USWNT - World Cup > Olympics

Dec 21, 2015
1,410
Looks like the Asian tournament is a 6-team round-robin, and both Australia and China beat Japan en route to winning the two bids from Asia.

You'd think there would be an inter-confederation playoff they could seek redemption in, the way there is in the Men's game for the Olympics, and in the World Cup for both genders.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
Germany didn't make the Olympics in 2012. UEFA selects their qualifying reams based on where they finish in the previous year's World Cup, so when the Japanese knocked the Germans out early, they missed out. England was the top UEFA team in the 2015 WWC, but they are out because the Home Nations are too worried about losing their independence in FIFA, and are refusing to allow a Team GB to compete.

Japan played with mostly the same team for the past few years, and many of them are getting up there in age. With Sawa retiring and them needing to turn over a lot of their roster in the next cycle, they may fall out of the ranks of the top teams for a while. At least we know it won't be US-Japan in the final for the 4th major tournament in a row.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.

Cup final against Germany. Pugh starts on the bench, Morgan and Press are in together, and Whitney Engen comes from out of nowhere to be in the starting lineup.
 
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
Game is streaming via ESPN3. If you don't care to watch the Celtics, that is. And the first cap for Ali Krieger in what feels like a long time.

2-1 USA before the half.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
39,749
Germany scores first and was controlling play a bit, but then Alex Morgan did Alex Morgan things to tie it up and then the US was gifted a goal on a deflection that somehow skipped through the German keeper.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
Because both teams came in 2-0-0 but Germany came in with more goals scored, the US need sto win outright to win the cup. Germany would take it in a draw.

Yeah, the US got a massive break on the second goal. Sam Mewis stole the ball in midfield, went to shoot, and the ball was deflected. The keeper had already started to dive, tried to scramble back to her feet, and the ball somehow got underneath her. The first one by Morgan was pretty awesome, though.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
39,749
Germany tries to take out Pugh and the German player ends up getting treatment on the sideline. Because Pugh is a badass.

And Klingenberg is like fucking Gretzky out there tonight with her passes. She had the assist on Morgan's goal and as nice a play by Morgan as it was, the pass was perfect. In the last 5 minutes she's sent 2 more perfectly weighted balls in that Morgan and then Lloyd didn't get good touches on.
 

Titans Bastard

has sunil gulati in his sights
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 15, 2002
10,418
The squad for Colombia

GOALKEEPERS (3): Ashlyn Harris (Orlando Pride), Alyssa Naeher (Chicago Red Stars), Hope Solo (Seattle Reign FC)

DEFENDERS (8): Whitney Engen (Boston Breakers), Jaelene Hinkle (Western New York Flash), Julie Johnston (Chicago Red Stars), Meghan Klingenberg (Portland Thorns FC), Ali Krieger (Washington Spirit), Kelley O’Hara (Sky Blue FC), Becky Sauerbrunn (FC Kansas City), Emily Sonnett (Portland Thorns FC)

MIDFIELDERS (7): Morgan Brian (Houston Dash), Tobin Heath (Portland Thorns FC), Lindsey Horan (Portland Thorns FC), Carli Lloyd (Houston Dash), Allie Long (Portland Thorns FC), Samantha Mewis (Western New York Flash), Heather O’Reilly (FC Kansas City)

FORWARDS (5): Crystal Dunn (Washington Spirit), Alex Morgan (Orlando Pride), Christen Press (Chicago Red Stars), Mallory Pugh (Real Colorado), Ashley Sanchez (So Cal Blues)
Ashley Sanchez is another super young player who turned 17 last week.
 

Titans Bastard

has sunil gulati in his sights
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 15, 2002
10,418
Five Top Female Players Accuse U.S. Soccer of Wage Discrimination

Five key members of the United States women’s national soccer team, the reigning World Cup and Olympic champion, have filed a federal complaint charging U.S. Soccer with wage discrimination.

