bum nikka still makes threads from his night shift. posted @ 2 a.m.
@TEXAS IS FULL how many times you get drug tested "randomly" this month?
@TEXAS IS FULL how many times you get drug tested "randomly" this month?
Them WNBA bytches Rubbing Their Hands like Birdman While Reading This
- Thread starter TELL ME YA CHEESIN FAM?
- Start date
And I think one issue that plagues the Men's team is the issue of parity. It feels like there is less parity among the women's teams than there is among the men's teams. In any case, and this may be unpopular, this is one reason why I never liked gender divisions in sports.
No they aren't. At the international level the women win more, get just as many eyeballs and have more players I'd consider superstars.
Legit if it wasn't for the '99 Women's World Cup team, the sport would be virtually non-existent in the US.
The WNBA can barely keep the lights on.
The Men's national team gets the benefit of playing other more dominant teams. They also get more revinue because the splits from the men's games are higher, not because its an inherently better product. So we watch the USMNT to see them play Ronaldo, Messi, and others. While the women's team gets watched because they are good themselves.
And to be honest, women's soccer is the only sport where the differences in viewing are rather minimal. The men are faster and more athletic...but to be fair they dive and cry WAY more.
Last edited:
Women need to stop trying to be major at all the same sports men are.
Some sports are more entertaining to woman play then men, and vice versa.
For example (in my own personal opinion) i think Women's tennis is more entertaining than mens tennis. Firstly i like looking at them more, but men are also too powerful to make tennis entertaining, every is just someone acing a serve. I prefer extending volleys of people going back and forth. Women(outside of serena) seem to live out that. and yes i know there are exceptions in mens tennis too, Andre agassi was more of a volley guy than a power server. but i digress
Women's Sports that are greater than men's
Volley Ball
Soft Ball
Track and Field
Gymnastics
Tennis
Roller Derby shyt
Mens sports that are greater
Boxing
MMA
Football
Basketball
Hockey
Baseball
Some sports are more entertaining to woman play then men, and vice versa.
For example (in my own personal opinion) i think Women's tennis is more entertaining than mens tennis. Firstly i like looking at them more, but men are also too powerful to make tennis entertaining, every is just someone acing a serve. I prefer extending volleys of people going back and forth. Women(outside of serena) seem to live out that. and yes i know there are exceptions in mens tennis too, Andre agassi was more of a volley guy than a power server. but i digress
Women's Sports that are greater than men's
Volley Ball
Soft Ball
Track and Field
Gymnastics
Tennis
Roller Derby shyt
Mens sports that are greater
Boxing
MMA
Football
Basketball
Hockey
Baseball
ndthentherewasx
El Capitan
Not women
Animal House
Superstar
lol yeah right so where is this money going to come from?
saturn7
Politics is an EXCHANGE!!!
Decision was bullshyt and the reporting on this has been misleading. Those women were never paid unequally. Years ago they chose guaranteed pay while the men's team chose pay based on performance.
Diondon
Thanks to the lawyers uh, I marbled the foyer
lol @ paying WNBA broads millions of dollars 
I'm more shocked that the men actually agreed to that split. If I'm lining up to get my ass beat by world class football players - I'm walking home with the entire "I got my ass whooped by world class football players" bag that comes with it. I guess the money had to come from somewhere though, oh well.
Something like this wouldn't with the NBA/WNBA, those are private organizations.
Something like this wouldn't with the NBA/WNBA, those are private organizations.
Yeah, this ain’t happening in the NBA
Except the women's squad is 10x better than the men's squad...and actually win world cup titles.
Men squad doesn't have a chance for atleast 50years .
The thing is FIFA give the money to the national federation in 1 pool and leave it up to the federation to divide. If they gave the money separately for each group then the USWNT’s case for equal pay would not be strong.
But i dont care. Im glad their stickup worked.
TELL ME YA CHEESIN FAM?
I walk around a little edgy already
Y'all seem way too closeme and my niece, fakkit.
Scust
saturn7
Politics is an EXCHANGE!!!
