Quote:
Originally Posted by calvindog
Like any other profession shouldn’t she be paid based on what she produces and what value she has? The women apparently receive 13% of their revenue and the men 9%. Maybe it’s the women who are overpaid?
|
Jeff-First, I have trouble understanding those figures. The US men did not even play in the 2018 World Cup. They were knocked out by Trinidad and Tobago. To be kind, the men’s team is mediocre. The men’s sport is bigger and the men’s tournament generates a lot more revenue. I understand that. However, our men’s team doesn’t generate its’ fair share of the revenue any more than the Washington Generals generated its’ fair share of the revenues when it played the Globetrotters. The US soccer federation can allocate their income to the players as it sees fit. The USWNT is a source of national pride and an inspiration to youngsters growing up. How can they not be compensated at least as well as the men?
In Olympic competition US athletes are compensated based on how they do. I competed in the US Olympic curling trials many moons ago. We were told that if we became the US team and won a gold we would get I believe $25,000. A silver was $10,000, and a bronze was $5,000. I think all US Olympic athletes are compensated based on results. I think that the soccer teams should be compensated in a similar fashion.