In the filing, the five players contend that the women’s team is the driving economic force for U.S. Soccer, the governing body for the sport in America, even as its players are paid far less than their counterparts on the men’s national team, said their lawyer, Jeffrey Kessler.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
9,840
Santa Monica, CA
I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but the players are paid what they are paid based on the market. Men's soccer players can earn tens of millions of dollars professionally. No such market exists for women's players, ergo there is no reason for US Soccer to pay them on that scale. It has nothing to do with how successful they are, and little to do with how they actually perform internationally for the US. The two markets, just like the two competitive environments, are completely separate and different.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but the players are paid what they are paid based on the market. Men's soccer players can earn tens of millions of dollars professionally. No such market exists for women's players, ergo there is no reason for US Soccer to pay them on that scale. It has nothing to do with how successful they are, and little to do with how they actually perform internationally for the US. The two markets, just like the two competitive environments, are completely separate and different.
It's an unpopular opinion because you didn't bother to read the link and made a bunch of assumptions and then argued against your own strawman.

Your post sucks because you assumed you knew what was going to be said instead of taking the time to read about what it was before offering us your "opinion".
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
The setup of the 2 sides is so different that it's tough to compare them. The women are US Soccer employees and get paid a salary whether they play of not, the men aren't and only get paid if they play. The women often play more international games in a year than club games, which isn't the case with the men. In 2015 I'm sure the women made more revenue than the men for US Soccer, but it was a World Cup year for them and they also played to huge crowds in the victory tour. I'd be interested to see the revenues for a full 4 year cycle for each side vs. the costs.

I'm all for them bargaining and getting as much money as they can, and especially getting the turf vs. grass and travel accommodation issues resolved. Hopefully the negotiations can take place out of the public eye and don't become a distraction leading up to the Olympics, but between this lawsuit and the one US Soccer already filed against the players union, that's probably not very likely.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
9,840
Santa Monica, CA
It's an unpopular opinion because you didn't bother to read the link and made a bunch of assumptions and then argued against your own strawman.

Your post sucks because you assumed you knew what was going to be said instead of taking the time to read about what it was before offering us your "opinion".
Let me share why your post sucks.

First, everything you have said is incorrect. Second, you're obnoxious. Other than that, great addition to the thread. You've added a lot of value and forwarded the conversation.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
9,840
Santa Monica, CA
The setup of the 2 sides is so different that it's tough to compare them. The women are US Soccer employees and get paid a salary whether they play of not, the men aren't and only get paid if they play. The women often play more international games in a year than club games, which isn't the case with the men. In 2015 I'm sure the women made more revenue than the men for US Soccer, but it was a World Cup year for them and they also played to huge crowds in the victory tour. I'd be interested to see the revenues for a full 4 year cycle for each side vs. the costs.

I'm all for them bargaining and getting as much money as they can, and especially getting the turf vs. grass and travel accommodation issues resolved. Hopefully the negotiations can take place out of the public eye and don't become a distraction leading up to the Olympics, but between this lawsuit and the one US Soccer already filed against the players union, that's probably not very likely.
I'd be interested in hearing more about why their collective bargaining has been so unsuccessful. They seem to have quite a bit of leverage, if they're really generating revenue at the level claimed in this lawsuit. I'd be all for them getting paid fairly if the facts as presented are accurate, it just doesn't seem that a court should be making that decision.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
Let me share why your post sucks.

First, everything you have said is incorrect. Second, you're obnoxious. Other than that, great addition to the thread. You've added a lot of value and forwarded the conversation.
Fuck off and admit you didn't read the article. Because it is FUCKING OBVIOUS to anyone who did why your "unpopular opinion" was just a waste of everyone's time.

It is so tiresome to have someone resort to a personal attack instead of just admitting they fucked up. You fucked up. You got called on it. You've made everyone dumber for having read your "unpopular" opinion that has nothing, NOTHING, to do with the op-ed linked above OR what the players are alleging.

But yeah, make it about me and not your own failings, you useless asshole.

