Haven't missed a USWNT competitive match since like 07. Definitely a bit turned off by the lawsuit stuff, I wish the Fed would just make the hotel/per-diem stuff all the same, and just make the pay all about revenue or something. You can't argue numbers.
Sure you can else economists would all agree, they all start with the same numbers and then choose which to look at and how to manipulate them. In the end statistics and most other facts only mean what we choose to let them mean. Most people use statistics the way a drunkard uses a lamp post, more for support than illumination. - Mark Twain
Hell, yeah! Not sure the US is going to win this one. The rest of the world has been improving rapidly the past decade, and we didn't exactly look like world beaters in the sendoff series. But it's going to be a great World Cup.
Last I checked this is the US Men’s board not US Women’s. Maybe you should put the bottle down Bruce.
nope.... i used to watch woman soccer but the constant virtue signaling and constantly crying of sexism turned me off. The icing on the cake where they called playing on turf a "humans rights issue".
This year I have read and heard so much about the women complaining about the Final being on the same day as the Copa and Gold Cup Final. Even more than the actual teams and the games they play. It is like they rather complain about issues like this than actually focus on the games they play in. Or at least it appears that way.
not only that but there complete silence on saudi arabia not field a woman teams but still have membership in fifa
I'll watch. It's not my favorite thing, but ... uh ... I like soccer? And I want to watch soccer? And it happens there's a team in this competition for which I have a rooting interest. I don't get the "the skill level isn't as good" argument for not watching. Because that hasn't stopped me watching the Gold Cup or WC qualifiers when the US MNT is smacking up a team of rec leaguers from Turks and Caicos. The women's game is different, with a different pace and strategies - so I can understand that might not interest everyone. I won't be watching every game - because as someone previously mentioned, the skill gap between the best and the average teams in women's soccer is pretty wide. Generally, only the matchups between the top teams have strong potential to be interesting - otherwise, it's often a blowout or complete chaos. I've noticed, in particular, that goalkeeping seems to be an area of lack among women's sides. Which kinda makes sense - I think keeper is a position that's very difficult to evaluate - and the best scouts and coaches for the position are probably on the men's side. I've noticed the same lack of keeper talent in youth competitions as well - case in point, the U-20 Honduran keeper who gave up 12 of the easiest goals you might ever see a couple days ago. But that hasn't stopped me watching U20s either - so yeah, I'll be watching the women's cup.
When talking about professional leagues, I generally agree with the sentiment above. But since you seem like a reasonable person, I'd ask you to consider these three thoughts. No need to respond; I'm not really arguing here, I'm just putting out thought starters. 1. Even if salaries should be allocated by revenue, why are people so certain the women's team is getting their fair share. People on here seem to believe the USSF is equal parts incompetent and evil in everything they do ... except in this, where they staunchly believe that USSF is both incredibly adept in paying exactly in line with revenue and not at all so greedy that they'd take advantage of being able to pay the women less. In fact, I believe the current lawsuit alleges exactly this -- that even if measured by revenue, the women are getting screwed. 2. A pro league's salaries will be in line with revenues ... but the USSF is a non-profit dedicated to promoting soccer in the US. Why is revenue the measure of success? Is it so ridiculous to say that the World Cup winning women's side -- which does draw well in NT games -- inspires more children to play soccer than the likes of Jozy Alitdore and Michael Bradley? Especially recently? There's nothing in the USSF charter that promoting the men's game counts more. Shouldn't there be an aspect of pay tied to the promotion of the sport? 3. Lastly, and this is less about what is right and more about what is smart. The women actually *need* the money. Many top players play all year because of low pay, never resting. Many prospective players quite soccer to joining more lucrative careers. Do we really need to be paying Christian Pulisic or Michael Bradley to play for their country when they have million dollar contracts? Where's the best bang for their bucks? Is this even worth the terrible PR. The women aren't playing victim here and there's no virtue signalling. They have legit arguments they should be paid more. I'm not sure why they should and bear it. I find most people I know who criticize them are the whiniest when they think they've been wronged.
Well, my normal routine was not paying attention until the semis, and then getting fairly invested in them winning seeing as though they are my countrywomen. Up until that point it's not a high enough level to hook me without high stakes. My state just got its first football club of any note this season, Forward Madison. I haven't tuned in to a match yet, even though they'd beat the U.S. women's senior team handily. The first match I'd watch would probably be the final in the playoffs. I'd normally give the USWNT an extra match because the World Cup is a more notable competition. After their behavior the last year-plus, exploiting a down period for the men's team, dragging their name through the mud, making a plethora of bad faith arguments, out of their own self interest; I hope they lose. But I won't be invested in that early on either. I'll tune in later to see if it came to fruition.
"Woke" has to be one of the dumbest social media terms ever invented. That followed closely by "hack" and "I can't even".
I'd probably only watch the Champions League knockouts if quality was everything to me. Even with a significant chunk of the men's World Cup I think it's the big event stakes more so than the quality of play that make for an entertaining experience.
I’ll watch all of our games. That fracking TV is going on mute if Faudy and Wambach get in the announcing booth. Shoot, I may mute for Faudy alone.
Will watch zero games, same as every other WWC. The same reason I don't watch women's basketball, even though i love basketball. Or women's rugby. Or women's tennis. Etc. That said, I hope they win. Pushing soccer into the casual fan's consciousness, regardless of level, gender, whatever, can only help it become more popular here, leading to an improved men's team!
I dunno, I don’t much care for the off field antics but using that as a reason not to watch makes me think of all the whiners vowing not to watch NFL because a player didn’t stand for the anthem or said something they didn’t agree with.
Well, I was only a marginal USWNT supporter in the first place, so them being vociferous ignoramuses off the field, including insulting players considered "not American" and insulting a program that I do support (the MNT), has a real chilling effect. This is like the WNBA's consistent whining if it carried over into the Olympics and Team USA. Plenty of people watch the NBA, but they're only marginal WNBA fans. Lo and behold, it's an easy choice to change the channel when you weren't all that invested in the first place.
I can only speak for myself here, but it bothered me that they agreed to their CBA, which they wanted structured differently to give them salaries instead of strictly a bonus structure, and then they later sued that it was unfair. If they didn't like the deal, they shouldn't have signed it and should have refused to play until they were presented with a fair deal. And then they got publicity with headlines about how the pay isn't "equal", by people who don't understand that the women never wanted it to be equal. And they love to throw digs at the Men's team for not qualifying, when the women have dominated largely because of Title IX, which codifies that the opportunities women have in sports in this country is more equal than almost anywhere in the world, and in soccer they arguably have more opportunities than men do. Women have almost twice as good a chance to win a a DI soccer scholarship as men do, for example. Regarding the revenue, they usually cherry pick the years to support their argument that they bring in more revenue. They will compare a Women's World Cup year to a Men's non-world cup year. If the USWNT brings in more revenue, I think they should get paid more. I have no problem with female models earning more than male models, for example. But the evidence for that is very questionable. In this context, I don't think revenue is a measure of success. It's just a measure of how much the federation can afford to pay their employees. I think players promote the game by playing well. I don't know how you would measure how many people get inspired by various players, but revenue seems like a reasonable proxy, and I would argue that them promoting the game is exactly why they get paid by USSF at all. It's not really an extra job on top of playing. It is the whole job. Wow, so now the male players should have to play for free, and only the female players should get paid. Or is it only male millionaires that don't get paid? That's your idea of what's right and smart? Yikes. The women probably did have some legit arguments in the past, but since the last CBA they signed hasn't been made public, we don't know whether they do anymore. We do know that they signed it. I think if they really wanted to inspire women everywhere (this is explicitly part of their goal with the lawsuit), they should have negotiated a better contract instead of signing it, and then suing because it was "unfair". I don't think the USWNT are virtue signalling, because they are actually doing something. A lot of the people who support them because they see "equality" and "gender pay gap" in headlines without understanding the facts are virtue signalling, however. And the media love it, because those headlines get them more clicks. In any case, I'll probably watch the games because I like soccer, but I won't shed any tears if they lose.
Yep- wearing my 1999 Mia Hamm jersey that I bought at the Rose Bowl. I must admit, however, it no longer compliments my no-longer girlish figure...