2019 USDGC (Jomez lovefest optional)

[Chains Bailey]

the post that I quoted was the "The example is hypothetical but all to real at times." but thanks for trying

I, honestly, had no idea how to interpret:

Originally Posted by Chains Bailey View Post
a big ol bunch of LOL

 

[Chains Bailey]

How much FIFA makes globally off of men or women is irrelevant. Do you know how much of the prize pool the US men collected? $0 That's right, they didn't even qualify.

How much they make off men and women is directly related to the amount each team receives. The numbers reflect World Cups and % of $ each team earns in regard to the overall number.

The fact that the USNMT team did not qualify is irrelevant. If they did qualify they still would of only received 9% of the total, while the USWNT received 14% of their total.

Not sure why this simple math is so overwhelming. My guess is that posters are blinded by their "Want" of some discrepancy that favors the men - it just is not there in any shape or form.

So, you have it completely backwards.

 

[robdeforge]

I, honestly, had no idea how to interpret:

Originally Posted by Chains Bailey View Post
a big ol bunch of LOL

you could have asked

if you click the little green >, it will take you to the quoted post

they still would of

lol

 

[DG_player]

How much they make off men and women is directly related to the amount each team receives. The numbers reflect World Cups and % of $ each team earns in regard to the overall number.

The fact that the USNMT team did not qualify is irrelevant. If they did qualify they still would of only received 9% of the total, while the USWNT received 14% of their total.

Not sure why this simple math is so overwhelming. My guess is that posters are blinded by their "Want" of some discrepancy that favors the men - it just is not there in any shape or form.

So, you have it completely backwards.

What are you even talking about, 14% and 9% of what?

 

[Chains Bailey]

What are you even talking about, 14% and 9% of what?

You would have to have read the thread to understand. It has been referenced multiple times.

I type too much as it is, so I am trying to not retype, restate or rehash too much. I am getting blocked by other posters for typing essays and my feelings have been irrevocably damaged.

 

[Chains Bailey]

you could have asked

if you click the little green >, it will take you to the quoted post



lol

Ok - now you are just toying with me. Well played.

I now understand how the "little green >" works - Thanks.

I shall concede defeat on my prowess of navigating DGCR with any real competency.

 

[DG_player]

You would have to have read the thread to understand. It has been referenced multiple times.

I type too much as it is, so I am trying to not retype, restate or rehash too much. I am getting blocked by other posters for typing essays and my feelings have been irrevocably damaged.

I did, and I can't figure it out, that's why I asked.

I can't figure out if you're referring to the percentage that FIFA pays out in prize pool vs. their revenues

OR

If you're referring to your prior incorrect BS figures about how much male/female players are paid vs the revenue they generate.

 

[Chains Bailey]

I did, and I can't figure it out, that's why I asked.

I can't figure out if you're referring to the percentage that FIFA pays out in prize pool vs. their revenues

OR

If you're referring to your prior incorrect BS figures about how much male/female players are paid vs the revenue they generate.

I have presented no "BS" figures at all. The numbers of % players make verse what they generate are reality. You want to change the numbers to 8% and 12%, be my guest, they still produce the same results mathematically. There has become some parity in some aspects of the revenue numbers while others remain high on one side and low on the other.

The direct fallacy I was addressing is that the USWNT is demanding EQUAL pay as the USMNT because they are being paid less and this would RAISE their pay overall. This statement has been echoed by people who are simply misinformed or choose to be willfully ignorant of the facts to suit their narrative.

The reality is if the USWNT was paid EQUALLY to the USMNT proportional to revenue they would be getting LESS money.

The numbers show this to be true when looking at the overall money generated by each team. The USWNT would get a lower % of the already lower revenue generated.

If you break it down further, there really is no argument to be made at all, since each team is treated as a separate entity and negotiates their own unique CBAs.

 

[DG_player]

I have presented no "BS" figures at all. The numbers of % players make verse what they generate are reality. You want to change the numbers to 8% and 12%, be my guest, they still produce the same results mathematically. There has become some parity in some aspects of the revenue numbers while others remain high on one side and low on the other.