(That's how to make it personal - the first time, I just ripped your post, not you, you fucking useless asshole)
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
The setup of the 2 sides is so different that it's tough to compare them. The women are US Soccer employees and get paid a salary whether they play of not, the men aren't and only get paid if they play. The women often play more international games in a year than club games, which isn't the case with the men. In 2015 I'm sure the women made more revenue than the men for US Soccer, but it was a World Cup year for them and they also played to huge crowds in the victory tour. I'd be interested to see the revenues for a full 4 year cycle for each side vs. the costs.

I'm all for them bargaining and getting as much money as they can, and especially getting the turf vs. grass and travel accommodation issues resolved. Hopefully the negotiations can take place out of the public eye and don't become a distraction leading up to the Olympics, but between this lawsuit and the one US Soccer already filed against the players union, that's probably not very likely.

I think this is the key point, and one that underlies all of the wage complaint issues. If they were being paid 40% of the USMNT and the fields were "FIFA Men" standard, this would not be aired as a complaint. There's legit reasons - as you and they point out - for the women to be paid less.

It is the "second class citizen" bullshit that FIFA and USA Soccer have rubbed their noses in over the past 2 years that really makes this a problem.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
I'd be interested in hearing more about why their collective bargaining has been so unsuccessful. They seem to have quite a bit of leverage, if they're really generating revenue at the level claimed in this lawsuit. I'd be all for them getting paid fairly if the facts as presented are accurate, it just doesn't seem that a court should be making that decision.
I'm not sure when they negotiated their last deal. They currently are as popular as they have been since 1999 and have quite a bit of leverage, but it wasn't very long ago that they were the team known for always choking in the World Cup and having their league go bankrupt every few years. They likely didn't have anywhere near as much leverage then.

Just think if Wambach hadn't scored that late goal against Brazil in 2011 and they had gone out in the quarters. Would the US public have cared near as much about the team going into 2015?
 

GBA

lurker
Jul 18, 2005
25
Fuck off and admit you didn't read the article. Because it is FUCKING OBVIOUS to anyone who did why your "unpopular opinion" was just a waste of everyone's time.

It is so tiresome to have someone resort to a personal attack instead of just admitting they fucked up. You fucked up. You got called on it. You've made everyone dumber for having read your "unpopular" opinion that has nothing, NOTHING, to do with the op-ed linked above OR what the players are alleging.

But yeah, make it about me and not your own failings, you useless asshole.

(That's how to make it personal - the first time, I just ripped your post, not you, you fucking useless asshole)
Dude, come on...you are much better than this. I did read the article and don't think anything he posted was all that objectionable based on it. There are what, a half dozen truly competitive women's international teams? It's a hell of a lot easier to be the best when you only have a few competitors.

As far as domestic popularity goes, the last men's wc filled the bars near me (at least for popular games, which admittedly didn't always include the usmnt). The same establishments for the women's wc? The games would often be on, but I sure as heck never had to show up a (crappy) game ahead to get in.

For a number of reasons (many listed by those more knowledgeable than me above) the usmnt and uswnt are apples and and oranges when it comes to comparing salary. The women have more in common with Olympic athletes from "fringe" sports. The quality of life (per diem, turf, etc) stuff is a different story. The grievances there are far more real.
 

ninjacornelius

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 18, 2005
276
Austin, TX
I'm not sure when they negotiated their last deal.
This Deadspin article says that the last CBA for the USWNT expired in 2012, and the two sides have been operating under continuances ever since. The same article also has an image of the meeting minutes where the USSF set its budget, and the numbers are pretty striking. The USSF's own internal forecasting says the WNT is expected to make $2 million more than the MNT in 2016 and and $8.5 million more in 2017 in international games. To then argue that, for example, the men's players should receive $9,375 for a friendly win against Suriname while the women's players should receive $1,350 for a friendly win against Germany certainly seems discriminatory on its face.
 

