Are pro football, basketball, & baseball players overpaid?

[Philosoraptor]

I know they work long, hard hours, but are they worth what they are paid?

Are good teachers overpaid? Or the average minimum wage slaves? Are Mexican farm workers overpaid? Are CEO's overpaid?

But sports figures, if you paid them by the hour like we get paid out here in Dumbfuckistan, what is their hourly wage, and are they really worth it?

They throw balls, they run, they shake hands, they practice, they travel, they hang out with all the really cool people, are they earning it, or are they just amazingly lucky?

Why should I even care?

[driver8]

1. Does the Pope shit in the woods?

They are so overpaid it isn't even funny.

I have this argument with a friend of mine who feels they are paid what they deserve. He feels that since they make all of this money for the teams, they should be paid accordingly.

I think he's full of shit, but that's just my opinion.

Let's see...a guy gets 40 million bucks to throw a ball through a hoop or hit a baseball while a teacher earns 40k a year? Or how about doctors? I know they make good money but they work their asses off.

While we're at it, movie stars and tv stars aren't worth the money that they're paid, either.

[Philosoraptor]

2. The minimum wage should be $15 or more an hour.

Teachers, especially good ones, should be overpaid.

We're ALL tired of being UNDERPAID out here in Romerica, where only gladiators and the connected get to be obscenely and undeservedly wealthy.

[scrinmaster]

171. If the minimum wage was $15 an hour,

all those fry-jockeys and bag boys would be getting way overpaid. The work they do isn't worth $15 an hour.

[BoneDaddy]

19. LOL

I was thinking the same thing.

[indepat]

21. Does the sun rise in the east?

[MGD]

35. Only when you hang him from a tree.

and fuck yes professional athletes get paid too much. It's disgusting and it's the reason I refuse to support their brand of entertainment.

[Mikey929]

54. Not overpaid

Of course they are NOT overpaid. If you believe they are overpaid, then you must - by definition - believe that there is some objectively determined amount of payment that is perfectly appropriate. How can one determine that? If we are to live in a free society, then no one can tell another person what he or she should be able to get paid. The player made a contract with the owner. Doesn't the player have a right to negotiate the salary he feels he deserves. That is the essence of freedom.

Would you say Stephen King is overpaid? All he does is type words on a computer. I can do that, and no one is clamoring to give me $10 million for my next book.

[jgraz]

76. If not overpaid, then undertaxed

Someone who wins the capitalism lottery in this way has a responsibility to give back to the system that has so disproportionally rewarded them. I'd love to see a true progressive tax restored in this country, topping off at, say, 95% for any income over $10 million.

[fishwax]

107. a personal belief that another individual is overpaid undermines freedom?

That's a bit of a stretch.

f you believe they are overpaid, then you must - by definition - believe that there is some objectively determined amount of payment that is perfectly appropriate.
How does it require that, exactly?

If we are to live in a free society, then no one can tell another person what he or she should be able to get paid. The player made a contract with the owner. Doesn't the player have a right to negotiate the salary he feels he deserves. That is the essence of freedom.

Of course the player has "a right to negotiate the salary he feels he deserves." And anyone else can still think they're overpaid. Nobody else has to agree with the results of the negotiation. That's the essence of freedom.

[Canuckistanian]

176. On a more pragmatic, less apologetic point

Should we not pay people based on their worth in society? Wasn't this the purpose of capitalism? If you make a lot, then you must create a lot of wealth. Reasonable statement?

The ones that generate the most revenue can command the highest compensations because they're encouraging commerce and entrepreneurship.

Now, take the case of the professional athlete. He/she (and there aren't many "she's") command such high salaries in a "closed system". The consumer never gets to vote with their wallets if they want to see such an athlete performing. They HAVE to pay the going rate. And it's high. The days of a minimum wage spectator seeing a live game are gone. So what they've done is change the average income of the typical spectator. Is this fair?

Now, the athlete employs nobody, produces no goods, generates no wealth (by himself) and performs no service that benefits anyone else (other than psychological).

Should they command salaries that dwarf a physician, a policeman or a teacher/professor? Just because they CAN demand such compensation because of historical reasons, should they?

This whole concept needs re-thinking.

[truebrit71]

59. I'll go you one better...if an athelete misses a shot/hoop/touchdown...

and the vast majority do on a regular basis..they STILL get paid...think about that...in baseball the high benchmark for a batting average is .400.....that means 4 out of 10 times they ACTUALLY have to do what they're being paid for...if a doctor messes up 60% of the time they get fired or have a bunch of dead patients...

Yeah, you could say these guys are overpaid for what they do...

[mondo joe]

118. But they're not paid to hit the benchmark. They're paid to sell tickets and

merchandise.

[Dorian Gray]

90. I agree and don't agree....

I definitely think that they are overpaid. But, I think that the teams themselves make that much money, and the players are a part of that. If they don't make that much money, that would be more in the pockets of the owners, who would also make too much money.

