• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. women soccer players charge pay discrimination

Fletch said:
Why do you say that? Should WNBA players make the same as NBA players too?
Click to expand...

In most sports women simply don't grab the same amount of viewers that men do. If the WNBA wasn't essentially a me too league and instead something that people actually watched there would likely be no difference between the pay. The problem is however that it is a me too league and the majority of the population pays no mind to it existing.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
From your quote of the article:



The men NETTED A LOSS.

???

So how does your point stand against the 'They made 16million on the women's teams - but HAD A REVENUE LOSS on the men's teams'?
If there's a supportive balance of supply and demand the men would still NET A PROFIT, not A LOSS.

In truth - it sounds like the men are OVERPAID, since they came in AT A LOSS.
And the women could actually stay where they are, pay wise, and maybe even get a bump-up because they do seem to be quite popular:


and the men:

and this:



So the women WIN a game and get paid LESS than the men are paid to play and LOSE a game.

Blow me . . . pay the WINNING women more or the LOSING men less.
Click to expand...

Completely apples and oranges.

The women are fantastic players, but their competition is woefully inept except for Germany, Brazil, Japan, and a couple of others. The men's pool is stacked with thousands of elite world-class players from virtually every country.

The women all live here and most play only for the US team or perhaps an American pro team in front of 500 people. There games are pretty much here. The men travel all over the world, and they live in several different countries and play for multiple professional teams.

The revenue stream far favors the men, but the profits favor the women because their operational overhead is a small fraction of the men's.
 
Erod said:
That's not it at all. There's no "formula" for negotiation. Tim Howard makes millions as a great keeper for Everton overseas. Yes, he wants to play for the US, but he's not risking injury and spending what little free time he has playing for our national team for just some formulaic amount of money. You have to pay him. Same for a few others. Soccer careers are often short.

Women's tennis doesn't have any problem whatsoever paying at or above the men because the interest is there.
Click to expand...

Women have other complaints there though. Ever hear Serena Williams bitch about Maria Sharapova making more from sponserships? Her problem is she has big man arms from lifting and likely past steroid use, which is frankly no one's problem but hers.
 
Fletch said:
Why do you say that? Should WNBA players make the same as NBA players too?
Click to expand...

WNBA players will make as much as male players when people care as much about filling out women's NCAA brackets as they do the mens. when women start doing tomahawk slams from the foul line or rejecting jump shots over the rim then maybe so.


the sad fact is women's basketball and women's soccer is less entertaining than men's. and that is true in most sports. I like watching women's tennis since I am a serious tennis player and I can identify more with their game as a 57 year old man then with guys who can hit serves at 150 MPH. But my wife notes (watching the big ATP/WTA masters event in Mason, Ohio) that women's tennis is boring compared to mens. and if you don't find the players attractive its even more so.

women tennis players can make an argument they should be paid as much even though the depth is still not quite there compared to the men (its getting closer). that is because they draw as well as the men. but soccer and basketball-its not even close
 
Henrin said:
Women have other complaints there though. Ever hear Serena Williams bitch about Maria Sharapova making more from sponserships? Her problem is she has big man arms from lifting and likely past steroid use, which is frankly no one's problem but hers.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and the "pretty" factor will always matter for women's endorsements.

I do think there's a future for women's soccer. It's a different game than the men's, but very watchable in its own way, unlike basketball or women's softball.
 
TurtleDude said:
WNBA players will make as much as male players when people care as much about filling out women's NCAA brackets as they do the mens. when women start doing tomahawk slams from the foul line or rejecting jump shots over the rim then maybe so.


the sad fact is women's basketball and women's soccer is less entertaining than men's. and that is true in most sports. I like watching women's tennis since I am a serious tennis player and I can identify more with their game as a 57 year old man then with guys who can hit serves at 150 MPH. But my wife notes (watching the big ATP/WTA masters event in Mason, Ohio) that women's tennis is boring compared to mens. and if you don't find the players attractive its even more so.

women tennis players can make an argument they should be paid as much even though the depth is still not quite there compared to the men (its getting closer). that is because they draw as well as the men. but soccer and basketball-its not even close
Click to expand...

