Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Dry_Needleworker7504 t1_iyas74s wrote

Wow, why would the men sign this deal? An even revenue share with women who bring in far far less money? What's the upside for the men?

37

maxxie10 t1_iyax755 wrote

Part of it would be the potential bad PR. At this stage, with the quality of the men's team, the money those players get from the NT is just a small fraction of their club salaries, so it's not worth fighting over pennies for them.

37

impatientimpasta t1_iybmgfa wrote

Probably negligible amount for the men's team considering a lot of them play in Europe. Plus it bolsters women's soccer in the US.

25

StrngBrew t1_iye87qu wrote

Pulisic alone makes around $8.5M per year. So his World Cup prize money of $300k is nothing.

4

charger77 t1_iyatytt wrote

I’m assuming the upside is they still get paid even if they fail to qualify like the last World Cup.

15

Teabagger_Vance t1_iyblc7q wrote

They still get paid salaries. From what I can tell the women’s team isn’t taking in a whole lot lol. If one group win can surpass two full bouts that doesn’t seem like a fair trade even if you miss it.

5

StrngBrew t1_iye86q2 wrote

The USWNT team is actually a profitable enterprise. People go to their matches, broadcasters pay to show the game, sponsors pay to be associated with them. They do make money.

This is not about that. This is about the split of FIFA prize money. It’s not about the commercials of US Soccer revenue really.

1

Teabagger_Vance t1_iyeayio wrote

Revenue and profit aren’t the same.

What I’m saying is that the men’s team is getting a raw deal here. If one lowly level match can surpass everyone the other club made in two world cups then this is lopsided.

1

StrngBrew t1_iyeejig wrote

You really ought to read the story you are commenting on.

>Revenue and profit aren’t the same.

This is prize money from the tournament. US Soccer is non profit who is mostly funded via sponsorships, ticket sales and broadcast rights. They aren't funded through prize money.

>If one lowly level match

This is prize money for qualifying from the group stage. Not one match.

>can surpass everyone the other club made in two world cups then this is lopsided.

Again, it simply due to difference in prize money that FIFA awards federations. That is not something US Soccer decides.

1

Teabagger_Vance t1_iyeimub wrote

The dudes are getting fleeced here. Idk how else to say it.

4

StrngBrew t1_iyelxwf wrote

The prize money from tournaments is so inconsequential to most men's players that a lot of them simply donate it charity or give it to their federations.

And actually as it's been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, the dudes are actually taking home a bigger piece of the pie than they did before. Previously, most of that money would just go into the pockets of US Soccer. So they're making more and also giving more to the women's team.

This is also not to mention that they'll also take home prize money if the women win as well, something that was not the case before.

The prize money here would make up something like 3% of Pulisic's yearly salary. I doubt he's feeling very "fleeced."

1

Teabagger_Vance t1_iyentqp wrote

That’s the english team

−1

StrngBrew t1_iyeocny wrote

Most of the US team plays in Europe making millions a year playing in the top leagues.

2

StrngBrew t1_iye9t4g wrote

Well no, they wouldn’t be getting any FIFA prize money which is what this article is referring to.

1

HE20002019 t1_iyc82hx wrote

Essentially if the men didn’t sign it US Soccer and the women would’ve dragged them in the press and made them the scapegoat for the lack of “equal pay.”

Most of the players on the men’s team make enough money from their clubs that they are okay simply not dealing with that.

14

IncidentalIncidence t1_iycum5u wrote

because the new deal also included revenue sharing on ticket and jersey sales. Before, that money was going straight to USSF; now, the players get a cut of every ticket and jersey that USSF sells. Which means that the players are incentivized to promote the team more (good for USSF), the men are getting a whole new revenue stream that they weren't before, and the women are getting paid equally in the revenue sharing agreement. Everybody wins.

8

ChepaukPitch t1_iycbj9t wrote

Because for most male football players national team pay is not their main pay. At least the ones who are good.

5

StrngBrew t1_iye9mxq wrote

First, this article is about the split of FIFA prize money. It’s not about a split of revenue that US Soccer earns from things like sponsorships, ticket sales or broadcast rights (which are always sold as a package anyway).

So it’s entirely about how the federation decides to split prize money from the men’s and women’s World Cup.

For the vast majority of the players on the men’s team, who play pro soccer in Europe, the fifa prize money is a pittance. So it would make perfect sense for them to share that with their female counterparts, who don’t have the ability to earn that at the club level.

In some other countries, the men straight up donate their nat’l team salaries to charity. England players haven’t kept their wages for years.

So no men’s player is really going to see this as “unfair.” I’m sure they’re just as happy to see it go to their USWNT colleagues as anywhere else.

0