Rugby for Fairies 2019-20 Conference Championships

Bokolis, 4-4, is looking to make hay this week so as to not have it come down to the pro-wrestling clown show in two weeks.

CHIEFS (-7) over Titans - Yes, this would bust Bokolis' long-held prediction of the Chiefs not getting to the bowl, but this is not a hedge.  History has repeatedly told us that teams like the Titans- run heavy, pass light, rely on no mistakes- almost never turn this trick three weeks in a row.  Derrick Henry is a special player and could pull this off in the cold and, even if not, the Titans can still cover.  However, it was only the Chiefs' momentary offensive jitters that put them in a 24-0 hole last week.  This is something I don't expect to recur.  The Titans will have to do a lot to keep up.

Packers (+8) over 49ERS - Bokolis doesn't promise that the Packers will win this game.  But, given that I don't think enough of Garoppolo to believe that he can beat the Packers by this much without help from his defense.  I'm going to take Rodgers and his back of tricks to keep it close.

Another divisional beatdown

So, about when the Texans made it 21-0, Bokolis was thinking about the beating I was taking this week and thinking that the silver lining was that my long-held prediction that the Chiefs and the Jets would not be back to another super bowl until all the rest of the teams made it first would still hold.  To boot, the potential was there for the Texans to come off the list,which also includes the Lions, Browns and Jaguars.

Aside - since the Cleveland Browns were paused/didn't exist when Bokolis first made the statement, and the Jaguars and Texans were, respectively, a recent addition and non-existent, I would claim victory if the Lions somehow made a super bowl.

Bokolis didn't watch the Saturday games and didn't start tracking the Vikings-49ers until some point in the second quarter.  But, I knew the Vikings were sunk when, after intercepting late in the second quarter and already in field goal range, they went 3-and-out.  I also had the sense that only one of the Saturday road teams would cover, so I was resigned to 0-2 right there.  Ultimately, my hasty picks disregarded my acquired perceptions: the Titans had a proper running back and the Vikings couldn't run between the tackles.

As if Bokolis didn't already know, after the Ravens were stuffed on the first 4th and short, it confirmed what the early part of the game had made apparent:  the Ravens and their QB weren't ready for the playoffs.

That's how it goes.  Bokolis didn't feel bad because I was lukewarm on those games.  Of course, back in the old days, I would have been backing up the truck on the Chiefs, as I had the most conviction on that game.

Imagine, then, how Bokolis felt when I turned on the game- I thought it started at 3:30- and saw 14-0.  That truck was hijacked.

When the Texans botched their plan to go for it on 4th and short while leading 21-0, ultimately standing down and taking a field goal, Bokolis didn't disagree.  Piling up points as a bunker seemed the correct thing, because 21 was never going to be enough- and it's not the hindsight talking.  However, and, that's an all-caps and huge font however, taking the field goal there, only to try a fake punt- and botching that planning as well- in their own territory made no sense.  I knew they would not make it to the end right then and there, but I still wasn't sure that KC would cover the 10 (the line nudged back up to 10 by game time).  The Chiefs, who scored their first TD on a short field, were handed another short field for their second TD, which sped up the comeback.

They brought the truck back, with a little extra in it, no questions asked.

Actually, there was a red flag the whole time, as Deshaun Watson spent way too much time after plays (seemingly) schmoozing with officials and players, things that should not be on his radar.  He is not a winner.

Aaron Rodgers is a winner.  This is being keyed in on either side of halftime of the Seahawks-Packers.  Not having to worry about a running game, the Packers seem to be getting pressure the same way the Chiefs did, and Bokolis sees Russell Wilson staring at the defensive end the same way Deshaun Watson was.  So, the Seahawks are suffering much the same way.  Of course, Russell Wilson is about the only QB who can get away with this, but not without a running game.  To boot, Aaron Rodgers isn't making mistakes, making the Seahawks secondary look foolish, and the Packers are cutting through the Seahawks.