GBA

lurker
Jul 18, 2005
25
This Deadspin article says that the last CBA for the USWNT expired in 2012, and the two sides have been operating under continuances ever since. The same article also has an image of the meeting minutes where the USSF set its budget, and the numbers are pretty striking. The USSF's own internal forecasting says the WNT is expected to make $2 million more than the MNT in 2016 and and $8.5 million more in 2017 in international games. To then argue that, for example, the men's players should receive $9,375 for a friendly win against Suriname while the women's players should receive $1,350 for a friendly win against Germany certainly seems discriminatory on its face.
Or maybe I'm very wrong...
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
This Deadspin article says that the last CBA for the USWNT expired in 2012, and the two sides have been operating under continuances ever since. The same article also has an image of the meeting minutes where the USSF set its budget, and the numbers are pretty striking. The USSF's own internal forecasting says the WNT is expected to make $2 million more than the MNT in 2016 and and $8.5 million more in 2017 in international games. To then argue that, for example, the men's players should receive $9,375 for a friendly win against Suriname while the women's players should receive $1,350 for a friendly win against Germany certainly seems discriminatory on its face.
So if it expired in 2012, it may have been agreed to back in the 2007-08 time frame. That would have been after an embarrassing 4-0 loss in the World Cup semis which resulted in Hope Solo throwing a fit in the media about being benched for that game and ultimately being sent home before the tournament ended. They did bounce back to win Olympic gold in 2008, but Wambach missed the tournament with a broken leg and due to the time difference with Beijing they didn't get a ton of exposure. There was also no league, with the WUSA having folded and WPS (which itself folded a few years later) not yet playing games. That would definitely not have been a great time for them to take a hard line in negotiations.

I agree that when presented like you did the pay looks discriminatory. But again, is that the whole story? Is that amount the men earn the only payment they receive for that game, while what the women get is a bonus on top of the salaries they receive? That changes the math quite a bit. I don't know all the facts, just pointing out that not all comparisons are apples to apples.

As i said above, they will likely never have as much leverage as they do right now, so this is a great time for them to negotiate. Here's hoping they can come to an agreement they consider fair and we don't have to hear about threats to boycott the Rio Olympics.
 

ninjacornelius

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 18, 2005
276
Austin, TX
But again, is that the whole story? Is that amount the men earn the only payment they receive for that game, while what the women get is a bonus on top of the salaries they receive? That changes the math quite a bit.
That's an excellent question, so I did a bit more digging. Using the numbers from this article and a some back of the envelope math, it looks like the amount that a single USWNT player can receive in salaries (from both USWNT and the NWSL) is $128,000 in 2016. There's a tiered salary system, so not every player earns this much. If my math is correct, the total salary outlay for a 24 player USWNT pool is $2.89 million in 2016. Interestingly, that's almost exactly how much more money the USWNT is expected to generate in 2016 than the USMNT from international games. So then it really does become more of an "apples to apples" comparison, right? You can't argue that paying the women players 7-13x less per game than the men is fair when they're earning more money and offsetting the cost of their own salaries.
 

Joe D Reid

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
3,271
Alameda, CA
The federation really screwed this up (shocker, I know). After the WC win, they organized that giant friendly tour that (1) antagonized the team because of the field conditions and accommodations and (2) made so much money that the federation can't say with a straight face that the men's team currently generates extra revenue that justifies its better conditions and accommodations. The salary stuff will be hard for the EEOC to wrap its head around because the men's and women's teams are paid using such different systems. But the ancillary stuff is right up the EEOC's alley.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
15,720
The federation really screwed this up (shocker, I know). After the WC win, they organized that giant friendly tour that (1) antagonized the team because of the field conditions and accommodations and (2) made so much money that the federation can't say with a straight face that the men's team currently generates extra revenue that justifies its better conditions and accommodations. The salary stuff will be hard for the EEOC to wrap its head around because the men's and women's teams are paid using such different systems. But the ancillary stuff is right up the EEOC's alley.
Meh, nobody has a deep look at the books yet.