Basically, either way, someone is making way too much money because of our populations fascination with sports.

[Az]

3. Our society is utterly inverted

The distractors are rewarded while those who do the real work that keeps this society working are treated with disdain.

[Philosoraptor]

4. Metropolis

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Philosoraptor]

6. Like dick cheney.

And the Rolling Stones. People make trillions from haliburton.

I do pretty good for only being 14 and you know it.

[lapfog_1]

7. The average NBA player makes about $5000 per hour.

Which doesn't include travel time or personal training time.

This number comes from the average NBA salary of $4.2 M per season (NBA players association), 82 regular games per season and figuring that pre-season, game prep, practice, and workouts are about 10X the time actually playing the game.

On the other hand, a good NBA career is usually less than 10 years, and career shortening injuries are common.

Are they worth it? Well, people buy the tickets and advertisers pay to put the games on TV... more than enough to cover the salaries.

I don't know. Are actors worth $10 M to $20 M per picture? Are Doctors worth what they are paid? How about nurses? teachers? Firemen?

I think things are getting out of whack (which has been the goal of the repuke social legislation and tax codes, coupled with those same people deciding how much everyone gets paid). I don't know what to do about it.

[Ravenseye]

8. Well to be fair comparing Teachers with Pro Sports

The professional sports player is the very tippy top extreme minority of his profession. How many people nationwide play in club leagues, college, pickups, etc. Only a very very small minority actually get paid to do it, and only a small minority of them, mostly in the NBA make millions of dollars.

Comparably, most teachers get paid a fairly decent wage. Not enough, mind you, but something. Then when you factor in all 'teachers' from elementary through higher education, and even personal training, the very top rung of teachers also makes alot of money from book deals, college and federal grants, etc. Again, these teachers are in the extreme minority just like their NBA counterparts.

Comparing an NBA player to an elementary school teacher in Topeka, is like comparing an effete Harvard University bestselling author professor pro-tem to a club league night b-ball player in inner city philadelphia.

As far as whether they're worth it or not, people in our system are worth what peoplea re willing to pay them to do for work, and what they're willing to take. Sadly many people have larger budgets for sporting events than they spend on public education through their taxes, and god help you if you try and hike the property taxes to pay for better schools.

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. Anonther point is that teachers' unions almost always oppose paying 'better' teachers

more than average teachers.

[Ravenseye]

25. That's always been problematic though

How do you judge who is a 'better' teacher? The standardized scores of their students? Student Evaluations? Subjective evaluations by administration? Union evaluation?

While it's simple logic to know that there are good teachers, average teachers, and even bad teachers, it's a much different thing to actually evaluate them as such. So, instead of paying based on quality, they're based on tenure. My high school's starting teacher's salary is now about 40,000 a year, but there are a number of teachers there who make over 100,000 a year.

[mondo joe]

29. How about a report card from their supervisor?

Nothing against teachers - but it's ironic that while there is little resistance to evaluating the performance of students, no one can seem to figure out a satisfactory way to evaluate the performance of the teachers.

[Ravenseye]

46. I've never seen one.

It's very subjective. Do you evaluate everyone in the same pool or do you separate them into categories.

Teachers, Math Teachers, 6th Grade Math Teachers, Special Needs 6th Grade Math Teachers.

Or do you compare the Special Needs 6th Grade Math Teachers, to the Special Needs 6th Grade Science Teachers and SN6G English Teachers?

Or does an AP English High School Teacher be rated in a similiar way to a 3rd grade Phys Ed. Teacher?

Lets take the 6th Grade Math Teacher. How do you evaluate the teacher? Do you evaluate the teacher based on the performance of the students? Any teacher will tell you that each class, each year is different. Some years the teacher has a class of amazing smart well behaved kids, other years it's full of troublemakers and kids with learning issues.

Is the teacher who makes Math interesting to a difficult class a better teacher, than one who teachers to the test of a relatively bright class?

I've never seen an easy answer as to how to judge teachers.

[Toots]

30. One hundred thousand a year for the best and players make that a game.

Yep America has it priorities in order as usual..

[Ravenseye]

41. Again you're looking at skewed numbers

How many players are there in the NBA? There seems to be about 14 per team, and 30 teams, so 420 players if my math is correct. There are probably 100 times that many teachers in this country, if not more, who make over six figures of base salary, and that's just secondary education. At the college level, some professors command even larger base salaries, all the way up to elite Dean level academics. I wouldn't be surprised if there are 420 if not more, teachers in this country who make 7 or more figures annually.

You're right though. The priorities are still out of whack.

[Nevernose]

166. No Child Left Behind: The Football Version

This floats across my desk every now and then, and you're right, it's not fair to compare teaching with playing sports (not just because of the money factor). If NCLB were applied to football, how long do you think the law would be in effect?