As it is, at 28-10 Packers, halfway through the third quarter, Bokolis is waiting for the Seahawks to bog down on their current drive before hitting publish, so I can get to bed.  At 28-17, I'm aggravated that I've got to hang with this, that, even if the Seahawks manage to hold the Packers AND score another touchdown, covering would come down to a 2-point conversion. The perils of results over process.

Actually, the Seahawks scored early enough that there was a little more to it than that.

The lack of a running game might seem glaring, but Russell Wilson is a running game.  What they won't tell you is that the Seahawks were done in by a lacking secondary, especially #21 and #28...and probably some dodgy replay angles.  Jimmy Graham did not get the first down at the end.  Thirty Forty years later, rulings are as dodgy as they ever were.

1-3 for this round, 4-4 for the playoffs, down the vigs.

Rugby for fairies 2019-20 Divisional Round

So, after a 3-1 wild card week, Bokolis is confronted with a couple of lukewarm Saturday matches. Then again, there is little that is more lukewarm than last Saturday's curtain jerker.

Vikings (+7) over 49ERS - Bokolis doesn't really think the Vikings will win, but I do think some combination of they have enough to keep with or cockblock the 49ers/the 49ers don't have enough to dominate the Vikings and/or the slower track will help converge performances.

RAVENS (-9.5) over Titans - Bokolis has to believe that the Titans have shot their wad.  The Titans are more equipped to hang than the Vikings, but the Ravens are better equipped to dominate.

CHIEFS (-9.5) over Texans - This is supposed to be game where the side barely squeaking by in the last round goes to the top seed and gets duly hammered.

Seahawks (+4.5) over PACKERS - From what Bokolis is told, the Packers are a soft 13-3- it allegedly includes a couple of ass-kickings- and Aaron Rodgers is making mistakes that he wasn't making in prior years. There's also something about the Seahawks road record- huh?!?  I'm not buying that the Seahawks will win, but I do believe that the Packers are not equipped to pull away.

2019-20 Rugby for fairies wildcard rehash

With what he considers to have been one and a half solid picks, a concussed QB and a luck-out, Bokolis manages a 3-1 wild card round.  While I didn't watch Saturday's games, I was texting with a group of blokes who were full of tickets and banter.  That is also connected to the Sunday update of the lines; the group was in constant uproar for every movement, which influenced me to be current.  The Seahawks actually went off at +1, but I felt a second update would've been too much.

After sleepwalking through much of that game, looking like they didn't want to win, just as they did last year, the Texans were in position to close out the fading Bills- whythefuck did the Bills go for it on 4th and 27 with all their timeouts?!?- but nearly pissed it away themselves when, scared to attempt a long-ish FG, they were stuffed on 4th down.  The QB had his Eli moment, and they pulled it out.  The betting public was nice enough to bet the game down to 2.5, so it's a cash...yaaay! dumb money.

Brady performed suitably shitty, and Derrick Henry was as good as advertised, maybe better.  As the Titans were running down the clock, some joker tried to call a pick six, to which Bokolis replied, when Brady gets the ball back?  When Brady did the deed, instead of crowing, I wrote, TaInt-ed legacy. TaInt, of course, is how Bokolis refers to what the mouth-breathers call a pick six.  It's a pain in the ass to text, even if you're not an iPhone fanboy who can't be bothered to capitalize, so, thankfully, it hasn't caught on.

Bokolis decided pretty early on that the Saints didn't want to win, and was reminded of the Saints' shitty play calling and their equally shitty run-blocking.  They had one excellent drive.  I'm starting to understand that this is likely related to there being certain throws that Brees doesn't want to make, or can't make.  It seemed that the Vikings were taking away his first option, and his response often showed his confusion.

On the other side, this kid Cook is pretty good, but he can't run between the tackles.  Keep that in your pockets for next time.  When he scored- between the tackles- to make it 20-10 Vikings, Bokolis was quick enough to key out that the Vikings were smart enough to call a draw play, which I later amended to stumbling onto the correct call, before they could rub my nose in it.  Besides, I said, he had only performed to expectations- it's just that we expected the Saints to have 30 points by then.

