are also paid by privately owned club teams. Megan Rapinoe, for example, plays for Seattle Reign FC, one of nine teams in the National Women's Soccer League (NWSL). Player's salaries in the NWSL range from about $16,000 to $46,000 annually, according to NPR. That's not a lot, and it's certainly less than even the lowest-paid players in Major League Soccer (MLS; the top North American men's pro soccer league), who earn a mandatory minimum salary of $60,000

That pay gap isn't the result of sexism. It's what the market allows. Major League Soccer teams drew an average of 21,000 fans last year, while NWSL games drew about 6,000. The TV contract MLS has with ESPN and other broadcasters generates $90 million a year. While neither league discloses revenue figures, it's a safe bet MLS earns considerably more—and, thus, its players do too.




https://reason.com/2019/07/10/the-d...en-soccer-teams-pay-shows-why-markets-matter/
 

BOP

Well-Known Member
If I may ...


I like women's games as well. Mud wrestling comes to mind. (Hot) Beach volley ball. (Hot) Women's track and field. (Hot) Womens gymnastics. (Hot) Women's Swimming. (Hot) Playing doctor and nurse, now there's a fun one. (Hot, Hot, Hot) But women's soccer? Women's soccer is nothing. As a matter of question. Why aren't soccer teams comprised of men and women? Both men and women are equally as fast? Can kick the ball the same. Hit the ball with their heads the same. Brute physical strength is not required. Why the separation anyway? Now, for some real excitement, (not the sexual kind), what would really be interesting to watch, I might even tune in, would be to see men's soccer teams up against women's soccer teams. And if the women win, like on a continual basis, then they'd have something to really crow about. That, I think would be worth watching. Lots more men, and women, would be watching games like that. Imagine it now, close your eyes, think .... one side of a stadium filled with men, the other with women, (I am not accounting for the A-Z crowd here either). The cheers from one side after a score, or penalty call, would definitely be sounding different.
Armed and armored up. That would be some exciting sh*t.
 
Top