Cordeiro issued a formal apology for U.S. Soccer’s legal strategy in the USWNT players’ gender-discrimination case on Wednesday night, but that apology rings hollow since it only came after the federation had received stinging rebukes in the Wall Street Journal and Buzzfeed News from its own sponsors, including Visa, Budweiser, Deloitte and Coca-Cola. (Sample from Coca-Cola: “We are extremely disappointed with the unacceptable and offensive comments made by U.S. Soccer.”) Those sponsors added they wanted to meet with U.S. Soccer officials immediately.
True, but the President sets the tone in many ways, no? Cordeiro was clearly a player in the Flynn replacement search process.Cordeiro was a lightweight, IMO. He always seemed in over his head, never quite fully grasping how to communicate or how what he says would be received by fans.
Despite my tagline, I've come to realize that when it comes to influence in the USSF, the identity of the next CEO is MUCH more important than the identity of the next president. And the CEO is chosen by the board. That's where the real power lies.
Yes, the President certainly plays a big role and we should care about how the person in that role performs. No doubt about that. I think that the CEO is more important for the internal workings of the organization. While the president has input into the CEO search process, ultimately that process is driven by the board.True, but the President sets the tone in many ways, no? Cordeiro was clearly a player in the Flynn replacement search process.
Which is pretty much what we were saying here.Klausner effectively concluded that differences in payment structure were the result of choices made by the women's players and their union -- including guaranteed annual salaries of at least $100,000 for 20 contracted players -- and not discrimination by the federation.
The 32-page ruling went through a detailed history of the collective bargaining process that led to the current CBA between U.S. Soccer and the USWNTPA that was signed in 2017. Klausner noted that representatives of the players rejected a pay-for-play model identical to the men early in those negotiations in 2016. In later negotiations, the players offered a counterproposal with lesser bonuses than the federation's offer in exchange for more contracted players and higher base salaries -- benefits not part of the CBA between U.S. Soccer and the men's union.
The flights and hotels moves forward as well, those they at least have a stronger case for. But yeah, the big issue is while USSF is probably in some ways "in the right" they're getting killed in the PR war.Analysis from ESPN here:
https://www.espn.com/espnw/sports/story/_/id/29125363/judge-sides-us-soccer-equal-pay-lawsuit
Which is pretty much what we were saying here.
On the other hand, their PR campaign has gotten a ton of traction, and at some point you have to imagine USSF will just offer to give them identical terms to the men. It won't be good for the WNT or the NWSL, but it'll at least be a way to put the issue to bed.
At root, this is a public-perception and equity battle, but not a legal one. USSF's decisions around turf fields, hotels and flights were probably not legally discriminatory, but they were dick moves. And self-defeating, too: those dick moves have caused (and will continue to cause) them 10x the pain relative to the dollars saved. It's just not that hard to find a playable grass stadium field, even in fall and winter, unless you're in the frozen northlands.
...Which kinda bugs me, because it feels like the women's team wants it both ways. They wanted the benefit of the bargain they made in ensuring the financial security of players (and a greater number of players to boot), but then once the USSF was reaping the benefits of the team's on-field success, they suddenly wanted the benefit of the bargain the MNT had made instead. Well, yeah, no shit, I wish I always chose the best option too. But if you're given a choice and opt for "less risk, less reward", and then it turns out the reward would really have paid out, just feels sour grapes to say "hey wait, actually we now wish we had the higher-reward option, so we're going to cast you as this big woman-hating group of bad guys in order to twist your arm into giving us more money". Like, we're supposed to be better than African FAs on stuff like this, and yet, the same drama is playing out - just in a courtroom.The flights and hotels moves forward as well, those they at least have a stronger case for. But yeah, the big issue is while USSF is probably in some ways "in the right" they're getting killed in the PR war.
View: https://twitter.com/SoccerInsider/status/1346849944485945346#USWNT will play Colombia Jan. 18 (7 p.m. ET on FS1) and Jan. 22 (7 p.m. on ESPN2) in Orlando.
THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER!Team doesn't seem to be rotating much, if at all. Is this a serious friendly?
edit: Oh, I see, final match before the Olympics
I mean, I don't understand what is going on with this official.And now what looked like a 10/10 penalty isn't called.
Bringing them on after they've been chasing Carli Lloyd and Tobin Heath for half a game almost isn't fairAlways good when you can bring in the likes of MegRap and MorganMagic off the bench