|
Replies: 48
| visibility 1
|
Orange Blooded [3981]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 5094
Joined: 8/23/16
|
People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback...
Jul 5, 2019, 11:12 PM
|
|
If you treated my family better 200 years ago I would play for you
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [38422]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33199
Joined: 7/28/11
|
Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback...
Jul 6, 2019, 12:42 AM
|
|
I think it's great . She had some fun at their expense . Just as much as I don't care for showboating I still think her celebration was mild by comparison for some of the things modern athletes do to draw attention to themselves .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24782]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 32224
Joined: 2/15/09
|
yeah I had no issue with it at all
Jul 6, 2019, 1:45 AM
|
|
England just had sour grapes, as most losing teams do, The losing team is always the champion of "class" no matter what sport.
I will say however that Morgan and others that are making it into a sexism thing are wrong. Male athletes get slammed for arrogant or abrasive celebrations all the time in many sports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17070
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Re: yeah I had no issue with it at all
Jul 6, 2019, 9:25 AM
|
|
You really don’t have an issue with mocking your opponent?
Imagine if Christian Pulisic scores Sunday night and eats a taco. I imagine people would be very upset.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24782]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 32224
Joined: 2/15/09
|
that would certainly be different
Jul 6, 2019, 2:22 PM
|
|
considering the current political climate. Even though tacos are almost as American as they are Mexican now. Certain types anyway, like hard shell.
I don't think Morgan was really "mocking". The revolutionary war was almost 250 years ago. England has been our biggest and closest ally for over 100 years now, it's all water under the bridge and just a little poking fun. England and the USA love each other deep down.
It's not the same thing as exacerbating real political tensions with recent wars or conflicts like you often see in men's soccer controversies in the Balkans
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16646]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9354
Joined: 11/1/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10134]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8862
Joined: 7/20/12
|
Re: yeah I had no issue with it at all
Jul 6, 2019, 9:36 PM
[ in reply to Re: yeah I had no issue with it at all ] |
|
You really don’t have an issue with mocking your opponent?
Imagine if Christian Pulisic scores Sunday night and eats a taco. I imagine people would be very upset.
Hillary supporter ^
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10121]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4858
Joined: 12/11/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13221]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9985
Joined: 5/11/99
|
I thought it was very clever...
Jul 6, 2019, 1:22 PM
|
|
But I loved that England got all butt hurt over it.
LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2663]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 4303
Joined: 1/4/07
|
Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback...
Jul 6, 2019, 9:40 PM
[ in reply to Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback... ] |
|
seriously. you know who else got in people's faces and demanded way more money than his sport was providing? Bobby Fischer. Nobody whined about him insisting he wasn't playing a world championship match without having the money be substantially increased.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3639]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5123
Joined: 4/23/19
|
Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback...
Jul 6, 2019, 3:01 AM
|
|
I'm sick and tired of the, "This proves there is a double standard" nonsense. Just stuff it!
That said, I don't have much of a problem with what she did. However, she should be grown up enough to accept the criticism that comes with it instead of trying to twist it into a sexism debate.
Controversial public actions on a big stage can have consequences. Same for free speech. Accept these consequences without using martyrdom as a defense mechanism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16646]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9354
Joined: 11/1/14
|
Silly reaction by the English, but
Jul 6, 2019, 5:17 AM
|
|
Given their soccer history, unsurprising. Soccer treats England like Lucy treats Charlie Brown with a football...tantalizes, then snatches success away. When you're left with tea and mushy peas...well... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback...
Jul 6, 2019, 7:00 AM
[ in reply to Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback... ] |
|
I'm sick and tired of the, "This proves there is a double standard" nonsense. Just stuff it!
That said, I don't have much of a problem with what she did. However, she should be grown up enough to accept the criticism that comes with it instead of trying to twist it into a sexism debate.
Controversial public actions on a big stage can have consequences. Same for free speech. Accept these consequences without using martyrdom as a defense mechanism.
Well, there is context there, and the chicks are hyper-sensitive right now, and for good reason. They're involved in a massive lawsuit against the United States Soccer Federation, and it's very much gender-related...and pay-related...and they have a point. All the girls do is kick butt. They won the last World Cup in spectacular fashion and are on the brink of winning another, and are by a lot the world's most powerful team. They are the standard-bearers for their sport.
The men, in contrast, managed to not even qualify for the last World Cup, and a lot of them put in effort that can best be described as "limp" in a shocking 2-1 loss to Trinidad and Tobago - currently ranked #92 in the world, and managed to finish behind both Panama and Honduras as well in the qualifying hex, the worst effort since 1986 when the USA didn't even have a professional soccer league and was composed of a bunch of college kids. The men are currently ranked - drum roll - #30 in the world. Awesome.
But the men get paid an average of $13,166 per game to represent the USA...whereas the women get paid just $4,950. And yes, before you get started, the men's revenue stream is bigger just because the FIFA revenue (not gate, not attendance, mind) is just so much larger at the moment.
To me that fiscal argument is BS, though, because fan base - meaning, the ultimate source of that revenue - is always driven by fans with a connection to a given sport, and thanks to the prominence of the women's game, of the 3,300,000+ youth players (all with parents, mind) currently involved with US Soccer, there's an almost even split (52/48) between boys and girls. And there's another estimated 9.5 million girls who play in anything from church to high school leagues. That's a lot of cheddar.
Regardless, our girls get it done, and while they inspire and bring out participation at a level other countries can only marvel at, the men are still getting paid more than two and a half times more...all while getting repeatedly patronized by both their bosses at the USSF and guys like Sepp Blatter, the former disgraced head of FIFA, who only a couple years ago famously suggested the women's game would be more popular if the women wore shorter shorts.
So yeah, they're a little prickly right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
Good, if they're so much the better than the men, then...
Jul 6, 2019, 7:06 AM
|
|
let them try out for the team or #### about equal play = equal pay, because it's not until they do.
Absolutely one of the most ridiculous assertions going today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Good, if they're so much the better than the men, then...
Jul 6, 2019, 7:29 AM
|
|
Most within the USSF do not consider it "ridiculous". I know; I'm actually a licensed USSF coach. I get out there and do. The majority of coaches within the USSF are in the women's camp on this.
The gender split as far as participation goes in the USA is actually pretty even...as I said, about 52/48. That's the fan base, the revenue generators, at least here in the USA. In Europe, it can skew 90/10 or even as bad as 95/5 in Eastern Europe.
The way it works is, FIFA - the world's governing body - allocates money to its member federations based on revenue sharing. Those Federations - in the USA's case, the USSF - then allocates that money to its players at its own discretion.
Yeah, the rest of the world is far more sexist than the USA - even Europe, which paradoxically prides itself on being all enlightened in its thinking - but that doesn't mean the USSF has to be, especially because our fan base is so much different than anyone else's.
The American women say they generate as much (and probably more devoted) fandom as the men and are entitled to equal pay, and it's hard to argue. That argument certainly wouldn't fly anywhere else in the world...but it actually does here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
Just because they do not, doesn't make it any less so.
Jul 6, 2019, 7:36 AM
|
|
We should then award Mount Union[Div III] & OAC equal payout to the ACC with Clemson's CFP championship earlier this year - Mount Union actually had a greater climb in the 32 team playoff.
I for one would love to see the ladies try out & god bless the little cotton socks of the woman[or 2, 3...] that might ever make the team.
While we're at it, we scrap Title IX and that antiquated system of set asides, because the ladies are handicapped - not a good look in 2019, right? Why anyone would force our universities and colleges to waste good money that could go to bettering their academic offering is beyond the realm of credulity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Just because they do not, doesn't make it any less so.
Jul 6, 2019, 7:56 AM
|
|
I dunno. How is Mount Union's fan base compared to Clemson's? All the chicks are saying.
If you're advocating scrapping Title IX, that's an entirely different argument, there...and I wish you the best of luck...especially because Title IX has such profound implications in regards to race as well as gender, since so many African-American girls get their entrance into college via athletics.
I will posit those that claim the revenue-generating sports - which includes only men's football and men's basketball, at this point - might have reason to be exempt from Title IX considerations because they pay for themselves and then quite a lot else on top of that - but after that, when you're considering which non-revenue-generating collegic sports are more "deserving" of a University's dollars it's kind of hard to argue against fairness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
It's not equal, not remotely or they'd be playing...
Jul 6, 2019, 8:09 AM
|
|
with the men, or DI instead of DIII or NBA instead of Europe...
Equal Pay = Equal Play, it's sterling, you know, PLAY and easily determined between the lines. No matter how idiotic they try to be, nothing closes that gap on the field.
Nothing.
It is cute though, their rolling around on the floor, kicking and screaming - the only sexist taint in that world is their demand to be payed as the men yet bringing half the ability - just put those mad skills to the test, or would they have too much to lose when they get bludgeoned?
It's really not much to ask if they have it in them, but they don't - clearly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24782]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 32224
Joined: 2/15/09
|
You are openly advocating for the elimination of women's
Jul 6, 2019, 2:06 PM
|
|
sports. You know that right? You are doing it in a sneaky way but that's what you are suggesting. That if a woman can't beat a man at a sport then they shouldn't get anything? Eliminate title IX etc.
Nobody denies that men are biologically stronger than women and therefore "better" at sports because of their natural bodies. Women have to worry about that whole baby making process you know that men don't have to deal with, so their bodies are biologically more designed for that.
So because of that they shouldn't be allowed to make a good living playing sports? No of course not that absolutely absurd and very backwards thinking. People for the most part would much rather watch the elite women in a sport play than like the 500the best male even though the male would technically beat them in a head to head game. So who would "win" is completely irrelevant.
Like the 400th ranked male tennis player would beat Serena and how many millions of people know Serena vs like five people in the whole world know who the low ranked male tennis player is? The US women national soccer team would lose to the Tunisian male soccer team and yet which one receives the worldwide attention and fame? Newberry men's basketball would beat the Uconn women, yet hoe many times to you see Newberry mens basketball on ESPN?
And if you're argument for eliminating women's sports as a serious profession is because it's a lower level then why do people enjoy college football and basketball so much? That's technically a lower level than the pros right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
You know you're openly proving what a complete idiot
Jul 8, 2019, 8:13 AM
|
|
you are, not that there was ever any doubt.
Equal pay for equal play does not exist when the play is not equal, that's all, pretty simple & yes, science is a fact.
No one was advocating for the ending of all the set asides afforded women's sports or women sports in general, just that they, the special needs/set asides/entitlements exist along the way, while on the back end they're still screaming as if they, the entitlements, never existed or don't.
Sorry they do and pointing them out simply reinforces the lack of equality between the mens & womens, they're not my doing, but governments & other organizations.
The word folks might should strive for is "fair", then they can haggle over or about what that might mean in the world of things?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34526]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 41378
Joined: 4/20/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
I'm no soccer fan from the sidelines, TV or stands. I don't
Jul 6, 2019, 8:20 AM
|
|
enjoy the game as even a casual viewer and yes, I played years growing up in FLA.
I'm happy for the ladies, they work hard, practice hard - no doubt about it, just as there's no doubt they could not hold a candle to a lesser level men's team.
Blame biology, XX, born with two strikes against when athletic prowess is in the balance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16646]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9354
Joined: 11/1/14
|
This thread tells me even some very
Jul 6, 2019, 8:28 AM
[ in reply to It's bad soccer. Heck, they got beat by the ] |
|
Open-minded thinkers travel a very narrow thought process at times. We all have our views, obviously.
To Q's point, the women soccer success is driving AT LEAST as many industry dollars as the men...and perhaps more. Kids are kids...soccer is soccer to them...and they like to emulate winners...same as we did growing up. Mom and dad like to keep the kids happy, so they spend mucho moolah on soccer...the same as other sports.
Women's soccer transcends sex, unlike softball. They're playing the same game as the guys and, frankly, as kids, the girls are more than equal. Been there...seen it.
Appalachian State will forever hang it's hat on beating Michigan. And as those U15 lads go through life, they can hang their collective hats on having won a match against the women's national team. It may well be their high water mark. Hopefully...just hopefully, the T&T loss will prove the men's low water mark...but the odds suggest otherwise, presently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
And once again, making it about everything else, but their..
Jul 6, 2019, 8:42 AM
|
|
inability to challenge the men on the field.
There's no equality in the NFL, it doesn't exist, save an attempt to cap pay roll with a hard ceiling - there are the highest paid players & those making league minimum - equality does not exist when performance is the guiding light.
Truth & facts are narrow-minded at times, clinical, surgical steel sharp & cut to the quick.
Set up the game, not my fault when reality brings everything else down on top of them - or maybe they'll get lucky, Billy Jean an over confident, mocking men's side?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2479]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1793
Joined: 12/20/01
|
Re: This thread tells me even some very
Jul 6, 2019, 8:45 AM
[ in reply to This thread tells me even some very ] |
|
"the girls are more than equal"
Are you seriously suggesting that the women's team could compete with the men?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
No, Salty's not, he's a good man, but making an argument
Jul 6, 2019, 8:48 AM
|
|
when none exists. Really easy to clear this all up, but they won't - far too much to lose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [15]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21
Joined: 5/20/18
|
Re: This thread tells me even some very
Jul 6, 2019, 10:44 AM
[ in reply to Re: This thread tells me even some very ] |
|
It’s not about who could beat who, it’s about equal pay for the same work. If a man and a woman lift the same box then they should be paid the same even if it’s easier for the man. Say what you will but if you must then make it merit based and then the women really have a gripe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
Yes, it is absolutely about who would beat whom...
Jul 6, 2019, 11:06 AM
|
|
that same box in your scenario would be Brazil's men's team, or Mexico or Germany or so many other men's teams that would absolutely dominate the women's squad and if so, other than some initial novelty, no one's paying beyond the first drop of the product to watch the USA women's team get pounded on the regular. It would be a mockery and those don't pay so well.
This is an exceptional year, the men's team can't make the show, the women are cruising, playing their way into defending their title. Bravo and good for the ladies, they should be proud.
A comparable men's team on this stage will dwarf the women. Is there a woman's sport with a men's equivalent where their best could beat, on the field or other, the men's squad?
It's not the same work, the men's side would have the girls huddling in the corner for safety, pointing on the doll where the bad men touched them.
Let all women try out for the Clemson Basketball team, etc... eliminate the handicapping and entitlements - let the women earn it, lifting the same box - they'll tap out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4545]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3357
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Re: This thread tells me even some very
Jul 6, 2019, 12:12 PM
[ in reply to Re: This thread tells me even some very ] |
|
Your point is valid but doesn't apply here.
The WNT's job is not to play (win) soccer games, per se, it's to get fans to PAY to watch them win soccer games. When the fans pay more to see them play, or more fans pay to see them play, then their incomes should go up. Currently, the US WNT is the cream of the crop in women's soccer, but the overall revenue from the Women's World Cup pales, absolutely pales, in relation to the men's World Cup income. The men do this part of their job far better than the women, even if they don't actually win their games all that often.
This reality is not sexist. Men playing golf in the Nationwide or Gateway Tour are playing the same SPORT as the men on the PGA tour, but they are not playing the same GAME against the same level of competition seen on the PGA tour. They play in front of dozens or hundreds of spectators in tournaments that have very modest purses.
By your argument, the men on the Nationwide Tour should make the same money as the women on the LPGA Tour, and the women on the LPGA tour should earn the same money as the men on the PGA tour. After all, they are all lifting the same box.
But it ignores the harsh reality that "butts in seats" and TV ad dollars (viewers are "butts in seats" are the reason they get paid. It's the same for the US WNT.
P.S. It's not helping the WNT's cause that many of them seem bent on alienating large swaths of the population who would otherwise be out in front chanting USA USA USA. Instead those people are now tuning out, reducing potential revenues even further.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4545]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3357
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Woman overall not generating revenues equal to the men
Jul 6, 2019, 3:42 PM
[ in reply to This thread tells me even some very ] |
|
Sports Illustrated:
"When it comes to revenue generation itself, there are some useful ways of looking at it.
Did the U.S. women generate more revenue than the men while winning the World Cup in 2015? Yes.
U.S. Soccer says the men produced nearly double the revenue of the women over a four-year cycle. But a look at U.S. Soccer’s financial report shows the gap between the U.S. men and women is much closer when you look at the four years from 2014 to ’17.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6153]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5080
Joined: 8/30/17
|
Re: Good, if they're so much the better than the men, then...
Jul 6, 2019, 10:50 AM
[ in reply to Re: Good, if they're so much the better than the men, then... ] |
|
I’m pretty sure the WNT is free to earn whatever they are worth in endorsements. Given your argument about popularity they should be able to cash in at a much higher rate than our unrecognizable MNT. That’s how capitalism works. Plus they play in pro leagues where they, once again, get paid what the market will bear. If popularity in the US for the women’s game is as you say, they should be making plenty and would not mind playing a tournament every 4 years where they get paid 1/3 scale of the men. Of course it is that very vehicle - World Cup - that brings them their fame. A vehicle that was built entirely by nations fielding men’s teams. If you took away the men’s World Cup it would crush 75% of the worlds sports fans. If you took away the women’s World Cup only 3 or 4 countries would grumble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3612]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3789
Joined: 1/21/16
|
Re: pretty hard to charge "sexism"
Jul 6, 2019, 11:07 AM
|
|
when you do bikini photo shoots for extra money.
As much as i love Alex the Soccer Player, Alex the Activist is pretty lame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3612]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3789
Joined: 1/21/16
|
Re: pretty hard to charge "sexism"
Jul 6, 2019, 11:24 AM
|
|
Let me clarify:
I fully support personal endorsements. I would buy a box of cereal with her photo on it.
If my little girls wanted the sox Alex endorsed like (they did when Mia Hamm did endorsements), I'd be inclined to buy them. I like my girls to be happy, and positive role models have a place in good parenting.
But if my girls saw Alex's bikini shot on the cover of a 'Men's' magazine, and screamed "Alex Morgan!", i don't think purchasing it would be the appropriate response. As a good parent would do, of course.
Nor would i go online to Google the photos for free. As a thrifty sexist would do, of course.
I'd rather be a good parent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [32580]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14886
Joined: 6/29/11
|
I didn’t know about her bikini shoot - I just Googler’d it -
Jul 7, 2019, 8:25 AM
|
|
that’s a nice hiney.
Excited to contribute to this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16646]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9354
Joined: 11/1/14
|
What's with all the 'Ifs'?
Jul 6, 2019, 11:09 AM
[ in reply to Re: Good, if they're so much the better than the men, then... ] |
|
First, no one is suggesting men and women play each other...that's folly. The 'debate' at this time is who is drawing more attention and popularity to the game...in this country. The women are infinitely more successful than the men. Of course, there's a reason...they didn't give the rest of the world many decades head start. Flip-side, the dominant women sides pretty much launched programs in tandem.
Still, as the 'debate' rages, I'm supportive of the women getting improved compensation, which is really all this is about. That program is contributing to the growth of the game stateside at least on par with the men, so the economics justify an improvement. Equality can be supported; however, it's not typically the tenor of this country to come down wholly on the side of equality...even when it's put in writing/law.
Who's up next? Take a breather, DSP!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
Don't blaspheme me...***
Jul 6, 2019, 11:18 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4101]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4362
Joined: 10/22/14
|
Re: What's with all the 'Ifs'?
Jul 6, 2019, 11:32 AM
[ in reply to What's with all the 'Ifs'? ] |
|
Just to throw in my .02 cents as someone who has never, and will never watch a soccer match of either gender, show me the gate receipts/profit margins and I will show you who should be paid more. If the men are filling a 50k seat venue and the women a 100k seat stadium, then they should earn more. However, if the men draw 75k, and the women 25... no brainer. If they are drawing about the same, then yes, we need to have a conversation. To me ability and winning count for nothing really. To use an example from another industry: John Malkovich vs Tom Cruise. Who is the better actor vs who gets paid more? Does John Malkovich turn in incredible performances in anything he does? Absolutely. So, he should be one of the highest box office earners right? No? Why not? Because Tom Cruise is box office money. He can fill theatres and draw a packed house in most cases. So while John M gets paid 1 million per movie(no clue actual $) Tom C gets upwards of 10 mil per flick. Who is better really matters not imo. And I think the numbers heretofore bear that out. Again, just one Jarheads opinion. oh, and again... I dont care and a large portion of the US still dosnt, although it is improving as more young kids are playing the footie until they are old enough for football/baseball etc. Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2663]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 4303
Joined: 1/4/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13221]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9985
Joined: 5/11/99
|
They are better than the Men on the field.
