Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
US Women's Soccer Team files lawsuit (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter parasaurolophus
- Start date
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
In related news, WNBA players make quite a bit less than their male counterparts.
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
We just had a discussion in the US soccer thread about how the USSF is so cash-strapped that they can't even fire Jurgen Klinsmann. Can't imagine this will go over well.
I really would like to see economics of the situation. It's easy to look at it on its face and think that the men are worth more in terms of TV revenues, tickets, etc., but I'd love to see some hard numbers.
I really would like to see economics of the situation. It's easy to look at it on its face and think that the men are worth more in terms of TV revenues, tickets, etc., but I'd love to see some hard numbers.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
I saw some stat that said something to that effect but said that they brought in $20 million more in revenue during 2015 specifically. I would expect them to have brought in more in 2015 considering there was a women's World Cup and not really much for the men. I think we need to see at least a 4-year cycle's worth of detail. If the women are bringing in $20 million more than the men, all things considered, every year, I can't see how they shouldn't be compensated.
Thorpe
Footballguy
The women negotiated their salaries, as did the men.
FIFA pays a lot more for the men for the World Cup than the women.
The women get more income guarantee, while the men get more money in bonuses for beating good teams.
People only care about soccer when there is a World Cup, so you have to compare men and women revenue for a 4 year period.
FIFA pays a lot more for the men for the World Cup than the women.
The women get more income guarantee, while the men get more money in bonuses for beating good teams.
People only care about soccer when there is a World Cup, so you have to compare men and women revenue for a 4 year period.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
This is not an accurate statement when you look at the combined TV ratings for the EPL, Liga MX and MLS every week or look at the huge ratings for the Gold Cup or the Euro's Championship or the ratings for the Champions League final etc. Even just a couple of days ago more than 4 million viewers tuned in for world cup qualifying.
Maybe you meant to say that the interest peaks during the WC itself, which is true. Or maybe you meant to say that people only care about womens soccer during the wc which is almost correct outside of the olympics which also draws pretty well.
Last edited by a moderator:
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
The most difficult part of the case is the TV revenue.
US Women, US Men and MLS are all packaged together. The most recent deal was a $720m deal that ESPN and Fox purchased for 8 years.
Most of that goes to MLS, roughly $560m. Roughly $160m goes to US Soccer.
I don't know how they are going to prove which part of the tv revenue is for the women vs the men. I think they would have to get people from ESPN and Fox to say how they factored that into the deal and I am unsure that is going to happen in open court.
Thorpe
Footballguy
Sorry, I meant to say the national teams. I know EPL is getting very popular here.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
Just did some reading
* The revenue for a current 4 year cycle is $60m for men, $50m for women
* This is all about timing, as the womens CBA expires in December and this is the perfect way to get ahead on the negotiations
* Klinsmann by himself throws everything out of whack. I think I read he makes more than entire WNT program makes, players and coaches combined.
* It appears the wage disparity is greater than the revenue disparity so the women have a decent case to create a much better CBA for themselves this time around.
* This will not come into the arguement, but the reality is that the women need this more than the men. Most of the men make excellent money at their club teams where as the women do not. So the added national team money is important.
* The Colombian women are simultaneously doing the same thing with their federation.
* The revenue for a current 4 year cycle is $60m for men, $50m for women
* This is all about timing, as the womens CBA expires in December and this is the perfect way to get ahead on the negotiations
* Klinsmann by himself throws everything out of whack. I think I read he makes more than entire WNT program makes, players and coaches combined.
* It appears the wage disparity is greater than the revenue disparity so the women have a decent case to create a much better CBA for themselves this time around.
* This will not come into the arguement, but the reality is that the women need this more than the men. Most of the men make excellent money at their club teams where as the women do not. So the added national team money is important.
* The Colombian women are simultaneously doing the same thing with their federation.
Last edited by a moderator:
Poke_4_Life
Footballguy
I'm just responding so I can find this thread, but I find this case fascinating.
The fact that JK makes more than the entire USWNT is absurd. I know Graeme Abel (USWNT goalie coach) a little bit. I'll try to reach out to him about this at some point.
The fact that JK makes more than the entire USWNT is absurd. I know Graeme Abel (USWNT goalie coach) a little bit. I'll try to reach out to him about this at some point.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
Do you know if the coaches are part of their own union or do they just negotiate their salary independently?
The players are tied to the CBA. As others have noted, they negotiated and then signed it.
If they want a better deal it seems like the course of action is to have a strong negotiating stance going into the current bargaining session, which might be what this lawsuit is hoping to do.
I do wonder if this lawsuit threat could backfire on them. Most people who don't follow the issue seem to be on their side but once people understand they signed their own deal and agreed to it, it becomes a little harder to understand the suit itself.
This is not a WC year coming up but if they do strike they at least have possibly missing the Olympics to prop up their side.
pantherclub
Footballguy
Strangely (or not) this is the exact same thing I thought of when I read the article. How is US Soccer at fault here?
God this PC world sometimes is just hard to take.
James Daulton
Footballguy
Judging by the their Today interview, the fine young lasses of the Women's team would probably make more money in the exotic dancing or porn field. In those fields they'd definitely make more than men.
pantherclub
Footballguy
nobeavers said:
Does the Federation not also subsidize the NWSL(women's pro league) players salaries etc. I know they did some of this originally for MLS but the women's league has not been able to find a suitable model that works over the past 10+ years. I imagine the ratings for the NWSL are pretty dismal. So any argument as to money related to television wouldn't help much.
Super King
Footballguy
- Leela: Femputer, be reasonable. Sure men are annoying and they wreck up whatever planet they're in charge of, but most of these men are sorta my friends. They don't deserve to die.
- Femputer: Hmm. Perhaps men are not as evil as Femputer thinks.
- Thog: But they make fun women's basketball.
- Femputer: What? Did you explain how the women's good fundamentals make up for their inability to dunk?
- Ornik: Yes. They still laugh.
- Femputer: The men must die.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
I think they gave them a loan when they started up (similar to MLS back in 1996).
The popularity of the womens league is not the case here, this is specifically about the national team (whose revenue, ratings etc are all much higher than the NWSL).
Yep - get that the popularity of the league is not at issue here. By the way, I am all for fair pay for the USWNT. My family has followed the womens game for a long time. I have reffed both the mens and women team(NCAA, semi professional etc). At the highest level i find it more enjoyable at times to watch. That being said, someone above mentioned TV revenues from the ESPN deal. My point only was to say how much of that going towards the NWSL and effecting this if at all would be pretty inconsequential.
If the league is so strapped where does this money come from then? I get it they could get rid of Klinsmann and his salary but that comes with its own can of worms. Reduce the mens pay and allocate more towards the women? Not loan the money to NWSL so that they can allocate it to the National Team? I don't know. Getting a league that can be supported seems like something of huge importance.
Last edited by a moderator:
GROOT
Footballguy
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
I will compensate every single on of them personally.Steve Tasker said:
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
US Soccer just put out a statement and their financial involvement in the NWSL might be more than I first realized.
I can't copy the statement but you can read it at this tweet
https://twitter.com/grantwahl/status/715596774547783680
the most interesting item is that US Soccer is paying the NWSL salaries for the US National Team players, something that obviously does not happen for the men.
Last edited by a moderator:
pantherclub
Footballguy
Those moronic comments on twitter are the exact reason I click on it about once a month. There are some incredibly misinformed people out there that have no problem spewing their crap regardless.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
My take is that this a strategy to highlight the disparities in the system in a public way. As it really is, the women will likely need to fail to agree to a CBA in order to make much headway. That leaves a decent probability that we'd see the top women players refusing to take part in some competition (conveniently, this would be after the Olympics). That would be a risky PR strategy out of the blue. The public hates athletes for labor stoppages and I think Kessler correctly perceives that the backlash would likely be even larger for women. This allows the public to start taking sides before a work stoppage happens. It also puts pressure on the MNT players to release statements. I wouldn't be shocked if Kessler floats the idea that the two bargaining units for the men's and women's team should merge and collectively bargain for both national teams.
@NewlyRetired I thought that was the case. The Fed pays the USWNT players salaries basically so that they can field a team. If they did not then no USWNT would be playing in the NWSL.They would be abroad. The rest of the roster pretty much gets paid worse than the lowest MLS players. US Soccer never did that for MLS. There is a big investment in the NWSL as they need a domestic league for the women to play in. The rest of the world is catching up on the international level.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
Following up on @walnutz post above, is the following conversation during the CBA negotiations possible/probable and if so, how does the women's union respond?
Womens Union: "We want across the board increases in items A, B, C, D, and E"
US Soccer: "We agree to all of those increases, however because of that, we can no longer afford to administrate and fund the NWSL which of course includes no longer being able to pay the full yearly salaries of the USWNT players in the league"
Womens Union: "We want across the board increases in items A, B, C, D, and E"
US Soccer: "We agree to all of those increases, however because of that, we can no longer afford to administrate and fund the NWSL which of course includes no longer being able to pay the full yearly salaries of the USWNT players in the league"
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
As expected US Soccer has responded to the women's suit with some information that does not really support their cause. Here are some snippets, you can read the article for more info
http://www.espnfc.com/united-states/story/2840897/sunil-gulati-and-us-soccer-refute-claims-by-womens-team
When asked if that almost two-to-one ratio was similar in terms of sponsorship and television revenues, Gulati said those deals are done collectively, and he thus declined to provide a percentage breakdown in terms of how much of the deal was tied to the women's national team and how much was tied to the men's. He said the television ratings for men's games were substantially higher than those of the women's games.
"An average rating [for a men's game], it's a multiple -- not 10 or 20 or 30 or 50 percent higher," Gulati said. "it's a multiple on the men's program right now."
A USSF spokesman added that any revenue numbers from the players that showed otherwise were "inaccurate, misleading or both." The spokesman went on to add that the average attendance for U.S. men's national team games from 2011 to 2015 was 29,781, while games for the U.S. women's national team over the same period averaged 16,229 fans per game.
Sauer added that part of the pay disparity is due to the fact that back in 2005, the players' union opted for a pay structure that stressed guaranteed salary and benefits at the expense of a pay-to-play structure that would have increased payment for appearances in national team games. At the time, there was no existing women's league in the U.S. The CBA was then extended in 2013 through a memorandum of understanding, though its validity is currently being challenged by the players.
Sauer went through a list of benefits women players get that are not available to the men, including severance, health benefits, vision insurance, dental insurance and pregnancy leave, which allows them to receive 50 percent of both their national team and NWSL salaries. If they are injured, they receive 100 percent of their guaranteed salary.
http://www.espnfc.com/united-states/story/2840897/sunil-gulati-and-us-soccer-refute-claims-by-womens-team
When asked if that almost two-to-one ratio was similar in terms of sponsorship and television revenues, Gulati said those deals are done collectively, and he thus declined to provide a percentage breakdown in terms of how much of the deal was tied to the women's national team and how much was tied to the men's. He said the television ratings for men's games were substantially higher than those of the women's games.
"An average rating [for a men's game], it's a multiple -- not 10 or 20 or 30 or 50 percent higher," Gulati said. "it's a multiple on the men's program right now."
A USSF spokesman added that any revenue numbers from the players that showed otherwise were "inaccurate, misleading or both." The spokesman went on to add that the average attendance for U.S. men's national team games from 2011 to 2015 was 29,781, while games for the U.S. women's national team over the same period averaged 16,229 fans per game.
Sauer added that part of the pay disparity is due to the fact that back in 2005, the players' union opted for a pay structure that stressed guaranteed salary and benefits at the expense of a pay-to-play structure that would have increased payment for appearances in national team games. At the time, there was no existing women's league in the U.S. The CBA was then extended in 2013 through a memorandum of understanding, though its validity is currently being challenged by the players.
Sauer went through a list of benefits women players get that are not available to the men, including severance, health benefits, vision insurance, dental insurance and pregnancy leave, which allows them to receive 50 percent of both their national team and NWSL salaries. If they are injured, they receive 100 percent of their guaranteed salary.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
Soccer America broke down the disparity in tv viewing audience between the men and women today.
==================================
http://www.socceramerica.com/article/68281/tv-viewers-us-men-vs-us-women.html
Just how much higher are viewerships for men's games?
A look at comparable types of games on English-language television show that these differences:
+212% 2014 Men's World Cup group stage vs. 2015 Women's World Cup group stage
+87% 2014 men's send-off games vs. 2015 women's send-off games
+70% 2015 men's friendlies vs. women's friendlies
Even when you include the record 25,400,000 viewers who watched the 2015 USA-Japan final on Fox, the U.S. men outdrew the U.S. women by 74 percent for their World Cup games.
What is not included are Spanish-language viewing figures in which an even greater disparity is seen between the men and women. Below are just the English language numbers.
2015 U.S. Women's World Cup Group Stage English-Language Viewers:
5,043,000 USA-Nigeria (Fox)
4,500,000 USA-Sweden (Fox)
3,311,000 USA-Australia (Fox Sports 1)
AVERAGE: 4,285,000.
2014 U.S. Men's World Cup Group Stage English-Language Viewers:
18,220,000 USA-Portugal, ESPN
11,100,000 USA-Ghana, ESPN
10,800,000 USA-Germany, ESPN
AVERAGE:13,374,000.
2015 U.S. Women's Send-Off English-Language Viewers:
998,000 USA-South Korea, ESPN
457,000 USA-Mexico, Fox Sports 1
319,000 USA-Ireland, Fox Sports 1
AVERAGE:591,000.
2014 U.S. Men's Send-Off English-Language Viewers:
1,231,000 USA-Nigeria, ESPN
1,067,000 USA-Turkey, ESPN2
749,000 USA-Azerbaijan, ESPN2
AVERAGE:1,106,000
2015 U.S. Women's Friendly English-Language Viewers:
AVG. MATCH (DATE), NETWORK
998,000 USA-South Korea (May 30), ESPN
709,000 USA-China (Dec. 16), Fox Sports 1
489,000 USA-China (Dec. 13), ESPN2
457,000 USA-Mexico (May 17), Fox Sports 1
342,000 USA-Trin. & Tob. (Dec. 10), ESPN2
331,000 USA-Brazil (Oct. 21), ESPN2
319,000 USA-Ireland (May 10), Fox Sports 1
315,000 USA-Costa Rica (Aug. 16), Fox Sports 1
294,000 France-USA (Feb. 8), ESPN2
274,000 USA-Costa Rica (Aug. 19), ESPN2
257,000 USA-New Zealand (April 4), Fox Sports 1
249,000 USA-Brazil (Oct. 25), Fox Sports 1
207,000 USA-Haiti (Sept. 17), Fox Sports 1
173,000 USA-Haiti (Sept. 20), ESPN2
163,000 USA-Switzerland (March 6), Fox Sports 1
154,000 USA-Norway (March 3), Fox Sports 1
138,000 USA-France (March 11), Fox Sports 1
121,000 England-USA (Feb. 13), Fox Sports 1
AVERAGE:333,000.
2015 U.S. Men's Friendly English-Language Viewers:
AVG. MATCH (DATE), NETWORK
1,012,000 USA-Brazil (Sept. 8), ESPN
806,000 USA-Mexico (April 15), Fox Sports 1
680,000 Netherlands-USA (June 5), ESPN
668,000 Germany-USA (June 10), Fox Sports 1
674,000 USA-Panama (Feb. 8), ESPN
469,000 USA-Guatemala (July 3), Fox Sports 1
445,000 USA-Peru (Sept. 4), Fox Sports 1
400,000 Denmark-USA (March 25), ESPN2
261,000 Switzerland-USA (March 29), Fox Sports 1
254,000 Chile-USA (Jan. 28), Fox Sports 1
AVERAGE:567,000.
2015 U.S. Women's World Cup English-Language Viewers:
25,400,000 USA-Japan (Fox)
8,400,000 USA-Germany (Fox)
5,700,000 USA-China (Fox)
5,043,000 USA-Nigeria (Fox)
4,700,000 USA-Colombia (Fox Sports 1)
4,500,000 USA-Sweden (Fox)
3,311,000 USA-Australia (Fox Sports 1)
AVERAGE: 8,151,000.
2014 U.S. Men's World Cup English-Language Viewers:
18,220,000 USA-Portugal, ESPN
16.500,000 USA-Belgium, ESPN
11,100,000 USA-Ghana, ESPN
10,800,000 USA-Germany, ESPN
AVERAGE:14,156,000.
==================================
http://www.socceramerica.com/article/68281/tv-viewers-us-men-vs-us-women.html
Just how much higher are viewerships for men's games?
A look at comparable types of games on English-language television show that these differences:
+212% 2014 Men's World Cup group stage vs. 2015 Women's World Cup group stage
+87% 2014 men's send-off games vs. 2015 women's send-off games
+70% 2015 men's friendlies vs. women's friendlies
Even when you include the record 25,400,000 viewers who watched the 2015 USA-Japan final on Fox, the U.S. men outdrew the U.S. women by 74 percent for their World Cup games.
What is not included are Spanish-language viewing figures in which an even greater disparity is seen between the men and women. Below are just the English language numbers.
2015 U.S. Women's World Cup Group Stage English-Language Viewers:
5,043,000 USA-Nigeria (Fox)
4,500,000 USA-Sweden (Fox)
3,311,000 USA-Australia (Fox Sports 1)
AVERAGE: 4,285,000.
2014 U.S. Men's World Cup Group Stage English-Language Viewers:
18,220,000 USA-Portugal, ESPN
11,100,000 USA-Ghana, ESPN
10,800,000 USA-Germany, ESPN
AVERAGE:13,374,000.
2015 U.S. Women's Send-Off English-Language Viewers:
998,000 USA-South Korea, ESPN
457,000 USA-Mexico, Fox Sports 1
319,000 USA-Ireland, Fox Sports 1
AVERAGE:591,000.
2014 U.S. Men's Send-Off English-Language Viewers:
1,231,000 USA-Nigeria, ESPN
1,067,000 USA-Turkey, ESPN2
749,000 USA-Azerbaijan, ESPN2
AVERAGE:1,106,000
2015 U.S. Women's Friendly English-Language Viewers:
AVG. MATCH (DATE), NETWORK
998,000 USA-South Korea (May 30), ESPN
709,000 USA-China (Dec. 16), Fox Sports 1
489,000 USA-China (Dec. 13), ESPN2
457,000 USA-Mexico (May 17), Fox Sports 1
342,000 USA-Trin. & Tob. (Dec. 10), ESPN2
331,000 USA-Brazil (Oct. 21), ESPN2
319,000 USA-Ireland (May 10), Fox Sports 1
315,000 USA-Costa Rica (Aug. 16), Fox Sports 1
294,000 France-USA (Feb. 8), ESPN2
274,000 USA-Costa Rica (Aug. 19), ESPN2
257,000 USA-New Zealand (April 4), Fox Sports 1
249,000 USA-Brazil (Oct. 25), Fox Sports 1
207,000 USA-Haiti (Sept. 17), Fox Sports 1
173,000 USA-Haiti (Sept. 20), ESPN2
163,000 USA-Switzerland (March 6), Fox Sports 1
154,000 USA-Norway (March 3), Fox Sports 1
138,000 USA-France (March 11), Fox Sports 1
121,000 England-USA (Feb. 13), Fox Sports 1
AVERAGE:333,000.
2015 U.S. Men's Friendly English-Language Viewers:
AVG. MATCH (DATE), NETWORK
1,012,000 USA-Brazil (Sept. 8), ESPN
806,000 USA-Mexico (April 15), Fox Sports 1
680,000 Netherlands-USA (June 5), ESPN
668,000 Germany-USA (June 10), Fox Sports 1
674,000 USA-Panama (Feb. 8), ESPN
469,000 USA-Guatemala (July 3), Fox Sports 1
445,000 USA-Peru (Sept. 4), Fox Sports 1
400,000 Denmark-USA (March 25), ESPN2
261,000 Switzerland-USA (March 29), Fox Sports 1
254,000 Chile-USA (Jan. 28), Fox Sports 1
AVERAGE:567,000.
2015 U.S. Women's World Cup English-Language Viewers:
25,400,000 USA-Japan (Fox)
8,400,000 USA-Germany (Fox)
5,700,000 USA-China (Fox)
5,043,000 USA-Nigeria (Fox)
4,700,000 USA-Colombia (Fox Sports 1)
4,500,000 USA-Sweden (Fox)
3,311,000 USA-Australia (Fox Sports 1)
AVERAGE: 8,151,000.
2014 U.S. Men's World Cup English-Language Viewers:
18,220,000 USA-Portugal, ESPN
16.500,000 USA-Belgium, ESPN
11,100,000 USA-Ghana, ESPN
10,800,000 USA-Germany, ESPN
AVERAGE:14,156,000.
Lester Burnham
Footballguy
I don't have a dog in this fight. I don't watch soccer.
It would be nice to see "average" pro athletes get their fair market value with regards to revenue regardless of gender. Does this mean women will make as much as men? It won't unless the women's teams are as profitable as the men's teams. No idea how to figure out what a "league minimum" would be, but it should happen. Stars will always be able to negotiate better pay than the average players (until Bernie Sanders is president anyway :facepalm: ).
It would be nice to see "average" pro athletes get their fair market value with regards to revenue regardless of gender. Does this mean women will make as much as men? It won't unless the women's teams are as profitable as the men's teams. No idea how to figure out what a "league minimum" would be, but it should happen. Stars will always be able to negotiate better pay than the average players (until Bernie Sanders is president anyway :facepalm: ).
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
I would love to see the Spanish-language viewing numbers as well.
McGarnicle
Footballguy
1. Lingerie Soccer League
2. Pay Per View
2. Pay Per View
Well - now that is hard to say. What was released was the bonus structure for the mens and women's sides. I have not been able to really find any public numbers. Here is a link to some of the more interesting tidbits from the Women's CBA .. http://www.starsandstripesfc.com/2016/2/4/10916838/most-interesting-uswnt-cba-collective-bargaining-details
I also saw an article in which US Soccer Fed listed the Top 10 higher paid US Soccer Employees - this was from 2012 to 2013. Could not find more recent --
Alex Morgan - 283K Sauerbrunn - 274K Rampone - 273K. Supposedly Morgan makes over a Million when you factor in endorsements and what not which is not really relevant to the discussion.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
Here are some numbers I have seen in the Wall Street Journal. Note I am unsure how these numbers are affected by the NWSL salaries that US Soccer is also paying. If memory serves the NWSL salaries are very low as you might expect for a micro niche league.
========================
Women’s players receive a base salary of $72,000 to appear in 20 exhibition games per season, with victory bonuses taking that up to a maximum of $99,000, according to the filing.
Under their current agreements with U.S. Soccer, for instance, the women’s team can earn $75,000 bonuses per player for winning the World Cup.
The U.S. women’s team doesn’t receive bonuses for qualifying for the World Cup either, since their record makes it almost a formality
Last edited by a moderator:
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
I mentioned this point earlier but to repeat myself I don't see how the women can get "equal" pay with out giving up the benefits they are getting via US Soccer propping up their entire league.
Something has to give here and I think everything that keeps coming out after the women's initial salvo is not painting the best picture for them in terms of this "equal pay" stance.
In fact I really think that if they truely got equal pay, even ignoring the revenue disparity over a full cycle, that they could actually come out worse if they lose the NWSL perks.
@NewlyRetired See the link I posted above. It depends on which tier the player is in as to what they make. The 72K is the top tier. There are 2 other tiers involved. That is just the national team salary as well - not the NWSL salary which i believe the USWNT are trying to keep separate. I don't believe they should be able to as the Fed subsidizes their league. I don't know how you monetize the additional health benefits, Severance leave pay, maternity leave pay, childcare while on the road pay etc. that they receive that the men do not. The men don't get this because their clubs provide it. There has to be a number associated with that. I am with you on this being a negotiating maneuver ahead of the new CBA. It will also be interesting to see if the court in Illinois rules as to whether there is a current CBA in effect(right now the team signed a MOU that was supposed to keep the CBA in place through the end of this year I believe). Lots of moving pieces. One more failed attempt at a league here in the US and I do not believe there will be another. To date the model has not worked out with the WUSA or any of the follow on versions.
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
I just read two important items today that harms the women's case/stance IMO. It is amazing how poorly this has been reported by the people pounding the "equal pay" gavel.
When the women quoted numbers showing they would make more revenue this year, two things stand out
1) The numbers assume the US women will win the Olympics and go on a long victory tour
2) The numbers did not include the huge Copa this summer since when the numbers were done the Copa was not yet fully inked.
When the women quoted numbers showing they would make more revenue this year, two things stand out
1) The numbers assume the US women will win the Olympics and go on a long victory tour
2) The numbers did not include the huge Copa this summer since when the numbers were done the Copa was not yet fully inked.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