The direct fallacy I was addressing is that the USWNT is demanding EQUAL pay as the USMNT because they are being paid less and this would RAISE their pay overall. This statement has been echoed by people who are simply misinformed or choose to be willfully ignorant of the facts to suit their narrative.

The reality is if the USWNT was paid EQUALLY to the USMNT proportional to revenue they would be getting LESS money.

The numbers show this to be true when looking at the overall money generated by each team. The USWNT would get a lower % of the already lower revenue generated.

If you break it down further, there really is no argument to be made at all, since each team is treated as a separate entity and negotiates their own unique CBAs.

Show the #s, quite quoting some random factoid you claim is reality.

Women's ticket sales are higher, sponsorships while packaged together are probably being driven more by the womens side. (All you have to do is look at sponsor marketing and see who they show to figure this out) The only thing the men could potentially beat the women at are prize pool winnings, if they actually could win a little, or uhhh qualify.

So please explain how or where the men are generating more revenue for U.S. Soccer.

 

[DiscgolfStu]

For someone who hates SJW's, Chains Bailey sure does fight like a warrior to bring about justice to the social issues that men face as a result of inherant systemic female oppression towards them!

 

[Chains Bailey]

Show the #s, quite quoting some random factoid you claim is reality.

Women's ticket sales are higher, sponsorships while packaged together are probably being driven more by the womens side. (All you have to do is look at sponsor marketing and see who they show to figure this out) The only thing the men could potentially beat the women at are prize pool winnings, if they actually could win a little, or uhhh qualify.

So please explain how or where the men are generating more revenue for U.S. Soccer.

The numbers are cited in all kinds of media. If you avoid the far Left' and Right' - find objective sources, then you will find my numbers true. I quoted two sources earlier - the Washington Post (Greatly Left leaning) and another source that I believe is in the middle somewhere on the political spectrum.

I try not to preface anything I type, but I have stated many times that I prefer the USWNT over the USMNT due to many reasons. I agree that the USMNT sucks and need to rebuild and restructure. The media revenue has almost reached parity and I only see the USWNT moving forward in that area. Basically, I LOVE the USWNT and am a huge fan.

With all that said - the USMNT brings in more OVERALL revenue, as hard as it is to believe, and receives less of a % of that revenue than the USWNT higher % of a lesser revenue.

Also, do not forget that this is all moot, because both teams are separate entities and have their own CBAs.

My point, which is completely true, was to call out the fallacy of equal pay between the teams would result in the women getting more money than they currently do....it is just a fact that they would make less money. It is similar to the "Gender pay gap" echoed by the SJW crowd - it has been debunked a hundred times, but still is a battle cry for the uninformed.

I am going to take the advice of a person who is better at the interwebs' than myself and just let this fade. I have provided ample examples and information to support my point.

______________

As for Stu' - Well played - actually made me laugh.

I am not one to agree to disagree when I am correct. My OCD drives my inability to make succinct posts and not respond. My desire to debunk false narratives makes me unpopular. So, in the words of Bill Murray - "At least I have that going for me".

 

[DG_player]

I ramble on in posts, an on going character flaw I doubt I will ever conquer - here is a direct response to your opinion.

From the Washington Post - "USSF sells sponsorships (which include broadcast rights for all U.S. Soccer games) as a bundle. The documents we reviewed don't distinguish which team brings in more sponsorships or how sponsorship dollars are allocated."

From Politifact - "Specifically, from 2016-18, the women's team brought in $50.8 million in revenue, while the men's team brought in $49.9 million. That's a difference of less than 2% in the women's favor. Looking year by year, 2016 was actually the only year in which the women's team generated more revenue from games — $24.11 million, compared to $22.24 million for the men. In 2017, both teams brought in about the same revenue at $14.61 million, and in 2018, the men's team brought in $13 million compared to the women's $12.03 million."


I believe those are two outlets with varying degrees of agenda, but put together is a fair assessment. As I said, in this regard things have become more even, but minimal in difference verse the larger overall numbers in my other post.

There

I'll re-quote them for you. They brought in nearly the same amount of revenue. And men should be paid more because of why...?

 

[robdeforge]

There

I'll re-quote them for you. They brought in nearly the same amount of revenue. And men should be paid more because of why...?

