I was talking about the rules for the NWSL -- and only the NWSL. Five of the nine NWSL teams had average attendance of less than 5,000 per game last year. In 7 years, we've had one franchise fail and two move (IIRC). The minimum salary for players in 2020 is $20,000 (I wonder if, with no season, they'll even get that.) TV contracts have been few and far between. The NWSL is a fragile flower -- I don't think the lack of scoring in this tourney will bolster it. I want to see a viable women's professional league. That's all. I don't think the NWSL should necessarily abide by FIFA rules, but rather should enhance its appeal. All the major sports in the US have made rule changes to encourage more scoring (too much scoring in my opinion). Why not women's soccer to get scoring up a modest amount to an average of 3-2 per game?
Someone wasn't paying attention when all the arrangements were made with the player's association were made ahead of the Challenge Cup, then. The NWSL may not be a sporting juggernaut but the notion that it's teetering on collapse absolutely needs to DIE. Both the league and multiple clubs within the league got new sponsorships this year, we have a highly competent commissioner now in charge, a strong new TV deal is in place, and we're about to get the best-planned expansion team in the league's history ready to join. Not to mention the ownership groups we currently have generally have shown strong commitment for the long haul. Yes, the league was in trouble when BOS and KC went under and CHI and NJ had multiple question marks. But that was years ago. People really need to stop being stuck in the past, good God.
PS @Smallchief - your comment about attendance was shockingly incorrect. In 2019, only two teams(HOU and NJ) saw averages under 5k. https://soccerstadiumdigest.com/2019-nwsl-attendance/
Yeah, you're right. I was looking at 2018 attendance. So 2019, a World Cup year, was generally up from 2018 -- but after 2020 I'm not optimistic. And I don't think this tournament helped. But my point remains. Strict adherence to FIFA rules is not the eleventh commandment for the NWSL. Survival and growth is.
Whether this tournament "helped" or not probably depends on who you're trying to get. To the average American sports fan, yeah this tournament maybe wasn't a great advertisement. However, if you're just trying to get existing fans to come to games more often, I don't think this was a bad tournament. In fact, those two low-drawing sides (HOU and NJ) are two of the four semifinalists, which could very well do wonders for those clubs (or at least provide modest bumps in the early games next year). Also, I'm betting the Olympics and a new team will help the overall numbers next year, too.
For me (a Thorns fan, but also a fan of the league as a whole -- and I have watched all the games except for the 3-3 tie), there were two extremely exciting games, the two Courage v Thorns games. Their quarter-final game was about as good as it gets for excitement. The scores: 2-1 and 1-0. Low scoring was not a negative in terms of fan experience. For the other games, I do not think the goal size is an issue or anything else rule-related (although referee non-enforcement of the rules is a problem). I think the teams starting from nowhere, with no pre-season games, altitude, poor field surface, lack of some key players who opted out, a compact schedule, and players carrying the stress we all are under these days all contributed to less than supremely attractive soccer. Under those circumstances, however, I think we have been well rewarded for our attention.
Seriously, we need to petition for a super-rep button. Maybe, with a limited number of clicks allowed over a year to prevent abuse. But some posts, like this one, would deserve it.