An Open Letter to Megan Rapinoe, from America

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,721
32,072
1,743
oklahoma city
#22
Rapinoe etc. are not lobbying to keep more of her OWN money. They are demanding someone else's.

She doesn't provide jobs for thousands of workers, she's one lady. She's not curing cancer or moving our technology forward. She provides mild entertainment to an audience roughly 10% of her male counterparts'.

It would be great if we threw our entire tax code in the trash and started fresh, with no subsidies, no loopholes and the same low rate for every company. Find me that candidate and I'll vote for them.
So, you are claiming that the corporations that do these things are only trying to keep more of their own money? The corporations that do these things are always providers of very important needs and provide lots of good jobs? Sure. Ok. Women's soccer is far less important than seeing what some person that you knew in high school had for dinner last night on Facebook.

10%? At this point, you are simply making stuff up.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/10/us-...world-cup-final-was-higher-than-the-mens.html
US viewership of the 2019 Women’s World Cup final was 22% higher than the 2018 men’s final

According to The Wall Street Journal, U.S. women’s soccer games have generated more revenue for the USSF than U.S. men’s games over the past three years, and according to Nike, the 2019 women’s stadium home jersey is the top-selling soccer jersey, men’s or women’s, ever sold on Nike.com in one season.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#23
So, you are claiming that the corporations that do these things are only trying to keep more of their own money? The corporations that do these things are always providers of very important needs and provide lots of good jobs? Sure. Ok. Women's soccer is far less important than seeing what some person that you knew in high school had for dinner last night on Facebook.

10%? At this point, you are simply making stuff up.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/10/us-...world-cup-final-was-higher-than-the-mens.html
US viewership of the 2019 Women’s World Cup final was 22% higher than the 2018 men’s final

According to The Wall Street Journal, U.S. women’s soccer games have generated more revenue for the USSF than U.S. men’s games over the past three years, and according to Nike, the 2019 women’s stadium home jersey is the top-selling soccer jersey, men’s or women’s, ever sold on Nike.com in one season.
that 10% higher statement is intellectually dishonest within the context of a discussion like this.

1) the US men were not in the 2018 world cup - it was between France / Croatia, in Russia. So, freaking duh, the "US viewership" to watch the US women was higher.

I mean, duh.

That has nothing to do with pay.

2) only about one-quarter of U.S. Soccer's total operating revenue can be attributed to gate revenues, according to the federation's financial documents. The other revenues come mainly from broadcasting and sponsorships, and it's difficult to parse out which teams contribute more to these revenues because U.S. Soccer sells sponsorships and broadcasting rights as a bundled package.

3) The U.S. men's and women's teams have different collective-bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer. The most noticeable difference lies in bonus structure and amounts. As a recent piece from The Guardian notes, male players stand to earn more money in bonuses as they progress through a World Cup. But that's just the World Cup: The men's and women's teams earn bonuses (of different kinds and amounts) in other games and tournaments, under a variety of differing conditions. Overall, men earn more in bonuses. But a recent update to the women's team deal has narrowed the bonus gap, and also made it so that female players earn a base salary (male players only earn money through bonuses).

4) The men's World Cup currently generates more money, by far. For context, FIFA earned upwards of $6 billion from the 2018 men's World Cup. Meanwhile, the women's 2019 World Cup is estimated to earn FIFA about $131 million.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,721
32,072
1,743
oklahoma city
#24
that 10% higher statement is intellectually dishonest within the context of a discussion like this.

1) the US men were not in the 2018 world cup - it was between France / Croatia, in Russia. So, freaking duh, the "US viewership" to watch the US women was higher.

I mean, duh.

That has nothing to do with pay.

2) only about one-quarter of U.S. Soccer's total operating revenue can be attributed to gate revenues, according to the federation's financial documents. The other revenues come mainly from broadcasting and sponsorships, and it's difficult to parse out which teams contribute more to these revenues because U.S. Soccer sells sponsorships and broadcasting rights as a bundled package.