I agree with all that, but a US vs Germany women's soccer match is great to watch. There's no WNBA women's game that is remotely interesting to me.
 
Beaudreaux said:
I remember the ladies talking about this during the last women's World Cup, and my opinion hasn't changed since then - the ladies should be paid just as much, if not more, than the men. This fact should be seen as a shameful error that needs correcting.
Click to expand...

When they bring in as much in ticket sales as the men, then they can get paid as much. This isn't about gender, this is about value. Men's teams are just more valuable than women's teams and that has nothing to do with gender, it has to do with how much people are willing to pay to go see them play. It's just as idiotic as saying that women actors need to be paid as much as the highest paid male actor, because sexism. No, that actor has box office draw. Being in a movie makes the movie make more money. That's why he gets paid what he gets paid. When the women can do the same thing, they can command the same salary.
 
Erod said:
I agree with all that, but a US vs Germany women's soccer match is great to watch. There's no WNBA women's game that is remotely interesting to me.
Click to expand...

Women's skills in Basketball get better and better but when I was in college, my intramural team (my university had 12 residential dorms called "colleges" and each college had intramural teams) made up of HS players not good enough or not interested in playing varsity and guys like me who played a ton of hoops but because I was a serious track and table tennis player, I didn't play HS ball. Three of the starting 5 women on what was then a top 25 women's team were in our dorm and their team played us one day for practice and we killed them. Sure, lots of it had to do with the fact that at .6-1 and a 175 I was bigger and stronger than anyone on the women's team and I could dunk and I was maybe the fifth tallest guy on our intramural team. But it was skill based too. we could pass better, dribble better, shoot better and foul shoot much better. Nowadays I suspect the women can do stuff like pass and shoot as well as the men but they aren't going to flush loose balls off the rim etc

its a fact men are quicker faster and stronger. and that leads to more spectator appeal.
 
Cephus said:
When they bring in as much in ticket sales as the men, then they can get paid as much. This isn't about gender, this is about value. Men's teams are just more valuable than women's teams and that has nothing to do with gender, it has to do with how much people are willing to pay to go see them play. It's just as idiotic as saying that women actors need to be paid as much as the highest paid male actor, because sexism. No, that actor has box office draw. Being in a movie makes the movie make more money. That's why he gets paid what he gets paid. When the women can do the same thing, they can command the same salary.
Click to expand...

The women's program draw full houses regularly, but their ticket prices are much less. There's a fear of raising the prices because so much of their huge crowds are made up of young girls teams that go as a group.

But if you're marketable and a good speaker, a women's player can make millions. And the youth coming up from across the country is astoundingly good. The women's team today can't hold a candle to what's on the way.
 
Ikari said:
First off, people don't really watch soccer in the US anyway. Secondly, even of those who do, how many watch women's soccer?
Click to expand...

Soccer is a tough sell to North Americans. Those of us who've played competitive hockey, baseball, football or basketball had it drilled into us that when we're hit, we get right back up. If someone is on the ice, diamond, court, field and isn't getting up, you know they've got a problem.

Soccer... if they touch you, they fall, roll, and wince... makes me wanna puke. And that's why it will always be a tough sell in North America... except every four years during the World Cup.

Women's soccer... it's half speed with a fraction of the skill. Perhaps they should institute a few of Seth Blatter's ideas... they weren't half bad actually.
 
TurtleDude said:
WNBA players will make as much as male players when people care as much about filling out women's NCAA brackets as they do the mens. when women start doing tomahawk slams from the foul line or rejecting jump shots over the rim then maybe so.


the sad fact is women's basketball and women's soccer is less entertaining than men's. and that is true in most sports.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Professional sports are entertainment and there is no better example that I can think then the NBA to show this. Many people don't watch the NBA for sound fundamentals and good defense, but the high flyers, the alley-oops, and other show boating plays. Even if you are a great basketball player and can dominate any day of the week, you still have to be able to entertain the fans, and more than likely they aren't going to be entertained by well run offensive sets, sound defense, and mid range jumpers.
 
