You get paid what you bring in
There was an MLS game in Atlanta recently that had over 70k in attendance. I wonder what the largest crowd has been for a woman's pro game. Men are better at sports than women, and therefore draw bigger crowds, and pull in more money. The US men's team also would have won the women's World Cup.
This announcement from US Soccer is literally one post above your own:
In fiscal years 2014 and 2015, U.S. soccer spent $49.8 million on the men’s team and $18.8 million on the women’s squad, according to an independent audit. U.S. Soccer had estimated it will have a 2017 net profit of about $5 million from women’s soccer and a $1 million loss for the men’s program.
So at the end of the day, who's making more money for U.S Soccer?
Earlier in the thread, some people said we shouldn't judge the Men's National Teams on the results of the 2014 World Cup. Then somebody said we shouldn't judge the Women's National Team on their 2015 World Cup. Then somebody else said she shouldn't judge this on the 2016 season.
Something tells me the same excuse is going to be repeated for the 2017 season and the 2018 World Cup that the Men's team can't even qualify for, after getting wrecked by Trinidad and Tobago during the elimination rounds.
You'd really have to take an average across years or run projections or something. If there is one bad year (or one good year) then it is misleading to take that as a snapshot trying to represent the bigger picture.
Also I wonder if the womens league would make 5 million profit if it paid them the same as the mens.
There are a lot of factors.
Since it's the thread is about the National Teams (despite people constantly trying to derail it to MLS teams), would it be fair if we use their success and failures at the World Cups and the Olympics as the benchmarks?
Success in terms of revenue or profit I think would be relevant. As long as it is an apples to apples comparison with some averaging. Seems like that would be the best way to compare the two.
in 2015, the women’s team won the World Cup and then embarked on a scheduled 10-city victory tour that yielded an eight-figure bump to U.S. Soccer’s bottom line. As a result, the women brought in more than $23 million in game revenue, about $16 million more than the federation had projected.
After expenses, the women turned a profit of $6.6 million last year. The men? Their profit was just under $2 million.
Looking ahead, U.S. Soccer’s 2017 budget predicts that trend will be repeated: Expecting another Olympic gold medal, and another victory tour, the federation has forecast a profit of more than $5 million for the women’s team in the next fiscal year (on $17.5 million in revenue).
The men? U.S. Soccer figures they will lose about $1 million this year (on only $9 million in revenue).
This announcement from US Soccer is literally one post above your own:
In fiscal years 2014 and 2015, U.S. soccer spent $49.8 million on the men’s team and $18.8 million on the women’s squad, according to an independent audit. U.S. Soccer had estimated it will have a 2017 net profit of about $5 million from women’s soccer and a $1 million loss for the men’s program.
So at the end of the day, who's making more money for U.S Soccer? The net profit or the net loss?
But then again, this is the NATIONAL TEAMS we're talking about. You know, the ones who represents our country in international competitions?
Earlier in the thread, some people said we shouldn't judge the Men's National Teams on the results of the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. Then somebody said we shouldn't judge the Women's National Team's smashing success at the 2015 World Cup in Canada.
Something tells me the same excuse is going to be repeated for the 2018 World Cup in Russia (that the Men's team can't even qualify for, after getting wrecked by Trinidad and Tobago during the elimination rounds), and then again for the 2019 World Cup in France where the women will excels, again.
Let's do that then, revenues and profits from the U.S Women's National Team's last World Cup in Canada 2015 vs. the U.S Men's National Team's at the next World Cup in Russia 2018.
Any objections?
In fiscal years 2014 and 2015, U.S. soccer spent $49.8 million on the men’s team and $18.8 million on the women’s squad, according to an independent audit. U.S. Soccer had estimated it will have a 2017 net profit of about $5 million from women’s soccer and a $1 million loss for the men’s program.
Abolish women's soccer. If there's a demand, let someone willing to make money from it create the team.
I'm guessing the one who actually gonna be representing the USA.Who sells more jerseys?
Abolish the current World Cup champion (and record profit-generating) U.S Women's National Team because the pathetic Men's National Team failed to even qualify for the World Cup...?
Do you people even think with your brain? Do you even know what this thread is about?
A year from now, which U.S National Team do you think America gonna be cheering for? The one kicking asses in the World Cup, from the Qualifying rounds all the way to the Finals (again), or the one sitting at home with their heads down in shame?
I'm guessing the one who actually gonna be representing the USA.
Then it won't be a problem for them to find an independent financial backer to support them. Right?