Or at least compare the ratings as a backdrop.That's the main difference between the NBA/WNBA debate and the Mens/Womens US Soccer programs: the women were getting jerked on the pay but had a higher ratings of their games. Glad they finally fixed that.I wish they'd stop this bullshit of comparing NBA and WNBA salaries.
Or at least compare the ratings as a backdrop.That's the main difference between the NBA/WNBA debate and the Mens/Womens US Soccer programs: the women were getting jerked on the pay but had a higher ratings of their games. Glad they finally fixed that.
US viewership of the 2019 Women's World Cup final was 22% higher than the 2018 men's final
According to a statement from Fox Sports, citing data from Nielsen, approximately 14.3 million U.S. viewers tuned in to the final match on television, compared to 11.4 million for the 2018 Men's World Cup Final, a 22% U.S. viewership boost.www.cnbc.com
Or at least compare the ratings as a backdrop.That's the main difference between the NBA/WNBA debate and the Mens/Womens US Soccer programs: the women were getting jerked on the pay but had a higher ratings of their games. Glad they finally fixed that.
US viewership of the 2019 Women's World Cup final was 22% higher than the 2018 men's final
According to a statement from Fox Sports, citing data from Nielsen, approximately 14.3 million U.S. viewers tuned in to the final match on television, compared to 11.4 million for the 2018 Men's World Cup Final, a 22% U.S. viewership boost.www.cnbc.com
Bruh ratings don't mean shit either as far as Men's and Women's soccer is concerned.
The men get higher revenues cuz Men's soccer generates billions worldwide. Where as just Women's soccer doesn't.
Bruh ratings don't mean shit either as far as Men's and Women's soccer is concerned.
The men get higher revenues cuz Men's soccer generates billions worldwide. Where as just Women's soccer doesn't.
It's actually deeper than. From what I've read, the women players had a choice. They could have always had a pay structure like the men, but they chose a different structure because it gave more money upfront and had better benefits. Then when they started winning and realized that the choice they made was no longer as profitable, they started acting like they were being cheated instead of just acknowledging that their position had changed and they wanted to renegotiate.
The WNBA argument is just nonsense. It would really be like Arena League players complaining because they don't get NFL money, but you'd never hear that because they understand reality.
I think the women in soccer have a better argument than those in basketball. With our men not even qualifying for last WC I'm not sure they bring in significantly more than the women. The gap is at least much closer in that comparison.
It's actually deeper than. From what I've read, the women players had a choice. They could have always had a pay structure like the men, but they chose a different structure because it gave more money upfront and had better benefits. Then when they started winning and realized that the choice they made was no longer as profitable, they started acting like they were being cheated instead of just acknowledging that their position had changed and they wanted to renegotiate.
The WNBA argument is just nonsense. It would really be like Arena League players complaining because they don't get NFL money, but you'd never hear that because they understand reality.
They don't. Which is why in the article that Mister B posted they would cherrypick certain years that made them look like they made more money. Like including the women's most recent World Cup money and excluding the Men's most recent WC money. If the Men get in to the next WC they will bring home between 300-500M, while the women will bring 50-75.
Also that article that Mister B posted is old