This Is Why The U.S. Women’s Soccer Team Lost Its Pay Discrimination Suit
Evan GerstmannSenior Contributor
May 4, 2020,05:49pm EDT
This Is Why The U.S. Women’s Soccer Team Lost Its Pay Discrimination Suit
Title IX revolutionized women’s sports in colleges, bringing strict new rules about gender equality. While participating in college sports is seen as its own reward, gender equality in college sports has also led to stronger women’s professional teams. As reported by CNN: “there's been an explosion of women in athletics since the passage of Title IX. And particularly for women's sports, it's had a worldwide effect. According to data from the NCAA, all but nine of the 24 teams competing at the World Cup had at least one current or former player who played US college soccer. That includes three teams — US, Canada and Jamaica — where most of the roster competed at a US school.”
For American female athletes, the jewel in the crown has been women’s soccer. Largely as a result of Title IX, the U.S. Women’s Soccer team has had a powerful pipeline of student athletes to draw upon. According the Los Angeles Times: “Between the year Title IX was passed (1972) and the first Women’s World Cup (1991), the sport saw a 17,000% increase in U.S. girls playing on high school soccer teams, according to the National Federation of High School Assns.”
The U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team has been impressive indeed, winning four World Cup Championships and Four Olympic Gold Medals. Understandably, they want to paid like the champions they are. In 2019 they filed a federal lawsuit alleging pay discrimination based on their gender.
Last week however, a federal judge dismissed most of their lawsuit. A few claims remain alive such as the allegation that male players get better travel accommodations. But on the key claim that the women are getting paid less than the men, the judge found the opposite: the women are getting higher compensation than the men.
The court found that the female players “received more money than [male] players on both a cumulative and an average per-game basis. Indeed . . . payments to the [female athletes] totaled approximately $24 million and averaged $220,747 per game, whereas payments to the [male players] totaled approximately $18 million and averaged $212,639 per game.”
The female players argued that, even though they got paid more than the male players, they would have been paid even more if they were operating under the same contract as the men. The judge rejected that claim because the men’s and women’s representatives negotiated different contracts during collective bargaining. The women’s team was far more risk adverse and bargained for numerous guarantees including a guaranteed minimum salary, injury protections, a minimum number of games played and a guaranteed number of players on the roster. The men’s team accepted a great deal more risk and agreed to terms under which they are only paid for the games they play. (This is called “pay to play.”) Because the women’s team was so successful, it turns out they would have made more money under the men’s arrangement, but they would have taken the risk that things wouldn’t have turned out that way.
The women’s team has promised to appeal, but if they do they face a more fundamental problem. Their lawsuit is based on the presumption that the men and women are playing the same sport: they are all playing soccer so compensation should be the same. But if the courts accept that premise, this may have serious negative consequences for female athletes.
Take, for example, the New York Marathon. Both the first place man and first place woman receive a $130,000 prize. The top ten male and female finishers also get prizes, with the smallest prize of $1000 going to the tenth place man and tenth place woman.
But the first place woman finished 31st overall in the 2019 New York Marathon. That means that twenty men who finished ahead of her got nothing while she got $130,000. In fact she got more prize money than all but one of the top-10 men who finished well ahead of her. This makes sense if the men’s marathon is a different sport than the woman’s marathon. But if the men and women are seen as running the same race, then all those men who finished ahead of the fastest woman, but got nothing, are victims of gender discrimination.
When all this is combined with the growing issue of transgender athletes in sports, it becomes increasingly reasonable to ask whether society should be gender segregating sports at all any more. The military doesn’t. And, acting awards are also beginning to move away from giving separate awards to men and women. Gender segregation in sports is becoming increasingly anachronistic.
But if society isn’t ready for gender-integrated teams, then there is no reason not to expect men’s teams and women’s teams to prioritize different aspects of compensation when they collectively bargain. It’s wonderful that the women were so successful that a less conservative compensation structure would have worked out better for them. But that won’t be always be the case. It is very unclear what will happen to professional soccer while COVID-19 is still shutting down stadiums. Given that the women have safeguards built into their contract that protect their salaries if they don’t play, soon it may be the men looking with envy at the women.
Evan GerstmannSenior Contributor
May 4, 2020,05:49pm EDT
This Is Why The U.S. Women’s Soccer Team Lost Its Pay Discrimination Suit
Title IX revolutionized women’s sports in colleges, bringing strict new rules about gender equality. While participating in college sports is seen as its own reward, gender equality in college sports has also led to stronger women’s professional teams. As reported by CNN: “there's been an explosion of women in athletics since the passage of Title IX. And particularly for women's sports, it's had a worldwide effect. According to data from the NCAA, all but nine of the 24 teams competing at the World Cup had at least one current or former player who played US college soccer. That includes three teams — US, Canada and Jamaica — where most of the roster competed at a US school.”
For American female athletes, the jewel in the crown has been women’s soccer. Largely as a result of Title IX, the U.S. Women’s Soccer team has had a powerful pipeline of student athletes to draw upon. According the Los Angeles Times: “Between the year Title IX was passed (1972) and the first Women’s World Cup (1991), the sport saw a 17,000% increase in U.S. girls playing on high school soccer teams, according to the National Federation of High School Assns.”
The U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team has been impressive indeed, winning four World Cup Championships and Four Olympic Gold Medals. Understandably, they want to paid like the champions they are. In 2019 they filed a federal lawsuit alleging pay discrimination based on their gender.
Last week however, a federal judge dismissed most of their lawsuit. A few claims remain alive such as the allegation that male players get better travel accommodations. But on the key claim that the women are getting paid less than the men, the judge found the opposite: the women are getting higher compensation than the men.
The court found that the female players “received more money than [male] players on both a cumulative and an average per-game basis. Indeed . . . payments to the [female athletes] totaled approximately $24 million and averaged $220,747 per game, whereas payments to the [male players] totaled approximately $18 million and averaged $212,639 per game.”
The female players argued that, even though they got paid more than the male players, they would have been paid even more if they were operating under the same contract as the men. The judge rejected that claim because the men’s and women’s representatives negotiated different contracts during collective bargaining. The women’s team was far more risk adverse and bargained for numerous guarantees including a guaranteed minimum salary, injury protections, a minimum number of games played and a guaranteed number of players on the roster. The men’s team accepted a great deal more risk and agreed to terms under which they are only paid for the games they play. (This is called “pay to play.”) Because the women’s team was so successful, it turns out they would have made more money under the men’s arrangement, but they would have taken the risk that things wouldn’t have turned out that way.
The women’s team has promised to appeal, but if they do they face a more fundamental problem. Their lawsuit is based on the presumption that the men and women are playing the same sport: they are all playing soccer so compensation should be the same. But if the courts accept that premise, this may have serious negative consequences for female athletes.
Take, for example, the New York Marathon. Both the first place man and first place woman receive a $130,000 prize. The top ten male and female finishers also get prizes, with the smallest prize of $1000 going to the tenth place man and tenth place woman.
But the first place woman finished 31st overall in the 2019 New York Marathon. That means that twenty men who finished ahead of her got nothing while she got $130,000. In fact she got more prize money than all but one of the top-10 men who finished well ahead of her. This makes sense if the men’s marathon is a different sport than the woman’s marathon. But if the men and women are seen as running the same race, then all those men who finished ahead of the fastest woman, but got nothing, are victims of gender discrimination.
When all this is combined with the growing issue of transgender athletes in sports, it becomes increasingly reasonable to ask whether society should be gender segregating sports at all any more. The military doesn’t. And, acting awards are also beginning to move away from giving separate awards to men and women. Gender segregation in sports is becoming increasingly anachronistic.
But if society isn’t ready for gender-integrated teams, then there is no reason not to expect men’s teams and women’s teams to prioritize different aspects of compensation when they collectively bargain. It’s wonderful that the women were so successful that a less conservative compensation structure would have worked out better for them. But that won’t be always be the case. It is very unclear what will happen to professional soccer while COVID-19 is still shutting down stadiums. Given that the women have safeguards built into their contract that protect their salaries if they don’t play, soon it may be the men looking with envy at the women.