Report: U.S. Soccer wanted to cut USWNT victory tour pay by two-thirds for first match

Discussion in 'USA Women: News and Analysis' started by FanOfFutbol, Aug 3, 2019.

  1. FanOfFutbol

    FanOfFutbol Member+

    The Mickey Mouse Club or The breakfast Club
    May 4, 2002
    Limbo
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
  2. sitruc

    sitruc Member+

    Jul 25, 2006
    Virginia
    The Victory Tour as stated in the CBA has been reduced to 4 games. This tour is 5 games. US Soccer was going to treat the first game as a friendly. Victory Tour matches and friendlies have different pay rates and terms. There was a fear that players would be paid at the lower rate since pay is not known until two days before a match. The sides talked and the players will be paid at the Victory Tour level.
     
    Auriaprottu repped this.
  3. Timon19

    Timon19 Member+

    Jun 2, 2007
    Akron, OH
    Well, that was unnecessarily sensationalist.

    There was a contractually-defined duration of tour. An extra game was scheduled that fell outside said contract.
     
    puttputtfc, Auriaprottu and BostonRed repped this.
  4. JimWharton

    JimWharton Member+

    Feb 25, 2017
    Aren’t they all friendlies?
     
  5. Caulfield

    Caulfield Member

    May 31, 2004
    Club:
    Atlanta
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Worse. You wouldn’t dare schedule an opponent who had even the slightest chance of beating you. I mean, it’s not called a, “Come out to see us maybe get beat” tour.
     
    RalleeMonkey repped this.
  6. FanOfFutbol

    FanOfFutbol Member+

    The Mickey Mouse Club or The breakfast Club
    May 4, 2002
    Limbo
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    Of course they are BUT the "Victory tour" is classified differently because those matches are rewards for the team the Federation and the fans for winning the WWC. The pay structure for "Victory tour" matches is set differently from "regular" friendlies.

    Basically, the "Victory tour" is a series of bonuses as a reward for winning the cup. US Soccer wants to maximize the income that they can get from the "Victory tour" and that is why the added the match and why they wanted in played where and when it was so they could gain the advantage of both sentiment and history.

    I do not understand why the Rose Bowl match had to be "added" as it seems so obvious that it should have been part of the original "tour" and if one was to be considered "added" it would be the last one on the current schedule.

    Personally I do not really like the very idea of a "Victory tour" much as the matches serve no purpose other than a "money grab" they are not needed for preparation even for the Olympics and they are not for any valid "evaluation" either. But a "money grab" is not, in itself, a bad thing as US Soccer, no matter how badly mismanaged, can always use money.
     
  7. Chicago76

    Chicago76 Member+

    Jun 9, 2002
    I'm not even sure they could get teams capable of beating them if they wanted to at the moment. Teams coming off the WC want a break. There isn't another big tournament for another 12 months, so no need to play the US to prep for that yet. The only reason for a top 12 or so side to play another is if they had a difficult match coming up as part of qualifiers. That is nobody through the end of the calendar year.

    Germany plays #24 Ukraine and Netherlands plays #25 Russia as part of Euro quals. Those are not difficult matches. The rest of the qual groups are really, really easy anyway. The only way Germany or Netherlands don't win their respective groups is if they somehow only take 1 pt over both legs vs Ukraine/Russia.

    All of the quality teams have the luxury of sharpening up their games as qualifying goes on. They don't need the US for that.
     
  8. Caulfield

    Caulfield Member

    May 31, 2004
    Club:
    Atlanta
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    They could get good teams if they would just pay them more and share more of the revenue...oh wait.
     
    Chicago76 repped this.
  9. Chicago76

    Chicago76 Member+

    Jun 9, 2002
    #9 Chicago76, Aug 6, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2019
    Prolly. But that not being the case, the best they can probably hope for are 2nd tier UEFAs (sub Spain/2nd and 3rd best in Euro qual groups), Americas teams outside of CAN and Brazil, and a NZ or S Korea level AFC/OFC squad.

    Nobody worth a damn will want to play them unless they threw cash at them.