If USSF splits out the TV and sponsorship revenue the men's side crushes the women's. Add in that they'll probably point to the NWSL salaries they pay and I would guess if it ever comes to it they can break it out and that might actually show that every USWNT player gets paid a higher wage than the men.

The whole thing is mostly posturing and playing the press to try and get a new CBA. If USSF wanted they could pay them the same per game as the men, but pull the NWSL money, the league would collapse, and many of the players would make less playing overseas.
 
Last edited:

WalletTrack

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,035
<Tomorrowland>
Thank God for Title lX.
Multiple Olympic Gold, multiple World Cups.
How's this a discussion beyond what our national teams s/b paid regardless of sex?
Pay the Ladies.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
13,123
Tuukka's refugee camp
Close to nothing? They generate minimal revenue and people only mildly care once every four years. The pro league is starting off in the YS and battling Canada's so that's a good thing but women's hockey isn't even a revenue sport at most major schools, such as BC (I ran stairs during their games at Conte). People care about women's soccer every other year. Not so much about the hockey program. But I imagine USA Hockey makes enough from the Olympics, World Juniors, and other fees to subsidize it, especially since many come from college.
 
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
Let me share why your post sucks.

First, everything you have said is incorrect. Second, you're obnoxious. Other than that, great addition to the thread. You've added a lot of value and forwarded the conversation.
While SF121 is certainly obnoxious and toxic in his tone, as is his wont, he does appear to have the benefit of having the facts on his side. Here's a few paragraphs from the middle of the NYT article that started this:

It has been argued that men’s sports, and their players, deserve a financial edge because they draw bigger crowds and generate far more money in ticket sales and corporate sponsorships. That is the case for U.S. Soccer’s national teams, the federation said Thursday. But that is not true for every sport. Women’s figure skating, for instance, has often drawn higher TV ratings and bigger crowds than men’s figure skating.

In their complaint, the five players cited recent U.S. Soccer financial reports as proof that they have become the federation’s main economic engine even as, they said, they often earned only half as much — or less — than their male counterparts.

At the same time, the players said, they exceeded revenue projections by as much as $16 million in 2015, when their World Cup triumph set television viewership records and a nine-game victory tour in packed stadiums produced record gate receipts and attendance figures.

U.S. Soccer officials disputed those figures, arguing that the women and their lawyer, Jeffrey Kessler, cherry-picked an extraordinarily successful year to draw broad conclusions.
If their facts are correct, your entire argument is invalid, because the USWNT *is* more financially valuable to US Soccer than the USMNT. Now, US Soccer may have other arguments to make, around the replacement cost of the athletes, the relative supply and demand of their services, etc, but if those revenue numbers are as easily distinguishable as they claim (i.e. if revenue can be bucketed into whether it's derived mostly from the women or mostly from the men - which isn't always clear if, say, TV deals are aggregated), I would find those arguments to be particularly weak sauce.

Which side is right, of course, is what is being litigated. The lawsuit is, I would assume, a vehicle for discovery - get US Soccer to prove their financial claims so that both sides can start from a common set of agreed-upon facts in the CBA discussions.

edit: also, I can tell US Soccer is being disingenuous just from the content of the article, which if CC had read as carefully as SF121 wished, might have pissed him off too:

In response to the complaint filed Wednesday, U.S. Soccer argued that not only was the players’ pay collectively bargained, but that the players had insisted more than once on a salary-based system as a means of economic security over the bonus-centric plan the men work under. Russell Sauer, the outside counsel for the federation during labor talks, also said the women’s labor contract included provisions — severance and injury pay, health benefits and maternity leave, for example — not available to the men’s team.

“The truth is,” Sauer said, “the players are claiming discrimination based on a more conservative structure, based on guaranteed compensation rather than pay to play, which they themselves requested, negotiated and approved of not once, but twice.”
That's great, Russell, except it's belied by the infographics the NYT put out:



So the men get 50% more guaranteed pay, and ~6x more incentive pay. Can't have it both ways, Russell, unless you're going to justify it based on differential value to the organization.
 
