I'm not saying that they shouldn't support a professional game in the United States per-se. I'm merely pointing out that they are under no obligation to do so. They're under no obligation to do so for the Men either. But they've gotten their money back and more over the years, whereas I'm not sure the WNT, particularly as their costs rise, will ever pay them back in the same way. At that point, we get to the question of: what's the most efficient way to spend limited resources? If the goal is to promote soccer in the United States, and the ratio of investment-to-revenue-impact is higher for one team or the other, then it would be in the USSF's interests put more of their money in that team. Because a rising tide lifts all boats. But, if the goal is to make the National Teams as competitive as possible, then perhaps they'd spend their money differently, or handle the teams differently. And if the goal of the USSF is to promote a professional soccer environment, then perhaps there's a different allocation. For example, the NBA funds the WNBA. The WNBA has never turned a single cent in profit, after 22 years. The NBA keeps the WNBA afloat for reasons that escape me, but likely because they figure that they're generating goodwill by continuing to support them. And at least initially, they had success, before the novelty wore off. I don't know if the NWSL will ever become a self-sufficient league. And, contrary to what the WNT probably wants, the USSF will, and should, decrease its subsidizing of the NWSL as it becomes profitable. As it has done with MLS.