Sports

The U.S. Soccer 'Pay Gap' Is About More Than Just Sexism

The U.S. women's soccer team deserves better, but mandating equal pay isn't the answer.

|

Members of the World Cup champion U.S. Women's National Soccer Team are agitating for better pay—equal to what the men on the U.S. team earn—after winning their second consecutive World Cup and their fourth overall. They were feted with a ticker-tape parade through Manhattan on Wednesday.

If pay exclusively reflected performance, there would be no doubt that Megan Rapinoe, Alex Morgan, Rose LaVelle, Julie Ertz, and the rest of the U.S. women's team deserve far more than what the men earn. The U.S. men's team, you may recall, failed to even qualify for last year's World Cup in Russia, and has not progressed beyond the tournament's quarterfinal round since the inaugural World Cup in 1930.

So it's easy to sympathize with the women's team when they demand better compensation—as they, and their fans, did during the trophy presentation on Sunday morning, shouting "equal pay, equal pay!" Presidential hopefuls have quickly judged which direction the wind is blowing and jumped aboard the cause. Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) have tweeted their support for equal pay on the soccer pitch, and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio on Wednesday said he would pay female athletes equally if elected president. Hillary Clinton has chimed in.

This debate is not happening only on the campaign trail, in New York's Canyon of Heroes, or on Twitter. The members of the U.S. women's team are suing their employer, the United States Soccer Federation, and the two sides have agreed to mediate the dispute out of court. That is important background for understanding why the women's team is trying to ramp up political and social pressure on the federation.

But, really, the debate over whether the U.S. women's team should be better compensated is about two related and overlapping issues. One is a matter of accounting and the other is about economics—specifically, about the importance of markets and about how workers are harmed when they do not exist.

Writing at Commentary, Christine Rosen dives deeply into the first argument. She notes that last year's American-less World Cup in Russia generated $6 billion in revenue, while the women's event in France this summer is expected to earn about $131 million. As a percentage of total revenue, FIFA (the body that governs international soccer and runs the World Cup) actually pays out larger prizes to the women's teams than to the men.

But what about the pay disparity between the American men's and women's teams, outside of prize money in major tournaments? The Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. men's and women's teams have generated about the same amount of revenue from games played since 2015, although those totals account for only about half of U.S. Soccer's annual income. Yet, as Rosen again points out, the women's team continues to get shortchanged when it comes to the percentage of the federation's budget spent on "advertising and P.R., travel and training budgets, and…per diems for food."

U.S. Soccer has no good reason to feed the women's team less than the men's, or to make them sleep in subpar accommodations. Those inequalities should be addressed.

Beyond that, though, it's difficult to argue that the pay gap is unfair or sexist. It's largely the result of different pay structures that both teams have collectively bargained with the U.S. Soccer Federation.

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

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.

If that changes, women's salaries will increase—and, really, that's the best way to make sure your favorite World Cup players earn bigger bucks, as Rapinoe acknowledged during an appearance on Rachel Maddow's show this week.

"Fans can come to games," Rapinoe said. "Obviously, the national team games will be a hot ticket, but we have nine teams in the NWSL. You can go to your league games, you can support that way. You can buy players' jerseys, you can lend support in that way, you can tell your friends about it, you can become season ticket-holders."

She's absolutely right. For all the attention that the World Cup generates, club teams are always going to be where soccer players make their money. And those club teams are beholden to the same rules that govern private businesses everywhere: requiring the Seattle Reign to pay every player as much as the MLS' Seattle Sounders would bankrupt the women's team.

That brings us to the second part of the debate. Part of the problem facing the U.S. women is the fact that there are no markets in international soccer.

What I mean by that is that there is no ability for the U.S. women to demand better treatment by taking their talents elsewhere. Even if a player does qualify to play on multiple national teams (in the event they had parents from two different countries, for example), under FIFA rules she is locked in place once she makes a single appearance on the field for a national team.

Think about it like this: If Rapinoe is unhappy with her contract with Reign FC, she can field offers from the other eight teams in the NWSL. She could even take offers from women's teams in other countries—Sunday's World Cup finale was held in Lyon instead of Paris in part because the local club team, Olympique Lyonnais, has a reputation for paying high salaries to female players and, not surprisingly, attracting the world's top talent.

Even with markets, there would still be obvious financial constraints. The popularity of women's soccer and the revenue generated by individual clubs may not allow teams to offer Rapinoe or Morgan the amount of money those players feel they are worth.

When it comes to dealing with the national federation, though, the players have considerably less leverage. That's why even the most egregious inequalities between the treatment of the U.S. men's and women's teams are difficult to correct.

Above all, it's certainly not wrong for successful employees to demand better compensation, regardless of gender. But because international soccer lacks the market mechanisms that would otherwise help members of the U.S. Women's National Team achieve that goal, they are forced to resort to other, less efficient means. That's why they have to turn this into a public relations issue, and a legal matter.

Lacking any better economic incentive to get the federation to change its behavior, publicly shaming U.S. Soccer over the disparity between how the men's and women's teams are treated might be the best lever for fixing the supposed pay gap.

Advertisement

NEXT: Trump To Convene 'Social Media Summit' Over Accusations of Anti-Conservative Bias

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The women should be paid enough to bankrupt the U.S Soccer Federation. Then we won’t have to hear this shit anymore.

    1. Look, Reason has finally figured out how to get Trump supporters to argue about soccer. This is some kind of accomplishment.

    2. They can party all they want.If they want more pay then get more revenue! if they are trying to get FIFA to promote them more then maybe you should have gone to visit Trump if asked and not be a spoiled political kid and refused to go before even being asked. I think she sprained her brain in England and not her hamstring..You have just destroyed everything for children playing the sport and your future as a business. Enjoy your low pay.

      1. It’s the USSF, not FIFA.

        And their lawsuit alleges that they are bringing in as much, or more, revenue than the men’s team.

      2. The USWNT acted like punks, ok a punk. Then her behavior at the parade, hanging all over a young girl who looked very uncomfortable, so where is the attacking gender feminists that went after Joe Bidden. Or PoundMeToo fraud suggesting XYs cannot be seated next to a child traveling alone on an airline. The XY is asked to move. Gender bigotry is alive and well, but the only real issue here is XXs do not go to USWNT, professional XX futbol matches, soccer dads do, clubs do, sometimes group of women, many who played do. But their audience is no where near the XYs game. Blame whom? XXs who do not support XX professional players, leagues, not XYs.

    3. It’s just bullshit anyway, the should also include income from endorsements too in the year after the World Cup.

      My guess is that the average USA women’s team member’s income (salary and endorsements and sponsorships) is higher that the average USA men’s team member.

      Obviously that won’t be true for France, Britain, Germany, Russia, Sweden, etc, etc. But that just shows how much more enlightened we are.

      1. “It’s just bullshit anyway, the should also include income from endorsements too in the year after the World Cup.”

        Why? That’s not paid by the USSF.

        “My guess is that the average USA women’s team member’s income (salary and endorsements and sponsorships) is higher that the average USA men’s team member.”

        Given the disparity in pay between the men’s and women’s professional leagues, I’m very skeptical.

    4. Since I started with my online business, I earn $25 every 15 minutes. It sounds unbelievable but you won’t forgive yourself if you don’t check it out. Learn more about it here>> Click Here For More Information >>>>> https://cutt.ly/Click-Here-For-More-Info

  2. If they want to get paid like the men do, all they need to do is go win a spot on a man’s team. Simple.
    Equal pay, but only for EQUAL WORK.

    1. And notes to U15 boys clubs.

    2. Better solution: No “men’s” or “women’s” teams in any sports at any level – just teams open to both men and women. The best players will produce the best teams for fans to watch and professionals will be paid according to free-market principles.

      1. And the chances of women playing in anything close to significant numbers approaches zero. So they’ll demand quotas or something else.

        1. Gender Special Olympics.

          You can have the team open to anyone based just on performance ( the men’s team). Then you can have the various teams that need to have restrictive qualifications like women’s, retards, physically handicapped etc.

          1. The USA retard squad would totally own it.

            1. There would be a massive pool to pick from. At least 62,979,879 (46.1%), according to revised and certified final election results from all 50 states.

              1. Why are you such an insufferable faggot? What the hell does this have to do with Trump? Get a fucking life.

      2. i think Nike or Gatorade or somebody had a TV ad like that — “sports doesn’t see gender”, okay, good luck with that.

        1. In high school I used to shoot hoops/play one on one with this girl I liked during free play in PE. I was a bench warmer in C-squad and JV until I stopped playing after my sophomore year (tore my MCL my junior year of football and despite being healed by basketball decided it wasn’t worth it). She was a starter on the varsity girls team. I was 5’10” she was 5’4″ if she was standing on her toes. I usually easily dominated every game we played (she occasionally beat me at HORSE, but only if we agreed not to shoot anything beyond the 3 point line).

          1. But did you score?

      3. They can party all they want.If they want more pay then get more revenue! if they are trying to get FIFA to promote them more then maybe you should have gone to visit Trump if asked and not be a spoiled political kid and refused to go before even being asked. I think she sprained her brain in England and not her hamstring..You have just destroyed everything for children playing the sport and your future as a business. Enjoy your low pay.

    3. Also, Tyler Boyd for the USMT has the same “job” as Lionel Messi, but he doesn’t get paid as much. I’m sure he’s not whining that he should get paid as much as the best-paid superstars in the world.

      1. Similarly, the shortstop on a single A baseball affiliate has the same “job” as the shortstop on an MLB team. If that single A team consistently wins a championship and the MLB team consistently misses the playoffs, does that mean that the single A players deserve more money? Or should we consider the fact that single A is an inferior league to MLB with a much lower quality of opponents.

        Maybe the members of the USWNT should stop their shit and appreciate the fact that they already received some of their benefits in the form of Title IX funding to play in college. Revenue sports at US colleges are forced to pay for those schools to also have sports like women’s soccer. As a result, US colleges are the best development organization in the world for women’s soccer. That’s part of why USWNT is the best in the world and it’s also why a lot of the nations that challenge the US have large numbers of players that went to US colleges.

      2. Women’s soccer, or any women’s athletic endeavor, is the “same work” as the men’s, in the same way a kindergarten teachers performs the “same work” as a college professor.

    4. Interesting fact: Amanda Nunez made more money than any of the men on the UFC 239 card this past weekend.

    5. Or have their league generate more revenue. It’s the same way in that women earn more than men in adult films.

      1. This. Many straight male porn actors do bi or gay porn because they get paid shit in straight porn.

    6. Well, how about equal pay for equal TOTAL revenue?
      And if your endorsement deals pay more than the men’s average, half the overage is distributed to the men?
      Actually, I’m just whining because I really don’t care about soccer.

  3. Why would they get paid more? Nobody really watches that crap.

    Women cannot get the audiences that provide more money to pay the players more. Its simple dollars and cents.

    Lefties will continue to make no sense.

