Published on March 28, 2025

Equal Pay in Football? It’s Not That Simple.

By Alexandra Peña Jimenez
Graphic designed with Canva Pro / Image credit: Alexandra Peña Jimenez
Unpacking the economics, history and controversies behind the wage gap.

Women’s football has grown significantly in recent years, attracting larger audiences, more sponsorships and greater visibility. But despite this progress, the pay gap between male and female players remains vast. Many argue this is unfair, but the real question is why this gap exists in the first place, and more importantly, is it truly unfair?

The reality is that the pay difference isn't due to gender discrimination, but rather economics, market demand and the way football has developed over time.

A Historical Disadvantage

For decades, men’s football had a massive head start. Women weren't just discouraged from playing, it was outright banned in many countries. In England, the Football Association barred women from competing between 1921 and 1971. In Germany, the ban lasted from 1955 to 1970. In France, women’s football was shut down in 1941 and wasn't properly recognized again until 1970. Meanwhile, men’s football continued to grow, attracting millions of fans, huge sponsorships and billion-dollar TV deals. By the time women’s football was finally allowed to develop, it was already decades behind.

But these bans did not just delay women's football, they also stunted its infrastructure and visibility. While men’s football exploded into a global industry, women’s football was still fighting for recognition. Men's football had access to facilities, sponsorship deals and established leagues, while women's teams struggled to find proper training grounds and regular competitions. For instance, the FA's ban on women's football led to the disbandment of around 150 teams, forcing the remaining clubs to play in public parks and farmers' fields.

Even after the bans were lifted, women's football struggled to secure financial backing from investors. In England, the Women's Football Association (WFA) was established in 1969 with representatives from 44 clubs, but it faced challenges in gaining full recognition. Despite some progress, the sport remained underfunded, and it wasn't until 1993 that the WFA transferred its responsibilities to the FA. By then, men's football had already become a multi-billion-dollar industry.

Another important aspect was media coverage. Men's football dominated television broadcasts, while women's matches were rarely shown, making it harder to attract sponsors and build a larger audience. Although women's football has made significant progress in recent years, these past disadvantages still have a lasting impact. However, the current pay gap is not a result of ongoing discrimination but rather a reflection of market dynamics and audience demand.

Football is a Business

Some argue that if women's football received equal investment and sponsorship, it would generate the same revenue over time. In an interview with CNN, former U.S. soccer star Megan Rapinoe, a leading advocate for equal pay, emphasized that the issue goes beyond salaries. She argued that true equality comes from equal investment in the sport, stating, “It’s really more about the investment in the game. Is the investment equal? We’re talking marketing dollars and branding, investment in the youth, investment in the players, investment in the coaching staff. I don’t think that that’s there. I don’t think that that’s ever been there.”

While Rapinoe raises an important point about investment, the reality is that football operates as a business driven by supply and demand. Men’s football didn’t become a billion-dollar industry overnight. It took decades of media exposure, heavy investment and a growing fan culture to reach its current status.

While this is a valid point, businesses invest where audiences already exist. It's not just about funding, it's about demand. More investment in marketing and broadcasting could help women's football close the gap faster, but viewership must expand naturally. Until then, the financial gap will remain because revenue, not gender, is what drives player salaries.

Football is a business. The more people who watch, the more money flows in. The 2024 UEFA Champions League Final between Real Madrid and Borussia Dortmund attracted 450 million viewers, with 145 million watching live, making it one of the most-watched club football events in the world. In contrast, the 2024 UEFA Women’s Champions League Final between Barcelona and Lyon had 3.6 million live viewers, despite setting a record for stadium attendance. That gap in audience size directly impacts sponsorships, TV deals and revenue, which is why player salaries differ so drastically.

The pay gap in women's football is driven by revenue, not discrimination. Higher salaries in men's football reflect greater ticket sales, sponsorships and media deals, not bias from clubs. Sponsors and broadcasters aren't sitting around plotting to underpay women, they are paying based on the revenue the games generate. Recognizing the historical disadvantage doesn’t mean claiming that intentional discrimination still exists; it simply helps explain why women’s football is still playing catch-up.

Broadcasters and sponsors invest where the audience is. More viewers mean bigger TV deals, more ad revenue and larger sponsorships, all of which contribute to the financial gap between men’s and women’s football. 

The Gap in Men's Football 

To understand why salaries vary so much, we can also look at the differences within men's football. The pay gap in football is not just a gender issue, it exists within men’s football too.

Take Cristiano Ronaldo, who reportedly earns £3.17 million per week playing for Al Nassr in Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, an average player in England’s Championship, the second division, makes around £10,000 a week. That means Ronaldo earns more in a single week than some players make in years, and these are all professional male footballers. Even within the Premier League, disparities are vast. Erling Haaland earns £500,000 per week at Manchester City, while the average Premier League salary is around £69,000 per week. Haaland makes nearly seven times the league average, and this gap grows even wider when comparing top stars to players in lower divisions.

This shows that football salaries are based on market demand and revenue generation, not effort or fairness. The same logic applies to the gap between men’s and women’s football.

Does Equal Pay Work in Football?

There is much debate about equal pay in football, with many arguing that female players should earn the same as men. On the surface, that seems fair. After all, they put in the same effort and play the same sport. But fairness does not mean ignoring the reality of how football generates revenue. A closer look reveals that the issue is driven by economics, not discrimination.

Footballers' salaries are tied to the revenue they generate. The men's World Cup, for instance, brings in billions. In 2018, FIFA reported generating over $5.2 billion in revenue, while the 2019 Women's World Cup made around $131 million. 

An example is the U.S. Women's National Team (USWNT), which fought hard and secured an equal pay deal in 2022. This agreement means that prize money from competitions, including the World Cup, is pooled and shared equally between the men's and women's teams. While this is a win for equality, it's important to note that the men's tournaments typically generate more revenue. So, to pay the women equally, funds are redistributed from the men's earnings.

This raises a key question: Can equal pay in football be sustained without creating financial imbalances? If clubs and federations are required to pay men and women equally without considering revenue differences, they might have to cut men's salaries or dip into other funds to cover the costs. In a market-driven industry like football, this approach could be challenging to maintain.

For example, the USWNT secured equal pay through a unique agreement with the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF), where prize money from both men’s and women’s tournaments is shared equally. That worked because the USSF handles both teams’ finances together, making it easier to split the prize money. But club football operates differently. Men’s and women’s teams usually operate separately, with men’s teams earning much more thanks to larger crowds, massive broadcasting deals and huge sponsorships.

To make things more complicated, a study of England’s Women’s Super League (WSL) showed that even while revenues skyrocketed by 590% between 2011 and 2019, club debts shot up by 1,351%, highlighting the financial strain many women’s teams face. So, while equal pay sounds great on paper, enforcing it without fixing the revenue gap could actually hurt women’s clubs in the long run. The key challenge is figuring out how to grow the women’s game financially so that equal pay happens naturally, without breaking the system.

Fairness in football is not about mandating equal pay. It is about paying players based on the revenue their game generates. It's about encouraging conditions where women's football can thrive on its own terms. The real solution is not reallocating money from one side to fund the other, it’s growing the women’s game until the financial gap closes naturally through demand and an expanding fan base.

Written by

Alexandra Pena Jimenez

Senior studying PPE at AUP