I disagree. In what other US sport does the federation have a stake in the league? Could you imagine US Basketball splitting the money with the NBA? The real problem is that the focus of the federation isn't on growing the game and improving our performance internationally. Their focus is on making money through their partnerships with the MLS and SUM. Why aren't they as involved in the NWSL? Why didn't they package the television rights of their women's league with the broadcast and marketing rights for the MLS and national teams? It is another example of how poorly we here in America manage most things that don't have strict accountability.
What other US sport does the federation have a stake in the league?
Soccer is unique for two reasons due to FIFA regulations.
1) The USSF actually sanctions the professional leagues. It is the governing body for the professional divisions (Major League Soccer (MLS) (Div. I), North American Soccer League (NASL) (Div. II) and United Soccer League (USL) (Div. III). USA Basketball, USA Hockey, USA Baseball do not provide oversight for the professional leagues. These organizations are limited in their scope focusing on the Olympic teams and youth development. The NFL, MLB, and NHL are all leagues with no oversight from the Olympic Committees or other national bodies. The MLS is wholly unique in that it is subject to the oversight of the USSF.
2) FIFA holds and promotes a 4 year cycle tournament (World Cup) that makes billions of dollars in addition to the Olympics. The World Cup provides a massive financial incentive beyond the Olympics. There are no other International programs like FIFA's world cup operating in the US, other than soccer. Note, FIBA (USA Basketball) does participate in a Basketball World Cup, but its financially no were near the Soccer World Cup.
Could you imagine US Basketball splitting the money with the NBA?
If (1) US Basketball had oversight of the NBA & (2) USA Basketball's media properties were valuable. However, as noted above, this is not how it works with the NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL. That said, your questions raises an important issue ... money. Let's take a quick look at the current "TV Contracts" for the various professional sports operating in the USA.
League / Broadcaster / Contract Value
NFL / Fox, CBS, NBC, ESPN / $27 billion
NBA / ABC, ESPN, TNT / $24 billion
MLB / Fox, TBS, ESPN / $12.4 billion
NHL / Rogers (Canada) NBC, Versus (U.S.) / $5.2 billion $2 billion
MLS-US Soccer / ESPN, Fox, Univision / $720 million
The fact that professional soccer's contract is nearly 37.5x less valuable than the NFL is damning evidence that the MLS and US Soccer are in entirely different negotiating positions than the NFL (37.5x), NBA (33.3x), MLB (16x) and NHL (10x). However, the question also raises a good point as to the other Olympic Federations (USA Basketball, USA Baseball, USA Hockey). The total value of the media deals entered into by those federations is $0. FIBA (basketball) did enter into a deal with ESPN, the value of which isn't clear and presumably USA Basketball will get a cut of some of the revenue, but the contract with with the International federation.
US Soccer is currently the only US Federation that actually has a TV deal (near as I can tell) ... thanks to the MLS/SUM for helping out with that one.
Why aren't they as involved in the NWSL? Why didn't they package the television rights of their women's league with the broadcast and marketing rights for the MLS and national teams?
By "they" you mean US Soccer? First of all, US Soccer is more involved with the NWSL (assisting with management and logistics) versus the MLS. Soccer United Marketing (SUM) is the MLS controlled marketing company. The NWSL formed a marketing company (just like the MLS did) in partnership with the A&E Networks called NWLS Media. There are multiple reasons why US Soccer could not package the NWSL in the media deal. But your question is disconcerting because it implies that US Soccer somehow has "control" of the MLS and NWSL. Both the MLS and NWSL are "for-profit" companies. Businesses that are intended to "stand" on their own without financial support from US Soccer. MSL has its own investors and management team. NWSL has its own investors, but the USSF serves as the manager due to the fact its financial not viable. Both the USSF and Canadian Soccer Association financially support the NWSL, but are now owners. While they are members of US Soccer (governing body), they conduct their businesses as they see fit. US Soccer simply has no right to sell media rights on behalf of the MLS or the NWSL.
The simple answer to your question "why didn't they package" the TV rights for the NWSL is because in 2014 (and presently) the NWSL has little to no media value and would have likely caused the deal to lose value. It would have been extremely bad business at the time. Additional points:
1. US Soccer joined the MLS/SUM deal and was a passenger to the deal. SUM is a stand alone for-profit company (controlled by the MLS owners). US Soccer does not control SUM.
2. The NWSL is an Eastern/Central Regional League with no west coast presence (no California teams). As a media property, it had little to no value in 2013 ... its first season to any network.
3. From 2013 to 2016 continued to struggle and generated little spectator interest. In 2016, its average attendance was about 5k per game.
4. As a media property, its value is insignificant (today). The A&E deal was an investment, with A&E taking a 25% state in the league. A&E hopes to ride the USWNT coat tails in a few years.
5. The viability of the league remains clouded and its costs US Soccer about $1.4 Million per year to keep it afloat.