CB would say that because they have separate CBAs, it's the women's fault for not negotiating better

 

[mistabman]

I ran into Nikko Locastro a week after USDGC hanging out at Gateway. I congratulated him on the albatross and his second place tie. He said thanks and was very nice.

 

[Chains Bailey]

CB would say that because they have separate CBAs, it's the women's RESPONSIBILITY to negotiate better

FIFY

 

[Chains Bailey]

There

I'll re-quote them for you. They brought in nearly the same amount of revenue. And men should be paid more because of why...?

Dig deeper - that is only one revenue source measure and I was pointing out how there has become more parity in ONE area. You have almost solved this puzzle. Put on your detective shoes and find that oh so elusive Google thing. Find objective sources and it shall become clear to you.

The world of soccer has provided many sources for the numbers - I have put some here for your reading pleasure, yet you cite the one where things are relatively equal as of late. Guess you missed the $XXX Million verse $X Billion numbers along with the % each entity receives.

The answer to "Why?" has been presented thoroughly. If you need more sources, do your own homework.

I will start you off on your way down the rabbit-hole' :

Left leaning - https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/

Fact Checking stating the above is false - https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/

Report of Women making more than men - https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-so...has-been-paid-more-than-mens-team-11564440487

This one will give you an OBJECTIVE look at OVERALL (Not Just media revenue) and the % disparities favoring the Women - https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/08/yes-soccer-pay-gap-women-make-men/

If you can not understand the bias from source to source, well I can not help with that - maybe in time you will begin to grasp the agendas.

The last source cited has some great information and is the most objective about just the numbers. It really is simple math when you look at it as two separate entities.

I need to let this fade at this point for my own sanity - If you can not understand the following, just drop the class and take pottery.

Making approximately 20% of $131 million is more than making <7% of $131 million - IF the SJW cry of EQUAL pay were instituted, then the above scenario happens. Again, simple.

In case your finger is hurt from scratching your head on this subject and you have lost the ability to click links, here is the basic breakdown of the larger numbers that often dwarf all the other small discrepancies cited: (Again I noted that there is parity in some areas, but those areas are just one part of the overall picture - but always used SELECTIVELY and SINGULARLY knowing people will look no deeper into the subject )

"This gap is criminal, right? ItÂ's not. When viewed objectively —based on how much money each competition generates—women actually make more than men. How so?

Well, there is a sizable difference in the revenue available to pay the male and female teams. According to Mike Oznian, a writer for Forbes, the 2015 WomenÂ's World Cup Â"brought in almost $73 million, of which the players got 13%. The 2010 menÂ's World Cup in South Africa made almost $4 billion, of which 9% went to the players.Â"

Last year, the menÂ's World Cup in Russia generated more than $6 billion in revenue; the participating teams shared about $400 million. That is less than 7 percent of overall revenue. Meanwhile, the 2019 WomenÂ's World Cup made somewhere in the region of $131 million, doling out $30 million, well more than 20 percent of collected revenue, to the participating teams. It seems a pay gap does exist, after all."


Ok - OCD be gone - I have wrapped this up about as well as can be done. Almost forgot - they have separate CBAs, so this is all really moot.

Class dismissed - Fin'

 

[robdeforge]

Thanks for reminding me to post an example of how the SJW crowd and their disingenuous narrative can have a direct effect in a negative way. The example is hypothetical but all to real at times.

A TD is discussing an upcoming event locally on social media. The TD was looking for opinions and feedback. The event is two rounds and the course has two sets of tees - shorts and longs. The TD is considering having all divisions play the shorter tees round one and then splitting the divisions for the second round. The TDs idea is to have the MPO, MP40 and MA1 play the long tees in the second round while all other divisions play the shorter tees.

Now, even though all divisions of both genders except the MPO, MP40 and MA1 will be playing the short tees round two - the TD is met with a vigorous backlash of people (Usually none are women) accusing the TD of being sexist for not having the FPO play the long tees as well. Cries of "Women are equal to men" are flying all over the place. The TD explains their point of view and is now met with being called a ism' phobic' or ist' of some sort again. The SJW crowd decides the intellectual thing to do would be post memes that are supposed to cast the TD in a bad light. What is worse is that the "Likes" are piling up from the virtue signaling crowd supporting the accusations against the TD and the TD is now feeling quite pressured to change their plans. Few to none have the character to go against the tide and in doing so ensure making themselves a pariah among their local disc golf community, so they just simply do not engage in the discussion.

