Rapinoe vs Green... who you got?

[Pg81]

Remember when Steven Adams told us we shouldn't take political advice from pro athletes and everybody on here praised him? You guys cannot be so hypocritical

People praised that? That's stupid. Your job doesn't dictate how politically literate you are. He's just pandering

No he has a point. The vast majority of "celebrities" have no more of an idea about politics, science and the like than the average shmuck next to you in the sports bar you go to to watch your favorite past time.

I'd start with her point that its not just the job of the marginalized to fighting against it. Yes, absolutely women athletes have a responsibility if they want more pay to help to figure out new revenue streams, lots of female athletes including her not only acknowledge that but having been fighting those fights for years. Worth noting that the UWNT generated more revenue than the men in her sport and still got paid less.... Same thing has happened in tennis where they tried to use the 3 sets versus 5 argument and Serena and others were like okay we'll play 5 now pay us--which did eventually happen.

Only because the USWNT rejected the same offer that the Men accepted. There's a reason their claim was immediately dismissed by the judge. While I can respect and agree with a lot of what she said in this specific incident, the USWNT's obsession with trying to paint their fight as one against sexism only hurts their/her credibility.

the USA women soccer team is much better than the USA men soccer team which is a joke these days, the Women team should be paid more

Is that so? Then they should be able to prove it. Let both teams play against each other and let us see what will happen. Probably the same that happened between the William's sisters and Karsten Braasch when they had a match each respectively. Of course that will never happen because we have seen what top national womens team do when they meet U15 boys, losing 7-0 and get embarassed. The reality is that the US womens football team is better relative to the competition but the competition is overall leagues poorer, probably worse than for example NBA vs CBA.

The male egos are fragile in this thread. And the self awareness is limited at best.

Have you ever played against women in your favorite sport? I have, I was a coach, referee and player who seen and played plenty of women. Bear in mind I played in the lowest of the low league in freaking Germany so I am pretty bad at it and I switched from football to basketball around the age of 16 having played football since the age of 5 and actually had an offer for tryouts with Kickers Offenbach which was several leagues above where I played before in some backwater village.
Suiffice to say that from what I saw as a referee, up to Regionalliga basically, was nothing short of shocking. Even with my meager skills I could have smoked any woman I ever saw. When I was playing against women as a coach, or out in one of the next major cities big basketball park, I had to severly back just to keep things competive. I do not even have to imagine what would happen if a superstar like LeBron James or James Harden would play against any kind of women'c competition, that would lead to utter destruction even if they play at 50% effort.

[bebopdeluxe]

I assume this thread won’t last long.

What makes you say that? Uninteresting? Controversial?

Misogyny?

Post of the thread right here:

[Rainwater]

Only because the USWNT rejected the same offer that the Men accepted. There's a reason their claim was immediately dismissed by the judge. While I can respect and agree with a lot of what she said in this specific incident, the USWNT's obsession with trying to paint their fight as one against sexism only hurts their/her credibility.

People refuse admit this point

Incorrect. We acknowledge it. But what the other side ignores is the context that allows men to accept the other deal due to being subsidized by the higher wages in club football.

Context always matters, but unfortunately there is this rush to diminish women's sports as quickly as possible so people latch on to this story and think its a mic drop. It's sadly not.

When you say club football do you mean MLS, correct?

[snaquille oatmeal]

Shoould male Supermodels, who no one recognize get the same money as the female Supermodels who have a way bigger reach and following like Adriana Lima etc. ?

They get paid way less, which bothers no one and rightfully so. If your league makes way less money, then its obvious that there would be no equal pay

You are misunderstanding the concept.
Say a male team brings in 100 mil in profits, the players get 10 mil in salary. Then say a female team brings in 50 mil in profits logic would dictate that the players should get 5 mil in salary. That is not what is happening. The females players are getting half a mil and that is what is wrong with the system.

[Optms]

Maybe before you make some blanket statement about girls not being as keen on "competitive competition" as boys (I found that particularly rich given that I will be be driving my daughter to her U12 travel softball practice later today), you provide research data that backs up the assertion that girls aren't as competitive as boys. Now, if you want to say that girls are raised in a different way - by parents, teachers and society at large - to not be as "competitive" as boys, I am all ears. But there is no "compitition chromosome" that boys have that girls don't.

This ties PERFECTLY into what Rapinoe is saying, by the way. A thought process that starts with an assumption that girls are not as "competitive" as boys is exactly what allows NCAA administrators to book 2nd-tier workout facilities for the womens' tournament teams...hell - why do they need excellent fitness facilities, anyway? There are a couple of ellipticals, some free weights - that should be enough for THEM, right?
I worked in the investment industry for ove
r 30 years. I would say the percentage of women in the investment field - for much of my time was, at best, 10 percent. And let me ask you something - do you think that an aggressive, hard-charging 25-year old woman was viewed EXACTLY the same as a 25-year old man? Huh?

And what blanket statement are you referring to, again? Its not my fault you or him appear to suffer from reading comprehension.

I repeatedly made it clear to you and anyone else that cared to analyze my words that I was making a generalizing statement that all boys are inherently more competitive. And this is due in large part to the biological difference between that both genders have. The testosterone found in boys is universally cited as the source for why males (even at a young) typical engage in more aggressive behavior tendencies. These aggressive behavioral patterns of course lending themselves well to physical competition IE Sports. Other chemicals that also play a role are serotonin. I of course left this part out because I had foolishly been under the impression most people understood the biological differences between male and female, and the roles chemicals play in developing not just their bodies, but brains. But I of course was wrong.

If you can't understand simple biology, that's a problem you need to address for yourself and maybe get up to speed on how the human body works. You seem to be bothered by the fact that boys and girls are just inherently different. And for whatever reason seem to take it as an attack on the female gender, as evident by you attempting to twist my words into something I never said. Again, perhaps another problem you need to address.

[azcatz11]

Shoould male Supermodels, who no one recognize get the same money as the female Supermodels who have a way bigger reach and following like Adriana Lima etc. ?

They get paid way less, which bothers no one and rightfully so. If your league makes way less money, then its obvious that there would be no equal pay

You are misunderstanding the concept.
Say a male team brings in 100 mil in profits, the players get 10 mil in salary. Then say a female team brings in 50 mil in profits logic would dictate that the players should get 5 mil in salary. That is not what is happening. The females players are getting half a mil and that is what is wrong with the system.

Didn't they negotiate that deal though?

[Optms]

So some of you seem to think that “marketing“ is some kind of magic button. Marketing can only do so much.

If I’m looking for non-NBA basketball, I’d rather go see my local HS team play than watch a WNBA game.

Who is the WNBA’s target audience anyway?

Some people seem to think investing money into a children's sport (specifically female basketball) will somehow equate to a professional league somehow being relevant. They think investors just backed the NBA and basketball from the jump. And that the league didn't spend decades mired in irrelevancy. The fans came first, then the major financial backers. This is how supply and demand works. But of course this is lost on these individuals.

The predominant demographic of viewers that dominate the Sports industry aren't interested in the WNBA. And no amount of money poured into girls basketball will change that. It would be a ridiculous waste of resources (as the WNBA currently is) and time actually preparing young girls to find real world accessible jobs.

[Texas Chuck]

People refuse admit this point

Incorrect. We acknowledge it. But what the other side ignores is the context that allows men to accept the other deal due to being subsidized by the higher wages in club football.

Context always matters, but unfortunately there is this rush to diminish women's sports as quickly as possible so people latch on to this story and think its a mic drop. It's sadly not.

When you say club football do you mean MLS, correct?

No. Most national team guys play in Europe now. MLS is a part, but the best players are playing in Europe now.

[DoItALL9]

Why don't men's professional lacrosse players get paid more?

Sent from my LM-G710 using RealGM mobile app

[mademan]

Shoould male Supermodels, who no one recognize get the same money as the female Supermodels who have a way bigger reach and following like Adriana Lima etc. ?

They get paid way less, which bothers no one and rightfully so. If your league makes way less money, then its obvious that there would be no equal pay

You are misunderstanding the concept.
Say a male team brings in 100 mil in profits, the players get 10 mil in salary. Then say a female team brings in 50 mil in profits logic would dictate that the players should get 5 mil in salary. That is not what is happening. The females players are getting half a mil and that is what is wrong with the system.

Didn't they negotiate that deal though?

I honestly dont understand how this is even a thing, and it's a testament to the power of politics that it is. They literally negotiated for this. They had the option of either security or risking it for a potential bigger payday. It's crazy anybody is ok with someone picking the safe route and then saying 'nah, give us the money we wouldve made if we went the other way'. There's a term for that (trying to get more money after the job without actually doing more work) and it's called rent-seeking, and most people hate it. But frame it differently and you got people cheering it on. Pretty amazing looking at it from the outside-in

[G35]

I'd start with her point that its not just the job of the marginalized to fighting against it. Yes, absolutely women athletes have a responsibility if they want more pay to help to figure out new revenue streams, lots of female athletes including her not only acknowledge that but having been fighting those fights for years. Worth noting that the UWNT generated more revenue than the men in her sport and still got paid less.... Same thing has happened in tennis where they tried to use the 3 sets versus 5 argument and Serena and others were like okay we'll play 5 now pay us--which did eventually happen.

Only because the USWNT rejected the same offer that the Men accepted. There's a reason their claim was immediately dismissed by the judge. While I can respect and agree with a lot of what she said in this specific incident, the USWNT's obsession with trying to paint their fight as one against sexism only hurts their/her credibility.

the USA women soccer team is much better than the USA men soccer team which is a joke these days, the Women team should be paid more

This is a meritocracy argument.

If you go down this path, then when (not if) the women's soccer team is not on top, then their pay should go down proportionally to their ranking.....

[bebopdeluxe]

Maybe before you make some blanket statement about girls not being as keen on "competitive competition" as boys (I found that particularly rich given that I will be be driving my daughter to her U12 travel softball practice later today), you provide research data that backs up the assertion that girls aren't as competitive as boys. Now, if you want to say that girls are raised in a different way - by parents, teachers and society at large - to not be as "competitive" as boys, I am all ears. But there is no "compitition chromosome" that boys have that girls don't.

This ties PERFECTLY into what Rapinoe is saying, by the way. A thought process that starts with an assumption that girls are not as "competitive" as boys is exactly what allows NCAA administrators to book 2nd-tier workout facilities for the womens' tournament teams...hell - why do they need excellent fitness facilities, anyway? There are a couple of ellipticals, some free weights - that should be enough for THEM, right?
I worked in the investment industry for ove
r 30 years. I would say the percentage of women in the investment field - for much of my time was, at best, 10 percent. And let me ask you something - do you think that an aggressive, hard-charging 25-year old woman was viewed EXACTLY the same as a 25-year old man? Huh?

And what blanket statement are you referring to, again? Its not my fault you or him appear to suffer from reading comprehension.

I repeatedly made it clear to you and anyone else that cared to analyze my words that I was making a generalizing statement that all boys are inherently more competitive. And this is due in large part to the biological difference between that both genders have. The testosterone found in boys is universally cited as the source for why males (even at a young) typical engage in more aggressive behavior tendencies. These aggressive behavioral patterns of course lending themselves well to physical competition IE Sports. Other chemicals that also play a role are serotonin. I of course left this part out because I had foolishly been under the impression most people understood the biological differences between male and female, and the roles chemicals play in developing not just their bodies, but brains. But I of course was wrong.

If you can't understand simple biology, that's a problem you need to address for yourself and maybe get up to speed on how the human body works. You seem to be bothered by the fact that boys and girls are just inherently different. And for whatever reason seem to take it as an attack on the female gender, as evident by you attempting to twist my words into something I never said. Again, perhaps another problem you need to address.

There IS a difference between "aggression" and "competitiveness" - isn't there?

Of course there is.

But then, perhaps you don't see that difference. That's fine.

If you do not want to own the gender assumption that you made in the initial thread I responded you - that ish about boys being inheritantly more "competitively competititve" than girls (or whatever phrase you used), that is fine. These gender stereotypes die hard. There is ZERO REASON why girls can't be just as "competitative" as boys. That is not testosterone. That is instilling in girls - as a very early age - that they can do ANYTHING they want to do, and they can be the best at it. It is having great role models, exposing girls to all of the various creative, athletic and intellectual pursuits that they are FULLY ENTITLED to pursue, and making sure they are in environments where they are challenged to excel. That is why we let our daughter play travel baseball until last year. She was the only girl on the team, but she loved baseball and she was good enough to hang. She made the decision to transition to softball this year, and that has been great - she is a 6th grader that is playing up with 13 and 14 year olds. She is no longer the best player on the team, but she recognizes that is the way she will get better.

Dawn Staley grew up in Phiily playing with boys - she used to scrimmage with the Dobbins' boys team after the girls team was done practice (they liked playing with her too - players LOVE playing with a good point guard, regardless of your sex). Her "competitiveness" takes a back seat to no one - largely because from her earliest days, she wasn't pigeonholed into situations where she had to compromise. The issue I take with your comment is that you are projecting some lack of a personality trait ("competitiveness") to a person's sex. That is simply wrong. What IS wrong, however, is having preconceived notions of whether one sex is more "something" than another. I know that my daughter can't play baseball anymore - the boys are getting bigger, they throw the ball faster...and she has accepted that. She would resent, however, somebody telling her that the reason that she had to change sports is, well, she's a girl, and because she's a girl, she is BIOLOGICALLY INCAPABLE of having the same "competitiveness" as boys.

I am done here. Peace.

[johanliebert]

This is rapinoe looking for an argument. Greens comments weren’t directed at her.

[johanliebert]

Rapinoe’s original stance on pay equality for footballers has been used by the media as click bait

Basically, the US Women’s Team is more successful and generates more revenue than the US Men’s Team but the ladies are paid less for representing their country

That definitely isn’t fair

As far as I am aware, she is not saying that she should be paid the same as Messi at Barcelona

That was a lie the us men’s soccer team brought in more revenue,

[Rainwater]

Incorrect. We acknowledge it. But what the other side ignores is the context that allows men to accept the other deal due to being subsidized by the higher wages in club football.

Context always matters, but unfortunately there is this rush to diminish women's sports as quickly as possible so people latch on to this story and think its a mic drop. It's sadly not.

When you say club football do you mean MLS, correct?

No. Most national team guys play in Europe now. MLS is a part, but the best players are playing in Europe now.

Be it a club team in the the US (MLS) or Europe, it doesn't matter; the problem still remains the same: drawing interest to gain money for women players. Just like men women have club teams as well. However, for whatever reason women's US soccer is far more popular then their individual club teams domestically or internationally. The women's club team's inability to draw the same attention US Women's soccer has forced US women soccer to take the deal they took. This is not a matter sexism but economics. Women club teams just don't draw the same as men club teams to allow them to take the same deal.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Shoould male Supermodels, who no one recognize get the same money as the female Supermodels who have a way bigger reach and following like Adriana Lima etc. ?

They get paid way less, which bothers no one and rightfully so. If your league makes way less money, then its obvious that there would be no equal pay

You are misunderstanding the concept.
Say a male team brings in 100 mil in profits, the players get 10 mil in salary. Then say a female team brings in 50 mil in profits logic would dictate that the players should get 5 mil in salary. That is not what is happening. The females players are getting half a mil and that is what is wrong with the system.

the key word here is profit.
are we clear we are not talking about the WNBA?

Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

[HEKTOR]

-By contrast, anything you see in the WNBA is stuff everyone here can do and has done. Layups- Check. Bounce Passes-Check. 3 Pointers from less than NBA distance-Check.

Because this is a basketball forum...

Go on a tennis forum, and everyone can do and has done everything women's tennis players do.

the thing is that women can do the same things men do, in tennis.
the ball is slower but not really that much from a spectator standpoint (much slower on court, though, to the point there would be no match).
in basketball it's just night and day, two different sports.

They can't but I think what you might be trying to suggest is that it would appear that way more so in tennis than in basketball. I think the TV angle does a lot in making the women's game look not nearly as far in quality as the men's as it really is. This is why you will have some people who actually think Serena is the GOAT tennis player when they don't realize that in her prime, she wouldn't crack the top-6-700 on the men's and that's probably being generous.

The fact that you think clay is not a "real surface" tells me enough. Please stop.
Ivanisevic had enough of an all-court game to make to the FINALS of the French Open.
Not going to bother trying to look up attendance and revenue numbers for 2001. There's a reason why ATP events had prize purses of $400k while women's events with similar points value had $100k - $150k prize purses.

To be fair, Goran only made the finals of the French in Doubles. Different game than singles.

That isn't true at all. Even at state level Boys High School Tournaments, the number of players who can consistently place 100 mph serves is very low.

You talking first serves? If so, those guys weren't very good, or perhaps they were simply too young at the time.

When I attended the Boys Division 2 State Tennis Tournament, almost nobody was serving consistently at the 100 mph range. There was the #4 Overall Seed who was destroying opponents with like a 120 mph serve and he was the anomoly.

120mph is a legit 'big-serve' but others should be able to get to 110 at the least and still not be considered 'big-servers'. I think the difference is the jump in quality when you go up levels and there are still a few levels to go from Division 2 State tennis.

Re: Men play 3 hours. This is a pointless thing though. It exists only for the sake of tradition. The reality is that tennis is having an existential crisis right now because Best of 5 matches in general are too long. I mean we all love watching a great 5th set, but in the vast majority of Best of 5 matches the winner is pretty much known when there's likely to be over an hour left in the match. That's not what you want in the age of 21st century audiences looking at the screen in between digital dopamine hits.

I'm not sure that's why 5 setters are considered too long. I'd say the main reason is that they have an effect on the athlete for the remainder of the tournament. What often happens is a guy gets worn out or even suffers and injury during the 5-setter or in the next match as a result of the 5-setter and thus future matches (and their quality) are affected. I still think that a 5-set GS final is somewhat of a dream match for most tennis fans, especially when watching some of the all-time greats go at it - Fed, Rafa, Nole.

Women Tennis Players still serve roughly 100 mph, hit down the line backhand winners with pin point accuracy, and have precision drop shots and volleys. Almost nobody in this forum can hit 100 mph serves or killer backhand passing shots.

I can do both

Women's tennis 20 years ago was just hit it back hard while grunting like pigs. Meanwhile, here's the year end top 16 of 2001 for the ATP:
1 Lleyton Hewitt AUS 4,365 1 8 Increase 6
2 Gustavo Kuerten BRA 3,855 1 2 Decrease 1
3 Andre Agassi USA 3,520 2 6 Increase 3
4 Yevgeny Kafelnikov RUS 3,090 4 7 Increase 1
5 Juan Carlos Ferrero ESP 3,040 4 16 Increase 7
6 Sébastien Grosjean FRA 2,790 6 19 Increase 13
7 Patrick Rafter AUS 2,785 4 15 Increase 8
8 Tommy Haas GER 2,285 8 24 Increase 15
9 Tim Henman GBR 2,100 8 12 Increase 1
10 Pete Sampras USA 1,940 3 12 Decrease 7
11 Marat Safin RUS 1,920 1 11 Decrease 9
12 Goran Ivanišević CRO 1,761 12 132 Increase 117
13 Roger Federer SUI 1,745 12 30 Increase 16
14 Andy Roddick USA 1,573 14 156 Increase 142
15 Guillermo Cañas ARG 1,572 15 231 Increase 216
16 Àlex Corretja ESP 1,525 7 17 Decrease 8

No serve-only guys, except maybe Roddick.

