NWSL slightly raises cap, minimum salary

The Equalizer Staff April 1, 2016 213
(Photo Copyright Clark Linehan for The Equalizer)

(Photo Copyright Clark Linehan for The Equalizer)

Amid a public fisticuffs between United States women’s national team players and the U.S. Soccer Federation over what players allege to be wage discrimination — part of a bigger collective bargaining agreement battle — the National Women’s Soccer League has slightly raised its low salary bar.

[MORE: U.S. women claim wage discrimination  |  World reacts]

The salary cap for each team has increased to $278,000 for the 2016 season, up from $265,000 last year. Rosters remain at 20 players per team, although United States and Canada women’s national team players are paid by their federation outside of that cap, so the number of players paid under that cap varies by team.

NWSL also increased its minimum salary from $6,842 in 2015 to $7,200 in 2016. The league’s maximum salary — which applied to both domestic and international players outside of those whose salaries are subsidized by a federation — increased from $37,800 to $39,700.

United States women’s national team players are compensated by U.S. Soccer for their participation in NWSL in addition to their national team earnings. U.S. players’ salaries for league play vary, but most are paid more than the league maximum. FiveThirtyEight reports that ‘Tier 1’ U.S. players — like Hope Solo and Carli Lloyd — earn a $54,000 base salary for NWSL play in addition to a $72,000 base for the national team.

  • STT

    Always good to see the league’s salary numbers going up. I assume that the bumps have coincided with bumps in profit sharing from Portland (initially) and Houston (last year). Hopefully with another Portland-like team joining in Orlando this season, next year’s salary numbers will make a significant jump up.

  • Rdalford

    Agree any increase in NWSL salary cap numbers is a positive. Looks like increase from 2015 numbers to 2016 is near 5%
    Appreciate that numbers are going up, but believe that the players min (now $7200 for 2016) should have been increased up to around $12,000. The current min of $7200 amounts to only about $240/week over the 30 week (preseason to end of season championship) time period.

    One clarification re USWNT players NWSL pay amounts from USSF. My understanding using information made public in USSF soccer court filing – ref Appendix D the Memo of Understanding (MOU). The NWSL salary $54k figure quoted for allocated players like Hope and Carli (players who were on USWNT when NWSL was founded and MOU was signed in 2013) is/was applicable for 2015. From My understanding (again based on MOU) the number is $56k for 2016. As article notes this NWSL allocated USWNT $56k amount for playing in NWSL is in addition to the $72k tier 1 base contract amount for USWNT players.
    Also note (info also from MOU) the “newer” USWNT players (players who became on contract USWNT players after 2013) who are allocated in NWSL would receive $46k for playing in NWSL in addition to their applicable tier 1 ($72k) or tier 2 ($51k) base contract amount for USWNT players.

    • Constant Weeder

      Thanks for these definite numbers. I appreciate your doing the digging for them. NWSL pay should certainly be considerably higher, but every little bit is progress. I look forward to the day when NWSL is no longer treated as an afterthought.

      • Oregon

        $6800 to $7200 gross isn’t much of a shift.

        Actually – still shocking when you think about it.

        Remind me of the starting MLS salary?

        • guest

          For what it is worth, MLS salary cap info from 2000.
          NYT article from Dec 2000 stated that in 2000 MLS player min was $24k, the team salary cap was $1.7m, and average player salary was approx $80k.

          Of course MLS has grown significantly over the past 16 years and salary cap numbers are higher now, but worth noting that MLS also struggled financially for many years.

          • Steglitz49

            $24k in 2000 is probably like $30k in today’s money. That is 4x the $7.2k for the NWSL.

            I know that today the MLS average attendance is higher than Portlands and the peak attendances are about 70-80k spectators, but even in 2000 MLS seems to have been doing better and that was before the great run in WC-02.

          • guest

            per Wiki
            MLS attendane in 2000 league avg 13.7K
            (high was LA at avg 24.k and low was Miami at avg 7.4k)

            MLS attendance in 2015 league avg 21.5k
            (high Seattle avg 44.2k and low Colorado avg 15.6K)

            Portland avg 13K in 2013 and 2014 avg 15.6K in 2015 is the only NWSL team (currently) near the MLS attendance range.

          • Guesting

            You might want to make reference to the big difference in ticket pricing, too.

          • Steglitz49

            Too obvious. WoSo fans can’t cope with the truth plainly stated.

        • Rdalford

          For 2016 MLS team salary cap is $3.66m
          Note however salary cap excludes Designated Players and salary adjustments made with allocation funds as well as development and reserve players
          The individual player max is $457.5k but again this excludes Designated Players (many of who have contracts in the millions).
          The player min is $62.5k for veteran with min of $51.5k for non vet/reserves.

      • Rdalford

        Agree that increased NWSL attendance and therefore increased revenue and sponsorship money and a tv/media deal for NWSL all needs to happen as soon as possible so that NWSL teams have financial stability to pay more reasonable $$$.

        As fan(s) we can buy season tickets, attend games etc but all the NWSL owners and NWSL management need to look at what is working from marketing/media and resulting attendance levels being achieved in Portland (and if reports out of Orlando re anticipated attendance prove accurate) and Orlando and find (borrow what works etc) ways to grow more effectively in the other NWSL teams markets.

        We also look forward to when NWSL is more financially stable (and look forward to continuing to enjoy the competitive woso matches as NWSL grows).

        • mockmook

          I think it is more likely that interest in WoSo preceded the teams in POR and ORL, though they undoubtably have some lessons for other teams.

          Just think other teams will have to grow fans slowly over many years before they will get anything close to those numbers, and some won’t succeed in their venue/city no matter how smart they are.

          • Rdalford

            agree that some teams are in markets where there is a wider variety and other established pro teams so much more completion for fan’s sports/entertainment $$s – but do feel that marketing approach and focus could improve. The league also need to be pragmatic when adding new teams (pick venue/cities more like Portland/Orlando and with links to MLS or other teams that control venues) and league may need to relocate/buyout etc teams that do not succeed. The NASL runs some teams that only average about 5k attendance, but Portland, Orlando etc indicate that higher attendance is attainable for woso in some venues/cities.

          • Lorehead

            Salt Lake City looks like a particularly good one. Not saturated with sports teams, good attendance for NCAA WoSo, good local support for the local BroSo team (but I can’t help but think a lot of people there must be sick of how dirty it plays and want a team they can feel better about), great demographics for WoSo, with a lot of little girls playing sports (the first girls’ tackle football league just started there).

    • Steglitz49

      There is a fine summary of how NT players earn their money in one of the other threads. It was a reply to a question of mine.

      • Steglitz49

        another poster added:

        Add in another set of numbers that everybody is ignoring (USWNTPA doesn’t want us to know) or doesn’t realize are there and the USSF ends up paying out around $250,000 per player in a Non-WC/OG years and around $400,000 per player for WC/OG years. Not sure if it includes the bonuses, but USSF has to pay their share of the SS taxes, plus they are paying for Health Insurance, Workers comp insurance, ect. All of which is reported on the players W2 at the end of the year.

        On the men’s side, they are not paying all the additional monies. They only report what they paid them on a 1099.

        [If these figures are correct, then only playing for the NWSL is a lot different from the NT]

        • CED

          People don’t realize how good of a deal the WNT has there are a lot of benefits, tax perks, guaranteed increases for NWSL pay increases, a clause they get a lump sum if pay to revenue is less than men ratio to make up the difference, etc…. USSF has given them 20 to 25% increases CBA to CBA and that’s probably what they are offering now.

          • guest

            no equal pay for nwsl then no equal pay for uswnt.

      • Rufan

        Plus US Olympics gives bonuses for medals.

      • CED

        27K win bonus is not overstated look at how many games they played last year and possibly this year. 2016 they have 9 games already, 2 vs Colombia this month, 2 in June, 2 in July, and 10 if there is a VT.,,that’s 25 friendlies.

        • Steglitz49

          The fundamental problem of the yawning gap between the haves and have nots must be resolved.

          When on top of that the USWNT carries a lot of dead wood who make out like bandits, this is potentially a damaging situation.

          Equal pay between the officer ladies in the gravy and male players but where does the crew of the NWSL get their cut? Solidarity?

          • CED

            That’s what people are forgetting in the pay debate. USWNT took dead wood to Wcup 2015 b/c they were legacy picks who the coaches did not want to play an important minute, but didn’t have the guts to cut them. Ellis got the job to appease the vets who lead the Sermani revolt to retain their spots.. In comparison, the MNT cut someone like Donovan that was still a player with stuff to offer. In the WNT system that would never happen. MNT system is dog it dog competition, WNT is based on security and legacy, the Sermani overthrow is a perfect example. He was bringing people in to compete for spots and the Vets lead a revolt b/c they were threatened. People like Wambach, Chalupny, Boxx aren’t at the Wcup if Sermani is the coach, they were dead wood brought b/c they hadn’t won a Wcup.

          • Steglitz49

            To my mind the gap between the officers and the crew is too big. That gap has, as you elaborate on, knock on effects. At some point the fans will be disgusted.

            Players around the globe, male and female, have described the thrill and honor of being selected for the NT, to step out on a pitch to do their utmost for their country. Clealry such skill must be rewarded and not exploited but there has to be some reasonable proportion.

            There is, well understood, big differences in pay between for example Lotta Schelin, Nilla Fischer and Caroline Seger and domestic Swedish players just as it is in Norway between Ada Hegerberg and Caroline Graham Hansen and their domestic team-mates — BUT that is based on their income from their clubs and the deals they have negotiated, not from playing in or not playing in their NTs.

          • Rdalford

            solving the “yawning gap” requires pro woso (NWSL etc) to grow attendance, sponsors, tv/media etc so that NWSL teams have financial stability to pay more reasonable $$$. Even when clubs are successful and financially stable would expect the top WNT players would still earn more than typical player.

            On the men’s pro woso side the club salary for top MNT players is multiple millions range so the USSF payments to USMNT (for example $428K from USSF to Dempsey in most recent USSF financial reports) is still only a fraction of the salary from the club (Dempsey $4.6M from Seattle MLS club).
            However, there is still a significant gap between top players (Dempsey and other designated players in MLS) and the “typical” MLS veteran ( under current MLS salary cap the veteran player min is $62.5k with max of $457.5k) makes a much smaller salary than top players.

            imo key is to grow pro woso (attendance, sponsors, etc) so that the “typical” pro woso salary is reasonable. However I do not expect that pay gap between top players and typical players will disappear. Improve and stabilize the woso club financials so that typical players earn reasonable wage so the low side of any gap is still a reasonable wage and the “yawning gap” would be similar to gap on men’s side.

          • Lorehead

            Yeah, in MLS, the designated player rule means that the top men still make ten or twenty times as much as some of their teammates, but at least there’s a decent minimum.

          • Steglitz49

            Would you want to see a designated player rule for WoSo? Is it needed? Too soon, maybe?

            Maybe to attract top foreign players, a designated foreign player could be introduced. It could mean getting Miedema instead of Melis to the NWSL, for example, or Ada or Caroline instead of Dagny.

          • Lorehead

            I think it would be a step in the right direction. It would mean a team could sign one star, or maybe two, without having to cut the pay of the rest of the team.

          • Steglitz49

            To retain the principle of parity, presumably there would have to be a ceiling of what could be offered but, maybe, it would be expedient not to reveal the level.

            Let it evolve naturally but rich teams, like Portland, Orlando, Seattle and Houston may have to agree in a smoke filled room not to spend more than X, where X might be between $50,000 to $80,000.

          • Lorehead

            An EEOC ruling that any sister team must be paid the same amount as its brother team would greatly harm women’s sports. The sister-team model is the most financially-viable one we’ve ever found, but a baby sister can’t grow and thrive if she has to pull the same weight as her big brother right away.

            What might work is a requirement that they be paid according to the same formula based on revenues. A simpler version of my formula that you thought was too complicated: revenues could be split 50–50 between players and teams for both men and women.

          • Steglitz49

            Equal pay for equal work.

            The two sexes play on the same sized pitches with the same sized goals during the same length of time and with the same sized ball.

            It is an open and shut case, I would say.

          • Lorehead

            The same principle would imply that lower-division football should pay as well as the first division.

          • Steglitz49

            Indeed. I presume that will be part of USSF’s arguments.

          • CED

            ” Even when clubs are successful and financially stable would expect the
            top WNT players would still earn more than typical player.”

            WNT players are guaranteed to make more b/c they are guaranteed a proportional raise to any increase in NWSL max salary. WNT aren’t going to give up that difference they specifically added it in the MOU.

          • Rdalford

            even in an more open market system top WNT players (whether from usa or other countries) will earn more regardless of how WNT players might be paid by their federations

          • Steglitz49

            Players all around the world have paid witness to how thrilled and honored they feel being chosen to play for their nation. Obviously, such pride must not be exploited.

            The principle that income should be based on their play for their club is fundamental to good governance. NT pay should add to that, of course, but not be an outrageous add on.

          • Guesting

            Especially when the selection process on who makes the team is highly subjective.

        • kernel_thai

          Im not sure they get win bonus for VT but Im not sure they dont either

          • guest

            the 5 CONCACAF OG qualifying matches are also not friendlies so USWNT earned OG qualification bonus (noted as $15k elsewhere in calculations) for qualification not the friendly “win bonus”
            bottom line – fairly clear that USWNT can make approx $150k in non WC/OG year and approx $335K+ in WC/OG cycle

          • CED

            USWNT get win bonus for everything but Wcup, Olympics and qualifying tournies for those 2 events. Of course the Wcup and Olympics have their own bonus structure

          • Steglitz49

            make up your mind, please

    • CED

      Btw, the USWNT just got a raise b/c NWSL max went up….READ THE MOU to all those saying their deal is so horrible the last few days.

      • Rdalford

        no need for the “all caps” read MOU snark comments
        My previous postings include specific reference to and info from the MOU which I have read along with other doc’s from court filing.
        The “most favored player status” paragraph speaks to parties working in good faith to reach agreement … etc. but did not find a final agreed to calculation so I only used numbers (i.e. $56k for 2016 NWSL play) that were more clearly stated in MOU.

    • kernel_thai

      While $12k minimum is a bit of a leap what I would have done is left the maximum alone and thrown that $1900 raise on the minimum raising it to $9100. While the Math wouldnt work out as Im sure there r more players getting the minimum, at least it would have shown that the league gets the problem.

      • Lorehead

        What would be nice to see is a formula based on revenues. Let’s say, by way of example, that the players need $12,500/player, $250K/team as a bare minimum and the owners need $1M to cover their other overheads.

        Then the salary cap might stay around $250K until median revenue reaches $1.25M and there’s a profit to split. Then players might get sixty cents of every extra dollar until there’s an even split.(which would happen when $2.5M goes to players and the owners keep $2.5M) and fifty cents of every extra dollar of revenues above that.

        You could even pay the men the same way, and have a form of “equal pay” that wouldn’t destroy the NWSL.

        • Steglitz49

          Too much detail. If the teams are profitable each player can negotiate her own deal. Capitalism, not communist 5 year derigiste plans.

          • Lorehead

            Hey, remember just yesterday when Steglitz thought I gave too little detail and should show some calculations?

          • Steglitz49

            Your text is too dense so this bear can’t follow your reasoning. Hopefully other bears and wolverines can.

          • STT

            Steg can’t handle details. I’ve tried before.

          • Lorehead

            Steglitz has also observed that I’ve stopped bothering with detailed replies to him or her.

          • Steglitz49

            Steg can’t divide by 10, that we have seen. As for complex problems, clarity is your friend, not verbosity.

        • guest

          Basically, split the revenue 50/50. Do most professional teams work this way?

          • Lorehead

            Yes. The CBA of most major leagues and their players’ unions specifies a percentage of revenue that goes to the players.

      • Rdalford

        On another article previously I had suggested multi year increase (up to $9K for 2016 then up to $12K ) but got a lot of “can’t live on $9k either” type comments so I just used $12k. Agree that NWSL owners need to show (by increasing min $$) that they understand problem.
        Without more clarity on teams actually financial status it is hard to calculate salary levels that NWSL teams can support and although min $7200 in 2016 is better than min $6000 in 2013 it is still too low.

        • Steglitz49

          In short WoSo players need rich relatives to subsidize their game, UNLESS they can break into the WNT and hang in there, where the gravy is and in abundance.

      • Rufan

        My memory is that we read that the salary range in ’13 was $6K to $30K. If that was correct, this year’s minimum is 20% higher ($1,200) but the maximum is up 32% ($9,700). So the teams have put more money in both relative and absolute terms in raising the maximum salaries that will go to a few players instead of solving a “problem” of the low minimums. I suspect the teams feel they do not have a problem getting players willing to play for the minimums (how many players are trying out for the rosters?) but have had a problem attracting high skill int’l players willing to play even for the maximums.

        • another guest

          your memory is correct
          there have been larger increases on the overall team cap and player max and the increase at player max was probably required to get/keep some higher skilled and/or intl players.
          For what it is worth – NWSL salary cap info
          2013 min $6000 max $30k team cap $200k
          2014 min $6300 max $31.5k team cap ??? (my memory fails)
          2015 min $6842 max $37.8k team cap $265k
          2016 min $7200 max $39.7k team cap $278k

          not sure that I agree with the “teams do not have a problem getting players to play for min” although I understand the “players keep entering the draft and showing up for tryouts” point – but – I do not like poor financial situation that creates for the players and there is some evidence (early retirements etc) low pay does impact the available player pool.

          • Steglitz49

            My impression is that all around the world parents or other relatives subsidize (or sponsor, if you prefer) young ladies who want to play soccer.

            The WoSo players around the world, who make serious money out of their soccer, are not too many. Indeed, USWNT members are privileged indeed.

            If you moved the $56k allocated pay from the USWNT members and used that to raise salaries for the crew in the NWSL, there should be enough for each player to get at least an extra $5k each, thus making the minimum salary $12,200. They might even manage $13,000.

            That they consider it.

          • guest

            I wonder how much the players on the low end of the pay scale are motivated by money. It could be intangibles like the experience of playing professional soccer is more of a motivating factor for them than money. This is assuming of course that all their necessities are being met because nobody could possibly live on this kind of salary without additional support, like free housing, and medical, for a start.

          • Steglitz49

            Indeed. I wonder what the reasonable expectations of a woman with a college degree can be in terms of income? $35,000 per year + benefits? Or, more like $50,000?

          • Lorehead

            According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median income of a woman with a college degree was $1,049/week in 2014.

            If you don’t want more detail, please stop reading here.

            Weekly earnings are more relevant to the NWSL because it isn’t a year-round job. Also, this is $300 less than what a man makes with a college degree .

          • Steglitz49

            Thanks. Even my $50,000 was on the low side.

            Iow, these ladies are truly underpaid while the officers in the NT earn 3x in a lean year and 6-7x in a fat year. Holy cow!

    • Anson

      About $6.00 an hour! Incredible!

  • Steglitz49

    Here is a bit of good cheer for those readers of the EQ who will be in London on May 14th, because the good news is that all children will be able to attend the ladies FA Cup final for free. FREE.

    This is thanks to the FA’s partnership with SSE, the sponsors of the FA women’s cup, who are making an extra contribution. This year’s Final takes place at Wembley Stadium on Saturday 14 May.

    Adult tickets are priced £15 and group bookings and charter standard discounts are also available. Tickets for The Final are on sale now via TheFA.com/Tickets.

    In short, this is the chance for your kids or grandkids to watch a match at one of the holy sites if not the holiest site of soccer.

    • Tom F

      here is the recent full game between Man City vs Arsenal. It’s got the lovely Alsani in it plus other hotties. The ref spoils it by giving a red card. Oshoala looks like she’s going to be a world class player by the end if this season. She’s certainly got the speed; wonder who would win a foot race between her & The Stick?
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJvL_l_FXCc

      • Steglitz49

        Thanks.

        I get the impression that the FA in collusion with the major men’s teams want to make England the epicenter of WoSo in Europe and even make it the ultimate place to play club WoSo in the world.

        The weather is against them, though.

        • MurderOnZidanesFloor

          Set to be hotter in London than Madrid for the start of this coming week, certainly warmer than Sweden!

          • Steglitz49

            Sweden is 1,000 miles north to south so it depends where you measure.

      • MurderOnZidanesFloor

        This was a very entertaining game even with the red card. And we can’t blame the ref for it, he had no other choice given the circumstances. Van Veenendaal’s stop from Asllani was incredible, she had a great game overall as well. Was interesting watching Corboz play in defensive midfield, thought she had a good game there. I think both Arsenal and Manchester City will have enough talent to run Chelsea close based on this.

        Oshoala is really talented, she showed that a few times last year as well, but she is nowhere near the finished article and very rarely managed to have a big impact in games last season. I’d imagine she’ll turn into a top player over the next few years, not sure how much I expect this year though.

        • Tom F

          yep, a very entertaining indeed! Man City got at least 6 of England’s NT starters, Arsenal got 2.
          Got to ask; why do you think Sampson prefers Man City players over Chelsea ones?(or at least as starters on the NT?
          With a bit more teams balance, faster paced games, nicer stadiums, tighter uni’s, the English league might just be the most enjoyable in Europe to watch.
          Don’t know if this game was on par with the quality of the recent Thorns/Reogn matchup(perhaps the quickness of the NWSL players shows more) but I hope Americans will spend more time viewing WSL games in the future

        • Ethan

          Thank you for bringing up that Van Veenendaal save. That, as well as Duggan’s reaction, was so fun to see.

          If Manchester City’s and Chelsea’s defenses and center midfields perform well and consistently, I think they’ll stay as the top two considering how good both of their offenses are.

          • MurderOnZidanesFloor

            I’m thinking Chelsea will win the league again, Ji and Carney together in the attack will be too much for sides to deal with.

            I feel Arsenal have a stronger squad than Manchester City, but this result will give City a good early boost to getting second place.

  • CED

    The author if this article should actually read the MOU. Every WNT players gets paid more than the league max for NWSL duty. Vets get 56K and newbies(new allocated) get 46K.

    • Lorehead

      The article does say that the NT players make more than the unsubsidized players. You should read it.

      • CED

        Try to keep up.

        ” U.S. players’ salaries for league play vary, but most are paid more than the league maximum”

        He says most WNT are paid more than the league max, which means he thinks some NT players get below the league max. Thus, if a NT player got below the league max, which he thinks occurs(not true). non NT players who are at the league max would, then get paid more than some NT players…

        .ALL WNT PLAYERS ARE PAID MORE THAN THE LEAGUE MAX…HE LIKE YOU HAS NO IDEA WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT!

        • Lorehead

          You seem to have the delusion, somehow, that I haven’t read documents that I’ve quoted to you repeatedly. And floaters on the USWNT, such as Allie Long, who just got another call-up, don’t make more than the league max.

          • CED

            Keep embarrassing yourself. The article was about allocated players as tiers were mentioned.. What tier is Allie long? Just stop making a fool of yourself and admit you like the author didn’t know the facts.

          • Lorehead

            Exactly: not all USWNT players have a NT contract or make more than the league maximum. Most do, but some are floaters.

          • CED

            You’re exactly wrong like the author. Please stop embarrassing yourself

          • Craigaroo

            Knowledgeable, thoughtful fans like Lorehead and STT need never be embarrassed here among women’s soccer fans because we know they’re well-intentioned generally well-informed and contribute greatly to the discussion here. My impression of people like you, however, is that won’t ever be embarrassed because you have little sense of decency.

            //I’m kind of lurking here and momentarily de-lurking because I find your tone unnecessarily rude. Possibly I don’t understand the topic at hand but I get the feeling you don’t grasp that there are national team players (meaning simply players who play on the national team) who are called up on occasion who don’t have a national team contract

          • Steglitz49

            It is kind of you to type that but neither of them are as knowledgeable as they would like us to think and clarity is not always as clear as is required.

          • Craigaroo

            Steglitz – I generally tolerate your cheerful contrariness but cheerfulness – and the generally civil tone among WoSo fas – demands we take sides against those who are rude and demeaning. I’m serious, Steglitz

          • Steglitz49

            If before you typed your entry you had bothered to read the entries, you would have seen that both had admitted to getting key points wrong. Always check your references.

          • Craigaroo

            My point has not to do with their infallibility but with treating people civilly, especially some of our most valuable contributors to these forums. I’m not going to stand by silently while someone like CED stomps on people like that, even if he turns out to be right, you got that? I’ve sometimes stood up for you, too, even when I thought you made a bizarre comment because your generally jocular nature is harmless. So once more, I’m going to ask you to do the civil thing and maybe stand with me this time? The alternative, and I’m putting this diplomatically, is you should just shut up for once. Regards – Craig

          • Lorehead

            Yes, if common courtesy is reserved for those of us who have never made a mistake, there will soon be very little of it. Thank you.

          • Steglitz49

            High time to apply Healey’s first law of politics.

          • Lorehead

            I have indeed gotten points wrong here or there, and I admit to it whenever I become aware, whereas in the conversation he’s talking about, he’s misrepresenting the facts in order to avoid admitting that he is plainly wrong.

            For example, I directly quoted the amount of money the US Soccer financial statements says it got from its sponsorship deal with Nike. His excuse for why I’m wrong is something about how that’s not “royalties,” which makes no sense at all. I literally can’t tell what he thinks the word “royalties” means or, if we agreed that the sponsorship from Nike is not a “royalty,” what statement of mine would become wrong, or why it makes any difference whether we call Nike’s money “royalties” or not.

          • Steglitz49

            We all get things wrong or at least only half right.

            I objected to the patronizing tone of that writer.

            The fact that both the persons s/he cited had already admitted to getting something wrong, made it an easy score. An own goal, to use soccer terminology.

          • CED

            LOL.

            You impressed by people that are wrong.. You’re beloved Lorehead is currently claiming USSF royalty income is 20.3 million and that some USWNT players get paid less than some NT players in NWSL…THEY ARE BOTH ABSOLUTELY WRONG ..But please continue to impressed by ” well intentioned people” who are wrong.

            Btw, the author was speaking of allocated players b/c if you read and comprehend he mentioned tiers.

          • Craigaroo

            You’re wrong. Logical fallacy. The mention of Tier One salaries is cited as an example of how most USWNT players make more than the NWSL maximum, but it does not follow that they are only speaking of players under contract (that is, in one tier or another). In fact, the statement that most (as opposed to all) USWNT players make more suggests the writer is thinking of more than the players with a national team contract. It isn’t clear, but it is a reasonable inference.

          • CED

            Actually he’s not doing as you claim, but you like the others want to spin nonsense.

          • CED

            Keep up!

            The author
            “:United States women’s national team players are compensated by U.S.
            Soccer for their participation in NWSL in addition to their national
            team earnings. U.S. players’ salaries for league play vary, but most are
            paid more than the league maximum. FiveThirtyEight reports
            that ‘Tier 1′ U.S. players — like Hope Solo and Carli Lloyd — earn a
            $54,000 base salary for NWSL play in addition to a $72,000 base for the
            national team.

            The author first states a USWNT player as someone compensated by USSF for their participation in the NWSL in addition to NT earnings, which means they are under contract as an allocated player. You try to claim “it does not follow that they are only speaking of players under contract (that is, in one tier or another)” The author specifically states he is talking about people under contract.

            You do know that USSF only pays people for being in NWSL if they are an allocated player, allocated players are under contract. You get a tier salary and NWSL salary paid by USSF,,it’s 46K for Newbies and 56K for people not newly allocated. That salary for NWSL went up b/c NWSL max went up

            You’re wrong!

          • Craigaroo

            What you say almost sounds right and I was about to acknowledge being wrong, but I’m not sure. Is a player like Allie Long, who is called up to the team, simply not compensated at all? If she is, then a player like her has national team earnings without “meaning they are under contract as an allocated player”. Perhaps Long, and players like her, aren’t compensated but it doesn’t seem likely to me.//
            At any rate, my point is that while you may be right, it hardly justifies the condescending tone you take to everyone else. I stand by that. And on top of that, are you even right?

          • Lorehead

            They’re considered “floaters,” and receive $500/week plus roster bonuses.

          • Lorehead

            The kernel of truth in what he said is that, instead of repeating the secondary source of FiveThirtyEight, The Equalizer’s staff should’ve gone to the primary source: the full contract, CBA and MOU made public by the USSF in its initial filing in its own lawsuit. (We know exactly how much less the women make for themselves and approximately how much they make for USSF because USSF told us themselves! That destroys their case utterly in the court of public opinion.)

          • Lorehead

            He has no reading comprehension.

    • STT

      Maybe you should read the article… It already says the WNT players get paid more than the league max.

      And you’re completely wrong that the bump in non-WNT league salaries affects the WNT salaries – there’s literally no link between the two. That was the entire point.

      • CED

        Actually a bump in NWSL does effect WNT pay..READ THE MOU ! You clearly haven’t.

      • guest

        for what it is worth,
        the MOU does include a “Most Favored Player Status” paragraph that states “the parties will work in good faith to reach an agreement on a most-favored-player clause …. The intent of such a clause will be to ensure that non-WNT player salary increases do not unreasonably outpace increases to WNT Players salaries upon the success and growth of NWSL”

        not clear to me from reading MOU and other doc’s what terms are in any final/agreed version of any most favored player status term nor the final/agreed calculation (if any) nor whether any of the NWSL increases to non-WNT player’s min/max and/or team cap has(or has not) triggered an additional adjustment to NWSL allocated USWNT salary amounts.

        so parties intended to negotiate a most favored player status clause
        just not clear what terms were (or were not) finalized.

        • STT

          Fair point – I had missed that before. That’s pretty buried though. And it doesn’t state what does and doesn’t count as unreasonable. A 5% bump in non-WNT salaries is small enough that it would be reasonable to not see any WNT salary bump.

        • Rufan

          Not clear if increases meant in % terms or absolute $ amounts. The #s given earlier from the CBA for allocated USWNT players are $54K for ’15 and $56K for ’16, a 3.7% increase which is less than 5% rise for maximum non WNT players but $2K increase is more than the $1.9K increase for the maximum non WNT salary.

          • guest

            those numbers ($54k in 2015 and $56k in 2016) were stated explicitly in MOU as written back in March 2013.
            there have been a couple of NWSL salary max/cap increases since then, but since the final “most favored player” terms that were agreed (or not) are not clear, difficult to determine whether any sort of additional increase to allocated WNT NWSL pay numbers was triggered. Regardless, the allocated WNT pay numbers are still above the max non-WNT numbers.

  • guest

    If this lawsuit goes through, the WNT may wind up being paid on a per-game basis like the men, their annual contracts done away with, which could open the door to more NWSL call ups. The allocation system might have to be eliminated though and another way to fund the NWSL thought up. Then again, this could all just be rampant speculation on my part.

    • STT

      The allocation system will have to be phased out anyway as the league grows, since USSF can’t supply 2-3 allocated players to every team in a 16+ team league. I think that’s part of the reason they’ve shifted to the Distribution Process – all of the current allocations will play out their contracts, and then any potential future subsidization will go through Distribution instead of having X number of players simply allocated to the teams.

      • CED

        Allocation of 2 or 3 players per team was only at the start, that is essentially gone since their are teams with 5 and some with 1 . They can still do allocation with 16 teams it wil just be more team with 1 or even no allocated players.

        Allocation is not ending soon b/c NT players will make sure it’s it their contract until NWSL can play them the same as what USSF pays for NWSL duty. The gap now is currently about 19K. Also, WNT players realize the sweetheart deal of getting paid up to 54K for NWSL duty while most played about 5 or 6 games, Press played 10 or 11 and she played the most. Krieger skipped the semi for a wedding. If a NWSL was the one actually paying her that doesn’t happen, of course DC had no recourse b/c they don’t pay her.

    • guest

      it’s time to end the girls club monopoly. this is the country’s team.

      • Steglitz49

        You sound like Anthony Quinn in Zorba the Greek.

  • MurderOnZidanesFloor

    Good to see a little growth, even if it is really slow. We can only hope attendances and interest receive another bump after the olympics and that Orlando can draw like Portland, then hopefully this rise will continue.

    • Lorehead

      Also, that the labor dispute gets resolved without a work stoppage.

      • STT

        Labor dispute? If you’re referring to the USWNT thing, that won’t cause a stoppage among all non-USWNT players unless USSF shuts the whole league down.

        • Lorehead

          But the stars of the league going on strike would certainly affect attendance.

          • Steglitz49

            The stars going on strike to earn even more lolly would kill themselves. The league might survive. Remember when the men boycotted Wimbledon and the ladies pulled in the punters.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            If NT players who make a great living, discrimination or not, go on strike, while NWSL players, who basically play for allowance money continue playing, the NT program itself might be jeopardized by a possible backlash. There is nothing that riles people up more than a bunch of people who work at “all expenses paid” occupations grousing about unfair treatment, while their peers soldier on gamely for nothing more than quaint principle.

          • Lorehead

            If that’s so, where’s the popular backlash against all those college players making nothing while stars in the NBA and NFL make millions? There was a backlash when high-school phenoms began skipping the “make nothing for four years” stage of their careers!

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            The problem is, many people do not think College are not being compensated. Many fully believe that the scholarships and the sham that passes for education for many of those players compensates them fully for their exertions. I find that attitude deplorable, but that won’t make it go away tomorrow.

            It’s a little different in the NT/NWSL case, in that the NWSL women are supposed to be professional players who played college ball like the NT women did, yet find themselves confined to the unenviable existence of sub-minimum wage earnigs.

            Little known to some soccer fans (it wasn’t to me) was that MLS players were threatening a strike last year until they reached an agreement with the owners to raise the league minimum from $30,000 to $60,000. Part of the impetus for the successful resolution was a sympathy for the players’ gripe that traversed wide swaths of the occupational spectrum. Even 9 – 5ers sympathized fully with them. Some players were making less than school teachers, bus drivers, UPS and FEDEX delivery person and many reporters for Pete’s sake!

            I suppose it depends on the variables involved.

          • Lorehead

            Yeah, I remember wondering if that dispute would cancel the season that the Timbers ended up winning.

          • Steglitz49

            Thus, what really is needed is an action by the NWSL crew that the lolly generated by the WNT, owned by the USSF, should be more equitably distributed amongst the players of the NWSL, also owned by the USSF.

            If you redistributed the USWNT allocation pay around the NWSL evenly, you could raise the lowest pay to $12,000. To get the lowest paid earning $26,000 (half of $52,000 — Lorehead, who gave me that figure, can explain — then more money is needed.

            At the same time it is meet and right that NT players earn more than crew but 2x ought to be enough, not 6-7x.

          • guest

            “the NWSL, also owned by the USSF” Wrong.

          • Lorehead

            Okay, technically, it’s operated and paid for by the USSF.

          • guest

            What about the owners, you know Merritt Paulson, Bill Predmore, etc? What is their role?

          • Steglitz49

            Milk-cows? Sugar daddies?

          • Lorehead

            Paulson’s publicly said that USSF calls the shots about things like where players go because the league needs its support. IIRC, it’s the owners who own the league and vote on its rules.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            Such a prospect is most likely to succeed if the current NT members agitate for additional revenue, such as you suggested, for their peers in the NWSL. USSF will not do it of their own volition, not the least of which is a concern that such “misguided altruism” might be rejected by the NTers and ferment unrest.

          • guest

            ” the sham that passes for education” This is not just a problem for student athletes either. There’s plenty of blame to go around, but I don’t hear any outcry over “I’m not learning how to spell!” That’s because student athletes, by and large, don’t want to learn to spell. Their main focus is on getting a car and spending money, before they hit the lottery, of course. Student-athlete entitlement, you might call it.

          • Steglitz49

            Female athletes at college have great graduation rates and graduate with excellent grades to boot.

            The same can’t be said about the male ones — but then the female of the species is deadlier than the male.

          • guest

            “College athletes are not being compensated” I agree !00% that they should be adequately compensated. If they’re not getting the education promised them, that needs to change. There are probably a lot sham courses, and sham degrees, and the system needs to be reformed, not just limited to student-athletes either. Paying them money wouldn’t fix any of this.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            Money is the preferred medium of exchange. To reiterate the cliche, it solves the “double coincidence of wants” problem. People engaged in income-generating activity are customarily compensated with money, with the workers retaining the discretion to dispose of their monetary wages as they see fit. Why do Colleges deviate from that model and compensate their athlete workers in kind rather than in cash?

            In all the jobs I have held, I was paid in money. I never received gift certificates, poker chips or training as payment. Student athletes should receive the most feasible form of compensation: easily negotiable cash or money, not alternative arrangements that essentially depresses their standard of living in a society reliant on money.

          • Lorehead

            Besides, if they wanted an education more than the money, they would be free to spend the money on tuition.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            As the itinerant sybarite and raconteur, Steglitz49, might say, verily and forsooth, hounds tooth, shod no foot.

          • Steglitz49

            As I understand it women at college who play sports have excellent graduation records with high grades. This is true of all the psorts they play and no doubt contributes to universities like Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, UNC and Duke bing among top sports colleges, as well as Tennessee and UConn, not to mention Harvard and Yale.

            The situation for male athlestes at college is very different. This is where you read about fake grades and players let through on the nod. Duke’s men’s basket is one of the few top proprgrams at a top university — which is coach K’s doing.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            This reply is also to your post above.

            “The situation for male athletes at college is very different. This is where you read about fake grades and players let through on the nod.”

            And this happens precisely because the notion of the individual who functions as an athlete in a pressure-packed program like Notre Dame or USC football, or Kentucky or Illinois basketball, is a fallacy. No one could possibly pursue a meaningful major and perform at the high standards required by these schools. The reason players are “let through on the nod” is because athletics is the actual reason for their “scholarship”. They are athletes using the school as their development environments. The student part of their student athletes designation is a big sham.

            If professional women’s sports develop to the point where they become awash in cash, I suspect those lofty graduation rates will plummet.

          • Steglitz49

            Did the Williams sisters go to college?

            I know most lady golfers go to college, and many to Arizona State.

            The day there is buckets of money in women’s sports, they won’t be going to college. Till then, college is a fine route for women to take.

          • Lorehead

            Or even to the point where women think it can support them for the rest of their lives, instead of needing to prepare for a second career in their twenties or thirties.

          • guest

            According to you, student-athletes are not there to receive an education but to earn wages for the work they perform. But wouldn’t that make them professional athletes? Isn’t there a better place for them to practice their profession? Yes, it’s called the NFL. But if the NFL and NBA bar high school grads from their leagues, there’s a reason for that. It’s because they want their athletes to get an e-d-u-c-a-t-i-o-n.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            “According to you, student-athletes are not there to receive an education”

            I never said that, or even implied it. I know your position on this debate is untenable but there is no need to twist my words. My argument is, student athletes should be paid in cash. And by that I mean, insofar as the school they are affiliated with maintains a commercially viable athletics program, they should be paid If the program generates no money, the students should play for love, if it does, the schools should pay the students – in CASH, not in kind.

            “if the NFL and NBA bar high school grads from their leagues, there’s a reason for that. It’s because they want their athletes to get an e-d-u-c-a-t-i-o-n”

            I disagree. I believe these organizations maintain the current model which supplies them with players through the current system because Colleges essentially satisfy the roles of farm teams. Augmenting their rosters through the draft provides an efficient, low-overhead mechanism for ensuring their competitiveness without the aggravation and expense that maintaining farm/development systems would entail.

            Professional athletics organizations want their players to get an education? Don’t make me laugh. If they appear responsible to the academic obligation, their interest is only incidental. Especially since the milk of human kindness that presumably courses through them predictably evaporates when they neglect to draft players they deem unsuitable professional prospects, or waive poorly-performing players as unceremoniously as sharks dismembering an unprotected whale calf.

          • Steglitz49

            Student athletes should receive scholarships, not cash.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            Gotta take care of some business. I shall address this insanity and inanity shortly.

          • Steglitz49

            Indeed. The education part of the NCAA is its marvel. Long may it last. That eponymous bear knew a thing or two.

          • Lorehead

            No, the reason is to strike a deal to accommodate the NCAA. If they cared about the athletes, even a six-figure minimum salary for their rookie season would easily pay for four years of college tuition.

          • guess

            “backlash against all those college players making nothing” Students aren’t meant to be making any money, they’re preparing, studying to enter lucrative professions. The same can even be said for all those sports management majors, or whatever they call students who don’t attend normal classes.

          • Lorehead

            Students are supposed to be making money if they also have jobs.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            “Students aren’t meant to be making any money, they’re preparing, studying to enter lucrative professions.”

            What about Universities and other tertiary institutions? Are they meant to be making money? Are they meant to be signing coaches to million dollar contracts, signing multi million dollar television deals, charging hefty ticket prices and recruiting players to athletic programs with the proactiveness suited to professional sports teams?

            Why isn’t college athletics recreational? Why isn’t roster-filling a more incidental process? If a talented athlete just happens to be attending your school, you play him of course, and if not, you make do with willing comers? Why do schools, purportedly constituted for the purpose of educating and shaping minds, prosecute athletics so aggressively, so commercially?

          • Lorehead

            I think we all know the answer to that. I don’t know, maybe have an intramural league that you aren’t allowed to make money on for the guys who’d just like to play some football on the weekend.

          • guest

            College sports is big business, no doubt about it, and most student-athletes are happy to participate, so even if the disgruntled left campus for the big lights, there would be plenty of others ready and willing to take their place, no doubt in large part because they recognize the value of a scholarship and the importance of getting a college education in today’s society.

          • Steglitz49

            Are ladies college sports truly big business?

            I thought that college grid-iron and a bit of male basket, was the big money-spinners for college sports. Even ladies basket does not amount to much more than a hill of beans.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            People serious about education do not participate in high-pressure college athletics. They focus solely on their education, which is a challenging undertaking in itself. The student athletes you claim are “happy to participate” only do so in the hope of being drafted by pro teams, or of leveraging their experience as athletes to success in anciliary or glamorous careers. It is strictly business for them.

            You said it yourself, “college sports is big business”, so cherish no illusions about the monetary motive driving the actors in its vast and expansive financial stage.

          • Steglitz49

            It is hard to make predictions, especially about the future, quipped Yogi Berra.

            On the whole, interest in the WNT drives WoSo in the US and many other countries, the obvious and possibly only exception today being Portland. Umeå back in their glory days bucked that trend to but it is 10-15 years ago.

            I suspect that if the ladies truly struck, the cause of pro-WoSo would be set back in the US. Even if the ladies did not strike during the OG, they would simply be seen as self-serving. The row would simply say, Ta very much.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            Soccer (men or women) simply hasn’t pervaded the American public’s consciously intimately enough to make a players’ strike anything but disastrous.

          • STT

            Maybe, I don’t think by very much. We barely see attendance rises and falls any more based on who visits, so the cult of personality has mostly faded at this point.

          • Steglitz49

            There are only one or two personalities: Alexandra the Great and Hope.

          • STT

            And even they don’t affect visiting attendances any more. They did in ’13 but haven’t since.

          • Steglitz49

            Attendance in the Swedish ladies league peaked in 2003. Such numbers have yet to be seen again. Those numbers back then are still higher than what the German league manages today.

            Let’s hope that WoSo has not reached some natural level in the US and can’t grow more. This season will give us part of the answer but 2017 and ’18 will be truly critical.

          • STT

            Oh, WoSo is growing quite well here. Even in ’17 and ’18 I’m sure Portland and Orlando will still be drawing 13k+ regularly, and the league average will continue going up if more MLS teams jump on board.

          • Steglitz49

            Truth is the daughter of time.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            Who is the father then? Space?

          • Steglitz49

            It is a quote better known as the title of a detective novel by Josephine Tey.

            The full quote is — “Truth is the daughter of time, not of authority.” – Francis Bacon.

            In Tey’s book, a police detective is hospitalized. To pass the time a (girl)friend lends him a book which sets him on a quest to discover the “true” Richard III. Tey’s novel kicked off new research on Richard III.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            Ah, finally a charming anecdote. Been holding out on us, have you?

          • Steglitz49

            The novel is worth a read. Tey is a pen-name.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            These players must have multiple personalities because they both featured in that Olympic qualifying match (a semi final at that) played only a month and a half ago, that drew just 5600 people. What happened to their vaunted crowd-pulling power on those occasions?

          • Lorehead

            CONCACAF ran that tournament and really dropped the ball on promoting it, because it just doesn’t care about the women’s game. If that had been USSF, Olympic qualifying against Canada, Costa Rica and Mexico would have drawn better than meaningless friendlies.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            I thought the average attendance of the victory tour was a tad underwhelming too.

          • Steglitz49

            Another marker is that the She believes matches were played as double-headers because of the reasonable fear that nobody would bother with the matches without the US.

            It is hard to think that matches between the men’s teams of England, France and Germany would not draw well.

          • guest

            The double-headers were still better attended than the Algarve Cup. So, it’s an improvement.

          • Steglitz49

            Non sequiter and also irrelevant.

          • guest

            There was no interest in woso at the Algarve Cup. There was sparse interest in woso at the Shiba Leaves Cup. Therefore there was more interest at the Shiba Leaves Cup.

          • Steglitz49

            A bit of WoSo history does not come amiss.

            The Algarve Cup grew out of the Swedish WNT searching for winter training quarters. The Portuguese FA wanted to get their WoSo going. A marriage made in heaven. A British property developer gave them a helping hand. Bob was their uncle.

            The stadia are away from the tourist areas. The whole point was for teams to spend time together and enjoy life in all its fullness.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            Nevertheless that lost opportunity (for Portugal) underscores to some degree why some countries prosper while others struggle in the competitive econo-political world. Portugal has lost a dynamic opportunity to energize her tourism sector with a tournament that boasted the unfailing patronage of the world’s top women’s national teams.

            America saw the opportunity and wrested it from Portugal. Can’t blame Uncle Sam for that one. He didn’t invade or sabotage anything to do it.

          • Steglitz49

            Because of the Rio-16 qualifying tournament, a normal Algarve Cup could not be held. The US created an alternative.

            Portugal has a flourishing tourist industry. That in te Algarve ranges from cheap to luxury but mainly cheap and middle. They also have a tourist industry based on Madeira, which is low volume high profit.

            By and large Europeans do not care about WoSo and certainly not on holiday when they want to get drunk and preferably also laid.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            Which affirms my conviction that the USWNT itself, the whole, is the driving force behind ticket sales, not any of the purportedly appealing parts.

          • Steglitz49

            I would have concluded that nationalism was the driver and neither love nor appreciation of WoSo.

          • F0OtballNowAndAlways

            That is what I mean. The USWNT inspires nationalism in many of her supporters. They support the team because it is “the country’s team”.

          • Gary Diver

            The double-headers made sense for a number of reasons:
            1. Six games needed to be played in appropriately a week. Double-headers allowed the games to be played in 3 stadiums during 3 days.

            2. Games had to be played during the middle of the week. This is always a problem when kids have to go to school the next morning. Stand-alone games without USWNT would not have had good attendances. It would look bad (and be a bad promotion) if the tournament had 6 separate games with only 3 well-attended ones.

            3. All of the teams wanted to play before good crowds. Obviously they wanted to win, but they also wanted to play before crowds much larger than they would have seen at Algarve.

            4. SBC is a brand new tournament. The idea of the best four teams playing each other each spring is a great idea, but it will take time to develop a following. The double-headers emphasized that this tournament was about all four best teams, not just USWNT.

          • Steglitz49

            How many decades the Algarve cup?

            You know as well as I that hardly anyone would have showed up for the non-US matches. Stop deluding yourself because it does not help WoSo.

          • Gary Diver

            So how does one grow WoSo? I see SBC as an experiment. WoSo has a 4 year cycle with 2 dead years. If Olympics were U23, there would be 3 dead years with nothing happening internationally.

            Maybe SBC is a flash in the pan, but why not try an annual mini-tournament of the best teams playing each other? Even at the WC, the best teams did not play each other except for France and Germany, and maybe some of the Japanese games. Competition and rivalries are two ways of creating interest in any sport. Living in Canada I can guarantee you that a well promoted game between USWNT and Sinclair’s team could easily fill a 50,000 seat stadium.

          • Steglitz49

            Soccer is a club game where the clubs provide players for the NTs.

            WoSo NTs ought to run on a two year cycle. World Cup and then the local federation like Euro-17 or equivalent. Currently, there are qualifiers for Euro-17 to be played in Holland. Euro-13 was a rip-roaring success.

            We are now at the semi-final stage of the ladies Champions League which like the domestic challenge cups — the oldest of which is the FA women’s cup, followed by the Swedish and Spanish cups — happens each year.