So, the TD decides to change their original plans and have the FPO play the long tees in the second round. I realize that different TDs with different personalities will have varying reactions, but even if a small percentage are pressured into poor decisions, then that is too many. The TD has placated the SJW crowd, but at what expense?

Often, not always, the results are similar to as follows. I have witnessed all four of the following happen at various PDGA events.

The FPO players who attended will actually request not to play the long tees again next time. The event runs somewhat long due to the FPO division taking quite a bit longer to complete the round. The FPO division did not enjoy playing a layout that was not suited more to their skill set. The FPO do not attend the next year thinking they have to play that long layout again.

So what happened here? Why did the SJWs demand that the FPO play the long tees not end in a celebration of equality? IMO, the SJW crowd often destroys the environment (Usually social media) where discussions are being held. Valid and productive opinions and feedback are lost in the wave of virtue signaling lunacy.

Who suffered from this scenario? Not the SJW crowd, that is for sure. The TD, to a degree, suffered in that the FPO may not think that the TD really cares about their experience at events. The FPO suffered the worst - refer to the above points of negative possibilities that could happen, and often do, if the TD gives in to the SJW narrative.

so do you have a real, not hypothetical example of something like this happening?

 

[Chains Bailey]

so do you have a real, not hypothetical example of something like this happening?

Yes.

The hypothetical part is the example of some other TDs making poor decisions on the FPOs behalf due to social media pressure from the virtue signaling crowd.

Reality are the examples of the FPOs' negative responses/results to being treated "Equal" and playing longer layouts and are directly from the female players who attended events I have been the TD of over the years.

I have communicated to the ladies that there is a fine line you have to walk as a TD - If I just have the FPO play the long layouts because they are Pros and should be treated equal to male Pros, there usually are the responses I noted. At the same time, if I have the FPO play the shorter layouts, it may be deemed sexist according to the SJW crowd.

So, I reached out to our local (Virginia) ladies FBook group/page and simply asked what they preferred. I asked about lower entry fees, playing the shorter layouts and many other aspects of PDGA events from their point of view.

What I learned from my inquiries boiled down to one, surprisingly, simple request/solution - as a TD, communicate what the entry fees, layouts and any other details are for the women's' divisions at that particular event and stick to them.

In my attempts to placate everyone, when asked, I would allow the FPO and any other ladies divisions to play a different layout then I originally communicated if the division unanimously agreed on the change. In my efforts to be more encouraging to the ladies, I was unknowingly discouraging some by changing things up during the events. Lessons learned and now things have been put into action accordingly.

___________________________

Overall, I am not one to be influenced by the SJW crowd. I will call them out in person in any social situation. I do not engage the masses of sheep on social media, as that is just like herding cats and then teaching them to play fetch. I chimed in here on DGCR because the false narratives have finally seeped into the DGolf community and it is like a cancer when these misinformed and illogical beliefs start to spread.

If interested in a nuclear sized Red Pill' and the SJW fallout, wait until I drop in on the Trans' thread.

 

[DG_player]

Dig deeper - that is only one revenue source measure and I was pointing out how there has become more parity in ONE area. You have almost solved this puzzle. Put on your detective shoes and find that oh so elusive Google thing. Find objective sources and it shall become clear to you.

The world of soccer has provided many sources for the numbers - I have put some here for your reading pleasure, yet you cite the one where things are relatively equal as of late. Guess you missed the $XXX Million verse $X Billion numbers along with the % each entity receives.

The answer to "Why?" has been presented thoroughly. If you need more sources, do your own homework.

I will start you off on your way down the rabbit-hole' :

Left leaning - https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/

Fact Checking stating the above is false - https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/

Report of Women making more than men - https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-so...has-been-paid-more-than-mens-team-11564440487

This one will give you an OBJECTIVE look at OVERALL (Not Just media revenue) and the % disparities favoring the Women - https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/08/yes-soccer-pay-gap-women-make-men/

If you can not understand the bias from source to source, well I can not help with that - maybe in time you will begin to grasp the agendas.

