- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Boston Herald Article: Braceras: Rapinoe no victim, her team earned more than men
Posted on 6/30/21 at 9:53 am to lionward2014
Posted on 6/30/21 at 9:53 am to lionward2014
I remember this topic on Reddit a few years ago, and even as woke as Reddit is, the majority there even thought Rapinoe was full of shite and the argument was horrible.
The data is right there and irrefutable.
The data is right there and irrefutable.
0
Posted on 6/30/21 at 11:25 am to chalmetteowl
quote:
so who earned and who didn’t earn?
In this case, the women didn't earn anything related to the men's prize pool, which is offered by FIFA for qualifying for the Men's WC. The women are already subsidized heavily. Why should they get access to a prize pool for the men?
Posted on 6/30/21 at 11:26 am to SUB
quote:
Hasn't this been the difference that causes the men to earn more, at least as of late? I think it's been known for a while that the USSF pays the women more, but the men still earn more because of WC payout, which USSF does not control.
Pretty much, and men will earn less per game if they don't make the WC, which is the way the men's team negotiated their contract.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 11:38 am to pvilleguru
quote:
I think the women only earned more because the men simply didn't win enough. The men could earn more even if you remove the bonus for winning the World Cup.
And think about this, the men make more for making the world cup than the women do for winning it because the huge difference in viewers.
I think the US should just split it up. No money the women earn goes to the mens pot and no money the men earn goes into the womens pot. Thats fair.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 11:41 am to dgnx6
quote:
I think the US should just split it up. No money the women earn goes to the mens pot and no money the men earn goes into the womens pot. Thats fair.
I think it is split up right now. The prize money issue isn't even in the federation's hands, and it would absolutely destroy the federation itself if they dipped into the men's prize pool to pay the women.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 11:52 am to dgnx6
quote:
And think about this, the men make more for making the world cup than the women do for winning it because the huge difference in viewers
I think the men make more for going to the world cup because that's how they negotiated their contract. I believe they have it in their CBA that they get X for making the WC roster, per start, appearance, etc. I think the prize for winning the WC is really the only thing outside of USSF's control. USSF could easily pay the women the same as the men for simply playing in the World Cup.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 12:15 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
that's how they negotiated their contract
Is ultimately the root cause of all of this is the CBA they AGREED to. It's not sexism, it's buyer's remorse on the USWNT part. Almost always if you take the secure route you don't have as much upside.
I get partially why the USWNT wanted the secured money, they can get pregnant for instance and miss a year plus and still get paid (if I understand it correctly), but they knew before signing it that they ultimately wouldn't get as much as the men if the USMNT made a deep run at a WC.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 12:18 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
USSF could easily pay the women the same as the men for simply playing in the World Cup.
Again, the women negotiated a specific CBA that included salaries for the top 44 women's players, guaranteed, a per diem at equal rates to the men's, things like childcare, and in the end earned more money total than the men's team and earned more total per game. In the summary judgement itself, the court noted that the specific provisions the women wanted they were offered, as they "explicitly rejected the terms they now seek to retroactively impose on themselves."
The issues relates not to an unfair payment structure from the USSF, but that the women wanted both guaranteed money as well as the per game bonuses offered to the men, who do not get guaranteed salaries.
This post was edited on 6/30/21 at 12:20 pm
Posted on 6/30/21 at 12:22 pm to crazy4lsu
Yes. We know.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 12:39 pm to pvilleguru
You have some extremely stupid notions for someone who claims to "know."
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:04 pm to crazy4lsu
Which notions are those?
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:08 pm to pvilleguru
That the USSF could easily pay the women the same as the men for the WC.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:12 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
That the USSF could easily pay the women the same as the men for the WC.
For simply playing and advancing through the WC, yes. The same bonus for winning the WC, no.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:13 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
I think the men make more for going to the world cup because that's how they negotiated their contract
Im strictly talking about what fifa gives to the winner of the mens tourney vs the winner of the womens.
The pay out for any mens team, not just the US, they got zero because they didnt make it, is higher making the tourney than the pay out to the winner of the womens world cup.
Im not talking about ussf at all in this.
Mexico got more money for making the 2018 world cup than the US women did for winning the 2019 world cup. Maybe thats a better way to explain it.
quote:
The France team that won the 2018 World Cup in Russia were awarded $38m (£29m).
quote:
The USWNT side that won the 2019 Women's World Cup in France were awarded $4m (£3.2m).
quote:
France's cash prize alone was more than what all 24 women's teams competed for in the 2019 World Cup.
Again, the women should just bring in more fans. But they lost a lifelong one in me. So good luck with that.
This post was edited on 6/30/21 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:17 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
For simply playing and advancing through the WC, yes. The same bonus for winning the WC, no.
Do you know what those bonuses were? And do you know why they aren't the same?
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:22 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Do you know what those bonuses were?
Not off the top of my head.
quote:
And do you know why they aren't the same?
Because FIFA pays a shite ton more for winning the men's than winning the women's. As far as the per game/roster bonuses, USSF could make up the difference if they weren't paying salaries, benefits, etc.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:27 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
The issues relates not to an unfair payment structure from the USSF, but that the women wanted both guaranteed money as well as the per game bonuses offered to the men, who do not get guaranteed salaries.
Rapinoe and Morgan were asked this point blank on either Fallon or Kimmel, and said they would not take the mens structure. None of this is new actually, it was still all a fricking disgraceful sham trying to frick over USSF.
They got their guarantee and came back and cried some more. The moment i saw that clip years ago was the moment i stopped siding with the women and knew they were full of it.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:34 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Do you know what those bonuses were?
Women got a bonus of $110,000 for winning the final. Men would have received $407,608 for winning the final.
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:35 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
Because FIFA pays a shite ton more for winning the men's than winning the women's.
I wonder why that is.
quote:
As far as the per game/roster bonuses, USSF could make up the difference if they weren't paying salaries, benefits, etc.
Again, what purpose would that serve?
Outside of the prize money issue, the women get their usual bonus for wins depending on their opponents ranking, a qualifying bonus per win, a qualification bonus per player, and a roster bonus per player, just for the WC. Because of the roster and qualification bonus, the baseline payment for a woman who makes the roster is $75,000, seven thousand dollars higher than the roster bonus for the USMNT. Since the women won all seven of their games, they received a baseline payment of $5250 per win (which can increase to $8500 depending on the opponents rank), a qualifying bonus of $3000 per win, the $75,000 roster bonus, and a $110,000 first place bonus, with a post-WC tour that provided payments of between $250,000-350,000. Again, do you know which team actually were paid more just from their respective WC's?
Posted on 6/30/21 at 1:35 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
Women got a bonus of $110,000 for winning the final. Men would have received $407,608 for winning the final.
What was actually paid out?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News