Last edited:

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
9,840
Santa Monica, CA
There is room for disagreement, but I would be hesitant to take any plaintiff's financial representations at face value before seeing what the defendant produces to counter.

I have not delved deeply into the numbers, and I doubt anyone has at this point, so maybe the plaintiffs here are correct. If so, they have a good chance of prevailing in court (and good for them if that's the case).

My point was more about the marketplace, though. It is a demonstrable fact that the market for men's soccer players is exponentially more lucrative and competitive than the market for women's soccer players. That doesn't mean that the women should just take whatever US Soccer offers them - they have every right to hold out for more and to try and show that they are worth it. But men's soccer and women's soccer are just different marketplaces, apples and oranges.

Due to the money available for men's players globally, they are going to command more compensation than are their female counterparts. That is independent of what they bring in for US Soccer in gate or TV revenue. If the US wants elite international-level players to make the USMNT internationally competitive, it is going to have to pay men's soccer prices.

If the argument is that the primary function of US Soccer is not to become a World Cup contender, then that's a whole different topic.

I am much more sympathetic on the surface to the gripes about travel, playing conditions, etc. There's no reason the women shouldn't be treated comparably there.
 
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
Is the total global market for men's soccer greater than the total global market for women's soccer? Undoubtedly, and greater by a very large factor.

Is the market in the US for men's soccer greater than the US market for women's soccer? Ours is clearly the only country where that might even plausibly be the case (where's the next-lowest ratio, North Korea? seriously.), and that of course is what is claimed. I could certainly believe it, and as was said upthread, we have Title IX to thank for it. But in the specific case of the US, it's clearly not enough to say "the men are going to command more compensation than their female counterparts", because the same logical predecessors don't apply: they are more favorably covered by sports media, by general media, there are jersey sales and TV rights and so on to look at, and I could quite believe the women are more valuable, prior to seeing any hard evidence from discovery.

That's independent about arguments over travel and playing conditions, although for things like the women's world cup, that's FIFA being obnoxious sexist dicks. I'm sympathetic there as well, but it's a sideshow compared to the economic arguments.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
9,840
Santa Monica, CA
As is the case a lot of times in these types of claims, establishing how to define the relevant market is a big part of the battle.

I hear what you're saying, but I also do think there is an argument for the global men's soccer market being relevant. Tim Howard makes $2.5 million dollars playing professionally. Dempsey and several others in MLS are making ~$5 or 6 million.

As far as I can tell, no one on the women's team makes more than Alex Morgan at $450K.

That's all due to market forces. If Alex Morgan was worth $6M to a team somewhere, they would be paying her $6M.

None of that is to say that the women are or aren't actually underpaid based on what they're actually worth to US Soccer in terms of marketing or revenue. But the argument shouldn't be based on what the men make. It's not a relevant comparison.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
I think most of us are agreeing more than we are disagreeing here, it's just that some people are trusting the info coming out of one side's argument more than others. It's my nature to be skeptical of the info coming from the attorneys from either side, so it's tough to get a true apples to apples comparison.

As best as I can tell, the current CBA with the women's side was negotiated in 2005 and has been continued since. That would certainly explain to me why there is more of a disparity, as that was when the Hamm/Foudy generation was retiring and the WUSA had flopped. The USWNT should definitely be fighting for as much as they can get while they hold this increased leverage and public visibility.

In the graphic above from the NYT, ThePriceIsWrong appears to be equating "guaranteed pay" with "how much do you make if you lose". When I read the article, I was taking the women's guaranteed pay to mean their salaries (which the men don't get), and the per-game play as an addition to that salary. I do know that the women continue to receive their salaries for a period of time even if they aren't selected, and get 50% pay during maternity leave. To my knowledge, the men get nothing unless they are actually called into the squad. I could be wrong about some of these assumptions, as the biased sources on both sides that are releasing the info make it tough to get a true picture.