    1. “The Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. men’s and women’s teams have generated about the same amount of revenue from games played since 2015”

      1. Women have played championships, men have played qualifiers and they generate the same amount of money

        1. Understood. I was merely pointing out that LC1789 is wrong, because sometimes when you walk past a barrel of fish, you just have to shoot some.

          1. Except he’s not wrong. The men are paid based on worldwide revenues and viewership. The 2014 men’s World Cup made $4.6 billion in worldwide revenue and the 2015 women’s World Cup made $131 million. If they were paid under the same criteria as men, they’d be getting a pay cut, not a raise.

            1. “when you walk past a barrel of fish, you just have to shoot some.”

              LOL he sure set himself up with that stupid fucking line.

            2. I agree
              They can party all they want.If they want more pay then get more revenue! if they are trying to get FIFA to promote them more then maybe you should have gone to visit Trump if asked and not be a spoiled political kid and refused to go before even being asked. I think she sprained her brain in England and not her hamstring..You have just destroyed everything for children playing the sport and your future as a business. Enjoy your low pay.

          2. Poor 0=[], he wont provide a link because he is full of shit.

            Sometimes you have to walk past a pile of shit and say “hey square=circle, nice to see ya”.

            1. You are mocking him for not providing a link to the article you are commenting on? Doesn’t that seem kind of superfluous? I mean, you are already here.

              1. Claims by circle=square dont mean squat without a citation to back it up.

                Im not mocking him. He is a piece of shit.

                1. It’s a quote from the article we are all commenting on. What citation is needed?

              2. I’ve gotta go with LC on this one. Circle is a bit of a shitposter.

          3. sometimes when you walk past a barrel of fish, you just have to shoot some.

            Sometimes there comes a day when a fish in a barrel tells you that he wants to be shot. Today, S=C is that fish.

        2. What would have more viewers — the US Women’s WC Final or a WC Final if the US Men were playing?

          Let’s be real, folks.

    1. I love the new woke Reason, that supports fair pay over free market prices.

      #LibertariansForPayJustice

      1. In this case, there really isn’t a market price. There’s only one national team per country, and players have very limited ability to choose between countries.

        1. a world of ability to choose alternate income sources too.

        2. In this case, there really isn’t a market price.

          Of course there’s a market price. They just don’t like it because it reflects reality: a lack of demand.

          1. That’s an interesting new theory you have on markets.

            1. That’s an interesting new theory you have on markets.

              It’s revealing you must pretend lower demand reduces prices is wrong to defend your position.

              1. But I don’t have to pretend that, and neither does Eric Boehm.

                1. The market for women’s soccer is much like the market for sand in the desert…

                  1. Dude, there is a global sand shortage. Look it up.

                    1. Is there a sand shortage *in the desert*?

            2. jph12
              July.10.2019 at 6:22 pm
              “That’s an interesting new theory you have on markets.”

              From about 1776, if you’d care to be honest.

            3. Supply and demand is an “interesting new theory”? WTF is going on around this “libertarian” place?

              1. Didn’t read the article, did you?

                1. 24 MLS teams, 9 women’s league teams. Men’s world cup $6 billion in revenue, women’s world cup $131 million. Seems you’re the one not reading the article. Basically there is no demand for women’s soccer, thus they make less.

                  1. And really, who in this country wants to watch a angry, bitter, man hating, communist, anti American, blue haired bull dyke with skills exceeded by fifteen year old boys play soccer?

                    Apparently, not even the progtards, who only sow an interest because she hates Trump publicly.

                    1. Yup

                    2. I read somewhere that viewership for the finals was down 38 percent from last time-deliberately pissing off some of those who would otherwise be inclined to support you has consequences.

                    3. Best comment.

                    4. Every time one of my feminists friends post about this topic, I ask, “When was the last time you bought a ticket to see women’s soccer match.” No one every answers.

                2. I skimmed it. That has no bearing on you claiming supply and demand is a new theory.

                  1. I never claimed that.

                    1. In essence that is exactly what you did. You claimed that the market price being set by a lack of demand was a new concept.

                    2. No I didn’t. I claimed there wasn’t a market price.

        3. “In this case, there really isn’t a market price. There’s only one national team per country, and players have very limited ability to choose between countries.”

          Sorry, but in that sport, that is “the market”.

          1. Well there’s also a big market for club teams all over the world. Men’s club teams though.

      2. Did we read the same article?

        That pay gap isn’t the result of sexism. It’s what the market allows.

        1. But the market is sexist! If it doesn’t yield equal results for men and women players, so much the worse for the market. Time for American sports to follow the Cuban model!

        2. Yet, as Rosen again points out, the women’s team continues to get shortchanged when it comes to the percentage of the federation’s budget spent on “advertising and P.R., travel and training budgets, and…per diems for food.”

          U.S. Soccer has no good reason to feed the women’s team less than the men’s, or to make them sleep in subpar accommodations. Those inequalities should be addressed.

          Women’s soccer does not and will never draw as many viewers as men’s soccer, so why would they waste an equivalent amount of money on ads or P.R.? They won the World Cup, so why do they need a larger budget for training? They pull less money, so why should they get equivalent money for traveling or food? Am I really supposed to believe these cunts are making poverty wages, and it’s such an injustice? They eat and sleep better than I do, I guarantee it, and here Eric Boehm is running interference on their “subpar accommodations”. Subpar for whom? Entitled sports stars that run their mouths too much? They aren’t forced to eat “less” than the men (though they are women, and they should be eating less, OBVIOUSLY), they are forced to eat less EXPENSIVELY, which is more than fair.

          1. I’ve seen more coverage of the Women’s soccer team the last week or so than I have seen of the men’s team in years.

            If they cannot generate revenue with free publicity, I don’t see why paid publicity would be better.

            Perhaps if the women didn’t seem so, well, cunty — people might want to give them a chance.

      3. I love the new woke Reason, that supports fair pay over free market prices.

        Where did you see them doing that?

        1. So what does “deserve better” suggest, if not pay?

          1. A larger percentage… Wait they already get a larger percentage than the men???

          2. What does “but mandating equal pay isn’t the answer” mean?

            1. it means “we still want to be invited to the DC cocktail parties”, even though we’re really libertarians.

                1. Well, almost bingo. Unless you meant to type “libertarians.”

                  1. +1 all the way through.

        2. Ever time Boehm mentions “inequality”?

      4. Did you even bother to read the article?

      5. Which Reason is that? Did you miss where he said that mandated equal pay is not the answer? The whole thing is about how free market prices are the best way to get fairer pay for international women’s soccer.
        I have no idea if there are artificial pressures from US Soccer or FIFA that artificially depress their pay. Maybe they are already paid more than the market would bear. But it would still be better if these crooked sports organizations had less power over international competition.

        1. Zeb, the premise is bullshit. There is no pay gap and womens soccer pay is based on revenue the franchise gets based on people watching and buying womens soccer stuff- NOT sexism.

          1. The USWNT isn’t a franchise.

    2. How about the Minnesota Lynx? they are a WNBA dynasty. The Minnesota Timberwolves are the dregs of the NBA.
      Who deserves more?

      1. I’ll go out on a limb and say the Timberwolves still produce more revenue. Franchi produces better shotguns but Beretta charges more.

        1. The concept being that higher pay or cost doesn’t always go to the best product.

          1. Which is why branding is valuable.

            1. Pretty much. Lots of people rag on Savage but they are also the most accurate out of the box factory rifles made. I’ve seen people spend far more on better branded rifles and complain about then well I am quite happy with the Savage I purchased for half the price.

  4. But…but title IX was supposed to fix all this!!

    1. Hint: Democrats lie.

    2. They get equal pay in the NCAA.

  5. “If pay exclusively reflected performance, there would be no doubt that Megan Rapinoe, Alex Morgan, Rose LaVelle, Julie Ertz, and the rest of the U.S. women’s team deserve far more than what the men earn. ”

    They should pool their paychecks with the men, and play a game winner take all. Let the better performing team win!

    1. After watching the men struggle against the likes of Trinidad and Curacao, I’m not sure which team would back out.

      This is mostly just a complaint about the pathetic performance of the men’s team recently.

      1. The women’s soccer team literally could not beat a high school boy’s soccer team.

        The gulf between male and female athletics is enormous.

        1. The USWNT lost 5-2 to the under-15 boys team for FC Dallas and lost 8-2 to the under-17 USMNT. A match between the national teams would not be close…they could play ten times and the women would lose every time.

          The men’s team doesn’t perform as well as the women’s team because they’re in a far more competitive tournament. That doesn’t mean that they’re worse than the women…it means that the women play weaker competition. If you put the best women’s team against the best men’s team, the only way the men lose is if they throw the game.

          1. Incidentally, the results aren’t any better for other national women’s teams facing U-15 boys teams. The Australians lost 7-0 to a U-15 side.

            Once they hit puberty, men are bigger, stronger, and faster.

            1. Allow me to quote myself. “This is mostly just a complaint about the pathetic performance of the men’s team recently.”

              Curacao has roughly 0.05% of the population of the United States. No competition between the United States and Curacao in a team sport should be remotely competitive.

                1. Canada has a population of a little over a tenth of the US but they always give us a run for our money in hockey. Could it be soccer is more important and competitive in Curacao or the US team had a bad day? Remember in 1985 when the Patriots beat the Dolphins and then got their asses handed to them by the Bears? Sometimes the bad team wins. That’s why they say any given Sunday in football.

                  1. the 1985 bears team was bad?

                    Was one of the most dominant football teams in history, unless you meant the patriots beating the dolphins that year to get to the superbowls was sort of unexpected, which it sort of was, but not by a huge margin.

                    The bears were going to beat whoever they ended up playing anyway.

                    1. I was referring to the Patriots win. And who were the Bears only loss to that season? Just take a guess.

              1. You can’t go by population. How does Uruguay do so well in the World Cup?

                1. You go by alternative sports that take the top athletic talent. In the U.S. the top pro sports are football, baseball, basketball, and hockey. That’s where most of the best young athletes focus because a) the possible paychecks are bigger and b) to make the best paychecks in soccer you generally have to go play in Europe, not in the U.S. in front of friends and family.

                  Soccer is fifth place for pulling athletes among men’s sports. Women’s soccer does better because there are no women’s baseball, football, or hockey leagues to speak of. Women’s basketball, tennis, gymnastics, and soccer are the only games in town. Tennis pays the best salary but is the hardest to succeed in, gymnastics pays worst but you’re done in your early 20s, women’s basketball lives on NBA welfare ($10 million loss per year on average for the WNBA) and height is a requirement, and women’s soccer has gone bust twice already and is pulling a quarter of the average attendance of men’s soccer. So if you’re a woman of average height and aren’t one of the top 100 female tennis players in the world, soccer is your only pro option in the U.S.

                  1. And that’s why women are paid less in every sport except tennis. No demand and no competition for their services.

                    1. And in tennis they are actually doing less work than men (in major tournaments, at least).

                  2. Ah hell…forgot about golf. Women do well in golf financially.

                  3. And that’s also why smaller countries have better football teams. Because they have less diversity of top pro sports for their best athletes to choose from.

            2. I’m surprised that the women even play against boys. Seems like the potential for embarrassment is huge with little upside if they win cuz no one really cares about women’s sports. Odd decision.

    2. This is a false comparison Unless you can demonstrate that the national teams that that women face are comparable in quality to the national teams that the men face. The best male soccer players in the world come from countries like Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, France, and Britain. These are the national teams that American men face. Is the same true in women‘s soccer?

  6. “requiring the Seattle Reign to pay every player as much as the MLS’ Seattle Sounders would bankrupt the women’s team.”

    Well then just pass a 75% ‘male athlete tax’ to bring them down to equal pay of the women.

    Do I have to think of everything.

    1. So much easier to get rid of the progressives.

      1. Well, I’m a Christian. So if by “get rid of” you mean “persuade to voluntarily abandon that ideology”, then yeah I’m on board.

        1. Bannish them from the USA for trying to murder all dissenters.

  7. The U.S. Soccer ‘Pay Gap’ Is About More Than Just Sexism

    Right. It’s also about stupidity and authoritarianism.

    1. Identitarian resentment

  8. 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.

    So, the situation is not remotely comparable, but they want equal pay?

    How about you play the men for it? When you get beaten 10-0 or so, will you shut the fuck up?

    1. When you get beaten 10-0 or so

      Why? Are they playing a shortened game?

      1. I was assuming some sort of mercy rule, but, by all means, if it takes utter humiliation to shut them up, so be it.

  9. #EndThePrisonGap

    1. #andWorkMortalityGap

      1. #andleavingworkearlytopickupthekidsbutreallygettingmyhairdonegap

  10. If pay exclusively reflected performance, there would be no doubt that Megan Rapinoe, Alex Morgan, Rose LaVelle, Julie Ertz, and the rest of the U.S. women’s team deserve far more than what the men earn. The U.S. men’s team, you may recall, failed to even qualify for last year’s World Cup in Russia, and has not progressed beyond the tournament’s quarterfinal round since the inaugural World Cup in 1930.

    The women’s team also failed to qualify for the men’s World Cup. The women’s team defeated zero men’s teams. They also could not ever defeat one of the men’s teams. They did not and could not perform better than the men.

  11. Will this be the most hated Boehm article ever?

    1. Doubtful. It’s an article about soccer. Women’s soccer. No matter that reading about women’s soccer beats the hell out of actually watching women’s soccer, it’s still far below “Jabbing myself in the eye with a pointied stick” on the list of things any sane person enjoys doing.

      1. It’s also better than endless shitposts from Chemjeff, AKA Pedo Jeffy, or Buttplug’s rants.

        1. Today I kind of liked reading racebaiterjeff pretend he doesn’t understand what a denominator is.

          Honk Honk!

    2. Depends on whether people actually read the article. So yeah most hated.

  12. “The Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. men’s and women’s teams have generated about the same amount of revenue from games played since 2015”

    By my very rough count, the women played 44 home games during the time under review while the men only played 30. That suggests that the profit on the men’s games outpaced the women’s games by a fairly significant margin.

    1. Would like to see the numbers when they’re not Cherie picked… Let’s talk about jersey sales, ad revenue, etc. I think the true numbers will reflect a very different picture.

      1. You might be surprised. “Mark Parker, Nike’s president and CEO, confirmed the news in a recent earnings report that the 2019 USA stadium home jersey, as seen worn by star forward Alex Morgan and goalkeeper Alyssa Naeher below, is now the top-selling soccer jersey ever sold on its website in one season.” And what’s one of the main reasons? “Because of the popularity of the Women’s World Cup and the success of the women’s national team, the United States, along with several other countries (France, England and Brazil) have sold the women’s designs in men’s sizes, which has helped nearly double the number of men’s jerseys sold over the 2015 Women’s World Cup.”

        I don’t think they’re there yet, but I don’t think they are that far behind either.

        1. Her backup, Christen Press, is wicked fast.

          She also scored an excellent goal in the semi-final.

          Basically, she’s better than Rapinoe, but Rapinoe is older and more grizzled.

          1. The above comment ended up in the wrong place, even though it is brilliant.

            Re Nike. Presumably Alex Morgan is making a pretty penny off Nike, so the markets are still taking care of things as they should.

        2. Or because the world cup is not an annual event, the hype produces high single season sales during its run. But this is not an Apple to Apple comparison. For MLS, I bet a lot of fans buy their favorite players jersey once not every season. I don’t rush out every year and buy a new Russel Wilson jersey (especially considering how much jerseys cost). If the Seahawks only played every four years, I might buy a new jersey every “season”.

          1. Awwwww, man, you’re a 12?

            Other than that you seem cool tho.

            Haha

            1. Been a 12 since number 17 was throwing TDs to number 80.

              1. There were no 12s in the 80s. Haha.

                Yeah, those guys were a lot more likable than Bennet and Sherman. Russel Wilson is cool tho.

                1. Seattle retired the number 12 in 1984 in honor of the fans. Though not widely used, some Seattle fans began calling themselves 12s back then.

                2. EISTAU Gree-Vance must be too young to remember the “Kingdom Rule” where the NFL changed the rules to allow teams to be penalized if their crowds were too loud.

          2. “Or because the world cup is not an annual event, the hype produces high single season sales during its run. But this is not an Apple to Apple comparison.”

            It is apple to apple, because the relevant comparison is between the USMNT and the USWNT and those two teams play on very similar cycles.

            1. The US men’s team plays other tournament, like the gold cup and concacaf world cup qualifying.
              I’m not aware of women’s soccer being that in demand

              1. You aren’t aware that the USWNT also plays in world cup qualifiers? Maybe you should sit this one out.

                And for the record, the USWNT has played significantly more games over the last several years than the USMNT. They also play in the Olymipics, which the USMNT can’t do because of the Olympic rules, and several other cups.

        3. Sooooo….. Nike should subsidize the women’s players paychecks since the team won’t pay more?

  13. They could refuse the national team job, but the women’s professional league pay is an order of magnitude less than the national team. That is what the market is.

    The men’s national team players are likely earning more the MLS minimum and many of their players likely have regular jobs with European top league teams which is another pay level. Which also likely explains the bigger per diem budget for male players. The men are in a better financial position to refuse to play for the national team than the women and therefore have more perks thrown their way for incentives.

    1. Supply and demand as inputs into they pay equation? Shocking!

    2. And probably half of the players on our men’s team could qualify to play on other national teams (if good enough). Also easier to walk away and go play for, say Honduras, than go sit at home, like the women.
      I think our best men’s player could technically play for Serbia

      1. Oh and the other day I argued that the women’s soccer team should make as much as the men.
        I’d like to now withdraw that argument after learning the revenue gap is insignificant (I found a source that credited USNWT +$9m over the men since 2015, which is apparently bunk) and finding out more about the contract structures.
        So: my bad.

  14. requiring the Seattle Reign to pay every player as much as the MLS’ Seattle Sounders would bankrupt the women’s team.

    Sounds good!

  15. The problem with the whining of these women is that Women’s Soccer was basically invented to give American women a sport to dominate. In typical USA fashion, they’re partying on lesser teams, doing stupid celebrations for beating up a bunch of tomato cans. Nobody else cares. Hence, the 131 million vs 6 billion figure. The level of play on its own is meritless. We’re talking about a teenage boys’ regional all star team level of play. Nobody would ever care about that absent the gender preference. It’s simply paternalistic tokenism that there even is a Women’s World Cup (USA Invitational is more like it). If they want to make real money then they have to get the rest of the world to care – so that the competition is a big deal, not a glorified junior varsity exhibition. The most amusing part is the Wokie Wokesters on the team are benefitting from sexism. Women aren’t equal to men so they get their own Special Olympics tournament to play in and get awards for winning.

    1. The problem I have is that the connotation of the name is that they are representing the US. I have a problem with an anti American cunt like this bitch and those like her reoresenting the US in any way.

      She and everyone like her need to go.

        1. To AOC rallies?

    2. 1,000% this. The modern iteration of the Women’s World Cup (WWC) was basically invented for the US to stomp all over the rest of the world and act superior for beating up on teams with vastly inferior training, inferior funding and little to no local interest. In national (men’s) soccer, there are teams that historically have dominated the Cup, but none come close to how much the USWNT has dominated the WWC, placing nearly twice that of the second most placing team, Germany. The truth is, there is very littler serious competition for the USWNT and this is largely why the competition isn’t interesting to anyone other than those espousing Girl Power. Nearly no one outside of the US cares at all about women’s soccer because it’s simply nowhere near as good as men’s. This isn’t the case with all sports, but it is routinely the case with contact sports.

      1. This is the point I was trying to make, less articulately, above. The US women’s soccer team is the big fish in a small pond. The US men’s team swims with the sharks. That’s why you do not see 13–0 scores in the men’s World Cup.

  16. BONUS ROUND: Defend pay equality for the women’s team with the vocabulary of AOC.

    1. Black audience vocabulary or white? She changes depending on which one it is.

  17. “If pay exclusively reflected performance, there would be no doubt that … the U.S. women’s team deserve far more than what the men earn. ”

    Performance includes skill level. This is like saying some little league that went undefeated should get paid millions. it’s infantile and idiotic. Not a single woman in all of pro soccer could qualify for a division 3 men’s soccer team. This is not to say you can’t enjoy women’s soccer or support the idea of a women-only league but let’s not lose our heads. The men are light years beyond the women in terms of skill and “performance”

    the men get paid because they are part of a world league that negotiates revenue-sharing with all the premier league teams and those games draw way more money via tickets and tv. it’s not rocket science. They draw way more money because the quality of play is way better. it’ s not even close.

    1. If pay reflected performance, the women would get paid $0. I think he meant “if pay reflected results”, which is different, and even more different since men and women don’t compete against each other.

    2. “If pay exclusively reflected performance, there would be no doubt that … the U.S. women’s team deserve far more than what the men earn. ”

      Uh, no.
      I don’t know what they’d get, but what was the attendance and ad revenue?
      These folks, like the NFL, are entertainers. Draw the crowd, get the money.
      If that means the women make more than the men, terrific! I don’t care.
      I also don’t care about any whine regarding ‘equal pay’.

    3. ” This is like saying some little league that went undefeated should get paid millions. it’s infantile and idiotic. ”

      Brought to you by Reason’s beat writer on the economy.

      Honk Honk!

  18. I kind of skimmed the article, so I might have missed the line where everyone on Megan Rapinoe’s club team is paid exactly the same because “equal pay for equal work” and all that.

    1. Some pigs are more equal than others.

  19. Ultimately women athletes have to pull more women into being sports spectators. Not just their sport but all sports. Men just aren’t very interested in women’s sports – but they are well over half of the audience for sitting on ones butt and paying to watch others sweat. Likewise, women aren’t particularly interested in men’s sports – which is why they are a small part of the sports spectating audience.

    1. women aren’t particularly interested in men’s sports

      One would have to assume that you live alone.

      1. Oh, wait, I have a better one…

        Wilt Chamberlain will have to disagree with you.

        1. I’m sure Wilt can name a few thousand women that are doing definitely into mane’s basketball.

    2. “Men just aren’t very interested in women’s sports”

      Women aren’t that interested in women’s sports. Because the minor leagues are not as compelling or thrilling as the premier leagues. That’s just the way it is.

      1. False. It is the type of sport. A lot of men enjoy watching women’s tennis for varios reasons. The game is different due to the different skills. Same with ice skating and women’s gymnastics. The truth is few people enjoy women’s *team* sports. Draw your own conclusions…

        1. I prefer women’s beach volleyball to men’s.

        2. And it’s not a surprise that in the most popular women’s sport (tennis) the women are paid comparably to the men. Because they’re playing in front of sold-out audiences and women’s team sports are generally played in front of nearly empty stadiums.

          1. Only at the majors, and only because of the same social pressure that everyone is so upset about here.

            1. They get paid because their matches sell out at the top levels, you stupid fuck. The NWSL pulls 6,000 fans a game…a quarter of what the men’s game does. Meaning they play in front of mostly empty seats because people don’t want to watch a less athletic version of soccer.

              It’s not sexism…it’s the fans’ preference for a better quality of sport.

              1. And it’s not like men’s team draws massive crowds. The mens team ALSO draws weak crowds. The women just draw crowds so much worse.

      2. if there’s anything more boring than soccer, it’s women’s soccer.

        Let’s just ban soccer, can we do that?

    3. There are plenty of women who love and watch men’s sports. Far more than women who watch women’s sports.
      People watch sports to see athletes compete at the highest levels. Women can’t do that.

      The market for women’s soccer is upper middle class white moms and their teenage daughters.
      Even among all my friends on the college soccer team, nobody gave a shit about watching the women’s national team – including the half dozen girls I knew who’d just played in the NCAA tournament

      1. In July of 2004 my wife was in labor with our oldest. We had the MLB All-star game on (she was being induced and it was early in her labor). The nurse came in to check on her IV and thought she was being funny when she said “now sir, your wife is the one having a baby, she gets to choose what is on TV.”
        My wife looked at her and said “move your head, I can’t see the game.”

        1. Congratulations on the baby and your wife.

    4. Probably more likely that women, on average, are less interested in sports at all than men. I’d guess that women in general aren’t particularly more interested in women’s sports than men’s either.
      Of course there are plenty of women who love sports and men who don’t.

  20. “If pay exclusively reflected performance, there would be no doubt that Megan Rapinoe, Alex Morgan, Rose LaVelle, Julie Ertz, and the rest of the U.S. women’s team deserve far more than what the men earn.”

    Pro Soccer is a Business. Words like “should” or “deserve” are moot. Salary, bonuses, perks, etc. are negotiated and contracted. End of story.

    Is this a libertarian site? No, it is not.

    1. Notice the word “if” in front of that sentence. Did you read the part where he talks about their contracts?

      1. The sentence is wrong anyway since the women’s team in no way performed as well as the men’s team.

        1. Yes, it is wrong in a significant sense. They don’t play the same games at the same level.
          But libertarians can be wrong about things. And when international sport organizations are involved, there is always government interference and corrupt shenanigans. That doesn’t mean women should be paid the same as men to play international soccer, but it could be distorting things.

      2. Here is the libertarian position

        Sans government interference or breach of contract, today they get paid EXACTLY what they “deserve”.

        Tomorrow, if the get paid more, that will be EXACTLY what they deserve. Likewise if the get less.

        I saw a tweet that captured it:

        “Rapinoe sues to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand.”

        1. “Rapinoe sues to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand.”

          The Babylon Bee has really stepped up its game the last couple of years. 🙂

  21. Is this a libertarian site?

    Is libertarian-ish a thing?

    1. Well, I would say libertarian-ish perfectly describes Reason lately. I mean with them defending the idea of charging obstruction for a crime that never occurred, defending managed trade because it is labeled “free trade”, defending the idea that an accusation of sexual assault without any physical evidence and witnesses that dispute the accusers account as ‘credible’, jumping on the pile on (and dishonest) demonization of High School students who were minding their own business, the knee jerk condemnation of any police officer involved in a shooting, before the facts are even known (hint: just because some police shootings are bad doesn’t make them all bad), arguing that tax cuts were bad because deficits increased (as opposed to talking about spending, which do they also, but mainly to complain about Trump and the GOP) etc, I would say the -ish is as close as most of them get to Libertarian.

      1. And no, I’m not a full fledged Libertarian, I am more a Constitutional libertarian.

        1. I used to describe myself as libertarian…now I’d say constitutional conservative with some libertarian leanings. I just got tired of watching the cosmotarians at reason desperately suck up to progressives in the hope that they’d get approval from the cool kids of the D.C. cocktail circuit.

          Then I saw the pieces of garbage the Libertarian Party tried to foist on us for President and VP in 2016, and saw the bitchiness from Reason writers about a President who did more for libertarian policy goals in two years than all of their preferred politicians had done in the entire history of the U.S….and after that I decided that libertarianism was an ideology for people who just wanted to sit around and bitch while getting nothing done.

          So yeah, went conservative instead and it’s much better.

          1. 2008 and 2012 and 2016 GOP nominees kind of soured me on the conservative label, but I always was more of a Constitutionalist then a conservative.

            1. Same here…although I cast my ballot for Trump in 2016 based on his policy goals and it remains the best ballot I’ve ever cast for a politician in my life. I got more agreement on policy with Trump than I have with most Libertarian politicians, and unlike most politicians Trump has followed through on what he promised.

              Tax cut, crack down on sex trafficking of minors (the arrests of pedophiles absolutely shot up his first year on the job), deregulation, addressing foreign protectionism, not getting us involved in new wars, resolving the war with ISIS, criminal justice reform, good-to-great judicial picks…it’s the jackpot of competent governance from a President. I don’t care about the sideshows on Twitter and frankly I’ve even grown to enjoy those a bit.

              1. This is the beauty of the EC, I could vote my conscious without having to worry about it helping Hillary, because she had no real shot at winning my state.

                1. My vote did nothing my for the EC in my state (Washington). But it was so satisfying having a front row seat for the leftist meltdown the morning after the election. 🙂

    2. Yes. And I’ll take it over most other political orientations any day.

      Libertarians really love making the perfect the enemy of the good.

  22. If they get equal pay, will they have to do equal work?

    Like, play against men?

    1. Or run a 4.4 40?

      1. Anybody who runs a 4.4 isn’t playing for our soccer team. I guess they might if too soft for pro or semiprofessional football.
        And that’s why the US men’s team sucks balls. All our best athletes play football or basketball.
        Additionally, soccer in the US is expensive. You have to pay to play on good teams with good coaches. Other countries are filled with dudes who’ve been training at a pro level since they were 10 years old.
        This might change in the future, it might not. If US soccer wanted to actually be legit, they’d start scouting for athletes and basically adopting them from impoverished neighborhoods.
        Our middle class white boys who self select soccer aren’t ever going to cut it – because if they could, they’d choose another sport

        1. Hell, even if they can’t hit well, there is a chance a MLB team would hire someone who runs a 4.4 40. Be a great pinch runner, a situational player (which baseball loves lately, how many pitching changes do we see in a World Series game?).

          1. Baseball used to run academy systems for inner city athletes, and some good players came out of those academies, but not enough to justify the cost, unfortunately. Not to mention that baseball is not just about athletics but also about skills that take some time to hone (plate discipline, fielding, situational understanding, etc.)

            The MLS teams run developmental squads for kids starting at early ages now (one of their under-15 squads crushed the US Women’s National Team), so I think you’ll see soccer grow in popularity, but one of the problems for soccer in the U.S. is that if you want to play it at the top levels and earn the biggest contracts and play in the best tournaments, you have to go to Europe. You can’t just stay in the U.S., like you can with most other sports. That’s a pretty powerful reason to choose a different sport to excel in other than soccer.

            1. It’s a good point.
              And at the level of world class athlete, no American would choose soccer.
              Imagine Allen Iverson or randy moss growing up their whole lives playing soccer – they’d be unstoppable.
              Fortunately for the rest of the world, we have basketball and football – in which those two were unstoppable.

              1. I’ve heard this kind of comment for decades, but the US has a skills gap, not an athleticism gap. We are not struggling because our players are too slow, or not strong enough, or not tall enough. We struggle because our players start really learning the game way too late compared to the rest of the world.

                Top players in other countries are scouted by professional teams as young as six years old. They are debuting as fully fledged professional athletes at 16 or 17 years old, with years of professional development and thousands of hours of work in a professional environment. Our teams are just starting early teens in their academy programs. That’s why we lag behind.

                1. It’s more than that. The best player for years in the U.S. was Landon Donovan. He was good enough to play and start in Europe. and he started Champions League games for Bayern Leverkeusen and played really well in a stint with Everton. But he just didn’t like living in Europe, particularly Germany, and stayed with the MLS.

                  And I get it…Europe may be Western civilization, but it’s not home. I lived in England six years and loved it, but there was still a lot I missed about home and I couldn’t see myself moving back there now and being happy. And I was definitely a lot more of an Anglophile than most of the other Americans I worked with…most did not enjoy it as much as I did. And European players often feel the same about playing in the U.S.

                  That’s why I think soccer will struggle to overcome the big four in the U.S.

                2. And, simply put, to get the top contracts in soccer you have to play in the top tournaments…and those are in Europe. That’s where the biggest endorsements for soccer are as well. The U.S. is just too far away, and our best opponents in the Western hemisphere are all in South America, which is even further away. So we’re going to struggle to attract good foreign talent to our leagues.

  23. Actually, the pay gap is not about sexism at all from the evidence available. Unless you think soccer fans world wide are sexists for preferring to watch the men’s game over the women’s.

    1. It’s all patriarchy, don’t you know?

  24. Something to note. MLS will accept any player. It’s not a “men’s” league is a “major” league. It’s not against the rules to put a woman or a child or a “trans” whatever on your team. You just put the best players you can on the field and try to win games. Like any other major pro sport.

    Women’s soccer is essentially a minor league. Minor leaguers in every sport get paid crap . hell the defacto NBA and NFL minor leagues (college) get paid $0. If we’re talking about minor league performance, then we should be lamenting that the NCAA football champs are paid less than the women even though their sport makes WAY more money for the team owners.

    This is all silliness and anyone taking this ‘equal pay’ chant seriously is a woke buffoon.

    1. We wouldn’t even be talking about this if we hadn’t collectively lost our good sense, and stopped giving dirty hippies a smack when they started raving about stupid shit like this.

      Dirty hippies get delusional about their place when the hard lessons (beatings) come to a stop.

  25. It is hard to care about this. They make far more than the average American earns. They play in a sport few care about here except children and some who emigrated. They won a World Cup and sullied it by being bombastic, obnoxious, and overtly political for no better reason than to get attention.

    I honestly don’t know why Reason is even covering this.

    1. I honestly don’t know why Reason is even covering this.

      It seems like you do.

      for no better reason than to get attention

    2. That was really only one person’s fault, from what I’ve seen.
      She is an ugly bitch though.
      Her backup is much better looking – and seemed to be just as good

      1. Her backup, Christen Press, is wicked fast.

        She also scored an excellent goal in the semi-final.

        Basically, she’s better than Rapinoe, but Rapinoe is older and more grizzled.

        1. Who the fuck wants to watch a gritty, leathery, angry, blue haired bull dyke on TV?

          1. I’m pretty sure there is a fetish for bill dykes in the lesbian community like there is a fetish for bears in the gay community.

          2. Who wants to watch a bunch of oversized dudes running around in tights and grabbing each other’s asses?

            1. Other than there is very little ass grabbing, we aren’t dissing the idea of soccer. Just politicized sports and identity politics.

        2. “Basically, she’s better than Rapinoe, but Rapinoe is older and more grizzled.”

          I’m not a fan of Rapinoe off the field, but Press isn’t better than her yet. She likely will be by the next World Cup though.

  26. They are entertainers: ‘ability’ has nothing to do with compensation

    There’s a reason someone like Dwayne Johnson makes more than an ubertalented actor who stars in nothing but small time art house flicks.

    1. Because he’s the most charismatic man alive?

    2. Because Samoans control Hollywood.

      1. That is why Disney is planning on casting a 300 lb Samoan Transvestite for the role of Merida in the live action version of Brave.

      2. “Well, he’s definitely something?” …. Peter Griffin.

        Haha.

  27. Amusing to see so many of Reason’s self-proclaimed nationalists to be dumping on an American sports team that just won a world championship.

    1. They are dumping on the pay equality cries from idiots. Not shocked to see you misrepresenting arguments little Jeffrey.

    2. I dumped on Ryan Lochte, too, because he was a dumbass and an embarrassment to the US. Like many of the USWNT

    3. Such as?

      Gonna need to see some links to these dumper onners.

    4. “self-proclaimed nationalists to be dumping on an American sports team”

      “Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your women’s soccer team when it deserves it, but definitely not after they spent the entire tournament making it about their stupid politics instead a celebration of teamwork and focus, where they actually represent all of the country instead just the portion they don’t hate”

      Mark Twain

      1. Well, as Mark Twain might have said…
        good one…

      2. +1000

    5. FYI, there is no “national” soccer team.

      It is an arbitrary creation of FIFA.

    6. not really when they dis the national anthem and won’t go to King’s house as an honor.

  28. “Bill de Blasio on Wednesday said he would pay female athletes equally if elected president. Hillary Clinton has chimed in.” So Bill de Blasio will invalidate the Constitution and dictate salaries? A violence free revolution? I think there are too many guns out there. Would the Anti American Party, once known as the Democrat Party, support de Blasio?

    1. Yes, Bill de Blasio would definitely invalidate the US Constitution. As would Hillary Clinton. As will any democrat.

  29. The U.S. women’s soccer team deserves better, but mandating equal pay isn’t the answer.

    So does the U-15 boys team, but no one’s crying them a river.

    1. It’s interesting how, in every one of those pictures, the 15 year old boys tower over the women they just defeated in a scrimmage.

      Maybe the women’s team should go full Harrison Bergeron and demand that men above a certain size, speed, and strength level be barred from playing soccer so that the women can beat them and thus be “equal”.

      1. To be fair, I think some of those boys just wanted to get laid.

        1. Barking up the wrong parsley patch if that’s the goal…

          1. Yes, is it a requirement for them to be lesbian (or at least in a same sex relationship) to be on the team? I’m sure not everyone is but it seems like the ones most talked about fall into that category.

            1. It helps to play the LBGT card to maximize their victim status when negotiating for higher pay.

              1. Question: how much do you think Rappinoe would like it if a male player off the USMT dressed in drag and claimed to be a woman and tried out for her position? Asking for a friend.

                1. She’d obviously scream and whine about it. She’s one who enjoys the benefits of gender and doesn’t want to give them up.

                  And of course the reason she’s likely bitching so much now is that her soccer career is nearly at an end (she’ll be 37 at the next World Cup) and she desperately wants that second career as a “community activist”.

                  1. A la Billy Jean King.

                    1. At least Billie Jean King played a sport people didn’t have to be hectored into watching.

                    2. True

            2. It makes the road trips a lot more fun.

      2. But in all seriousness, you’re right. 15 year old boys a full head taller and 8″ broader than the women players. They look surprisingly tiny next to those kids.

        1. Yup. Most soccer players are a lot shorter than people realize…the average height is about 5’9″. So they’re tiny in comparison to youths in a sport on the shorter side of the height spectrum.

          You put the USWNT up against the last place team in the English Premier League and it’ll be a double digit rout. They’ll be lucky to be able to finish the game without half the team being injured. People who say they’re comparable sports because they’ve maybe watched a couple of MLS games have no idea about the speed at the top levels of soccer. The US women’s team is probably the best women’s soccer team in the world, and if they were a club they’d be extremely lucky to get into the bottom tier of the men’s English league system (three leagues below the EPL).

          1. And the MLS is not an elite league by any stretch. They can pick up a win or two in the exhibition matches that top European clubs play here, but the best American clubs in the MLS would be relegation candidates every year in the English, Spanish, Italian, or German leagues. They’d be more competitive against the mid-tier European leagues, but that’s a big talent differential and the best players on those teams are always looking to move on because they’ll never win major trophies there. The talent level of the players who can’t get signed elsewhere is the talent level that the MLS (and by extension most male American soccer players) compete at.

            Rapinoe comparing her team to the U.S. men’s national team is basically picking the low-hanging fruit of men’s World Cup soccer…and her team wouldn’t even be able to beat that team.

  30. Serious question, is there any restriction on women trying out for the NFL, MLS or NBA? Is there an explicit rule in any of the leagues that bar women?

    1. That time Mark Titus tried to declare for the NBA draft, they sent a cease and desist letter… So it’s not illegal but the leagues don’t want crap players confusing the issue.

      1. And he actually played at Ohio State.
        Ok, played might be an exaggeration – but he was on the team!
        Good writer

    2. There was an explicit rule in baseball. Started in the early 50’s to shut down the women’s baseball league that had started in WW2 – but that’s one reason girls started playing softball instead which meant they didn’t have baseball experience and wouldn’t be drafted. The rule was rescinded in 1992 but afaik the only woman who’s ever been drafted was the daughter of a GM.

      That’s the sport where I could see women succeeding in some role. If Jackie Mitchell can strike out Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig and then get banned from pro ball (the last woman ever to play MLB affiliated pro baseball) two days later, that tells you there’s some head games element to that sport and women can do that.

      1. I don’t know if striking out two players once (she only pitched against them one inning) proves anything. Considering Ty Cobb’s hit less than four out of ten times he was up to bat over his career (he is the career record holder) the pitcher generally wins in most pitching contests.

        1. Striking them out doesn’t. Having your professional contract torn up two days later DEFINITELY does.

          1. No, again it just proves the owner wasn’t sold on her ability to keep up at the male level for a full season.

            1. The team owner was the Washington Senators. Most likely, they told the manager (who had scouted her – and he was an excellent scout) – either she’s gone or you won’t be an affiliate. By 1932 she was gone and the Chattanooga Lookouts were now an affiliate of the Senators.

              If that had been an 18 yo he instead of an 18 yo she, that wouldn’t have been an issue. But running a woman player thru the minors system has the same politics as it did in 1946 for Jackie Robinson. The MLB team wasn’t gonna do that and MLB has the ability to blacklist.

              1. Do you have proof or just conjecture? You haven’t provided evidence other than your assertion that it was all sexism. The manager stated he didn’t believe she could endure a full season of baseball. Considering how often male pitchers get hurt during the season, this could have been a real concern. Especially as in those days pitchers generally were expected to throw for 9 innings. Unless you can definitely demonstrate that his sole reason was his sexism you haven’t shown anything. It also isn’t sexist to say women generally have weaker upper body strength and upper leg strength (leg strength is actually more important to a pitcher). So, maybe it was because she was a woman, but because her lighter muscular mass was likely to make it harder for her to complete a season. Even in baseball, muscle mass and strength are important, especially for a pitcher.

                1. In the 1990s, they had a women’s professional baseball team, the Colorado Silver Bullets, that used to travel around doing exhibition games against amateur and semi-pro male teams. In their first season, they went 6-38, their three best hitters batted .200, and their best pitcher had a 5-10 record and a 4.80 ERA.

                  In their last season they had a winning record, but they didn’t keep statistics that year (or statistics for their opponents in any year) and their schedule doesn’t even list the teams they played against, so it’s likely that their competition dropped to basically pick-up game level against non-athletes.

                  So, no…women would not be competitive in professional baseball. Velocity would likely be an issue for pitchers as would power for batters.

                  1. If they had been really good or even able to rise to be competitive, you know Hollywood would have made a movie about it by now. Also, considering the fact that scouts are willing to go into jungle villages of central America and the slums of Caribean islands to find players, do we doubt if a woman could play baseball at the professional level that she wouldn’t get recruited?

                    1. Especially by a bad team looking for a publicity stunt to get fans to come out. Think Leela and her professional Blernsball career.

                    2. And Leela sucked.

                    3. +1 for an awesome Futurama reference. 🙂

                  2. women would not be competitive in professional baseball. Velocity would likely be an issue for pitchers as would power for batters.

                    There is plenty of opportunity for pitchers with elite control and/or knuckleballs or ‘junk’ pitches that batters either miss or can’t hit solidly. In the field, I could see a potential 2B where the player has a good glove and doesn’t need power if they are a contact/spray type batter who’s a ‘tough out’ (can foul balls off and wait for pitcher mistakes).

                    At any rate, no MLB team drafts a player cuz they will make it to MLB. They draft a player to send them to ROOKIE league – with five levels beyond that before they make it to the majors. They all actually waste 5-10 picks each year on players they have no intention of signing. Tim Tebow is playing for the Mets organization not cuz he ever has a chance of playing MLB but cuz he puts butts in seats! If you don’t think that a woman player would put butts in seats then you should read the comments here. Most male fans would come to jeer/scoff – and many [new] female fans would come to cheer. THAT is the formula for huge profits.

                    MLB won’t do it cuz they are a completely constipated league that is scared of anything new and seems perfectly happy being the oldest fan base in pro sports.

                    1. Knuckleball pitchers generally adopt that pitch out of desperation because their stuff isn’t good enough to stick in baseball. There’s maybe one good knuckleballer that comes along a decade and they’re constantly on the verge of their career ending because the pitch is so unstable. If you’re saying that women could be in baseball if they learn the knuckleball, you’re basically saying they can’t pitch. If their best fastball can’t crack 90 miles an hour, odds are you’ll never see a woman pitch in the majors.

                      2B is now where teams hide their lesser fielders for hitters with no fixed position. If you want all-field, no-hit for a position there’s catcher or shortstop, and you need a strong arm for both positions, a lot of durability for catcher, and pretty good range for shortstop if you’re not great with the bat.

                    2. Tim Tebow puts buts in seats because he was a legendary college QB and had some flukish success in pro football (and his evangelical views attract a following). People go to watch him because they like Tim Tebow…it’s celebrity worship, same with Michael Jordan (who did not belong on a baseball field). You’re not going to attract that many fans to watch Random Unknown Woman play in the minors just because she has a vagina.

                    3. Fact is – your comments prove that if a team put a woman on the field, you’d go to the game to heckle and jeer.

                    4. “Fact is…” His statement doesn’t support this assertion on your part. You love to present pure conjecture as indisputable fact. You’ve done little to prove your case other than restating your hypothesis over and over again.

                    5. Fact is – your comments prove that if a team put a woman on the field, you’d go to the game to heckle and jeer.

                      And now we get to the point where JFree can’t make any kind of argument that women belong in the major leagues, so he devolves into calling people sexist.

                      Tell you what, dipshit…the day a woman gets to the majors on actual talent and not because they loosened the standards for her, I’ll happily go to the game and cheer for her. She’ll have to make it through three levels of the minors first, of course, and no woman has ever gotten past A-ball…but if she does that and performs (just like every other male player has to), I’ll say she’s earned it. But if her entire sales pitch for going is “I have a vagina”, she’s a fucking bum and she doesn’t belong on a baseball field. And I would never waste good money just to go to the stadium to heckle a bum…I can find better stuff to do, and the highlights will make the case against her without my efforts.

                2. The manager stated he didn’t believe she could endure a full season of baseball

                  No he didn’t. A journalist from the WaPo who was covering that game wrote some sexist bullshit – something along the lines of ‘then she finally realized she was a woman and left the game to have a good cry’ – after she walked the next batter (Tony Lazzeri) and was pulled from the game. And apparently she did have a sore arm cuz she had overpracticed knowing that she would pitch against the Yankees.

                  There’s little doubt that she was put in the game to face the heart of Murderers Row more as a publicity stunt than because she was the ‘best pitcher’. She was only 18 and wasn’t some Bob Feller ready to make an MLB debut at that age – but she had been taught to pitch by Dazzy Vance (yet another Hall of Famer).

                  And you are seriously missing the point here. NO 18 year old boy who did that even by luck would be tossed overboard cuz some paternalist was prematurely concerned about some speculative future. They would be given many opportunities (esp at that age) to prove whether what they had showed was real – to the point of breaking them (and MLB has a long history of breaking players and then tossing them in the trash – one reason the players now have a union). Every MLB scout would have gotten on a train to go there. The feat would not be viewed as an embarrassment to be gotten rid of but as an accomplishment.

                  1. Only if he had good stuff (e.g. a fastball that cracked 90 miles an hour with movement), had a serviceable second pitch, and had some time playing baseball in high school. Most girls aren’t going to have that.

                    Incidentally, the GM’s daughter who got drafted? She didn’t even play baseball…she was a basketball player and the only reason they drafted her was because nobody gives a shit about players they pick up in the 43rd round (where she was selected), and she never signed with the team (she went on to play college basketball at DePaul. At that round you’re basically pulling names out of a hat.

                    The women who’ve made it into the minor league system didn’t get past A-ball level.

                  2. Young players (18 years old) come up all the time. Pitch one inning (or even against a single batter) are successful and then never heard from again. They were brought up for a specific reason, but once they’ve served that reason they’re never heard from again.

                    1. No – 18 year olds do not ‘come up all the time’ and then disappear.

                      From Baseball Reference:
                      The last time an 18 year old played in MLB – period – was Alex Rodriguez in 1994. The last group of 18 year olds before that was in the late 1970’s – Robin Yount (Hall of Fame), Alfredo Griffin (17 years), Tim Conroy (5 years), and Brian Greer (aha a nobody who prob came up as a stunt because he had just been the Padres local boy 1st round draft pick that year – but still played 7 more years in the minors). The last 17/18 year old (also the last 17 yo to appear in MLB) who just disappeared was Jay Dahl who came up for an ‘all-rookie lineup’ stunt in 1963 – cuz he got injured the next year and then was killed in a car crash.

      2. the major leagues used to ban black players too, even though many of them were better than the players already in the league.

        1. Yeah, except the black players were male.

          1. And had had their own professional league for decades before Robinson was drafted. Women only had a professional league because to many men were off fighting the war and the owners were willing to try something to earn some revenue.

            1. Sort of like the replacements during the 87 NFL strike. Few of them kept playing after the strike ended.

              1. But Shane Falco got his redemption and got the captain of the replacement cheer squad too.

                1. I hate that damn song!

      3. A woman who could throw a knuckleball might-MIGHT-make a go of it as a pitcher. She would have to throw strikes with it and consistently hit at least the mid 70s, but she better not walk many because teams would run on her at every opportunity, and we all know that hat happens to the knuckleball when it doesn’t knuckle.

        1. Combine knuckleballs with an eephus (see the one at :42), a good curve and some of the Japanese-style pitches. Might not make it through a lineup multiple times as a starting pitcher – but 2/3 of all MLB pitchers now are 1-inning relievers.

          And honestly MLB batters have now gone to the extreme of hunting fastballs for a home run (the 22 highest MLB seasons are all since 1995) – with a ton of swing and miss (the last 12 MLB seasons are the 12 highest K rates in MLB history – each being a new record – and the 25 highest K rate seasons are every season since 1995). There’s a huge opportunity to exploit crappy batting now. But if a woman were to pitch – well that would really expose how poor the batting has become.

          1. I agree entirely about MLB batters. I like Juan Soto because he has a good enough eye to combine hitting for power with walking a lot, maybe he is the trend for the future.

            1. The problem with guys who have good power, plate discipline, and so-so contact at a young age is that they have what Bill James called “old ballplayer skills”, that were generally developed to make up for a lack of athleticism. They actually tend to fade out faster than the average ball player.

              Soto might not fit that category, because he hits for contact pretty well, but so did Bryce Harper, who’s been mired in a two-year slump that may be indicating an early career decline. Or he could end up like Albert Pujols, who was an excellent hitter all the way through what was likely his age 33 season (since it appears he lied about his age by two years).

              1. Ichiro had great plate discipline (at least early in his career). He would frustrate pitchers by hitting foul after foul until they threw him what he wanted. This was paired with explosive speed when he was younger, led to great on base percentage. I am less a fan of big ball then good small ball. Get on base, advance them and wear out pitchers. Take advantage of opportunities. Play the game the way it was meant to be.

                1. Ichiro was the most fascinating player…he didn’t get to the majors until age 27, which generally means you have zero shot at making 3,000 hits, but he did it. Only tool he was missing was power, although I suspect he could have done okay if he’d been willing to change his swing a bit and sacrifice batting average. But that wasn’t his game.

                  It was nice to get to see him finish up with the M’s in Japan, though.

    3. No. None of the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, PGA, USTA, or MLS bar women from playing.

      It’s just they don’t succeed at competing.

      Annika Sörenstam tried playing the men in golf, failed to make the cut.
      The Williams sisters at the height of the powers played the then-#203 men’s tennis player back-to-back, on the same day, and he crushed them both.
      The US national women’s ice hockey teams scrimmage against teams of teen boys because it’s a ready pool of equal-ability talent to test themselves against.
      This comments section has covered what happens when you put the women’s soccer team against male high school all-stars.
      A handful of women have managed to play a few years in minor league-level baseball.

      1. Michelle Wie tried playing on the men’s PGA tour in 2006. She only made it into one tournament and missed the cut on every other one she tried out for.

  31. I’m happy our US women’s team dominates. Watching other teams play them looked so demoralizing. I hope it continues.
    But Rapinoe’s attention whoring ruined it for so many. She basically came out and said she won’t let the team visit the white house, because of her priorities. Seems abusive, and sucks for the rest of the team.
    She also likely undercut her own argument. The 2015 final got 22m viewers. This year, 14m.
    I’m sure it wasn’t all due to her being a bitch, but when your audience demographic includes a large crossover with Trump supporters (middle class married white women), you don’t want to drive them off for no reason.
    But I guess she did have a reason – she wants attention. Doesn’t care about the team so much as herself. Alex Morgan spoke about her teammates, and rapinoe took the opportunity to start dancing and make a spectacle of herself in “support”. She screamed “I deserve this”
    Colin Kaepernick and Maryl Streep aren’t great role models.

    1. “…The 2015 final got 22m viewers. This year, 14m.
      I’m sure it wasn’t all due to her being a bitch, but when your audience demographic includes a large crossover with Trump supporters (middle class married white women), you don’t want to drive them off for no reason…”

      If they were paid the same as they were in 2015, they’re overpaid. Draw the crowds and the ad revenue, or starve; ain’t no ‘shoulda’.

    2. The rest of the women have “gone along” because this is primarily a money grab and they’re all on board for that, even if they might not agree with her anti-USA tactics.

      1. I doubt that. Morgan seems like a total asshole, too. In fact, the USWNT has a history of being complete assholes. Hope Solo’s contract got terminated not because of her domestic abuse charges, but because of a long string of unprofessional and unsportsmanlike conduct.

        Anyways, here is Morgan in all of her snide, bitchy glory:

        “Morgan explained to Time that the responsibilities for a women’s soccer player exceed their male counterparts.”

        ” ‘We have to do more in general–we have to be the athlete, we have to be the role model, we have to lead the way for the next generation,’ Morgan explained to Time. ‘Are male athletes doing that? Are they thinking about anyone other than themselves? I don’t know.’ ”

        Only a deluded moron would think that the USMNT players don’t have to deal with being role models and paving the way for future players. “Are they thinking about anyone other than themselves?” I think she should take a long look in the mirror when accusing the USMNT of this, who has been nothing but supportive of the USWNT.

    3. acting like they beat Pele and Brazil when they scored 20 goals against Thailand didn’t help either.

    4. But Rapinoe’s attention whoring ruined it for so many.

      She made the event all about her so she could improve her career chances after her playing days are up. Plus she set up any teammates who don’t agree with her politics to be vilified, forcing them to go along. She’s a terrible teammate.

  32. If Rapinoe is unhappy with her contract with Reign FC, she can field offers from the other eight teams in the NWSL.

    Not likely. The NWSL is run by the USSF. Specifically, USSF pays part of the salaries earned by the national team players but also distributes them among all 9 teams – so in fact there is no ‘free market’ at all. So a lawsuit against the USSF is actually the only way to resolve the pay issue.

    The problem is the USSF is a crappy sports governing authority – like most of them in the US. The US seems to have only two models for a governing authority – one is the sort owned by teamowners in cartel; the other is the sort designed solely to select players for international competition.

    The former is designed to restrict participation in the sport in order to maximize cartel profits. The latter is focused solely on recruiting at the elite end and so does nothing to increase participation in the sport beyond viewing anything lesser as ‘tryouts’.

    The USGA is one of the only examples of the sort of governing authority that is most common everywhere else where people play the sport. Where the governing authority is anchored around those who want to play the sport.

    1. Its still a free market, it’s just such a shitty market no one cares to compete with the USSF. Check your premises.

      1. It’s not a shitty market. Soccer is the third most active participation team sport in the US. And I’m not talking about kids. Basketball, soccer, baseball/softball, and volleyball could all use a better governing body – a membership organization geared around players of that sport.

        When a top-down cartel is able to blacklist and/or restrict player opportunities – and eliminate competitive opportunities from emerging – then that is NOT a fucking free market. Only on Reason do people actually argue that that shit is a free market.

        1. There have been multiple attempt to start alternate football and basketball leagues. They have rarely survived more than a few seasons. Soccer may be popular at the school level but it isn’t even close to the big foir of NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL.

          1. I’m not talking about an alternative fully professional league created as a spectator sport. I’m talking about thousands of teams in hundreds of leagues ranging from mostly recreational to serious amateur to semi-pro to pro.

            Soccer will never become as popular here as Germany – but the German football association is an example of how a successful sports governing body works. 8% of the population is dues-paying members. 7 million members, 80,000 teams, 25,000 clubs and a few thousand leagues. The teams range from people who know each other at the same bar/co – to the national team. The clubs range from a local gym which plays in the local park up to Bayern Munich (which owns a large stadium, has 4000 fan clubs, and is worth a few billion dollars – more than the Dodgers/Bulls less than the Yankees/Cowboys). The leagues set the schedules and hence own the games and get the media/sponsorship contracts which are then distributed to the teams in the league that year but they are not permanently owned by those teams – and range from municipal leagues that fund parks (or the rough equivalent of the state-level high school athletic associations here) to the Bundesliga.

            There’s never a question that the German team will be a favorite in intl competition. There’s never a question that a mere investor will find tons of profitable opportunities running and growing and owning a club. There’s never a question that the best players in the world can get paid well playing there. Or that German football will find plenty of spectators who are attractive to media/sponsors. But NONE of those is allowed to control the sport itself. They are simply the high-profile part of something much bigger. That something bigger is, financially, MUCH smaller, almost invisible, and afaik a non-profit. Squash that tiny thing – and you kill the sport for participation.

            1. So you use Germany as an example, yet admit that Germany support it because they love it. That, however, will never work for soccer in the US. I presented a similar model and how it works in the US. Your system is the same as the PRCA system, yet I doubt that the women’s soccer team would like the benefit and pay system that the PRCA has in place. The fact is, you wouldn’t have any better outcome with a player driven association, especially in a less popular sport.

              1. Idk PRCA. Seems more like a player-owned league than a sports governing body. Does PRCA do anything re amateur rodeo or setting rules for the sport or such?

                The reason I mentioned USGA before is because that’s the one I know that is also a true sports governing body. They have the independently managed subsets of PGA and PGA Tour (seems more like PRCA). But they also do a lot more from rules of sports to helping course designers set par to test equipment to the Opens. Team sports need those governing bodies even more. German football is an example for team sports

              2. And yeah it can work for soccer here in the US. Repeat. Soccer is the third biggest participation team sport among adults in the US. More people play soccer in the US than in Germany (obviously skewed entirely to kids here).

                Among adults, soccer is 3rd not because it’s popular – but because team sports participation drops like a rock here once people leave school – far more than individual sports or fitness/outdoor. By age 25, only basketball is in the top ten fitness/sports participation activities. Schools are effectively a governing body and make it easy to just join. Forming a team – a club – a league – scheduling games – refs – travel if nec – all thankless non-athletic grunt work if you have to do it from scratch. Only basketball really overcomes that hurdle – prob cuz the sport was invented for the YMCA and they still do some grunt work.

                The whole point of a governing body is that that’s what it does. Pro sports leagues don’t do that. Olympic bodies don’t do that.

        2. Also, I will bring up the PRCA example again. It’s founding was completely cowboy driven. It is still managed by participants. Because there are no owners, it is all pay for play. There are no minimum paychecks. You pay to enter and if you fail to finish at the top, you go home empty handed. Additionally, your paycheck is based upon the ticket sales and entry fees. So if you enter and win a small rodeo, you may not even win enough to cover your costs. Let’s run women’s soccer like this. How long would they be happy with this model?

          1. Pretty sure that model doesn’t work with any team sport. Who hires the coaches? Who picks the team?

        3. When a top-down cartel is able to blacklist and/or restrict player opportunities

          It’s not really a cartel when they’re selling a product that nobody wants to buy.

    2. PRCA is one of the oldest and largest governing bodies. It’s all pay to play in rodeo.

      1. Well maybe not largest.

    3. The problem is that the NWSL draws an average of 6,000 fans per game while the MLS draws an average of 24,000.

      Translation: The problem is that not enough people are willing to pay to watch women’s soccer to pay Megan Rapinoe what she delusionally believes she’s worth.

      1. 24,000 that is like Mariners home game attendance (actually that is a bit larger but still close) and the Ms ain’t made the playoffs in 17 years and counting.

        1. And never won or even made it to a World Series. Fuck, they’re just awful this year.

          I went for Ken Griffey Jr. bobblehead night this year and left after the 4th inning because the Twins were crushing them so badly (12-0 when I left). Just brutally unwatchable baseball from the M’s, especially without Haniger (who wasn’t doing all that well before he ruptured a nut).

          1. The almost had me convinced early in the season, but they’ve burnt me to many times. After not making it to the world series despite 116 wins, after leading the division by multiple games halfway through August and then not even making the playoffs, after going into September in the driver’s seat for a wildcard slot and again missing the playoffs, I’ve just come to expect them to get my hopes up and them break my heart.

            1. That somehow made it even more cruel, because it made people think they were good.

              Aside from the emergence of Santana (who I always thought was underrated) and Narvaez, it’s been a miserable season.

  33. I’m guessing the women’s team would have also failed to qualify for the World Cup last year in Russia though.

  34. EVERYTHING IS SO TERRIBLE AND UNFAIR!!!!!

    Haha

  35. They don’t deserve better. I was rooting for them to lose because of the Rapinoe moron.

    1. Does it not feel shitty to be unable to be patriotic because you feel a burning need to support Donald Fucking Trump?

      You do know he’s going to be considered one of history’s greatest douches, right? You have to know that.

      1. Because patriotism is about supporting someone who openly criticizes her country because she is playing for a national team created by an international body?

        1. That isn’t patriotism that’s jingoism.

        2. This is America. Its founding principles encourage us to criticize the country. Libertarians are supposed to know at least that much.

          1. No, it’s founding principles are respecting individual freedom and choices. And respecting others differences. Rappinoe did neither and instead criticized the country because she disagrees with some people’s view points. She basically spit on the country because we don’t fall in lockstep with her views and also to get publicity. Turning down an invitation that hadn’t even been extended yet is just pure “look at me ain’t I so woke and edgy”.

            1. Donald Trump n’est pas l’état.

      2. You do know he’s going to be considered one of history’s greatest douches, right?

        Does it feel shitty to understand one of history’s greatest douches screws up our economy far less than any of the idiots you support? That even getting Trump out of office is not important enough to give up your program of breaking down America’s economy and ruining civil life? It says quite a bit about your priorities.

        1. Which of his economic policies do you admire? Is it the tariffs or the massive debt spending?

          You can’t say the man’s not lucky. Despite being the worst businessman in the world, he still gets to own gold toilets.

          1. Which of his economic policies do you admire?

            I admire his not letting the Dems double our unemployment with a $15 minimum wage. I admire his not considering having taxpayers pay for college so left wingers can double attendance in grievance studies at our expense.

            Is it the tariffs or the massive debt spending

            Is it massive debt spending if it’s half what the Dems would do? Would the Dem program be double secret massive debt spending?

            1. No, Democrats tend to do way less debt spending.

              Jesus fucking Christ, no wonder these horrible creatures get elected. So many people don’t pay any goddamn attention.

              1. Democrats tend to do way less debt spending.

                Stupidly wrong. It’s only based on Dem Presidents and the data points are driven by Dems being constrained by Republican congresses. This does not reflect the underlying beliefs or what would happen under an unconstrained Dem government. This is easy to understand by noting every time a Republican has increased spending (like Bush’s Medicare D) the Dems criticize it for not spending enough in their effort to spend even more. This is immediately before both they and their idiot supporters criticize Reps for spending.

                This doesn’t even consider what damage their additional taxes would create.

                Some people are so in thrall to their partisanship they can’t even understand their own evidence.

          2. Forget to mention his non-support for the Green New Deal. Banning airplanes is the way to go. Maybe then they can justify wasting 100 billion on trains to nowhere instead of just a few billion.

      3. No, I feel fine and it has nothing to do with Donald Trump. It has to do with how incredibly insufferable some of these girls are.

        USWNT Uses Gender Discrimination Lawsuit As Confetti During Victory Parade: ‘Pay Us Bitch’

        The U.S. National Women’s National Team (USWNT) used paper from their gender discrimination lawsuit as confetti during their victory parade in New York on Wednesday. At one point, goalkeeper Ashlyn Harris said “pay us bitch” as her teammate Allie Long chewed on a piece of the confetti.
        Harris posted a message to social media claiming that she used crumpled up pages from the federal class-action lawsuit she joined to force the U.S. Soccer Federation to pay female players the same as male players.

        The player took to her Instagram account to post a video of the crumpled pages with the caption, “Our lawsuit is in the f—ing trees, bitch.”

        In the video, midfielder Allie Long is also seen stuffing one of the pages into her mouth. While Long is chewing, Harris says, “Pay us bitch.”

        The 28 players of the U.S. team filed a lawsuit against U.S. soccer in May. The lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles under the Equal Pay Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and alleged gender-based discrimination by the U.S. Soccer Federation….

        The U.S. Women’s team turned their World Cup appearance into a politics with constant broadsides against the president, and making numerous political proclamations such as protesting about “equal pay.” Team co-captain Megan Rapinoe also refused to place her hand over her heart and sing the American national anthem.

        For his part, President Trump congratulated the team for its World Cup win in a Sunday tweet.

        1. They’re a bunch of whiny victims and I don’t feel sorry for whiny victims who are complaining about being paid an amount of money they agreed to.

          If Rapinoe doesn’t like the pay in women’s soccer, she’s free to go and get that lucrative job in rocket science or brain surgery that I’m sure she studied for in college.

          1. You are thinking about this wrong. The money they are going after is money foreign men are entitled to for making the World Cup an amazing event. Then these mostly white liberals come along and start demanding “equal pay” for playing in a tournament with a similar name to the “World Cup” that FIFA did them a favor even using their power to organize the tournament!?!

            These women are brazen and they know America will be favored every 4 years and if FIFA agrees to give them more money it would be hilarious! White liberal women taking money from brown foreign men is funny!

    2. #MeToo

      Fuck women’s soccer.
      Fuck soccer in general.

      1. I do like soccer though, don’t follow the pros much but I like watching it occasionally and I play myself. Dominate those community rec leagues! And 30+ leagues..forget about it.

  36. So I’m one of the sops who watched and enjoyed the whole thing. I rather enjoyed it. And yes, I am most annoyed by Rapinoe.

    It also annoys me that people believe that men’s and women’s soccer are the same thing. They are different games. They look the same, and have many of the same trappings, but they are different games because they have different rules. The defining rule being “No men may play.”

