The much debated pay gap between men and women in Soccer/Football.

[Rygu]

I've seen this all over FB and Twitter with people arguing back and forth non stop the last few weeks. The feminists male and female calling for equal pay between the sexes.

Now I'm not an expert on economics, but I'm also not clueless. I do know that the men's world cup generates between 5 and 6 billion dollars compared to 100-150 million for the women.

I have not yet, out of the hundreds of posts in support of equal pay seen a single person go over the revenue of both the men's and women's world cup and come up with a number of what the men and women should be paid. All I hear from the left is women should be paid more or higher, particularly the American women due to their success in the WC and the lack of WC success for the men.

Will someone actually put the numbers together and come up with an economically realistic number for what the women should be paid based on the revenue they generate? If I'm wrong with the revenue numbers I stated then fine but I still haven't seen one proposal from anyone whether it be perfect or ridiculous.

Can anyone here with a legit grasp of them, political affiliations aside give a non bias proposal as to how it would be economically viable to pay the women as much or even more than the men? I have no problem being wrong I just haven't seen it yet.

 

[Da Speeit]

It's all bullshit and women just being fucking annoying and the dudes who want to fuck them joining along.
It's not going to change and it shouldn't. These fucking nerds can go back to jerking off to Marvel Movies and Stranger Things.

Here's what we should do for a year:
Women play in CONCACAF mens, Men play in whatever fucking weird qualification system the Women play in.

We'll see who returns with silverware first. Winners get combined theoretical prize money of both competitions.

 

[Graves The Elder]

lol gotta love the speeitzer

 

[Da Speeit]

lol gotta love the speeitzer

 

[Da Speeit]

@Rygu
Here you go, all the numbers, men are actually paid less

 

[Ceez]

It's all bullshit and women just being fucking annoying and the dudes who want to fuck them joining along.
It's not going to change and it shouldn't. These fucking nerds can go back to jerking off to Marvel Movies and Stranger Things.

Here's what we should do for a year:
Women play in CONCACAF mens, Men play in whatever fucking weird qualification system the Women play in.

We'll see who returns with silverware first. Winners get combined theoretical prize money of both competitions.

Fucking lol get em yo

 

[Bamboozled]

Its like 8% revenue share for men, and 13% or more for women. Only problem is Men's soccer has charisma and talent. So more people spend money on it.

 

[KOQ24]

they might have a point if womens soccer generated the same amount of profits, but its not even close.
The women's world cup is the only tournament that actually generates profits.

Most euro clubs are subdivisions of big Men's clubs like Arsenal,Paris St. Germain, Bayern München etc.
The US womens league has gone bankrupt like 3 times now.


Avg attendance in the men's Bundesliga is 43.000.
It's barely over 1.000 in the women's Bundesliga.

 

[MikeMcMann]

the only thing that should matter in terms of pay for Entertainment is the draw or ROI.

If the women are drawing the same or similar to the men then they should be paid the same or similar. If they are not then they should not but are parasitically seizing on politics and even the #metoo movement to try and shame others to doing what is not right.

Based on the logic of the women's team why should any female, or male for that matter, actor make any less than the top actor does? Why is not everyone woman paid the same as the top women?

Are women arguing for men to make equal pay in modeling?

 

[ferrisjso]

I've seen this all over FB and Twitter with people arguing back and forth non stop the last few weeks. The feminists male and female calling for equal pay between the sexes.

Now I'm not an expert on economics, but I'm also not clueless. I do know that the men's world cup generates between 5 and 6 billion dollars compared to 100-150 million for the women.

I have not yet, out of the hundreds of posts in support of equal pay seen a single person go over the revenue of both the men's and women's world cup and come up with a number of what the men and women should be paid. All I hear from the left is women should be paid more or higher, particularly the American women due to their success in the WC and the lack of WC success for the men.

Will someone actually put the numbers together and come up with an economically realistic number for what the women should be paid based on the revenue they generate? If I'm wrong with the revenue numbers I stated then fine but I still haven't seen one proposal from anyone whether it be perfect or ridiculous.

Can anyone here with a legit grasp of them, political affiliations aside give a non bias proposal as to how it would be economically viable to pay the women as much or even more than the men? I have no problem being wrong I just haven't seen it yet.

This ain't the NBA and WNBA, in terms of the physical differences between the two genders, far less impactful on the quality of the games. Now let's get to the finances. When you cite the difference between the men's world cup and Women's world cup you are ignoring that the US men are a non factor in the men's world cup(didn't even qualify last time and likely would never qualify if they were in Europe or South America) while the women are a dominant force in theirs. All for merit but this isn't a case where we just compare league revenue's and see what people want and don't want to watch, these aren't leagues these are international competitions that happen once every four years.

Other country's men teams are the reason for those male world cup numbers, US men are responsible for almost none of that revenue while the US women are the best team in women's soccer and likely contribute considerably more than any other team. So they have a case on the financial merits. In terms of athletic merit they have a case to be paid even more cause they win while the US men haven't made the semis of the word cup in 90 years and have made the quarters one time since then.

 

[Da Speeit]

This ain't the NBA and WNBA, in terms of the physical differences between the two genders, far less impactful on the quality of the games. Now let's get to the finances. When you cite the difference between the men's world cup and Women's world cup you are ignoring that the US men are a non factor in the men's world cup(didn't even qualify last time and likely would never qualify if they were in Europe or South America) while the women are a dominant force in theirs. All for merit but this isn't a case where we just compare league revenue's and see what people want and don't want to watch, these aren't leagues these are international competitions that happen once every four years.

Other country's men teams are the reason for those male world cup numbers, US men are responsible for almost none of that revenue while the US women are the best team in women's soccer and likely contribute considerably more than any other team. So they have a case on the financial merits. In terms of athletic merit they have a case to be paid even more cause they win while the US men haven't made the semis of the word cup in 90 years and have made the quarters one time since then.

lmao you idiot.
The men didn't qualify...which is why the women's team made more money than the men did this cycle.

Qualifying for the women's world cup, for the US, is not difficult, and even in the final game, the market is not as big as when the US Men's team played Belgium, who went on take bronze in last year's world cup.

How about this riddle for you losers:
England's Men's team got literally the same finish as the Women's team in their respective world cups.
So should the pay be exactly equal? Should Raheem Sterling, Harry Kane, GLOBAL SUPERSTARS forfeit their wages in the name of equality to Bronze, Whtie and Co?

 

[ferrisjso]

lmao you idiot.
The men didn't qualify...which is why the women's team made more money than the men did this cycle.

Qualifying for the women's world cup, for the US, is not difficult, and even in the final game, the market is not as big as when the US Men's team played Belgium, who went on take bronze in last year's world cup.

How about this riddle for you losers:
England's Men's team got literally the same finish as the Women's team in their respective world cups.
So should the pay be exactly equal? Should Raheem Sterling, Harry Kane, GLOBAL SUPERSTARS forfeit their wages in the name of equality to Bronze, Whtie and Co?

Qualifying for the mens world cup isn't difficult either. CONCOCAF can be seen as semi rigging the system for the US to make it. And they still didn't last time. Don't know how difficult qualifying for the women's one is, but this ain't exactly what you want to highlight to make the case men should be paid more. Yay we beat Barbados we are soooo awesome.

Those are Brits? Also that was the second or third best English team of all time. Entirely different story than in the US.

Also soccer players don't make their "wages" on the world cup they make it in their leagues while the main point of world cup's are patriotism and prestige. Male superstars are already paid for their celebrity. Should be irrelevant and in the US, some of the women's players are bigger celebrities than Kane and Sterling.

Hate to break it to you, 99 % of Americans probably have no idea who Sterling or Harry Kane is. Only British player who's probably been a "global superstar" is David Beckham. You sound like an American trying to call an NFL QB an international superstar.

 

[Da Speeit]

Qualifying for the mens world cup isn't difficult either. CONCOCAF can be seen as semi rigging the system for the US to make it. And they still didn't last time. Don't know how difficult qualifying for the women's one is, but this ain't exactly what you want to highlight to make the case men should be paid more. Yay we beat Barbados we are soooo awesome.

Those are Brits? Also that was the second or third best English team of all time. Entirely different story than in the US.

Also soccer players don't make their "wages" on the world cup they make it in their leagues while the main point of world cup's are patriotism and prestige. Male superstars are already paid for their celebrity.

Hate to break it to you, 99 % of Americans probably have no idea who Sterling or Harry Kane is. Only British player who's probably been a "global superstar" is David Beckham. You sound like an American trying to call an NFL QB an international superstar.

So American women should be paid more than American men, but English Women don't deserve the same pay as English men.
Holy shit you're full of it.

America isn't the globe. Harry Kane and Raheem Sterling are GLOBAL superstars.
Yes, Georgie Best, Steven Gerrard, Gareth Bale, Bobby Moore, Wayne Rooney, Ryan Giggs, none of them were or are "Gobal Superstars" because not a lot of Americans watch them. What's funny is that one of them is now one of the highest paid MLS players in history. What an asinine point.

You sound like some cuck who has no idea what he's talking about. CONCACAF Men's qualification is not easy whatsoever compared to the rest of the world. If we were in a different pot we'd qualify every cycle like the Australia's, Japan's, South Korea's of the world.

Oh, by the way, are you arguing that Tom Brady, Odell Beckham, etc. etc. are not global superstars? Hahahahha
Just shut up

 

[Da Speeit]

There's a reason all of these annoying sanctimonious cunts were complaining at the prospect of Women's goals being smaller.
The US team has a height and physicality advantage over most of the world. The Dutch, French and British are about the only team that can compare, and that's just in starting lineups; other countries have their tallest women in the starting 11 per average, we have a physical mix.

The worst thing about women's football, past the bad touches, the horrible passing and the shambolic refereeing, is the goalkeeping. Fucking Thailand's goalie is like 5'5. van Vedeendaal is a giant in the net and she's 5'11.

Smaller nets would make a more competitive game, which is why the US is STAUNCHLY against the idea and rings the "SEXIST" bell whenever it's brought up, but it's clear as day to see.

 

[therealdope]

This ain't the NBA and WNBA, in terms of the physical differences between the two genders,

Ummmm, yes it is. You missed the part where a 14 yr old boys team beat the USNWT.

 

[ferrisjso]

So American women should be paid more than American men, but English Women don't deserve the same pay as English men.
Holy shit you're full of it.

America isn't the globe. Harry Kane and Raheem Sterling are GLOBAL superstars.
Yes, Georgie Best, Steven Gerrard, Gareth Bale, Bobby Moore, Wayne Rooney, Ryan Giggs, none of them were or are "Gobal Superstars" because not a lot of Americans watch them. What's funny is that one of them is now one of the highest paid MLS players in history. What an asinine point.

You sound like some cuck who has no idea what he's talking about. CONCACAF Men's qualification is not easy whatsoever compared to the rest of the world. If we were in a different pot we'd qualify every cycle like the Australia's, Japan's, South Korea's of the world.

Oh, by the way, are you arguing that Tom Brady, Odell Beckham, etc. etc. are not global superstars? Hahahahha
Just shut up

England ain't the globe either, it has like 50 million people. I generally agree us Americans have too deluded a sense of self importance but that ain't nothing compared to in the UK.

Highest paid MLS players aren't necessarily global superstars.

The Oceania and Asian qualification are easy too, generally South America, Europe and Africa are the only three tough qualification regions.

 

[Da Speeit]

England ain't the globe either, it has like 50 million people. I generally agree us Americans have too deluded a sense of self importance but that ain't nothing compared to in the UK.

Highest paid MLS players aren't necessarily global superstars.

The Oceania and Asian qualification are easy too, generally South America, Europe and Africa are the only three tough qualification regions.

Holy shit, you don't get it. You literally have no idea what you're talking about
Raheem Sterling and Harry Kane are GLOBAL STARS. Gareth Bale is a GLOBAL star. Gareth Bale plays for the biggest club in the sport. Thai Boxing's betting market has crashed because they bet on the Premier League instead. The PL is huge in China, Korea, Africa. It's a massive market and it's not even the best league. It's bigger than Britain.

You're just one of these annoying American cucks that pop up every couple of years to wax poetic about football in the summer. Just shut up.

 

[Da Speeit]

"England aint the globe either" jesus fucking christ.

 

[ferrisjso]

"England aint the globe either" jesus fucking christ.

Yeah that statement was so stupid. England IS the globe.

My god the delusion runs deep.

 

[Da Speeit]

Yeah that statement was so stupid. England IS the globe.

My god the delusion runs deep.

No, the fact that you know so little about this sport that you're just spewing stupid phrases to save face, all while ignoring the actual point, by the way.
You said "David Beckham is the only global susperstar from Britain" which is beyond fucking clueless and stupid, I named half a dozen British players who are massive names in the sport GLOBALLY and you said "England isn't the globe"
First of all England =/= Britain.
Secondly, where did I specify they're only big in England?
Finally: What the hell does that have to do with how much anyone on the national team is paid? The WORLD was England.

England vs Croatia got nearly half the viewers in the US than USA vs Netherlands final on Sunday.
England vs Croatia in the UK was over 25 million compared to 14.5 in the US million who watched the USA beat the Netherlands IN THE FINAL.
USA Population: 327 million
Britain Population: 66.04 milion

So not even 10% of our country watched the women win the final of their semi-pro tournament, and nearly half in Britain watched England lose in the Semis to Croatia.
Let's go to the Lionesses: 11.7million in the UK watched USA vs England. That's 15% of the country. They finished in exactly the same place as the men. So if we're for all of this "Equal Pay" bullshit, surely the Men's team should garnish their wages toward the women's team no? Why not? Oh because the men's team got double the exposure, and we're only talking about their home soil market.

USA vs Portugal in the group stage: 25 million viewers
USA women vs Japan IN THE FINAL: 25 million viewers

If the US men's team EVER made to the semis or final in the modern era, it would be the biggest sporting event in the history of this country. End of. Women can't even do weekday NFL numbers on a sunday morning.

Go away. No one asked for your input and we're all dumber for reading it.