It would be nice to see some actual numbers for specific players vs. hypotheticals, as in how much did Alex Morgan or Abby Wambach make from US Soccer in 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 vs. how much did Clint Dempsey or Michael Bradley make. Clearly all players make a lot from their club teams and outside sources like sponsorships, but to get actual figures on their US Soccer-paid compensation would be interesting.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
I enjoyed all the women tweeting at Bedoya about how he should shut up because Wambach had a more successful career than him.

Between Abby and Solo, it's nice to see that women are just as capable of defending a player for off-the-field stupidity because of on-the-field skill as men are.
 
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
Yeah, I'm on the Bedoya/Jozy side of this one, because:

1. It's funny
2. Wambach also said some extremely rude things about Bedoya and Altidore's teammates, so they have standing
3. Wambach actually did some bad shit, i.e., they're mocking her for what she's said and done, not because they're being condescending about the womens' game or something

They could definitely take it "too far", but thus far they haven't. Ale's been on-point with his follow-ups, too, and isn't apologizing for the burn but has credited Wambach for accepting responsibility. She probably has this song in her head.
 

cromulence

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2009
4,483
For a guy who's known to miss opportunities, Jozy absolutely crushed that one. Perfect.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
Heath is the nutmeg queen, even at practice.


The US beat Colombia in a friendly 7-0 last night. Allie Long got her first 2 international goals, and was joined on the scoresheet by Dunn, Lloyd, Heath, Press, and future World Cup Golden Ball winner Mallory Pugh.

The goal by Press was pretty sweet.

 
Last edited:
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
Sweet-looking, yes, but also really shitty goalkeeping. Either close the angle down, or drop to your line and give yourself an extra step to get there. That was not exactly, as they say, upper 90. The Colombian keeper hedged, got caught in no-woman's-land, and thus got beat by a middling shot.

I gotta say, that She Believes Cup was really entertaining, because it put on the field the only 3 other teams (aside from, I guess, Japan, and the US reserves) who can give the USWNT a game. There are full games on youtube vs England, France, and especially Germany from that competition. They're a rare example, other than the World Cup, of women's soccer that's both aesthetically pleasing and disciplined.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
Another friendly against Colombia about to start on ESPN.


If I'm reading that correctly, Heath is playing right back. Combine that with Lloyd, Press, Dunn, and Pugh out there, and that's a lot of firepower.

I saw an interview Julie Foudy did with Becky Sauerbrunn, she said that boycotting the Olympics is definitely on the table if the negotiations with US Soccer don't go well. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

Tickets for a June friendly against Japan in Denver went on sale a couple days ago, and all 18,000 tickets sold out in 10 minutes.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
While I don't like the new white kits on the men, I thought they looked pretty good on the women in the last game.

After watching this game for 5 minutes, I've decided the black ones look awful on both teams.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
Press chipped a Horan cross over the onrushing keeper for a 1-0 lead.

Alyssa Naeher just touched the ball for the first time...in the 31st minute. And it only came when her own defense tapped the ball back to her with no Colombian anywhere near.
 

Ale Xander

Lacks black ink
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
26,284
Not a fan of ending a half before a corner due.

Carli with an off day on her day
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,204
California. Duh.
Do you bring a 7th defender, a 7th midfielder or a 4th forward to Rio?
I went back and wrote down what Foudy had as her projected roster:

Locks:
Solo

O'Hara
Krieger
Sauerbrunn
Johnston
Klingenberg

Heath
Brian
Horan
Lloyd
Pugh

Morgan
Dunn
Press

That is 14, and we know that a backup keeper (likely either Naeher or Harris) makes 15. That leaves 3 spots.

You probably have to bring another center back, (Engen? Sonnett? Rampone?) and another center mid (likely Mewis or Long). Will Rapinoe be ready to go in time? If not, do you bring someone like O'Reilly who likely won't play a lot but brings a veteran presence? There are a few ways Ellis could go.

On a related note, it's a bit silly to have a roster of only 18 when winning the tournament would require playing 6 games in 17 days.
 
Last edited: