Who woulda thunk??? Way to go ladies…
Gives the men a tough bar to clear. Bawahahahaa
An impossible bar to climb for at least the next 20 years or so…
- Knowing the hatred of USA soccer in Mexico, I doubt that was the case.
- I am fluent in Spanish.
You missed the joke. As mentioned, the World Cup rights are with Telemundo.
It depends, do you just mean English language broadcast or English and Spanish language broadcast? Because interesting, the WWC Final had very low numbers on Telemundo (only 1.3 mil). So the total was 26.7 million. By contrast, in last year’s US-Belgium Round of 16, while the English language broadcast garnered 16.49 mil on ESPN (second highest USMNT rating after last year’s US-Portugal group stage match), Univision also had 5.1 mil viewers as well, totaling 21.6 million.
Of course, the issue with the next 2 Men’s WC is that they will be in (supposedly ;)) Russia and Qatar, meaning the times are going be difficult to catch a match. But if 2026 (or 2022 gets reassigned) goes to the US (and imagine if the US can make it to even the Quarterfinals - as they did in 2002), I can easily see that number getting passed.
Apparently, now a number of people are whining that FIFA paid the 24 teams in the tournament an average of $625K while the 32 teams in the men’s WC received an average of $18M - and then, for some reason, point out that the women’s final got a much higher TV rating in the USA than the men’s final.
What I would like to know is, how much did FIFA get for worldwide broadcast rights to the two tournaments? And why do I have a feeling that these numbers may be up to “interpretation” as some countries may pay a single amount for rights to both tournaments - for example, Fox Sports (USA) apparently did, and there will be claims that “it should be counted mainly towards the women”?
From a purely business perspective, they may have a point. If Fox Sports had more viewers of its telecasts of women’s games, and got more revenue from selling advertising during those games, then the rights to broadcast those games are more valuable. On the other hand, there are more games in the men’s tournament, so Fox Sports has more commercial time to sell. An accountant could probably figure it all out.
Yet another way to look at it is that women’s soccer has now reached a stature where its athletes can be fucked over by FIFA just like the men’s game. You’ve come a long way, baby.
Of course we do know that ad revenue is vastly different. We’re talking tens of millions in ad revenue for the Women’s World Cup vs. billions in ad revenue for the Men’s World Cup. That is one huge reason for the differences in money. And while players like Wambach, Morgan, Solo may be well known in the US (how well known is debatable - it can be argued that Mia Hamm is more well known than any of them) that is nothing compared to the world wide fame of players who participate in the Men’s WC such as Messi, C. Ronaldo, Neymar, Pogba, Hazard, Neuer, Schweinsteiger, etc.
This is what CBS reported as the figures for the 2010 men and 2011 women.
The bar I was talking about was that the women had won the WC.
How will the US men do & when will they win the men’s WC?
Yeah, Yeah, the stage - competition is a big bit different but when has that ever not been used to put down the women’s game?
Turn about & all that. World Cup from FIFA is a WC from FIFA.
Ladies got theirs, when will the men? I thought the ‘20 years’ was a good answer. Bawahahahaha
It’s the third time the US has won the women’s world cup.
Personally I think 20 years is optimistic for the US men’s team to win the Men’s world cup. I doubt they’ll manage it before 2050 to be honest.
World wide, I don’t doubt it. I was just commenting on the situation in the U.S., which is where the complaints about unfairness seem to be coming from.
The US isn’t the one the pays out World Cup winnings ;).
In addition, there are complaints that the US women professionals get paid much less than US men professionals. The amount of money that comes in to MLS vs. NWSL is even a great magnitude than the difference between the WWC and the MWC, and the MLS doesn’t even make that much. It’s just that the NWSL makes almost nothing - they have no TV deal (their games are broadcast live on Youtube) and their attendance average is ar little less than 5,000 a match. The USSF is already funneling money into the NWSL to keep it afloat. Where exactly is the other money going to come from?
I see this changing slowly…hopefully more succesfully than after WWC 1999. Attitudes towards womans sports have evolved.
Not that much. I still see Women’s Soccer like Track and Field. It’s more something that people will tune in to watch (well in the US) every 4 years. Not something they’ll consistently see week in and week out. I mean heck, Abby Wambach decided to sit out the entire NWSL season to focus on the WWC. Can you imagine that happening in any other league?
Intellectually I think you are right but my heart hopes you are wrong. The more good sports leagues we have the better. I think both the male and female game suffer from the lack of youth academies.
Off topic but I think the fear of todays parents of American football will really help us develop better male soccer players.
There is the other issue. Kind of like an elephant in the room. People like to say they watch sports for “entertainment”, but that isn’t necessarily true I find. If it was just for entertainment, people would be watching far more lower levels or “equal” leagues - the MLS would have higher American TV ratings than the Premier League (even equalizing for the MLS being shown on ESPN2 and the Prem on NBC). I think a massive part of why we watch sports, apart from entertainment, is that we want to see people do amazing things that we couldn’t even hope to come close to accomplishing. We want to see, for lack of a better word, freaks of nature. So millions will follow La Liga, all over the world, even though only 3 teams really have a chance at the title (and until last year really only 2) - because those teams have such amazing collections of talent.
I think that tends to doom women’s soccer a bit, aside from these major events. Because women’s players, in general, are slower and less strong than their male professional counterparts, and people know this.
Good point. Hate to say it but I dont watch MLS…its the snob in me.
I see no need to distinguish this from entertainment. Watching the world’s best athletes in circumstances that require them to demonstrate their extraordinary skills is entertainment at its best.
People tend to use the term “entertainment” in this debate slightly different. If you say the Men’s game is more entertaining because of the speed and strength of male professional players compared to female professional players, there tends to be quite a backlash to that use of the term. Or at least I’ve found (interestingly enough some of it from folks who watched far less of the Women’s World Cup than I did, but I digress).