USWNT players in WPS

Breakers didn't have a true winger last year so bringing in HAO would really help.

 

thanx for the list beau. i'll be using it to keep track of who signs where.

with regard to the magicjack list:
i know that there's one less team this year, so places are at a premium. but most all of the players in that list should be able to make the roster of one of the remaining teams. and if they can make good money to play just a few games, i think they'll take it.

of course the question is which owner is willing to pay good money for top class part time players.

 

Wouldn't be short of match fitness though ? camp and training are not really a good replacement for competition ?

 

So they want a league but don't want to play in it? That's why I wish that our Fed didn't give out yearly contracts.

Like all other Federations, you earn your spot and you get paid accordingly.

How many men's Federations have these long camps like the USWNT does?

When Nemanja Vidic plays for Serbia on Wednesday, he is expected by Sir A. Ferguson to be on the pitch on Saturday to play for ManU. Unless injury, no excuses.

The way this is all structured, WPS, USWNT, there will always be a conflict between the two. And of course the players under Fed contract will be loyal to the Fed.
Sorry to express myself this way but it's all fu__ed up if you ask me.

 

I wouldn't compare a man with a multi-million dollar contract vs a woman who might earn 2000 - 3000 a game in the wps. the wnt under contract is a good thing for the ladies. the problem is the ridiculous friendly and tournament schedule. they still lost to japan and sweden and minus one well-timed header they would have lost to brasil. at the moment the wps is just extra income for a top women's player like rampone, and the current women's system she should be able to play under a contract to support her family vs fighting for a per game check. give them realistic schedule which allows team to balance time with the wps and the nt. again, this is on the ussf or whoever puts this together. and yeah, i wouldn't want to be killing my knees in boston than the road 48 hrs later for a friendly and back to boston on concrete in another 72 hrs.

 

Other federations mostly schedule their leagues a bit better though. For ex., both Germany and France run fall-spring, leaving the summer open for the usual international tournaments.

 

So we want a strong WPS but the USWNT members can come and go as they please. And I've said it before, people come out to see the stars, namely USWNT players and Marta.

But still...

If the USWNT players want a league of their own, they need to support it. By playing in it.

 

The English FA is trying to copy that camp model with training and testing nearly every month. That's why the FA WSL has only 14 games and is concentrated over like 8 weeks.

 

So what do we want guys? We want a strong pro league, but if the USWNT players are not a consistant part of this then it will not be.

We're all over the map here. People were running petitions for WPS top be sanctioned but now there is a posibilty that the top players in this country may opt not to play in it this year.

In other major sports in the US the team is more important then the National Team. for instance I guarantee you that most Chicago Bulls or Miami Heat fans would rather see Derek Rose or Dwayne Wade play for their bulls or Heat then the US Olympic team or World Championship team. Most American fans could care less about international competition. Only in the rest of the world is international competion important. Americans could care less. Except in soccer.

 

A strong pro league comes from having a depth pool with high standards to field quality, competitive teams. If, however, you mean a league that's popular to the casual woso fan, then yes, I suppose you'll want the USWNT.

Your first paragraph is not contradictory... We can still want the WPS to be around and sanctioned as a top league. That has nothing to do with whether the USWNT players decide to play in the league. Honestly, I don't care if they show up to the WPS before the Olympics. I'll still watch WPS but yes, I do rate the Olympics higher than the WPS Championship.

The second paragraph is just silly. Not only are you comparing a multi-million dollar business feature male players to a league that is almost def. paying less than USSF for women, you're also talking about relative prestige. NBA Finals has a prestige attached to them that is higher than Olympics and FIBA World Championships. This is not the same with the World Cup or even the Olympics, for women.

I bet if you asked a WNBA fan if they'd care about the Olympics or FIBA World Championship, it's almost def. 'yes.' For that matter, I wager it's the same with volleyball and softball (not that softball has an Olympics berth anymore).

 

no, we are not. the problem is the olympic and world cup year. this wasn't a problem the first 2 seasons of the wps. it's still a usa a problem. geez, marta, kelly smith, alex scoot and sinclair played to the last minute before they joined their teams. in olympic and world cup yrs, the nters play per game pay. that's it. let them for fill their contracts and their REAL money. the issue again is the crazy friendly and tournament right on top of the wps season. they were playing worthless friendlies in the middle of the season last yr (this yr), going to camps when they were already in camp for the wps and still couldn't string passes together in the world cup. problem goes back to who does the scheduling and their respect or lack of it for the wps.

here's a question: is getting coaching from paul riley equal to pia and the national team? i say riley, since A-Rod can actually score goals when he coaches her.

ussf system is MESSED up, not the wps on this point.

 

Players were overpaid for their services last year They got full pay for playing less then a dozen games

They don't want to play for less then they were making last year but team's are not inclined to pay those prices.

As far os the WPS vs USWNT coaching, Pia coaches and expects different things form her players than the WPS Coaches... sometimes causing conflict with how they play (See A-Rod for a good example)

RIley had to get her back to playing how she was playing the year

 

I'm aware of this. My point is, A-rod is A-rod with a wps schedule similar to sinclair and kelly smith with coaching from riley vs all those worthless friendlies with pia and company. in fact, extra time with riley going into the wc , may have been better for her finishing which was horrible during the world cup. it's still more specialize with her club vs splitting time with the usa forwards. it's all debatable. she's the best of the group of forwards but plays like the worst with pia.

 

Good points.

 

I also wish that the Olympics is like the men's. Only U23's and a couple of older players.

 

IMO, the friendlies are the perfect opportunity to call new players to camp; not all of the usual players need to go to every friendly game, I see no reason (except injury, of course) for the USWNT players not to sign with a club. The clubs paying them on a per game basis sounds reasonable to me, that way if they are not called for friendlies, they can still get a paycheck.

 

I don't see a per-game pay as likely to convince some members of the USWNT to risk their health to play in honestly, meaningless games (about as meaningless as the friendlies) when the difference between medaling and not medaling is a fair amount of bonuses including up to a million more if they win gold.

 

Katreus, how would you have it? Should they play in the WPS or shouldn't they?

Is the survival of a womens Div I pro soccer league as important as prep for the Olympics?

The USWNT players can't have it both ways. Demand that USSF sanction WPS as a Div1 league but yet not want to play in it.

If Many or most or even the most well known and/or popular players in the USWNT decide to skip playing in the WPS this season, this may be a big nail in the coffin of this league whether they realize it or not.

Good soccer is not enough. Fans want to see stars. That's what pro sports are about.

 

From Goff's piece in WaPo:

Participation in Olympics = 250k but winning the gold medal triggers 1 million in bonuses for player pool and then probably more from the Victory Tour.

They should play in the WPS if doing so does not cause undue harm on their ability to compete in the Olympics.

I don't agree with your idea that several USWNT players not signing will lead to the WPS folding. A Div1 pro soccer league for women is important but imo if we count 'prep for the Olympics' as effective and leads to a medal in the Olympics (best if gold to build on the momentum), it brings much more momentum to the WPS than USWNT players signing pre-Olympics.

Of course they can? There's no contradiction between these two ideas, esp. for someone like Abby who has nagging injuries but wants the WPS to be around for future soccer players.

Alex Morgan has signed a contract so that's one already and I'm sure a couple other younger USWNT players are considering the WPS and the offers they're getting.

Then pay them enough that their mental calculation decides it's worth it. I understand the budget situation and I sympathize. On the other hand, I just think, realistically, you're not going to get a couple of the top stars with a pay-per-game, esp. if they're getting on in age, because yes, the Olympics is more important in their and most US fans' calculations, both in prestige, attention, and monetary rewards.

Essentially, you're asking them to take on a whole lot of risk in a very important year for very little reward: if they get injured, they not only would not be able to play in the Olympics but the pay-per-game would prevent them from having a steady income for the rest of the summer (not to mention, their future earnings will in the short term be low as they won't be able to sign overseas until they return from injury and may need to dip into insurance to pay for doctors and recovery).