Anthony60 said:
This has nothing to do with gender. If the women's game took in more money and was more valuable than the men's game, then they would make more money.
Click to expand...
They do.

"The women's team does the identical work as the men's team, except they have outperformed in every way," said Jeffrey Kessler, a lawyer who represents the women. "The U.S. Soccer Federation made a profit of $16 million on the women's team last year. It had a loss on men's team."

The women's team won the World Cup last year and is among the favorites for the Olympics this summer. Its World Cup championship match scored the best U.S. rating ever of any soccer game -- men's or women's. It also drew more viewers than some other top-flight men's sporting events such as the World Series and NBA finals.
Click to expand...
I mean, it's right there in the article.

So you agree they should get paid more now, right?
Ikari said:
First off, people don't really watch soccer in the US anyway. Secondly, even of those who do, how many watch women's soccer?
Click to expand...
According to ratings, more than the men's team. :shrug:

gdgyva said:
so then this is what will happen

you cant raise the women up, so you will have to lower the men's numbers if equality is the end game (unless we want the soccer teams to cost us millions upon millions of dollars each year)

and when you lower the men's numbers, you will have a number of the best players quietly leave the program

what you will be left with, is college rank players, who while giving it their best, will be decimated by the men's teams from the other countries of the world

this is what pay equality will bring you.....sad but true

just how much do we want to spend on the national teams is the question?

because as the OP said....our best players are making big bucks playing in the big leagues in europe and south america

if we do not compensate most of them, they will not play....
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is the women should just suck it up and deal with or leave, so the men don't have to suck it up and deal with it or leave?

Seems a little hypocritical, to be honest.
Cephus said:
When they bring in as much in ticket sales as the men, then they can get paid as much. This isn't about gender, this is about value. Men's teams are just more valuable than women's teams
Click to expand...
But not in this case.

I think it's hilarious how so many people are jumping on the "men sports have more interest and make more money" when the article clearly states the opposite.
 
Erod said:
The women's program draw full houses regularly, but their ticket prices are much less. There's a fear of raising the prices because so much of their huge crowds are made up of young girls teams that go as a group.

But if you're marketable and a good speaker, a women's player can make millions. And the youth coming up from across the country is astoundingly good. The women's team today can't hold a candle to what's on the way.
Click to expand...

They're not getting paid to speak, they're getting paid to play. It all comes down to the profit that their employers can make from their performance on the field. The male teams are simply worth more, by your own admission. That's just the reality of it. It isn't that they are earning their employers as much as male teams are, they're not. Why should they get more when they simply aren't worth more?
 
zimmer said:
Soccer is a tough sell to North Americans. Those of us who've played competitive hockey, baseball, football or basketball had it drilled into us that when we're hit, we get right back up. If someone is on the ice, diamond, court, field and isn't getting up, you know they've got a problem.

Soccer... if they touch you, they fall, roll, and wince... makes me wanna puke. And that's why it will always be a tough sell in North America... except every four years during the World Cup.

Women's soccer... it's half speed with a fraction of the skill. Perhaps they should institute a few of Seth Blatter's ideas... they weren't half bad actually.
Click to expand...

Man, you've got this wrong. The NBA, NHL, and MLB are freaking out at the TV ratings the EPL is getting right now.

And the women aren't playing with a fraction of the skill. Have you watched Lloyd, Rapinoe, Klingenberg, Johnston, or any of the Japanese or German players? I'm not saying they're on par with the men, but it's not a "fraction". And better players on are the way. There'll be 15 Carli Lloyds on the team in 10 years.