3) The U.S. men's and women's teams have different collective-bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer. The most noticeable difference lies in bonus structure and amounts. As a recent piece from The Guardian notes, male players stand to earn more money in bonuses as they progress through a World Cup. But that's just the World Cup: The men's and women's teams earn bonuses (of different kinds and amounts) in other games and tournaments, under a variety of differing conditions. Overall, men earn more in bonuses. But a recent update to the women's team deal has narrowed the bonus gap, and also made it so that female players earn a base salary (male players only earn money through bonuses).

4) The men's World Cup currently generates more money, by far. For context, FIFA earned upwards of $6 billion from the 2018 men's World Cup. Meanwhile, the women's 2019 World Cup is estimated to earn FIFA about $131 million.
1. It is about money. Obviously, since the men suck and don't make it to the championships, they should be paid more. That isn't disingenuous, it is dumb.:derp:
2. It is difficult to tell where it comes from, therefore, we should pay the bad men's team more than the good women's team. :derp::derp:
3. Gee, I wonder what might have made them update it . It would not have been the pressure from the issue being raised, nah, couldn't be that.:derp::derp::derp:
4. What relevance does worldwide revenue for a sport that is hugely popular elsewhere but isn't popular in the US have to this issue? None. :derp::derp::derp::derp:
 
Mar 11, 2006
1,811
1,419
1,743
#26
1. It is about money. Obviously, since the men suck and don't make it to the championships, they should be paid more. That isn't disingenuous, it is dumb.:derp:
2. It is difficult to tell where it comes from, therefore, we should pay the bad men's team more than the good women's team. :derp::derp:
3. Gee, I wonder what might have made them update it . It would not have been the pressure from the issue being raised, nah, couldn't be that.:derp::derp::derp:
4. What relevance does worldwide revenue for a sport that is hugely popular elsewhere but isn't popular in the US have to this issue? None. :derp::derp::derp::derp:
Did you actually include a link that compared the US TV ratings in a game that included the United States versus a game with France and Croatia? Talk about disingenuous and dumb. Wow, who would have thunk that US people like to watch US teams. :lol::lol:
(Btw, I hope this doesn’t surprise you , but the OSU and OU softball games in the CWS did better ratings in Oklahoma than the baseball World Series in Omaha. But outside of Oklahoma the ratings were reversed)

I don’t know the formula of how revenue is divided. But worldwide revenue, I believe, is a big deal. The TV revenue the US soccer federation receives for men’s soccer dwarf that of women. Why should women get a piece of that revenue? It is already a fact that men get paid a smaller percentage of the pie than women.
Should women get an even larger percentage than men? How is that fair?

Do I hope the women get paid more, yes? But fact is they do not appear to be underpaid for the TV revenues generated.
 
Aug 16, 2012
1,719
959
743
56
#27
1. It is about money. Obviously, since the men suck and don't make it to the championships, they should be paid more. That isn't disingenuous, it is dumb.:derp:
2. It is difficult to tell where it comes from, therefore, we should pay the bad men's team more than the good women's team. :derp::derp:
3. Gee, I wonder what might have made them update it . It would not have been the pressure from the issue being raised, nah, couldn't be that.:derp::derp::derp:
4. What relevance does worldwide revenue for a sport that is hugely popular elsewhere but isn't popular in the US have to this issue? None. :derp::derp::derp::derp:
1. Popularity drives revenue, not wins/losses. Men's is more popular, draws significantly more revenue to be dispersed.
2. Wins/losses is irrelevant. Until you realize that, further discussion is useless. Think there are players on the hapless Tampa Bay Buccaneers that make more than some who play for the Patriots? Of course there are. W/L is irrelevant.
3. No. The changes have been in the works for years.
4. EVERYTHING. You really need to educate yourself on where the money comes from. US teams get huge chunks of their revenue as a share from the international organizations.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,721
32,072
1,743
oklahoma city
#28
Did you actually include a link that compared the US TV ratings in a game that included the United States versus a game with France and Croatia? Talk about disingenuous and dumb. Wow, who would have thunk that US people like to watch US teams. :lol::lol:
(Btw, I hope this doesn’t surprise you , but the OSU and OU softball games in the CWS did better ratings in Oklahoma than the baseball World Series in Omaha. But outside of Oklahoma the ratings were reversed)

I don’t know the formula of how revenue is divided. But worldwide revenue, I believe, is a big deal. The TV revenue the US soccer federation receives for men’s soccer dwarf that of women. Why should women get a piece of that revenue? It is already a fact that men get paid a smaller percentage of the pie than women.
Should women get an even larger percentage than men? How is that fair?