The last source cited has some great information and is the most objective about just the numbers. It really is simple math when you look at it as two separate entities.

I need to let this fade at this point for my own sanity - If you can not understand the following, just drop the class and take pottery.

Making approximately 20% of $131 million is more than making <7% of $131 million - IF the SJW cry of EQUAL pay were instituted, then the above scenario happens. Again, simple.

In case your finger is hurt from scratching your head on this subject and you have lost the ability to click links, here is the basic breakdown of the larger numbers that often dwarf all the other small discrepancies cited: (Again I noted that there is parity in some areas, but those areas are just one part of the overall picture - but always used SELECTIVELY and SINGULARLY knowing people will look no deeper into the subject )

"This gap is criminal, right? ItÂ's not. When viewed objectively —based on how much money each competition generates—women actually make more than men. How so?

Well, there is a sizable difference in the revenue available to pay the male and female teams. According to Mike Oznian, a writer for Forbes, the 2015 WomenÂ's World Cup Â"brought in almost $73 million, of which the players got 13%. The 2010 menÂ's World Cup in South Africa made almost $4 billion, of which 9% went to the players.Â"

Last year, the menÂ's World Cup in Russia generated more than $6 billion in revenue; the participating teams shared about $400 million. That is less than 7 percent of overall revenue. Meanwhile, the 2019 WomenÂ's World Cup made somewhere in the region of $131 million, doling out $30 million, well more than 20 percent of collected revenue, to the participating teams. It seems a pay gap does exist, after all."


Ok - OCD be gone - I have wrapped this up about as well as can be done. Almost forgot - they have separate CBAs, so this is all really moot.

Class dismissed - Fin'

Why do you keep bringing up FIFA? We're not talking about the German or French soccer pay gap. We're talking about the US. The men collected to $0 and the women collected $4 million. It's irrelevant if the French men won $40million. The only thing that matters is how much revenue the men vs. women generate for US Soccer, which your sources all point to being roughly equal.

It's a real simple question, instead of repeating your talking points ad nauseum, why don't you answer it? If the women and men bring in the same revenue, why should women be paid less?

 

[Chains Bailey]

Why do you keep bringing up FIFA? We're not talking about the German or French soccer pay gap. We're talking about the US. The men collected to $0 and the women collected $4 million. It's irrelevant if the French men won $40million. The only thing that matters is how much revenue the men vs. women generate for US Soccer, which your sources all point to being roughly equal.

It's a real simple question, instead of repeating your talking points ad nauseum, why don't you answer it? If the women and men bring in the same revenue, why should women be paid less?

This is my last attempt and I am done with this thread. <(I suck at sticking to this)

I have never said the USWNT should be paid less - NEVER.

I am not sure you comprehended the overall picture I have laid out for you. The amount they make at World Cups is not irrelevant - if it is to you, then you just do not understand. I have been over the media revenue and that is not the lions share of what the teams make (Even with it coming closer to parity as of recent years). What they create for US Soccer is not the only source of income and by far not the largest pool of money available. So, lets just go to the basics and call it a day.

I was responding the the narrative of "Equal Pay" for the USWNT verse the USMNT.
Problem is, if you look at the numbers the USWNT would make less if they were to have an equal pay scale as the USMNT.

There are many examples in the SEPARATE CBAs of differences in pay - some favoring one group and some the other. Those are the smaller numbers in the overall picture. Feel free to go down that rabbit hole if you wish. The USMNT players DO NOT GET PAID unless they play in the WC in the first place - that is just one of the differences you will find.

Specifically, the respective World Cups of each team is where they are to gain the most pay and is where this "Equal Pay" fallacy lives among the media, political figures and mass SJW meltdowns.

My guess is you are messing with me, because I find it hard to believe you can not grasp what has been presented multiple times. If I have been Trolled', well done - if not, just use the following simple math to realize the imbalance does not lie in favor of the USMNT.

The USWNT make a HIGHER % of the money generated by their World Cup ventures verse the USMNT. So, it would not be in their interest to make a LOWER %. Done.

Funny enough, for the posters that spew "The men never qualify and make $0" - OK, lets go real naive here....then the USWNT DEFINITELY do not want that Equal Pay!