There are a lot of pro NFL and NBA players that idolize these women players. They love to watch them play.
 
Beaudreaux said:
I remember the ladies talking about this during the last women's World Cup, and my opinion hasn't changed since then - the ladies should be paid just as much, if not more, than the men. This fact should be seen as a shameful error that needs correcting.
Click to expand...

Good afternoon B - hope all is well with the family,

I usually agree with you on most issues, but I have to disagree here. Salaries in sports have always been and always will be based on the revenue those sports and individual athletes generate both from gate/merchandise and from TV and other airing rights. Should women's professional basketball players be paid the same as NBA players? Should all NBA players be paid the same fixed salary? Look at baseball - should minor league players, who play the same game as the pros, be paid the same as the pros?

If women soccer players aren't being paid a salary similar to what the men are being paid, as a proportion of the revenue they generate for the program, then by all means up their pay. But to compare it to the men's game and the revenue the men's game generates around the world is to ignore the realities of where the money comes from to pay the salaries.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Good afternoon B - hope all is well with the family,

I usually agree with you on most issues, but I have to disagree here. Salaries in sports have always been and always will be based on the revenue those sports and individual athletes generate both from gate/merchandise and from TV and other airing rights. Should women's professional basketball players be paid the same as NBA players? Should all NBA players be paid the same fixed salary? Look at baseball - should minor league players, who play the same game as the pros, be paid the same as the pros?

If women soccer players aren't being paid a salary similar to what the men are being paid, as a proportion of the revenue they generate for the program, then by all means up their pay. But to compare it to the men's game and the revenue the men's game generates around the world is to ignore the realities of where the money comes from to pay the salaries.
Click to expand...
What if the men's game operates at a loss and the women's game profits $16 million? How do you feel about that?
 
CanadaJohn said:
Good afternoon B - hope all is well with the family,

I usually agree with you on most issues, but I have to disagree here. Salaries in sports have always been and always will be based on the revenue those sports and individual athletes generate both from gate/merchandise and from TV and other airing rights. Should women's professional basketball players be paid the same as NBA players? Should all NBA players be paid the same fixed salary? Look at baseball - should minor league players, who play the same game as the pros, be paid the same as the pros?

If women soccer players aren't being paid a salary similar to what the men are being paid, as a proportion of the revenue they generate for the program, then by all means up their pay. But to compare it to the men's game and the revenue the men's game generates around the world is to ignore the realities of where the money comes from to pay the salaries.
Click to expand...

The tricky part lies in that the women's team makes money, and the men's team is losing money. But the broader picture involves the significantly higher cost of fielding quality men's team versus a women's team in America.

I do think the men's team is gaining steam. Interest is growing, and the men are gradually becoming a legitimate national team on the world stage.

The women just dominate because - unlike what CNN claims in their endless "Hillary" campaign stories to lure women voters - the United States treats its women far better than the rest of the world. We invest more in our women than anywhere else in all facets.
 
Slyfox696 said:
But not in this case.

I think it's hilarious how so many people are jumping on the "men sports have more interest and make more money" when the article clearly states the opposite.
Click to expand...

That's one year. How about historically? And nobody is saying that the players cannot strike, cannot demand more pay, etc. They're welcome to do whatever they want to do within the confines of the law. If they can convince their employers that they are worth more, they can get paid more. But this isn't some social ill, this is a very low-profit sport to begin with, Forbes estimates the entire MLS to be worth only $157 million, for the entirety of the sport. Compare that to the NFL, which is worth $1.428 billion. They are, by far, the least valuable professional sports demographic in America.
 
Slyfox696 said:
They do.


I mean, it's right there in the article.

So you agree they should get paid more now, right?
According to ratings, more than the men's team. :shrug:

So what you're saying is the women should just suck it up and deal with or leave, so the men don't have to suck it up and deal with it or leave?

Seems a little hypocritical, to be honest.
But not in this case.