The history of men's tennis shows that the best players are the best all-around players while one-dimensional big servers can get hot and beat anyone on their day, they usually can't stay hot for so long and dominate solely based on their serve. Most of the players on the tour say Isner has the best serve but he's yet to make a GS final.

Out of that list, Hewitt was a counter-punching baseliner, Kuerten more so, Agassi a baseliner with a great return, Kafelnikov an all-arounder, JC Ferrero too, Grosjean and aggressive baseliner, Rafter was a serve+volleyer, Haas big serving baseliner, Henman serve+volley, Safin, big-serving power hitter, Ivanisevic basically a serve-bot, Federer all-around, Roddick another serve-bot with better groundstrokes than Goran, Canas a counter-puncher who relied on speed and stamina, and Corretja who was more of a baseliner too.

Women's tennis is abhorrent and I don't know how bad WNBA is because I have never watched a minute of it I cannot imagine the quality is worse than women's tennis.
Nobody watches women's tennis except for the finals of the majors, and even then only to see who wins.

I think a big thing that helps women's tennis in regards to viewership is that many tournaments host both the men's and women's events. So, one can travel to see the top women and top men in the same day. It's a lot more convenient. In Canada, the Canadian Open swaps the men's and women's events each year - one year the women compete, the next year the men compete either in Montreal or Toronto. I'm not sure what the viewership is like for the women when it's just a women's event, but I'm sure they benefit from being on at the same time as the men in regards to the tennis networks switching from men's and women's matches.

[Doctor MJ]

Re: Men play 3 hours. This is a pointless thing though. It exists only for the sake of tradition. The reality is that tennis is having an existential crisis right now because Best of 5 matches in general are too long. I mean we all love watching a great 5th set, but in the vast majority of Best of 5 matches the winner is pretty much known when there's likely to be over an hour left in the match. That's not what you want in the age of 21st century audiences looking at the screen in between digital dopamine hits.

I'm not sure that's why 5 setters are considered too long. I'd say the main reason is that they have an effect on the athlete for the remainder of the tournament. What often happens is a guy gets worn out or even suffers and injury during the 5-setter or in the next match as a result of the 5-setter and thus future matches (and their quality) are affected. I still think that a 5-set GS final is somewhat of a dream match for most tennis fans, especially when watching some of the all-time greats go at it - Fed, Rafa, Nole.

A men's 5 setter can go on for 5 hours. This is considerably longer than, say, a basketball game, and it's a problem.

I don't know if you realized but during Social Distancing last summer they experimented with novel ways of playing matches in a couple events. The recurring theme: How can we make this thing faster so that people will watch it?

Tennis isn't the only sport going through this. Cricket is trying shorter formats, and of course baseball continually laments its inability to make its games be less than 3 hours.

You're right that the player getting warn out is also an issue, but I'm actually fine with that. Do what you can to cut the guy a little slack in the schedule, but you'll live.

I actually have another issue with the 5 setter that I don't expect most to agree with me on:

I'd rather the game didn't devolve into a war of attrition.

While I understand that it's admirable when a guy can sustain his body for longer, I think the possibility of winning by wearing your opponent out tends to lead to play that reminds a little bit of a stalemate, and likely disincentives netplay.