            The reason that the best teams got a bit wonky in WC-15 was the biased draw that paved the way for the US and was meant to do likewise for Canada but Japan benefitted instead. And Sweden was screwed for make benefit to Brazil. FIFA was right about giving the US the world cup. It benefits all of WoSo around the globe.

            If the US and Canada WNTs want to play each other every year, let them. Not too long ago there was a tournament in the British Isles called the “Home Championship” but it died out after having run for decades, if not a century.

            Had the NWSL kept to its brief and helped the Mexican lasses develop, maybe more would have been achieved.

          • Steglitz49

            Would have, could have, should have — people did not come to games played in the USA.

          • Steglitz49

            Please don’t ask difficult questions because WoSo fans can’t cope, poor lambs.

            It is a long time since a ladies Champions League final was that poorly attended.

  • HOFCToDi

    USWNT (Current MOU)
    Base Salary – $72,000
    Win Bonus (per game) – $1350

    For 18 games, that equates to $4000 per game appearance. Maximum earnings for 18 games equates to $96,300.

    USWNT (New CBA)
    Game Appearance – $5000
    Win Bonus (per game) – $2000

    Maximum earnings for 18 games equates to $126,000.

    The USSF needs to eliminate the NWSL player allocation system altogether. The USSF can subsidize the NWSL with $1 million amended to the salary cap with each team receiving $100,000.

    • CED

      Where are you getting this proposed CBA from? Is that from your thought (proposal) or from some leaked WNT stuff. There has never been a report or release of anything by them on what they actually want.

      • Steglitz49

        HOFCtoDi is using his loaf, something he is quite good at when he puts his mind in gear.

    • Steglitz49

      How about
      Base Salary: $4,000
      Win bonus per game $1,600

      Thus you get $72,000 + $28,800 = $100,800

      $100,800 is about twice what a lady with a college degree on average earns, according to Lorehead.

      • Guest

        You don’t get it do you

        • Steglitz49

          No. I contend that playing for the NT should get you a small sum. The lion’s share of your income must be from your club.

      • HOFCToDi

        Doubtful. The maximum potential earnings become even more apparent at 20 games.

        USWNT (Current MOU)
        Base Salary – $72,000
        Win Bonus (per game) – $1350

        For 20 games, maximum potential earnings equates to $99,000.

        USWNT (Proposed CBA)
        Game Appearance – $5000
        Win Bonus (per game) – $2000

        For 20 games, maximum potential earnings equates to $140,000.

        Strictly hypothetical, of course.

        • Steglitz49

          The maximum potential earnings should not exceed $100,800, this being roughly twice what a female college graduate can expect to earn.

          • HOFCToDi

            Sexist, misogynist pigs from Europe need not respond.

  • mockmook

    Almost time for HOU vs POR 8PM EDT

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ct-s4vgx0Y

    • newsouth

      Great Icelandic!

      • Guest

        She isn’t anywhere near as good as Morgan Brian right now but she has a lot of potential.

      • guest

        Looks like Iceland melted under the pressure of Ohai, Beckie, Daly & Co.

    • Lorehead

      Nice penalty save there, but Franch was incredibly lucky that yellow card was not red for DOGSO. She’d better not try that in a real game, unless it’s a World Cup semifinal.

      I’m sorry to see that Sinc has the yips again. I don’t want to read too much into a performance against college players, but it is definitely looking like Nadim should be the striker.

      • Steglitz49

        Maybe it is a Norwegian tactic?

        • Lorehead

          If so, I’m glad Adam Kwarasey didn’t pick it up there.

      • MurderOnZidanesFloor

        Would have been very harsh to give a red considering Daly knocked the ball away from goal and was heading someway towards the corner flag.

        And Sinc really didn’t look great in this game, especially when she was the focal point of the attack. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her stay up front though, since Portland seem to lack decent wide players and Nadim is better there than Sinclair too.

        • Guest

          They could play Klingenberg on the flank opposite Heath when the NT players are there but there is definitely a lack of wide depth. I think Sinclair’s time is nearly up. She should probably be a sub at this point in her career.

        • Ethan

          I don’t think it would have been harsh. The ball wouldn’t have been far ahead of her if she hadn’t been tripped, and it was heading fairly straight on towards the goal line. Add in the fact that Daly looks like she’d get there with both Williamson and Menges not in great positions to stop a decently paced shot into an open net, and I think a red would have been a completely fair decision.

        • Lorehead

          I’m not saying ten out of ten refs would have given a red for that, but plenty of them would.

  • GT

    It’s not enough. Min. should be 10k, max. should be 45 K. The teams saw increased revenues/profits last year post WC. Should see more of the same this year with Olympics and the addition of Orlando Pride. Also teams with more NT players are rewarded twice. Once with the presence of more top players and secondly with more money to give to the remaining players.

    • guest

      maybe the uswnt players nwsl salaries should be reduced to makeup the difference.

      • GT

        By the way, what do the coaches get paid?

    • CED

      Every team but Portland is still losing money. Take away Portland attendance numbers and the league attendance is 3721/game…Portland huge number makes the league avg 5046. The league as whole draws 454K and 156K of that is Portland. 3 teams drew less than 30K. Second best was Houston at 64K but nobody else had over 42K.

      • Steglitz49

        That is why you should use medians, ranges and interquartile ranges instead of means because the median etc takes into account outliers.

      • Lorehead

        Again, your assumptions are not true. Not every other team is losing money.

        • Steglitz49

          CED may be right on this one. Hard to be certain but which other team is doing better than breaking even? Houston? Sky Blue?

          • Lorehead

            Stop encouraging the troll when you don’t know the facts. Houston broke even.

          • Steglitz49

            I had “Houston” with a question mark. It would appear that the MLS teams do not charge their female teams a proper rent for use of the stadium and training facilities. A subsidy iow. Sky Blue has to pay for that, which is why I included that.

            I am not sure what the definition of a troll is but you can’t label everyone critical of WoSo or aspects of WoSo as a troll.

          • Lorehead

            I’m calling this guy a troll because he comes here to tell us that the people we like are awful and we’re all stupid. He’s not interested in a respectful exchange of views.

          • Steglitz49

            On one level you can understand the arguments of supporters of physical male sports, that because women can’t beat men they are obviously inferior. A WNT is hard pressed to beat a boys U17 let alone a U19.

            It is fascinating that in sports like shooting, the men and women compete separately yet many of the very top shots are women, not just Jessica Rossi. In show-jumping and dressage they compete together but at the top level there are more male riders than female, in spite of the grass roots being dominated by girls and young women.

            Most people accept the separate but equal. This is best seen in the ski events, where the ladies ski shorter courses or simpler pistes. In ski-shooting (biathlon) the women are better shots partly because the penalties are severer for the ladies than the men because they are the same.

          • Lorehead

            That’s not even the argument the person we were discussing upthread made. It would be possible to make all his points without insulting people. And the guy admits what he says is politically-motivated.

        • CED

          Actually they are all except Portland

  • Gary Diver

    Good food for thought by Caitlin Murray (The Guardian):

    http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/04/womens-soccer-us-fanbase-puzzle