That was a push-off, by the way.  The Saints get hosed again.

The Seahawks were probably better, but losing Wentz rendered the Eagles non-competitive.  The Seahawks teased everyone by doing the minimum and committing a few penalties.  Nonetheless, Bokolis thinks the Seahawks playcalling was a bit better than I've seen from them in big games.  They kept themselves out of trouble and didn't have to (overly) rely on Russell Wilson pulling a play of of his ass.  I mean, it was the same 17-9 as the regular season, so discussion is done.

That's all the fuck I've got.  We go again next time.

The Waybach machine: NYF Giants at SF 49ers into rugby for fairies playoffs

To get myself in the mood for NFL playoffs, Bokolis found an old playoff game on YouTube.  In this game, the San Francisco 49ers, on their way to winning Super Bowl XIX, defeated the New York Giants 21-10.  While the Bill Belichick-led linebacker corps intercepted the legendary Joe Montana three times, and the 49ers did not score in the second half, the Giants' offense could not score a touchdown of its own.

Despite detesting the 49ers more than any other team, Bokolis loved watching games played at Candlestick park, especially playoff games, because the slow track made for some hitting.  While the Walsh 49ers were known for his revolutionary v2.1 of Paul Brown's offense, mis-labeled as the "west coast offense," it was when they had a suitably punishing defense that Walsh won his three super bowls.

In the moment, Bokolis could not appreciate, or even acknowledge, such a defense.  Even though the Giants had emerged from the dark ages, any Giants fan was already well-used to an offense pissing in the wind.  So, the Giants not getting anything done against the 49ers didn't make the latter seem like anything special.

The first drive ended in a 49ers touchdown, but left the Giants with what ifs.  A Montana pass deflected off of Roger Craig's hands and right to defensive back Bill Currier with room to run.  You can debate what would have happened, but Bokolis says Currier was gone.  Both running backs were in the pass pattern, and the only receiver, surely quicker than Currier, would've been blocked.  It would've been a matter of getting past the linemen.  Give me that play and let's see what would've happened.

Aside- The defensive backs have always been an issue on the Giants.

Dwight Clark then caught a 3rd down pass to extend the drive where he probably didn't get both feet in bounds.  On the next drive, Ronnie Lott intercepted a pass at midfield and was contacted while on the ground, but was allowed to get up and run to the Giants' 12.

It would take another two years for Phil Simms to blossom (at the super bowl played in the Rose Bowl {nudge nudge}, get it?).  Simms would often try to hang in there that little extra so that his receivers (who were never very good) would get open.  In this game, it seemed that he often waited too long, probably because his receivers couldn't get open.  It didn't get any better the next year in Chicago.

Now that Bokolis is good and ready- good and ready, yeah- fast forward to the playoffs.

TEXANS (-2.5) over Bills - In a battle of the teams that have rolled over so many times in the playoffs, Bokolis is not buying Buffalo and thinks it will go wrong for them.

Titans (+4.5) over PATRIOTS -  For a guy like Brady, Bokolis would typically have to see him fall to believe it.  But, with nothing other than Edelman around him, I've seen enough shitty play from Brady this season to believe that, short of Gronk showing up, the best he will do is pull out a close one that the other team has pissed away.

SAINTS (-7.5 -7 Sunday edit) over Vikings - Didn't the Saints cock this one up a few years ago?  They had better be playing to leave no doubt.

Seahawks (-1.5 PK Sunday edit) over EAGLES - Bokolis never quite trusts the Seahawks, as they make things harder than they should be, and have to resort to QB Wilson to pull some (jizz-stained?) magic out of Ciara's ass.  But, the Eagles have not done it against any team that is any good, QB Wentz hasn't done it with a full team, and won't have TE Ertz to help.  Ertz is solid and doesn't do stupid stuff on the field, which will be missed, even at home.

Sunday note- lines moved to Saints -7 and PK.  Winning back the hook in the Saints, especially since I would've bought it anyway, and simply needing the Seahawks to win are too much to ignore.

23 girls 4 cups?

Bokolis decided to wait until all the afterglow simmered down to talk some shit about the US Women's National Team running out winners of its fourth world championship.  Despite any efforts to sidestep the noise, I've had to endure the nonsense of those who think the women should be paid more than their male parallels, and of those who think they are being edgy in using '90s references to insinuate that each practice ends in a daisy chain.

Still others have thumbed their noses by bringing up that, a couple of years back, the side lost a scrimmage against a FC Dallas under-15* side by some distance.  This gets met with some broad straight out of Dave Lozo's GSF academy coming through with the they weren't really trying excuse, and allusions to insecure men who would dare bring this up, as if a victory against 15-year old American boys is supposed to be groundbreaking.

Aside- they call it under-15, but it should more properly called '15 and under.'

No, whether elite US women footballers win or lose a scrimmage against a u-15 side is not relevant.  Bokolis hasn't seen any footage, and I imagine it has been burned or locked away.  We don't know at what levels the sides were playing.  It is reasonable enough to speculate that they boys were going at 90%-100% and the women were going at 70%.

It is far more damning that they would have to go that far down the latrine to find a pace of play and level of athletes that suits their preparation.  You see, if playing full bore, this USWNT could probably hang with a u-17 side, or u-18 side taking pity on them.  They've already learned that they can't practice against a serviceable college side because the male players can't figure out the appropriate amount of pity to take.

A side of 15-year old boys going virtually full-bore provides the women with a tolerable amount of physicality and speed against which they can practice.

Of course, 15 year old American boys aren't well-drilled footballers.  They largely rely on their athleticism.  This, of course, does nothing to help the women become better footballers.

And, Bokolis' issue with the assessment of this squad was that, while they had, far and away, the best athletes, this world cup showed quite clearly that they did not have the best footballers.  Sweden, England and the Netherlands all had better footballers.

Hey, jerk- the US beat all those teams!

In all those cases, their superior athleticism won out.  Against England, they also flat-out got lucky- lucky that VAR caught the offside despite England again splitting the US centre-halves after having done so on their lone official goal, lucky that the England women made like the England men when it came to taking a penalty.

That said, they were never threatened.  Bokolis thought Alex Morgan stumbled onto brilliance with the tea-sipping display, but the raised pinky was bad form.

Sweden punted the group stage match, apparently trying to play possum in case of a possible meeting in the final.  The US clearly dictated the play, but had trouble producing any football capable of breaking down Sweden, and benefited from the dodgy new-age offside interpretations on the second goal.

By the time of the final, it should have been abundantly clear that the Netherlands had no shot of standing up to the superior US athleticism.  Nonetheless, it took a dodgy VAR penalty decision for a foul on Alex Morgan, who had been diving/embellishing all tournament, to break the ice.  Bokolis immediately dismissed this in real time, even as I quickly texted my group that, sooner or later, this diving dishrag was going to get one of these calls.  Sure enough, here came the prompt to re-referee the game.  I also told my friends that I would bet one of my testicles that Rapinoe was going to her right on the PK.  How the Dutch keeper didn't deduce the same is beyond me.

The second goal was legitimate, and took advantage of what should have been the glaring liability in the Dutch side, the centre-half wearing the number 3 jersey.  She was exposed in the Japan game, and this should've been known.  The US should've piled on about four more.

Bokolis must admit that I had no prior knowledge of the Dutch side, much less that they won the latest Euro.  I immediately noticed that they all played like they thought they were Dennis Bergkamp.  Of course, they bunkered up once the competition got better, which reinforced Bokolis perception that their best female athletes are still riding bicycles or speed skating, playing field hockey or whatever.

The Norwegians were better footballers, too.  But they didn't measure up athletically and weren't deep.  They had nothing left for England.  Bokolis will leave out Germany, as this was not even close to a proper German side.

Spain were not better footballers but, thanks to their tactics, the US did nothing from open play.  They won two penalties, one on an excellent embellishment by the only proper footballer on the US (Tobin Heath), and a dodgy one on what was a straight-up dive, and a bad one at that.

Perhaps it wasn't surprising that their best performance was against France, who had the most similar squad makeup, enabling the US women to press their athletic superiority against a side who weren't necessarily better footballers and worse yet, were set up to rely on their athleticism to bully lesser sides.

Since Bokolis always says that Ligue 1 is MLS, but faster, I got a kick out of the females being similar.  France had two singularly unique players in winger Kadidiatou Diani and the giant centre-half Wendie Renard, players for whom the rest of the world had no answer.  To boot, the side was stocked with players from Olympique Lyonnais, which has won the women's Champions League four years running.

Like the Norwegians, the birds from Lyon also figured out that they might not be as good without Ada Hegerberg.  They tried to match the US athleticism, and they failed, big-time.

The new-age nonsense worked against the US in this game, as they had their third goal taken away because the VAR machine said a heel was in an offside position.  Get the fuck out of here!

Nonetheless, the US outplayed the French, and only conceded because the player wearing the number three jersey (Mewis) played the whole French team onside by dropping too early on the free kick.  The analysts neglected to bring up what was in their face, instead blaming it on Horan, who was apparently marking Renard but, like the rest of the team, trying to play the French offside.

To boot, those analysts didn't figure out to give Crystal Dunn credit for the job she did on Diani until after the match, by which time the whole world had already weighed in.  They hadn't done it at halftime, when Dunn had already plugged what, going into the match, seemed like the biggest liability.  It was all the more amazing because Dunn, playing out of position at left back, had shown herself (in prior matches) to be a naive defender, allowing herself to be pulled out of position in search of something to do.  Diani certainly had a few tricks up her sleeve to wrong-foot Dunn, Dunn's fight allowed her speed to hang with Diani.

The French were neutralized, and there was maybe one other person in the world who could have done that job as well as Dunn.  But the Velvet Mafia didn't want her on the squad because she wasn't feeling the rainbow, so Dunn got the chance, and gets all the plaudits.

Bokolis had a chuckle because her teammates seemed to refuse to pass Dunn the ball.  I wondered whether they didn't trust her, or they didn't want to give her too much to do.  Subsequent games suggested it was the latter.  But, hey, at least they let her play.

Bokolis would now give individual assessments of each player...would- but I don't want to break any ground.

You know the rest, lift the cup, parade in NYC, Rapinoe drops a few f-bombs while demanding equal pay (if not more) based on wild distortions of reality, a bunch of them dressed up like porn whores at the ESPYs- what's that?  It's their prerogative? Sure it is, just as it is Bokolis' to say they dressed up like porn whores- and now they'll go back to playing in front of 6,000 at their league matches while the rest of the world forgets about them until the next cycle.

No one can say this in the face of their distortions because they'll just shout it down as insecure men and patriarchal hate and all this other nonsense.  Bokolis will give them more credit than they deserve by calling it an attack of cognitive dissonance rather than than their own attempt to counter bullying with bullying.

You see, ladies, you can't get paid like the men because, while the footballing world is going to be locked in to every qualifier for ever major nation (and most middling and minor nations), the world is set to pick your plight back up in June 2023.  What's your next trick?

Cup runneth...dry?

So, it's the birds' turn to play football.  Said slightly more properly, it's the turn of the women to be in the bright lights for playing football.  The Women's World Cup is upon us.

Like the hockey women, the female footballers are whingeing about not being paid like the men for what they perceive to be the same work.  While Bokolis' cock-jerk reaction is to guffaw and to tell them to get paid like men, go earn like the men, I grudgingly admit that the issue might be a little more nuanced than that.

But, Bokolis will say that equal pay for equal work is bullshit.  Negotiations are all about leverage, which is a catchphrase that really means a side's ability to bully.  When you don't own the factors of production, your ability to bully is limited.

Bokolis will now dismiss the merits of their case.  I actually did some poking around on this.

The USWNT claims that because they do better than the men do in international competition, that entitles them to draw at least as much water as the men.  More accurately, they do comparatively better than the men.

This is because the US women have a relatively higher-level of athlete in their talent pool and because the US women had a head start on most of the world, certainly the nations that would be considered top among the men (Germany, England, France, Spain, Italy).  Germany caught up; France caught up; England and Spain are catching up; Italy haven't yet reconciled that women are allowed to be something other than mothers or whores, and the Dutch women seem to be committed elsewhere.  Others will eventually catch up, and the rankings of the US men and women will converge.

If the best male athletes in the US focused on (soccer) football, even with a lack of quality coaching, we would pound the rest of the world back into the dark ages, crushed as they would be that we took their sport away from them.  Ironically, that would do more for the women's game than anything the USWNT have ever done.

They do not do better than the men, as they do not play the same competition; they play against a talent pool that isn't as developed, or as deep.  Would you like us to take off the governor and put you in against men?  After enough ass-whuppings, at some point, evolution will smile on women and they'll be the physical equals of men.  Society would have broken down by then, and we'd probably have had an ice age or two, affording women even more chance to better their place in its reconstruction.  But that also presumes that women would have evolved to be the hunting equals of men- and equally adept at avoiding being the hunted- which is how we got the drop on them in the first place.

Before that, if we dropped the current USWNT into the fourth tier of English (Men's) Football- League Two- for a full season, they would most likely get relegated. Bokolis is told the league average wages (using 2017-18 figures, employ an inflation multiplier accordingly) is about 1000GBP/week, or 46000GBP ($60k USD, rounding up) per full season. Once they were relegated to the Conference National League, which straddles the line between full-time and semi-pro, wages figure to drop by 25%-35%. $40k-$45k/yr seem fair for you ladies?  Because, you would very likely be relegated from there, as well.  Bokolis is pretty sure that players in the 6th-tier of English football get paid more from their day jobs than from football.

On the basis of percentage of revenue generation, the failed leagues demonstrate that the women cannot draw anywhere near the men.  This is even the case in the US, where the WUSA, WPS, W-league, WPSL Elite have folded and the NWSL is still trying to gain traction.  All this, while MLS chugs along just fine, despite those guys being just a little better than Bokolis was.  At least in the US, the women's clubs function independently of the men's.  In Europe, the women's teams are typically arms of a larger (men's) club.

Sure, as revenue earners, the USWNT compares far better in relation to its male counterpart than does the rest of the world.  In the US, 'soccer' is perceived as the girls sport- that is, it is the sport females are best equipped to play.  Said another way, it is the sport we'd most prefer our girls to play.  You've got seventh-generation American fathers, who wouldn't be caught dead watching soccer, mindlessly putting their daughters into soccer because it seems like the thing to so.  This has been going on for a couple of generations and, as a consumer group, American women- despite what they tell you- have a standard of living suitable to support their national team.

"Girl Power" and all that notwithstanding, women in the rest of the world still prefer men's football to women's football.

As such, taken in total, the men's world cup cycle generates 40x-50x the revenue that the women's world cup cycle generates.  Said another way, for every billion that the men's game generates, the women's game generates $20-$25 million.  Nonetheless, the WC prize pool for women is already at a greater payout rate than for the men. This is actually understandable, as there are far greater carrying costs associated with the men, who are far more greatly valued assets.  If Sheikh Mansour puts in a bid for Alex Morgan- well, you've heard what happens on those yachts- whatever he pays is barely going to eat into what City will get by selling Leroy Sané back to a German side.

The players suffer further humiliation by having the lords of the game- and a few other chauvinists-  suggest that they'd be more of a draw if they played in revealing, form-fitting and otherwise more suggestive outfits.  Does it need to be said that this could also be harmful, even dangerous?  The fucked up thing is, as it is a weighing machine in the short term, these fuckers would be right in the short run.