Do I hope the women get paid more, yes? But fact is they do not appear to be underpaid for the TV revenues generated.
The point if the link is that the men’s team isn’t there. If you can give a link of the men’s team in a championship game, be my guest.

I personally don’t care that much about their pay. I’m just laughing at all of you who would be calling this “just business” it if it was a company, particularly a conservative company. Since it is a women’s team with some outspoken lesbians, they are considered the devil around here. (While this is in a response to you that part was not at you specifically.)
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#29
1. It is about money. Obviously, since the men suck and don't make it to the championships, they should be paid more. That isn't disingenuous, it is dumb.:derp:
2. It is difficult to tell where it comes from, therefore, we should pay the bad men's team more than the good women's team. :derp::derp:
3. Gee, I wonder what might have made them update it . It would not have been the pressure from the issue being raised, nah, couldn't be that.:derp::derp::derp:
4. What relevance does worldwide revenue for a sport that is hugely popular elsewhere but isn't popular in the US have to this issue? None. :derp::derp::derp::derp:
your post makes zero sense. #2, for example, they do not know how much is attributed to each team because it is bundled, but the total difference between men and women is ENORMOUS in terms of revenue generated. 100 million to billions difference...

come on man, this stuff is not that hard.

if you run the numbers, the women are OVERPAID roughly 22% compared to men's teams.

I posted information straight from the site, those are not my comments. If you want to know more about it, it's very simply to research further.

There is no gender pay gap. not in soccer, not anywhere except for Obama's and Clinton's election campaign teams (that difference is at least documented)
 
Aug 16, 2012
1,719
959
743
56
#30
The point if the link is that the men’s team isn’t there. If you can give a link of the men’s team in a championship game, be my guest.

I personally don’t care that much about their pay. I’m just laughing at all of you who would be calling this “just business” it if it was a company, particularly a conservative company. Since it is a women’s team with some outspoken lesbians, they are considered the devil around here. (While this is in a response to you that part was not at you specifically.)
The lesbian aspect of it is irrelevant and only introduced by the left to fit a narrative.
It is a business decision. They are in sales and the men generate far more sales than the women. Think the guy who sells fewer widgets should be compensated the same as the guy who sells far more?
 
Mar 11, 2006
1,811
1,419
1,743
#31
The point if the link is that the men’s team isn’t there. If you can give a link of the men’s team in a championship game, be my guest.

I personally don’t care that much about their pay. I’m just laughing at all of you who would be calling this “just business” it if it was a company, particularly a conservative company. Since it is a women’s team with some outspoken lesbians, they are considered the devil around here. (While this is in a response to you that part was not at you specifically.)
Steross - this may surprise you, but I am a big USWNT fan. I have taken my daughters to their games in both Chicago and Dallas. I have a niece who has a decent, but outside, shot of making the National team in a couple of years (she plays on one of the youth national teams now).

That is one of the reasons I am so disappointed in Rapinoe. She caused a division when there did not need to be. She made everything about herself instead of the team. She was a spectacle. If I was her coach, I would have sat her for kneeling during the anthem. Not so much for disrespecting the flag, but for separating herself and not participating in team unity.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#32
That is one of the reasons I am so disappointed in Rapinoe. She caused a division when there did not need to be. She made everything about herself instead of the team. She was a spectacle. If I was her coach, I would have sat her for kneeling during the anthem. Not so much for disrespecting the flag, but for separating herself and not participating in team unity.
if I was her coach I would have made her get a Colin Kaepernick hairdo.

1562801828487.png
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,813
24,061
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#33
Hey Megan - please play soccer...not politics. You have eliminated 1/2 of your potential fanbase with your pride and arrogance.
Which is ironic considering that apparently what they make is dependent on specifically how many people watch them. You'd think she'd be bending over backwards to offend as few people as possible, but no, lawsuits and rhetoric instead.
 
Last edited:
Jun 4, 2014
933
693
643
Dallas, TX
#34
that 10% higher statement is intellectually dishonest within the context of a discussion like this.

1) the US men were not in the 2018 world cup - it was between France / Croatia, in Russia. So, freaking duh, the "US viewership" to watch the US women was higher.

I mean, duh.

That has nothing to do with pay.

2) only about one-quarter of U.S. Soccer's total operating revenue can be attributed to gate revenues, according to the federation's financial documents. The other revenues come mainly from broadcasting and sponsorships, and it's difficult to parse out which teams contribute more to these revenues because U.S. Soccer sells sponsorships and broadcasting rights as a bundled package.

3) The U.S. men's and women's teams have different collective-bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer. The most noticeable difference lies in bonus structure and amounts. As a recent piece from The Guardian notes, male players stand to earn more money in bonuses as they progress through a World Cup. But that's just the World Cup: The men's and women's teams earn bonuses (of different kinds and amounts) in other games and tournaments, under a variety of differing conditions. Overall, men earn more in bonuses. But a recent update to the women's team deal has narrowed the bonus gap, and also made it so that female players earn a base salary (male players only earn money through bonuses).

4) The men's World Cup currently generates more money, by far. For context, FIFA earned upwards of $6 billion from the 2018 men's World Cup. Meanwhile, the women's 2019 World Cup is estimated to earn FIFA about $131 million.
1. It is about money. Obviously, since the men suck and don't make it to the championships, they should be paid more. That isn't disingenuous, it is dumb.:derp:
2. It is difficult to tell where it comes from, therefore, we should pay the bad men's team more than the good women's team. :derp::derp:
3. Gee, I wonder what might have made them update it . It would not have been the pressure from the issue being raised, nah, couldn't be that.:derp::derp::derp:
4. What relevance does worldwide revenue for a sport that is hugely popular elsewhere but isn't popular in the US have to this issue? None. :derp::derp::derp::derp:
1. The women’s team has SIGNIFICANTLY less competition for wins than the men. It’s not even close. There are maybe 5 countries with a legit shot at taking the cup each year its played. It’s just not as developed internationally.
2. The only portion that is questionable is the sponsorship portion. Companies sponsor US Soccer, not men’s or women’s. Perhaps with some different accounting that could change. Revenue from matches is disbursed to the team that generates it.
3. The women have a better CBA than the men, the bonus money from the competitions is where the gap is. It also goes back to a salary vs commission pay structure. Commission structures will always pay out more than a salary as they aren’t guaranteed and predictable.
4. The reason world wide popularity matters is because of the money generated by the competitions. That’s what drives the bonuses paid out to the teams. Not sure what is difficult to grasp on that one. Argentina isn’t lining up to watch the women play, but by damn if the whole country doesn’t shut down to watch Messi play in the World Cup.

Ultimately the revenue just isn’t there for the women. I wish it was but they’re talking out both sides of their mouth. Can’t try to itemize your own endorsements and then ask for a cut of the men’s prize money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mar 11, 2006
1,811
1,419
1,743
#35
Just read Rapinoe has larger endorsement deals than all the players on the team. If she expects to receive some of the revenue the men generate, shouldn’t she share some of her endorsement money with her teammates?
 

bleedinorange

Federal Marshal
Jan 11, 2010
16,444
30,676
743
In Pokey's head
#36
Just read Rapinoe has larger endorsement deals than all the players on the team. If she expects to receive some of the revenue the men generate, shouldn’t she share some of her endorsement money with her teammates?
Will be interesting to see whose products he endorses. Gives me a reason not to buy from them.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,721
32,072
1,743
oklahoma city
#37
The lesbian aspect of it is irrelevant and only introduced by the left to fit a narrative.
It is a business decision. They are in sales and the men generate far more sales than the women. Think the guy who sells fewer widgets should be compensated the same as the guy who sells far more?
Is anyone on this board negotiating with them? You are making my point. Every day business negotiations, lawsuits, and other methods are used by people/companies to try to get more money. The only time anyone on this board complains about that fact is if the person/company trying to get more money is a women, a minority, gay or otherwise liberal. I think that the guy who sells fewer widget but was able to negotiate more compensation for himself or his widget company has made a smart move. As would all of you if we were actually talking about some corporate widget maker. But, since we are talking about a women’s soccer team, blasphemy that those chicks would try to get more money. How dare them. Don’t they know their place? Don’t they know that nobody else in business ever tries to get more than what some person on op.com feels is the fair share?
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
7,884
3,727
743
49
#38
The lesbian aspect of it is irrelevant and only introduced by the left to fit a narrative.
It is a business decision. They are in sales and the men generate far more sales than the women. Think the guy who sells fewer widgets should be compensated the same as the guy who sells far more?
Is anyone on this board negotiating with them? You are making my point. Every day business negotiations, lawsuits, and other methods are used by people/companies to try to get more money. The only time anyone on this board complains about that fact is if the person/company trying to get more money is a women, a minority, gay or otherwise liberal. I think that the guy who sells fewer widget but was able to negotiate more compensation for himself or his widget company has made a smart move. As would all of you if we were actually talking about some corporate widget maker. But, since we are talking about a women’s soccer team, blasphemy that those chicks would try to get more money. How dare them. Don’t they know their place? Don’t they know that nobody else in business ever tries to get more than what some person on op.com feels is the fair share?
I have no problem with them negotiating, but my understanding was their contract is not ready to be negotiated. Even if it is, they can cry all they want. The money isn't there to pay them exactly what the guys get and they are already getting a large percentage that is more than the guys. I also believe that their antics with the anthem and politics and such are just going to cause their image harm in the eyes of would be fans, thus hurting their negotiating position.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 
Aug 16, 2012
1,719
959
743
56
#39
Is anyone on this board negotiating with them? You are making my point. Every day business negotiations, lawsuits, and other methods are used by people/companies to try to get more money. The only time anyone on this board complains about that fact is if the person/company trying to get more money is a women, a minority, gay or otherwise liberal. I think that the guy who sells fewer widget but was able to negotiate more compensation for himself or his widget company has made a smart move. As would all of you if we were actually talking about some corporate widget maker. But, since we are talking about a women’s soccer team, blasphemy that those chicks would try to get more money. How dare them. Don’t they know their place? Don’t they know that nobody else in business ever tries to get more than what some person on op.com feels is the fair share?
You are completely missing the point and are gullibly falling into the narrative they want you to . This is not about women, gay, black, etc. This is about a second-tier product that generates a small fraction of the revenue inanely believing they deserve the same degree of compensation as those that perform at the highest level and generate billions in revenue.

Tell you what. Let us take out the woman factor and other arguments of convenience designed to elicit sympathetic, equality response. Answer one question....why does a minor league baseball player not get paid the same as someone in the Show? The answer is simple. Despite being the same general composition in regard to gender, race and sexual orientation, minor league players are not as good, they play for smaller crowds, and they do not generate anywhere near the revenue as the major league teams.

Tiger Woods is nowhere near the golfer he used to be but because he still attracts insane crowds, he gets compensated more than pretty much everyone else in regard to appearance fees, endorsements, etc. Sponsors know he moves the needle, he draws crowds, he makes everyone money, even those who play against him.

A pro surfer, X-game athlete, triathlete, etc , are every bit the athlete a soccer player is. Do they get paid the same as NFL, MLB, NBA, etc. athletes? No. Why? There is not as much interest, few sponsorship dollars and television revenue.

Be smarter than falling for the equality schtick. They get paid less because their sport makes less. Plain and simple.

BTW, if this were about equality, each player, beginning with Rapinoe, would put all individual sponsor/endorsement dollars into a pool to be equally shared with all teammates and coaches. This is about wanting more and manipulating the situation using current social hotbutton topics to do so.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,721
32,072
1,743
oklahoma city
#40
I have no problem with them negotiating, but my understanding was their contract is not ready to be negotiated.
I think this sentence actually belongs in the thread about Paul George. He left our great state barely into a four year contract. Maybe you can help me find the thread where you are raging about him.