    As a result of this rule it is an entirely different product. It is a product that is growing in popularity in the US, largely due to the national team’s success on the world stage. (Viewing differential numbers this time around were likely lower due to timezone differences. 2015 was in Canada) This is a product that is in its infancy. You don’t go building your product and brand by announcing to the public (your customers) that your partners in brand building (the federation) are bad people and that people shouldn’t like them. Lawsuits never work for building brands. If all people ever hear about women’s soccer is that loudmouths like Rapinoe are obnoxious every time they win, what incentive do they have to consume your product?

    Sermons are free on Sundays.

    1. If these women are trying to get their hands on men’s World Cup money FIFA should just spin off women’s soccer and make it an independent organization. That said as an American of course I want America women to get money foreign men are entitled to because I think it’s funny.

  37. Libertarians are the people at a dinner party who lecture everyone about why women shouldn’t get equal pay.

    1. Who said they shouldn’t get equal pay. Pretty sure everyone here is pretty much in agreement that if they can play at the same level, and draw the same crowds and produce the same revenue then they’ve earned equal pay.

      1. They play better and draw more crowds and revenue. But this article does go into some more detail that I found interesting.

        1. The US Women’s Team is at the top of a lower level of competition than the men’s squad, who are, at best, middling at the highest competitive level of the sport. They are not equivalent.

        2. Tony, just outright lies…again.

        3. The article actually did state the actual attendance and revenue.

        4. The women do some disingenuous math, though. They take they annual salary plus bonus for playing in and winning 20 games. Then they create a hypthothetical male player, assume he played in 20 games and won them all, then compare that to the woman’s earnings. This ignores the facts that no men play all the games; I saw number somewhat the most of them don’t play in 1/3 of the games…for which they get $0.

          I’ve never seen the women do the math the other way: if we played all our games under the contract the men play under, what would our earnings be at maximum and on average. The minimum is $0, since the men are under a play-for-pay system.

          We know that hte men and womena re paud differently, but it seems that in the uppoer levels, (top 10 players on either side) there’s not that much difference.
          NY Times:

          The Women Make a Quarter as Much? Really?

          Yes and no. According to figures provided by U.S. Soccer, since 2008 it has paid 12 players at least $1 million. Six of those players were men, and six were women. And the women hold their own near the top of the pay scale; the best-paid woman made about $1.2 million from 2008 to 2015, while the top man made $1.4 million in the same period. Some women in the top 10 even made more than their male counterparts over those years. But the numbers diverge down the list. At No. 25, the female player made just under $341,000, and the corresponding male player supplemented his salary by about $580,000.

          [Not sure what “supplemented his salary by about $580,000” means…did he have income outside of soccer (endorsements, club team pay, what?].

          1. Oh, for an edit button…

    2. Do you invite libertarians to your dinner parties?

      1. Why would Libertarians ever go to a Tony dinner party?

        Lefties are the people at a dinner party who lecture everyone about why Libertarians should be sent to Gulags.

      2. One doesn’t discuss politics at a dinner party.

    3. Libertarians are the people at a dinner party who lecture everyone about why women shouldn’t get equal pay.

      Do you get custom-printed name tags that say “Hi I’m ______ and I’m a Republican/Democrat/Libertarian.” or do you just get the regular name tags color coded?

      Either way, your dinner parties sound really shitty. All the dinner parties I attend all the women talk about how great it is to be high-paid underwear models. All the men lament how much harder it is to be Navy SEALs and how much lower the pay is but, ultimately, that’s the price we all pay being married to underwear models.

      1. Either way, your dinner parties sound really shitty. All the dinner parties I attend all the women talk about how great it is to be high-paid underwear models. All the men lament how much harder it is to be Navy SEALs and how much lower the pay is but, ultimately, that’s the price we all pay being married to underwear models.

        This belongs in an Online Quotes Hall of Fame somewhere. 🙂

    4. Tony
      July.11.2019 at 2:11 am
      “Libertarians are the people at a dinner party who lecture everyone about why women shouldn’t get equal pay.”

      Fucking lefty ignoramuses are the people at a dinner party whining about why those who didn’t get anything are due so9mething or other.
      And if the dinner party includes those involved in business, the fucking lefty ignoramuses are, with any luck, heaved out the door followed by someone pissing on them.

    1. Dibs on Morgan or press

  38. As a percentage of total revenue, the women are actually paid more than the men. They should either be paid less or the men should be paid more.

  39. “The U.S. Soccer ‘Pay Gap’ Is About More Than Just Sexism”…

    You, sir, are correct! It is also, and mainly, about the irrefutable fact that the women’s team collectively bargained for guarateed salary and benefits, while the men’s team negotiated for pay-for-performance.

    Apples and oranges — Boehm isn’t quite as “Woke” as he thinks.

    1. Neither Gisele Bundchen nor Kendall Jennar has earned a single Super Bowl Ring or World Cup and both make more than Tom Brady or Megan Rapinoe.

  40. “”Lacking any better economic incentive to get the federation to change its behavior, publicly shaming U.S. Soccer over the disparity between how the men’s and women’s teams are treated might be the best lever for fixing the supposed pay gap.””

    Public shaming is becoming so over played that people are becoming numb to it.

  41. Time-motion analysis has been a part of soccer since the 70s. It’s pretty well known, just like in sprinting and distance running, that women on average cover ~75% of the distance as men and/or move ~75% as fast. Even if you bring their pay into absolute parity, it’s the same bullshit where one body on the field counts as a paid full-time employee whether that employee does 35 hrs. worth of work 26 weeks a year or 90 hrs. of work 52 weeks a year. Soccer is already a pretty low-scoring game, paying people more or the same wage to move slower and not score as much… might as well watch women’s golf.

    1. No contest. Paula Creamer has a nicer ass than any of the US soccer women.

  42. The insurmountable problem that will be very hard to overcome is the money is based on global eyeballs, and due to pace, which is never going to change, women’s football is unwatchable. Pretty much the only slower paced sporting event is yacht racing (which is like watching the paint dry).

    There is really very little interest in women’s football worldwide.

  43. I agree with the economic assessments given. I however cannot respect statements that say these women DESERVE more pay. They deserve exactly what they negotiate for. Nothing less, nothing more.

  44. If the WNT was offered the exact same contract, including all $ amounts, providing them with true equal pay, they would most likely reject it.

    The MNT contract offers high risk/reward ratio. If a MNT member doesn’t get put on the roster for a game, he doesn’t get paid for the game or get bonuses for wins.

    The WNT contract, collectively bargained for by their union, in contrast offers “safety” favor low risk (hence lower reward) but steady paychecks. The WNT members get paid even if they are injured or otherwise don’t play. They get paid for maternity time, etc. They chose LOWER pay as a trade off against STEADY pay.

  45. There’s also the matter of a revealed clause from the USWNT’s 2006 collective bargaining agreement, published by former U.S. star Julie Foudy this week on ESPN.com. It was designed to reward the U.S. women’s team if their compensation-to-revenues ratio was ever better in a calendar year than that of the U.S. men. The exact wording, per Foudy, was this:

    “If in any calendar year, the ratio of aggregate compensation of women’s national team players to the aggregate revenue from all women’s national team games (including all games in U.S. Soccer promoted women’s tournaments) is less than the ratio of the aggregate compensation of the men’s national team players compensation to the aggregate revenue from all men’s national team games (including all games in U.S. Soccer promoted men’s tournaments), then U.S. Soccer will make a lump sum payment to the women’s national team player pool to make the ratios equal.”

    The headline on Foudy’s story was: “Why Isn’t the USWNT Using Its Fair-Pay Clause?” The answer: The clause does exist, according to U.S. Soccer, which adds that the U.S. women have not been able to trigger it yet.

  46. Of course, if the MNT continues to suck as bad as hey do, no one is ever going to see them play anyway and even the paltry wome’s team revenues will tower over the men’s and there’ll be no revenue argument to make. OTOH if the MNT get’s their act together and becomes a top-tier contender, their revenues will so far outpace the women’s that it won’t be funny.

    Face it. The WNT is the best in the world, but the world wide marketplace for $$$ to be made getting people to pay to watch women’s soccer (or women’s basketball, or women’s curling, or…) is nowhere near the size of the market for $$$ people will pay to watch top-tier men’s soccer. So the best-in-the-world US WNT is raking in all the revenues they possible can and a far larger chunk of those revenues are being used to pay the WNT. The US MNT, which sucks, still pulls in revenues, and a smaller percentage of those revenues goes to the men’s team members.

    But I still content that the WNT would never agree to a pay structure that is identical in all facets to the men’s because there’s too much risk of NOT getting paid AT ALL in the MNT contract.

    1. Here is why I support equal pay—I want some of that men’s World Cup money coming to America!! Screw the rest of the world and our men will never win the World Cup! There is literally no downside to an American supporting “equal pay” whatever these women have in mind because the losers will be foreign men and the winners will be American women!

      1. Sebastian Cremmington
        July.11.2019 at 8:20 pm
        “Here is why I support equal pay—…”
        Because your an imbecile. Fuck off.

        1. White American women are entitled to brown men’s money!! #equalpay #metoo #whitepower

  47. Rapinoe – like Kaepernick – is not role model.

    It’s been reported she ‘mean girled’ a former black Christian team mate off the team for an innocuous comment.

    The USWNT need to learn some class and sportsmanship. And need to lay off the damn woke politics.

    I’ll reserve comment on the rest of the nonsense.

  48. Yet, as Rosen again points out, the women’s team continues to get shortchanged when it comes to the percentage of the federation’s budget spent on “advertising and P.R., travel and training budgets, and…per diems for food.”

    Why would the federation pay a lot of money for something they don’t really care about? As in “You don’t like your per diem? Quit and see if we care.” Why would they pay a lot on advertising for a product that isn’t particularly successful? And why would they invest a lot of money in training athletes who are far less likely to sacrifice family and health for success?

  49. “If pay exclusively reflected performance, there would be no doubt that Megan Rapinoe, Alex Morgan, Rose LaVelle, Julie Ertz, and the rest of the U.S. women’s team deserve far more than what the men earn.”

    ….umm, didn’t they to lose badly to a U-15 Dallas boys club?

    If it was a performance thing, the women wouldn’t win a single game against any men’s team the US has ever faced while the US men would run roughshod, by double digit goals each game, over every single team the women have ever put together. Hell, put the best women on Earth together, give them a year to practice together — men would STILL beat them by a huge margin with ease.

  50. “If pay exclusively reflected performance, there would be no doubt that Megan Rapinoe, Alex Morgan, Rose LaVelle, Julie Ertz, and the rest of the U.S. women’s team deserve far more than what the men earn.”

    Not so fast… Pretty much any state championship high school boys team could murder these chicks in a game. I wouldn’t be surprised if most 10th in state boys teams couldn’t kill them.

    Also, nobody cares. Womens sports are lame. It’s fine for them to play them, and have fun, and provide entertainment for those that care… But they’re not in the same league as mens teams, and they never will be. Deal with it.

Please to post comments