Amazingly enough, Bokolis does not want this.  I like my sex with my sex, and my sports with my sports.  Some hornbag will make youtube videos cherry-picking the best-looking asses of female volleyball players in those shorts and get a bunch of people to look.  Still, I'd rather see the pros of the skin trade, swimsuit models and porn whores, in those outfits than athletes.  Seeing pics of Hope Solo's nasty looking growler- even though that was not meant for our consumption- was bad enough.  Seeing Megan Rapinoe in the swimsuit issue was a soul-scarrer of a train-wreck.  I'd much rather watch them play football than shake their asses.

Aside- ever since Bokolis let a female friend convince me that Alex Morgan was not that hot, I've never been able to judge the looks of any of them.  In fact, when I saw Julie (Johnston) Ertz WAGged out at Super Bowl 52, my first thought was alarm that she may have given up football.  Of course, she has been playing professionally the whole while, but I'd never know.

Besides- and, Bokolis will blow that fantasy right out of the water for you- for the most part, jocks, female and male, are weird.  But, hey, they've got to earn, so go on with your patronage.  I'll try to reel this back in, while also trying to forget about Rapinoe in a thong.

So, they don't measure up physically, and they don't earn like the men. To boot, as opposed to doing their own thing, they have submitted their game to the patriarchal FIFA's rule. Nonetheless, the women are effectively asking that the cash cow that is the men's game (further) subsidize the women's game by bringing pay in line with the men- in effect, to bump up the women just for the sake of doing it.

hmmmm....ok, Bokolis will bang it around.

Training should be funded as closely to equal as is feasible all the way up and down the age levels, and elite-level women should not have to train and play on crappy turf fields, which would be unconscionable in the men's game.

As far as being paid, the reality is women's football is currently a second class sport, and there is a certain amount of grinning and bearing it that female footballers will have to suffer from choosing a calling that doesn't fund itself.  If schoolteachers have to suffer and no one cares, no one is going to give a fuck about the lot in life of a female footballer.  That said, Bokolis thinks there is little to be gained by being ruthlessly pragmatic.  Continuing to treat them like second-class citizens could quite possibly damage revenue on the men's side by turning women off to the men's game.

The American women, in particular, attempt to invoke Title IX, intended for federally funded and/or educational institutions, and assert that it should apply in this case.  Bokolis scratches his head, as, not only does Title IX involve entities that are not intended to be profitable (which FIFA most certainly is not), Title IX is the main roadblock to ANY college athletes getting paid.

While the education aspect is certainly not applicable, Bokolis isn't sure that the "Federal financial assistance" aspect of Title IX is applicable here.  Even if it is, it probably wouldn't be much of a problem for USSF to forego any federal funding, thus being able to tell the women to go fuck themselves.  Even if they get some of what they want from their federation, while the USWNT would be improving its own situation, it would seem a bellwether, but none of this would necessarily apply to other nations.

FIFA takes a big chance by alienating the US Women.  FIFA has gained much from the US market, even as it has barely tapped the well.  It is not the wisest thing to do anything that could jeopardize that income stream.  Is FIFA going to come through for all federations?  The answer is, not until it figures out how to make itself look like a superhero for doing so.

As it is, Ada Hegerberg, a Norwegian considered the best female footballer, has declined to play in this World Cup.  Her reasons are not entirely clear, but it is evident that she is sick and tired of the way FIFA and the national federations treat the women's game.  Even if she is the best player, she is just one woman, and the competition will shrug it off.

If the USWNT, whether as champions or not, were to boycott the next World Cup (to take place, presumably, in Australia), it would make a dent.  If the US boycotts AND whoever wins this year (France?) boycotts the next WWC, then it would be a sham.  If you lose the American woman as a consumer, the women's game is in trouble, and it's going to do no favors to the men.

Y'all muthafuckas didn't think I was going to do predictions, did you?