[maradro]

As a latino (soccer fan!) who grew up in the US and since returned home and become a father-

-Gender roles exist, but if you cant distinguish between biological differences and cultural indoctrination then you cant identify what we control and what we dont. Before puberty hormones havent really kicked in and the roles are almost 100% cultural. Ages 3-8, my daughter was more physically dominant than most of the boys in her class, my boys could never say the same

Having grown up in 80s america and raising my kids in 2010s chile, the level of sexism here this past decade is bad for 80s US standards. Near our house a neighbor built a skating rink in his lot outside his house, and started to coach a rink hockey team (old school roller skates, not roller blades, played mixed gender at the youth level). I started taking my kids, half the team left half way through the season because the coach would yell "you run like girls!" at the BOYS who were slacking ... obviously most of the players that left were girls, even though he was yelling at the (bad) boys. My daughter kept going but eventually went to figure skating where she wasnt surrounded by men and boys who were constantly singling her our for her gender. BTW, the team eventually joined the formal league circuit and achieved some regional success, several players got scholarships and professional gigs- the biggest star was the only other girl on the team, shes a fantastic scorer and tough as nails and barring injury will probably be a pro in europe. if that option didnt exist maybe her parents would encourage to focus on school instead..

-The people who say supply and demand, basic economics! have a fair point but the same logic dictates that if there is a weak market for something few will dedicate themselves to it. Paying players more would undoubtedly make it more worthwhile for more women to dedicate themselves to sports. If male models got paid more, there would be more men dedicating themselves to modelling, and if you could make more money playing team sports than being pretty more women would try that. The US soccer situation is kind of the perfect example of this. Womens soccer has a level of support and funding basically no other country has, so comparatively the US has the best womens soccer program ever. The mens team, despite getting MORE support and funding than the womens team is still comparatively weaker even than other national teams with less support and funding, because even though they have a better talent pool and infrastructure than honduras there are CULTURAL ROLES keeping the best US athletes from playing soccer and making hondurans soccer mad. Women athletes are asking for investment just like any other interest group, be it a robotics firm or a rural internet program- not free money just because, but money to stimulate a particular area where they believe a market exists. The supply and demand argument can be used to say the market doesnt exist, but it doesnt really address their point which is that the market needs to be created, and it certainly doesnt make them ignorant of economics to make that argument.

-I dont know the specifics of the USWNT contract negotiations, but for the guy who is constantly insulting everyone to blame FIBA--- FIBA is the global basketball federation, FI F A is the global football federation. So FIBA definitely has nothing to do with it. FIFA does dish out some ad/tv money out to federations but AFAIK each federation, and there are bonuses for teams that advance rounds, 8th, 7th, 6th etc.. but each federation decides internally how to administer that money, and the players usually negotiate a cut of the bonus with the federation- its very well possible the men get an equal cut of a bigger pie and that means more money for them. IMO the ideal is they should be paid equally- regardless of performance- because a national team is an honor not a full time job, but if the argument for decades prior for men being paid more was due to their performance and marketing draw, then its only logical that the USWNT women given their performance should be paid more and their division given more resources. I read all 10 pages hoping somebody would post the actual details beyond saying "hey, thats what they agreed to!". That they agreed to it doesnt make it right, often you have to agree to less than ideal terms because you dont have the leverage, I dont see anything wrong with testing your leverage after the fact, if theyre not successful its because they didnt have enough...

[homecourtloss]

So predictable. The GB doesn't get it...just like Draymond Green doesn't get it.

The difference is facilities between the men and women basketball players for the NCAA tournament is all you need to know about how deeply embedding sexism is. And just like racism, people don't appreciate being dragged out in the light.

I don't think that Rapinoe is saying female athletes should be paid the same. She is saying that their efforts and commitment should be given equal respect. The example I gave above is Exhibit A of what she is talking about.

No, she said something else before but that’s another story.

As for “equal respect,” why don’t women watch women’s sports en masse and make women’s sports profitable? There’s an elephant in the room and Rapinoe and her ilk who live in the Just World Fallacy world know the elephant is there but want to pretend it’s not and continue to live in a make-believe world.