Women's World Cup

[Doomsday]

One of the things CNN is leaving out of their 2018 stats is last year was the men's World Cup so the men played far fewer matches.

Because the women's team was getting ready for a World Cup run they had 12 events in 2018 compared to the men's 6.

The women generated 11m vs the mens 10m however, the men drew 24k to the women's 14k. Yet the men still generated over 90% of the revenue the women did in 1/2 the events.

It is hard to compare their revenues on a year by year basis against each other because their schedules are going to be different due to the timing of the World Cup.

Heck the USA vs Mexico game drew 5k more then the women's World Cup final.

In typical CNN fashion, you have to look past their narrative at the raw data.

 

[erod]

One of the things CNN is leaving out of their 2018 stats is last year was the men's World Cup so the men played far fewer matches.

Because the women's team was getting ready for a World Cup run they had 12 events in 2018 compared to the men's 6.

The women generated 11m vs the mens 10m however, the men drew 24k to the women's 14k. Yet the men still generated over 90% of the revenue the women did in 1/2 the events.

It is hard to compare their revenues on a year by year basis against each other because their schedules are going to be different due to the timing of the World Cup.

Heck the USA vs Mexico game drew 5k more then the women's World Cup final.

This is about what every World Cup women's game looked like in attendance.

 

[yimyammer]

This is about what every World Cup women's game looked like in attendance.

thats a. bummer, I think they're really fun to watch but I like soccer (however, I don't like watching MLS)

 

[Rockport]

My daughters play in the US Women's development program. Quite a bit different, buddy. We understand the reason for this, even if dolts like Rapinoe do not. Soccer is not a communist sport as much as she'd like it to be.

If you don't pay the men, you're going to get a bunch of college kids that never cross midfield. The US men's pool is getting better and better, but they're still playing against the best in the world, which takes soccer more seriously than any sport there is. They will not bother going back and forth over the ocean to play here for the US team if you don't pay them well. The women don't have to do that because pro soccer for women there isn't any better than it is here.

The 26 US women make a lot more playing for the US team than they do club. They should be grateful. The men take a huge paycut to do so.

Meanwhile, nobody in the world gives a flying you know what about women's soccer except the US. They just don't care anywhere else. It's like watching putt-putt golf to them.

Ahah! Your beef is with Rapinoe for obvious reasons. For your information the whole team sued not just her.

 

[erod]

Ahah! Your beef is with Rapinoe for obvious reasons. For your information the whole team sued not just her.

What? I'm trying to explain the basic economics for you. Deflect away.

 

[atlantacowboy]

One of the things CNN is leaving out of their 2018 stats is last year was the men's World Cup so the men played far fewer matches.

Because the women's team was getting ready for a World Cup run they had 12 events in 2018 compared to the men's 6.

The women generated 11m vs the mens 10m however, the men drew 24k to the women's 14k. Yet the men still generated over 90% of the revenue the women did in 1/2 the events.

It is hard to compare their revenues on a year by year basis against each other because their schedules are going to be different due to the timing of the World Cup.

Heck the USA vs Mexico game drew 5k more then the women's World Cup final.

In typical CNN fashion, you have to look past their narrative at the raw data.

Stories like this that try to impose a narrative by skewing data is a large part of the reason CNN has lost so much credibility.

 

[atlantacowboy]

This is about what every World Cup women's game looked like in attendance.

Yep but many of those seats were sold thanks to corporate charity.

 

[atlantacowboy]

In that case, I would be inclined to argue that the USWNT players should be paid far more than the USMNT players BECAUSE they can't possibly earn the same level of pay that the men achieve from their clubs. The major European countries pay the men a token amount to play in internationals because, clearly, playing for their country is prestigious and not about money.

So, you advocate for a sort of women's soccer charity? It already exists in the form of corporate sponsors who buy tickets in order to justify most of the women's teams playing in empty stadiums.

The 2018 WC champions France had 23 players and each got 1.2 million Euros for a month of their time. That is far from being a token. While it may not blow the socks off Paul Pogba, it is more than a fair wage for most of those guys.

Fact is that the US womens team is an anomaly in the world of womens soccer and the only country where the women team rivals the men in popularity.............and thats only b/c the men are so bad.

 

[Bigdog]

My daughters play in the US Women's development program. Quite a bit different, buddy. We understand the reason for this, even if dolts like Rapinoe do not. Soccer is not a communist sport as much as she'd like it to be.

If you don't pay the men, you're going to get a bunch of college kids that never cross midfield. The US men's pool is getting better and better, but they're still playing against the best in the world, which
takes soccer more seriously than any sport there is. They will not bother going back and forth over the ocean to play here for the US team if you don't pay them well. The women don't have to do that because pro soccer for women there isn't any better than it is here.

The 26 US women make a lot more playing for the US team than they do club. They should be grateful. The men take a huge paycut to do so.

Meanwhile, nobody in the world gives a flying you know what about women's soccer except the US. They just don't care anywhere else. It's like watching putt-putt golf to them.

Well as Brazilian soccer fan said to an American reporter when he was asked why they take this sport like it was life or death at the 1994 men’s World Cup, “ Life or death? No it is much more important than that.” They sure do take this sport more seriously than we do.

 

[Pompey-Cowboy]

So, you advocate for a sort of women's soccer charity? It already exists in the form of corporate sponsors who buy tickets in order to justify most of the women's teams playing in empty stadiums.

The 2018 WC champions France had 23 players and each got 1.2 million Euros for a month of their time. That is far from being a token. While it may not blow the socks off Paul Pogba, it is more than a fair wage for most of those guys.

Fact is that the US womens team is an anomaly in the world of womens soccer and the only country where the women team rivals the men in popularity.............and thats only b/c the men are so bad.

Agreed, the U.S is definitely unique in that sense, possibly because you've become interested in the game decades/centuries after everyone else (that's not a criticism if it reads as one). Whether or not the women's game becomes less popular when the USMNT finally gets it right (they will) is to be seen of course.

 

[Pompey-Cowboy]

thats a. bummer, I think they're really fun to watch but I like soccer (however, I don't like watching MLS)

I get the impression that is quite a common attitude in the U.S. Funny, the MLS gets a fair amount of coverage in the UK and is generally regarded as a reasonable standard league, probably on a par with say, the Belgian or Austrian leagues. Not yet at the level of the top European leagues but not light years behind either.

 

[Johnny23]

Well as Brazilian soccer fan said to an American reporter when he was asked why they take this sport like it was life or death at the 1994 men’s World Cup, “ Life or death? No it is much more important than that.” They sure do take this sport more seriously than we do.

Most kids play soccer to pass the time for football or basketball ball or whatever sports off season to stay in shape. That's how it was at least when I was growing up the best player girls and boys were great at something else and using soccer to pass the time. Stay competitive.

 

[atlantacowboy]

Agreed, the U.S is definitely unique in that sense, possibly because you've become interested in the game decades/centuries after everyone else (that's not a criticism if it reads as one). Whether or not the women's game becomes less popular when the USMNT finally gets it right (they will) is to be seen of course.

We are unique in that our women's team wins WC's and our mens team is lucky to get out of CONCAFF. No other country has such a disparity. We are unique in that our country has something called Title IX that forces college athletic department to spend equally on women's sports. Title IX is the main reason we produce so many female soccer players. It seems in Europe, the clubs sponsor women as a charity and token of faux interest.

Women's soccer is actually a thing here and legally mandated. lol

 

[Rockport]

This is about what every World Cup women's game looked like in attendance.

That’s BS. You just have prejudices.

 

[jterrell]

One of the things CNN is leaving out of their 2018 stats is last year was the men's World Cup so the men played far fewer matches.

Because the women's team was getting ready for a World Cup run they had 12 events in 2018 compared to the men's 6.

The women generated 11m vs the mens 10m however, the men drew 24k to the women's 14k. Yet the men still generated over 90% of the revenue the women did in 1/2 the events.

It is hard to compare their revenues on a year by year basis against each other because their schedules are going to be different due to the timing of the World Cup.

Heck the USA vs Mexico game drew 5k more then the women's World Cup final.

In typical CNN fashion, you have to look past their narrative at the raw data.

You completely ignored other sources providing the same data.
The WaPo article uses a 4 year cycle.

No one is arguing if the man had the same level is success they'd make more money or draw greater audiences but not making those games they can't draw those audiences or share in cuts of that money.

As noted above we spend insanely more to develop men's teams and pay the men more for FAR lesser results.
That's simply stupid economically.
Especially given the women's game is where growth is occurring.

The Men's gold cup drew more eyes largely because the opponent was Mexico. Mexico national team also had the majority of the crowd for a game played in Chicago.
To suggest it was our men drawing that audience would be disingenuous at best.
CNN/Fox News style crap for sure.

 

[jterrell]

I get the impression that is quite a common attitude in the U.S. Funny, the MLS gets a fair amount of coverage in the UK and is generally regarded as a reasonable standard league, probably on a par with say, the Belgian or Austrian leagues. Not yet at the level of the top European leagues but not light years behind either.

It's because American fans are elitist.
MLS is like double AA baseball.
MLS is very slow and far less skilled than EPL or the top La Liga/Bundeliga matches we get on TV here now.
I can't watch Chelsea twice a week then watch FC Dallas and find it entertaining. I just can't

Americans would never watch Euro basketball. NBA is just better so we'd never enjoy the inferior product.

Europe is a bit different in that there's a local build up from early age.

Soccer was my first sport and I was coached by a product of the Man U system.
I was quite good at the sport and loved it but gave it up as a sophomore in HS because no girls came to our games.
I played football alone the final 2 years and sat the bench in college in football.
If I had stayed in soccer I likely would have been quite good collegiately but never gotten the scholarship I did for football.

 

[Pompey-Cowboy]

We are unique in that our women's team wins WC's and our mens team is lucky to get out of CONCAFF. No other country has such a disparity. We are unique in that our country has something called Title IX that forces college athletic department to spend equally on women's sports. Title IX is the main reason we produce so many female soccer players. tokenIt seems in Europe, the clubs sponsor women as a charity and of faux interest.

Women's soccer is actually a thing here and legally mandated. lol

That is true to a point but the men's game only has that attitude to the women's game because public interest in the women's game has been non-existant. The last 3 or 4 years though has seen an upturn and there is much more TV coverage of late which is driving things now. Personally, I enjoy the women's game nearly as much as men's and would maybe enjoy it equally if my local women's team wasn't very low level.

 

[erod]

That’s BS. You just have prejudices.

So you didn't watch the games then. Attendance was incredibly weak for more than 90 percent of them.

Dude, I sit on boards in this sport. My daughters have played all over the world. I know what's going on globally in women's soccer.

 

[erod]

That is true to a point but the men's game only has that attitude to the women's game because public interest in the women's game has been non-existant. The last 3 or 4 years though has seen an upturn and there is much more TV coverage of late which is driving things now. Personally, I enjoy the women's game nearly as much as men's and would maybe enjoy it equally if my local women's team wasn't very low level.

There is truth in that here in the US, but nowhere else really. France played in front of some pretty small crowds in their own country in this thing. Europe still largely sees "sport" as very much a man's thing, especially football. There are only a small handful of clubs that even bother with a women's pro team. Man City puts a little money into it. Man U doesn't care about it at all. Lyon takes it seriously. Arsenal and PSG dabble in it a bit, and maybe 4 or 5 others. Most clubs don't even bother. Here, some MLS teams field a women's team, but not all.

They just can't get anyone to attend the games. Until that changes, the national team stuff is too seasonal and too lopsided to be a serious endeavor financially. The US team is wildly more funded than other national teams in the world. Many of them have to buy their own damn shoes to play.

It's like having the Cowboys play in the ACC conference. Seriously. That's how lopsided it is.

And simply put, the men's team will always get paid better because it's the only way to get these highly paid professional club players to go back and forth between their European teams and the US to play against Trinidad and Tobago. Pulisic is now the striker for Chelsea. McKennie is playing for Shalke 04. Yedlin plays for Newcastle. Brooks plays for Wolfsburg.

These are world-class players making world class money. You've gotta pay them.

And when the men's World Cup literally makes 84 times as much money as the women's World Cup.....there's just no financial argument the women can make right now. (It's $6.1 billion generated for the men's cup, not $4 billion as I posted yesterday.)

They'll get a little more, but not much right now. If they don't like it, there's a long line of girls behind them, many of which are going to be better than they are.

 

[Rockport]

So you didn't watch the games then. Attendance was incredibly weak for more than 90 percent of them.

Dude, I sit on boards in this sport. My daughters have played all over the world. I know what's going on globally in women's soccer.

So what do you have against the women getting paid what they men do? Don’t you want your daughters to be treated equally?