I think it's hilarious how so many people are jumping on the "men sports have more interest and make more money" when the article clearly states the opposite.
Click to expand...

Actually, no, none of that is correct.

The men get much higher TV ratings, and they generate far more revenue. The difference is the overhead required to be a legitimate program on the world stage.

It's like comparing the operational challenges of a 5-star restaurant to a McDonalds.

If they eliminated both teams, the men would still be playing all over the world for high salaries. The women would be changing professions altogether.
 
Slyfox696 said:
What if the men's game operates at a loss and the women's game profits $16 million? How do you feel about that?
Click to expand...

Then the women should be paid significantly more than the men. If that's the case here, by all means correct the imbalance.

My response to B was more on general principle than on the specifics of this case.
 
Erod said:
The tricky part lies in that the women's team makes money, and the men's team is losing money. But the broader picture involves the significantly higher cost of fielding quality men's team versus a women's team in America.

I do think the men's team is gaining steam. Interest is growing, and the men are gradually becoming a legitimate national team on the world stage.

The women just dominate because - unlike what CNN claims in their endless "Hillary" campaign stories to lure women voters - the United States treats its women far better than the rest of the world. We invest more in our women than anywhere else in all facets.
Click to expand...

If that's the case, the imbalance should be corrected. I appreciate that with the professional men's soccer league in North America as well as the various other professional men's leagues around the world, there is a shortage on men prepared to commit to the national programs - Canada has the same problem. The women don't have that problem and the national teams are really the only game in town once you leave the collegiate ranks.
 
Cephus said:
That's one year. How about historically?
Click to expand...
Certainly we'd need to see for the last couple of years, but rarely do profits spike so dramatically without a general trend appearing beforehand.

And nobody is saying that the players cannot strike, cannot demand more pay, etc. They're welcome to do whatever they want to do within the confines of the law.
Click to expand...
And if the law states one should be paid equally for equal work, they should get it, right?

But this isn't some social ill
Click to expand...
But I feel the response to it, even in just this thread, is quite symptomatic.

this is a very low-profit sport to begin with
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. If the women's team makes $16 million and the men's team operates at a loss, then surely the women can receive more equal pay, regardless of the overall revenue of the business.
 
Slyfox696 said:
They do.


I mean, it's right there in the article.

So you agree they should get paid more now, right?
According to ratings, more than the men's team. :shrug:

So what you're saying is the women should just suck it up and deal with or leave, so the men don't have to suck it up and deal with it or leave?

Seems a little hypocritical, to be honest.
But not in this case.

I think it's hilarious how so many people are jumping on the "men sports have more interest and make more money" when the article clearly states the opposite.
Click to expand...

revenue doesnt equal profit

the women's team generates more profit because it has lower expenses

if you paid the women on par with the men, the women's team would be losing millions

US World Cup Team Salaries - Business Insider

and then this article explains the business of soccer

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/06/for-us-soccer-wages-women-still-fall-far-short-of-men.html

revenue is the key.....the women do not bring in anywhere close to what the men do....

ticket prices, concessions, jerseys....all are higher on the men's side
 
Slyfox696 said:
What if the men's game operates at a loss and the women's game profits $16 million? How do you feel about that?
Click to expand...

Keep in mind, half of the MLB teams report a loss, too. Let's not kid ourselves. People are getting happy rich.

It's a lot harder to explain a women's team losing money than a men's team when you look at the total revenue stream.
 
Erod said:
That's not it at all. There's no "formula" for negotiation. Tim Howard makes millions as a great keeper for Everton overseas. Yes, he wants to play for the US, but he's not risking injury and spending what little free time he has playing for our national team for just some formulaic amount of money. You have to pay him. Same for a few others. Soccer careers are often short.

Women's tennis doesn't have any problem whatsoever paying at or above the men because the interest is there.
Click to expand...

So then 'but they travel' isn't an excuse to pay less per game (regardless of venues) - and I'm not even sure how true it is, this notion that men 'travel more'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom