This question has been a boiling topic in the soccer world, especially since the Women's World Cup, where the United States Women's national team was paid a significant, $6 million dollars less compared to the men's national team for reaching the round of 16. From a young age, I played the game of soccer, and have been an avid soccer fan. From the 1999 Women's World Cup win, the women's team was taken more seriously. Growing up watching both the men's and women's national teams, I've seen the success on the national level both teams having had, and historically, the women's team has been more successful. I believe in the equal pay of men and women in the work force on all levels, therefore I believe in the equal pay on the professional level of soccer too. In my personal experience, the boys teams in my club use to get priority for field use and practice times, even though my team was much more successful. Quite miniscule compared to talking about some of these athletes livelihood, however it still left a lasting impression. As I got older, the girls on my team (including me), complained until we got priority when our tournaments were near. On the national level, the Women's teams had more views on their final cup match than the men's team did on their round of 16 game, yet, the pay difference was $6 million. I feel qualified to write about this topic because I have played and watched soccer for years, and I have seen this issue develop over the years. This question has not been a recent issue, its been brewing for years, but the number from the Women's World Cup in the summer of 2015 sent the issue into the spotlight. 

The article from Money Magazine goes into depth about the issues with the inequality with women in sports, specifically the US Women's National team. The article addresses the arguments against equal pay and gives specific numbers for multiple arguments. Some of the topics discussed were the ticker-tape parade, sales of merchandise, average pay, tv ads and such endorsements. The major value in the article is the holistic view of how much the women are actually underpaid. The article is pro-women's soccer, supporting the fight for equal pay. The interest for Money Magazine for discussing the numbers, is the magazine is made to discuss all things money. With this article, they approach a wider audience than those just interested in the finances, they reach out to soccer fans, and feminists too. The author of this article pretty much just states numbers, therefore he is not too biased. There is not much sway in the article, but the author, Brad Tuttle, does manage to give his opinion. 

The article from The Atlantic, gives more options into how to handle the issue. Throughout the article gives responses to many critiques of the equal pay for women, and buries the opposing arguments. The author of this argument is an avid soccer fan, having been to both Men's FIFA World Cup, and Women's FIFA World Cup. She is educated on the issue, and even interviewed others for aids to her argument. Though the author appears to be a feminist, however, to agree with the article's arguments, you do not have to be a feminist. I would say the article is pretty credible for the most part. The article may be biased because it instills some of her beliefs on what is fair for women in the soccer world. 

The article and interview from The Business Insider is specifically taken from Abby Wambach's opinion on equal pay after she retired and reflects upon her career. Throughout the interview and the article, the main focus is on how the unequal pay is put under the spotlight post 2015 Women's World Cup. Abby Wambach reflects on when women soccer players retire, they have to worry about what work to do next, opposed to men's players who don't have to worry about beating up their bodies, because they are making enough money to last them. The major values and interests at stake here are the interests of people in gender pay equality. If the person is not interested in such, they may find this argument very elementary, however if one is interested in gender pay equality, this article will be appealing. The credibility of this source is strong, considering it includes an interview from the player herself, Abby Wambach. However, the author of the source does not include much outside information to build her argument, it's more of a recall of Abby's answers. 

This topic is arguable since some of the men's soccer players advocate the women in this fight. Oppositions may claim that women actually have it better because they are getting a bigger percentage of the overall revenue from the games, however, the Women's final was the most watched soccer game in history. Some may say the boys are better, but Abby Wambach is the all time leading scorer, men's and women's, and her salary is what Leonel Messi makes in one day. Overall, the numbers have been in agreement over all the sources I've read, however, some sources give more bias than others. The authors of the sources will sometimes insert their opinions with some persuasion, and I find the sources to be more reliable when they have less bias. I might need to revise my question to make it more focused, however I like the scope of my idea. 

