Men's pro teams have been getting subsidies for years. Time for women to get them, too.
If state and local officials are going to hand out money for sports construction projects, itâs high time womenâs teams had a place in that line.
At the front of it, preferably.
Menâs teams have been getting public subsidies for decades, so much so some are now on their second and third go-rounds. Womenâs teams, meanwhile, havenât even been part of the conversation. This despite the NWSL kicking off its 12th season Saturday and the WNBA deep into its third decade.
âThe reality is, we are doing this and only doing this for men. Men get these giant facilities built for them ⊠and it gives men these huge advantages,â said David Berri, a professor of economics at Southern Utah University and co-author of the upcoming âSlaying the Trolls: Why the Trolls are Very, Very Wrong About Women and Sports.â
âIf weâre going to be doing this for men, we should be doing it for women.â
Set aside the question of whether multi-millionaires and billionaires deserve to have the public build their sports palaces for them. Despite all the studies showing these projects donât generate nearly the jobs or economic boon owners claim they will, politicians long ago decided arenas and stadiums are a fine use of taxpayer dollars and thatâs not likely to change.
So if public money is going to be doled out, it is only right womenâs teams get a fair share of it, too.
âWe are just asking for the same opportunity to have this investment and grow the game,â said Karen Leetzow, president of the Chicago Red Stars. âThere's a lot of opportunity for us to bring attention to the city of Chicago, but it can't be done without a facility that provides the women a quality playing environment.â
This isnât some random thought exercise by Leetzow and Red Stars owner Laura Ricketts.
When Rickets bought the team last fall, she acknowledged a new home was needed for the team after its lease in suburban Bridgeview expires in 2025. SeatGeek Stadium is, to put it nicely, geographically undesirable. Itâs a torturous drive from both the city and north and western suburbs even when thereâs not traffic, and itâs not easily accessible via public transportation.
The Red Stars also donât control their own schedule or rake in the ancillary revenues because they donât own the building.
As Rickets and Leetzow were exploring options, the Bears and White Sox were both lobbying state and local officials for public money to build new stadiums. This despite taxpayers not being done paying for their current ones!
âI was like, `Hold on. Wait a minute.â To me, it's a fundamental tenet of what we're facing in womenâs sports, a lack of investment,â Leetzow said. âIt just seemed obvious that if there was going to be public funding for men's teams, we ought to have a seat at the table because we are already 100 years behind.â
You can make the argument women actually need it more than menâs teams, given the WNBA and NWSL have spent their entire existences playing on someone elseâs turf. When the Kansas City Current opens CPKC Stadium on Saturday, it will be the first stadium ever built specifically for a womenâs professional team.
Thatâs right. Ever.
Those who live to knock down womenâs sports will say menâs teams deserve public funding because they make money. But owning their own stadiums and arenas is a large reason why they do. If a team owns or controls its building, it gets the money from naming rights and other sponsors. Parking. Concessions. Merchandise. It can let others use the building â like, say, for a Taylor Swift show â and collect the revenue from those events, as well.
Do you really think the NFL, NBA and Major League Baseball would be where they are now without these cash cows their teams call home? If stadiums and arenas arenât a significant source of the revenue for menâs teams, then why are they all so eager for shiny new digs or to spruce up the ones they currently have?
âYou could almost look at it as menâs teams got their seed funding from public sources. Itâs allowed for them to have all those things: control over revenue streams, control over their schedule, (flexibility) with broadcasters. None of that has ever been available to womenâs teams,â NWSL commissioner Jessica Berman said.
âThen we say, `Oh itâs 2024 and letâs compare.â It hasnât been a level playing field.â
Now, some menâs team owners have built their own Taj Mahals. Los Angeles Rams owner Stan Kroenke splashed out $5 billion on SoFi Stadium. Steve Ballmer built the Los Angeles Clippers a $2 billion arena.
Kansas City Current owners Angie and Chris Long went that route, financing all but about $6 million of the teamâs new $117 million stadium themselves. The public money, in the form of tax credits for infrastructure improvements, became necessary when the cost of the project ballooned.
The Longs and co-owners Brittany and Patrick Mahomes also shelled out their own cash on the Currentâs $18 million practice facility, which opened in June 2022.
But that shouldnât be the expectation. Because itâs never been for menâs teams.
âI hope that equity isn't something that causes a backlash,â Leetzow said. âI hope itâs the opposite, that there's a recognition that we've never asked for this before. And if you're going to give anyone money, it ought to be those that haven't had the opportunity (for it) previously.â
Cities and states have long seen men's teams as worthwhile public investments. There's no reason they should see women's teams any differently.
Follow USA TODAY Sports columnist Nancy Armour on social media @nrarmour.