    Edit: just for shits and giggles, I went back and looked at 2017 Euro qualifiers for Norway, Spain, England, France, Germany and Sweden (NED didn't participate as the host).

    Their collective records vs. teams that finished...

    #4 and #5 in their groups: 24 wins, 0 draws, 0 losses. 107 GF 1 GA
    #2 and #3 in their groups: 21 wins, 2 draws, 1 loss. 77 GF 7 GA

    worst performer vs. #2 and #3s was Sweden at 3-0-1. 8 GF 2 GA

    I knew quals weren't competitive, but I didn't realize they were this much of a joke. Everyone is pretty much shutting things down until prepping for Euro proper.
     
  10. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Previous victory tours have included
    2015: Brazil and China and was supposed to include Australia instead of Haiti until the Aussies withdrew because of a pay dispute with their federation
    2012: Australia, Germany, China
    2011: Canada and Sweden (only 3 games so these were the only 2 teams)

    Those victory tours did also include weaker teams, but they haven't shied away from strong teams if they can get them.
     
    Chicago76 repped this.
  11. blissett

    blissett Member+

    Aug 20, 2011
    Italy
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    Was it called a "Victory Tour" in 2011, despite USWNT not having won the World Cup? :cautious:
     
    Chicago76 repped this.
  12. Chicago76

    Chicago76 Member+

    Jun 9, 2002
    Good points. I do think most of those situations are a bit different now. It did open up one source of good teams they might have been able to get. Those who aren't going through quals for upcoming tournaments in need of matches. Japan for 2020. England for Euro 2021.

    When you're either hosting or a direct qualifier for an upcoming tourney, you're gonna need matches where you can take them. Brazil in 2015. China and Australia in 2012. Sweden in 2011.

    When you're facing top teams in qualifiers or a tourney final on the nearish horizon, the USA is a good team to put on the schedule. In 2015, Australia and China were facing that scenario for Olympic qualifiers. Single table hex with China, Australia and Japan. This time around, Japan is hosting and Australia and China will be potted into separate groups of a 2x4.

    That really only leaves Germany and Canada as teams that didn't have much of a reason to accept an invite. No idea what was up with the Germans, but something really strange about Canada:
    2 friendlies on US soil v. Canada in last 7 years. That may not be coincidental. Maybe 2011 was a different time? There's been some bad blood and they could have told US Soccer what to do to themselves for all we know.

    So...ESP, NED, FRA, SWE, GER, NOR, AUS, and China all have stuff to do but no one elite to prep for. Brazil is ancient and Sundhage is in charge. Which would leave England and Japan + Canada. Maybe there were some options if they really wanted to pursue them, but the stars didn't really align this time.
     
  13. Chicago76

    Chicago76 Member+

    Jun 9, 2002
    Oh, believe me. We won in 2011. It was the biggliest crowd and the most glorious match of all time. Many fine people have been telling me that the USWNT's World Cup title in 2011 is finally getting the credit it deserves.
     
  14. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The NWSL teams need to get their players back ASAP and in a condition that will allow them to play well. The "Victory Tour" itself is hurting the NWSL teams; and playing top level competition, even if it were possible, would impair the players' ability to play well for their NWSL teams when the do get back. Seriously, the weaker their opponents on the Tour, the better.
     
    blissett repped this.
  15. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No, it was not. Nor were the three games post 2007 WWC, but that's in effect what they were as far as the CBA and pay goes. The CBA at the time did call for a tour of 3 games, instead of 10, for a silver-medal performance. So they were friendlies with extra bonus pay, I believe, which is the point of the thread.
     
    blissett repped this.
  16. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    They have been released by USSF back to their clubs. All players should have been back with their clubs on Monday unless they had personal or media responsibilities. All other games are within FIFA dates, and players are not expected to miss any more NWSL games (except for the one at the end of August that's within FIFA dates). Of course, players may have to sit another game or two during the season if they're tired or injured, but that's part of pulling double duty with club and country.
     
    TimB4Last repped this.

Share This Page