Jul 6, 2019, 1:41 PM
[ in reply to Good, if they're so much the better than the men, then... ] |
|
When you measure it by the revenue they produce. This is a fact. It can't be argued.
The US women's team has produced almost 1 million dollars more (50.8 vs 49.9) in revenue than the Men's US team over the last 3 years.
Yet, they receive MUCH less in pay.
So, when you see difference of 96% less pay for the women over all games played and won, or 358% less pay for making the US national team....yeah, I'd say they have a pretty good case for voicing their displeasure for the wage gap.
The federation fell asleep on this one the last few years. Even the US Men's team is on the women's side of this and has let it be known they support a new revenue sharing model.
There is no debate here. This will change, and there should be b/c they've already earned it and the number support it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4545]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3357
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Re: They are better than the Men on the field.
Jul 6, 2019, 3:56 PM
|
|
The women's union collectively bargained away maximum pay for "safety".
"The U.S. women point to the fact that Tier 1 women's players, who made up the majority of World Cup roster, made a base salary of $72,000 in 2015, whereas the men earned more than $5,000 per game, which over the course of 20 games would exceed $100,000. But the USSF claims that is also an unfair comparison. The federation said that of the 49 men who played for the national team last year, none played all 20 games, only three played more than 13 games, and only 11 played in 10 or more. All Tier 1 women's national team players, meanwhile, earned $72,000 regardless of the number of games they played.
NY Times:
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. At No. 50, the male player made 10 times as much as his female counterpart.
he pay plans differ for the men’s and women’s national teams, who have their own players’ associations and negotiate their own collective bargaining agreements. The women’s team’s pay is a mix of a base salary — $72,000 for the majority of players on the regular roster — plus a modest game bonus ($1,350) for each game won. (The women do not receive game bonuses if they tie or lose matches.) U.S. Soccer also pays the salaries of the national team players who compete in the N.W.S.L., the nascent American women’s professional league, as well as providing some health insurance benefits, severance pay for players cut from the team and maternity leave at half pay if they become pregnant.
The men, meanwhile, operate on a pay-for-play system: Those players who are called in for matches are eligible for roster and game bonuses considerably higher than those paid to the women, but a player must be called into camp to receive anything. So when Tim Howard took a year off after the 2014 World Cup, he earned no pay from U.S. Soccer for the games he missed. Any player who is injured, or one who is on the fringes of the national team player pool and is not called in for months or years, receives nothing until he returns to camp. The security net is that every male player in the pool, unlike the women, has the advantage of falling back on a lucrative salary from his professional club.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4545]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3357
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback...
Jul 6, 2019, 11:57 AM
[ in reply to Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback... ] |
|
"Women on the U.S. national soccer teams aren’t paid less than men. They’re paid differently..."
There's a number of factors here. First, the WNT players are part of a union, which collectively bargained for their compensation, so they got what they wanted or they should not have signed the contract. Second, the collective-bargaining agreements they have negotiated emphasize income- and job-security rather than topping out earning potential. The women's union voted for things like getting paid even if they don't play, maternity leave, injury pay, and severance pay if they get cut from the team. The men's team contract, on the other hand, puts players income more at risk--they don't get paid (or paid as much) if they are cut, or injured, or don't play due to coaches decision.
[e.g. 2016 WSJ article]
Data released by the U.S. Soccer Federation show that the top women’s players make nearly as much as the highest-paid men’s players. Since 2008, six national-team men and six women have earned more than $1 million from the Federation. And according to ESPN, 14 of the 25 highest-earning national-team players over the past four years have been women, whose compensation averaged $695,269. That’s 2.2% below the average for men. Women also receive benefits that men don’t, including maternity leave and severance pay if they get cut from the team. Women get paid if they’re sidelined with an injury; men don’t.
Women on the U.S. national soccer teams aren’t paid less than men. They’re paid differently because the collective-bargaining agreements they have negotiated emphasize income- and job-security. Women players earn annual salaries of $72,000; the men get paid by how many games they play. The men’s roster is more fluid, and the head coach can call players to camp for one game.
Nearly 50 men’s players appeared in games for the U.S. national squad last year, but only three played more than 13 games. The women’s team fields about half as many players.
Players on the women’s team receive smaller bonuses than the men: Women are awarded $1,350 for each win, while the men get $5,000 for each game they’re on the national roster and are paid $6,250-$17,625 for each victory, depending on their opponent’s ranking.
Another significant disparity: The U.S. women’s team received $2 million from the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) for winning the World Cup last year, while the men’s team landed $9 million merely for advancing to the round of 16.
How could that be? Simple: Men’s soccer is much more popular than women’s soccer world-wide. Historically, men’s soccer has also been a bigger draw in the U.S. Between 2011 and 2015, men played in 53 home games with attendance averaging 35,536. During that period, women played 50 games in the U.S., drawing an average attendance of 16,559. In 2014, when the men’s team was in the World Cup competition, their revenues were roughly four times that of the women’s team. Last year, when the women’s team was competing for the World Cup, their revenues ($23.5 million) beat the men’s team’s ($21 million) for the first time.
Most men’s soccer players earn more from their club teams than women do from the embryonic National Women’s Soccer League, which the Federation launched in 2012 to provide female players who don’t make the national team with a venue to showcase their talent. But the Federation isn’t responsible for how professional soccer leagues pay their players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [24]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 24
Joined: 9/1/13
|
Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback...
Jul 6, 2019, 12:47 PM
[ in reply to Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback... ] |
|
Unfortunately the numbers of participants isn’t what pays the players. I won’t pretend to know how FIFA or the USSF doles out the pay but I’m sure youth participation isn’t part of it. I love the fact that the game is growing but if you look at average attendance of the MLS (22k) compared to the NWSL(6k) per game you can see an obvious discrepancy. This is more a representation of what’s important. People willing to pay to watch vs people playing.This doesn’t even bring avg. ticket cost into play. Don’t get me wrong. I love watching the national women’s team play but I still the men’s program brings in more gate revenue therefore gets paid better. You can’t dispute the success of the women’s program. Cut the players in on jersey sales. Maybe that would help them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [790]
TigerPulse: 50%
Posts: 1512
Joined: 8/3/16
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7639
Joined: 1/6/04
|
Re: People getting into Alex Morgan for celebration. My comeback...
Jul 6, 2019, 12:04 PM
|
|
I'm more for the old school celebrations when the women would rip they jersey off. (1999 Brandi Chastain)
Can't say I wouldn't turn and look the other way for some players...but would still like to have that option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64969]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33160
Joined: 12/3/03
|
Libtard Snowflakes must literally just sit around all day
Jul 6, 2019, 1:12 PM
|
|
looking for something to get upset and cry about. Here at home, and in Not-So-Merry Olde England.
Here's a plan. Become Bama or USuK football fans. Then, you will have something concrete to complain and cry about, repeated arsewhuppins!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2663]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 4303
Joined: 1/4/07
|
jesus christ, can you trump leg humpers just
Jul 6, 2019, 9:45 PM
|
|
throw yourselves down some stairs already. I am so tired of hearing people who show up at Trump rallies to cry about how their jobs are being stolen by people who can't speak English talking about "liberal snowflakes."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3612]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3789
Joined: 1/21/16
|
Re: jesus christ, can you trump leg humpers just
Jul 7, 2019, 12:57 AM
|
|
Wait: you think it's the snowflakes who want the wall built??
I think you're confused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1421
Joined: 12/12/12
|
Re: jesus christ, can you trump leg humpers just
Jul 7, 2019, 9:44 AM
[ in reply to jesus christ, can you trump leg humpers just ] |
|
And meanwhile Saudi’s Arabia will not allow woman to wrestle from WWE in their country. But we are the worst sexist country in the world ?? and everybody’s worried about a sipping tea gesture, give me a friggin break.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 800
Joined: 8/25/17
|
England players were taking cheap shots at Morgan...
Jul 7, 2019, 9:21 AM
|
|
Including Bright getting red card for elbowing Alex in the chops. Alex was just peed off and got some payback. That's what competitors do
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 48
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