1. ALL teams must make the state playoffs and MUST win the championship. If a team does not win the championship, they will be on probation until they are the champions and coaches will be help accountable. If after two years they have not won the championship, their footballs and all equipment (funding) will be taken away UNTIL they do win the championship.

2. ALL kids will be expected to have the same football skills at the same time even if they do not have the same conditions or opportunities to practice on their own. NO exceptions will be made for lack of interest in football, lack of desire to perform athletically, or genetic abilities or disabilities of themselves or their parents. ALL KIDS WILL PLAY FOOTBALL AT A PROFICIENT LEVEL!

3. Talented players will be asked to workout on their own, without instruction. This is because the coaches will be using all their instructional time with the athletes who aren't interested in football, have limited athletic ability, or who's parents don't like football.

4. Games will be played year round, but statistics will only be kept in the 4th, 8th, and 11th game.

5. This will create a New Age of Sports where every school is expected to have the same level of talent and all teams will reach the same minimum goals. If no child gets ahead, then no one is left behind.

6. If parents do not like this new law, they are encouraged to vote for vouchers and support private schools that can screen out the non-athletes and prevent their children from having to go to school with bad football players.

[rpannier]

9. As long as these leagues are raking in billions of dollars a year for TV contracts

no they are not overpaid.

People do not watch sports to see the owner, the GM or the executive whatever. People watch the games to see the players play the game.

Until the networks and advertisers stop putting up the billions they do, the players are entitled to as much as they can get.

If I was good enough to play pro sports and I was considered a superstar you better believe I'd have a contract paying me 8-12 million a year if I could get it.

[PA Democrat]

16. I don't have a major problem with their salaries.

I DO have a problem with sports franchises and the players turning to the taxpayers to pay for new stadiums/ arenas.

[rpannier]

71. I agree with you 100%

These owners try and blackmail cities into providing free stadiums that cost 9 figures to build, then they want the majority of the revenue from that stadium.
I'm glad Seattle stood up to the Sonics.
In the end, I don't think the city of Seattle will be the lesser for losing the sonics.

[malaise]

68. And that is that

Broadcast rights and sponsorship bring in the money which is earned by the players. Indeed they get a small percentage of it.

[KharmaTrain]

10. If Someone's Willing To Pay 'Em The Money, They Worth It

Sports team owners are fools but they're not stupid. Most made a boatload of money to buy the team and most find ways of making a buck with their pro franchise.

No one held a gun to George Steinbrenner or Jerry Jones head to make them pay the money they do to their players...thus if they're willing to offer the money, an athlete would be a fool to say no. It's capitalism at work.

[donheld]

11. Yes, just as movie stars, pop stars etc.

They get millions and teachers get pennies.

[MonkeyFunk]

13. Nope

the team owners are willing to pay them that much, and STILL make money.

[madinmaryland]

14. As long as people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars to

attend these events, the athletes are going to get their share of the pie. If society decides they don't want to watch the games (elimating ad revenue), go to the games (elimated actual stadia revenue), and stop buying the licensed products, then they won't get paid the outrageous wages. Won't ever see that!

It is society that gives this industry billions of dollars in revenue every year.

[elocs]

15. This is America, and unless you put a gun to somebody's head,

then they are willingly paying you what you ask. Any of us deserve however much we may legally obtain. If the owners were not making tons of money, then they could not afford the salaries. They are, so they do.

[chelsea0011]

17. As long as our society values entertainment, they are worth it.

Many people make millions to keep us amused. And it is much more than sports. Music, books, gaming, theme parks, movies, video, and on and on and on. Amuse me.

[aaronnyc]

18. Would it be better if the owners pocketed the profits?

If somebody is able to generate millions of dollars for their employer, it only seems fair that they should be paid accordingly. Sports is one of the only businesses where owners do not pocket most of the profit. I only wish that more business owners/CEOs gave their employees what they are worth, instead of keeping all the excess revenue for themselves.

[Road Scholar]

109. How about lower ticket prices, would the fans boycott for

that? Noooo.:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:

[never cry wolf]

120. Owners wouldn't lower ticket prices

Player salaries and ticket prices are quite independent. If an owner can fill his arena at $50 a seat why would he charge less than he can get?

This off season the Cubs dropped $300M on new players and announced their ticket prices will stay the same? Why? There were a lot of no shows and season ticket demand had dropped.

Meanwhile the White Sox last year set record attendance and TV ratings, made more money than they ever had. Yet this off season they made no major free agent signings and traded away Freddy Garcia and his $10M/year salary. Their ticket prices are being raised. Why? People will pay it.

[Road Scholar]

121. If people stopped buying tickets, the price.......

you know, supply and demand.

[never cry wolf]

125. You are correct, but it won't happen

Not on a macro scale anyway. There will always be ticket buyers. It's a nice dream to think that there could be an organized boycott but it won't happen. Smaller market teams will draw less and their tickets will be cheaper but even they, these days in baseball, draw over a million. If they don't the owners will shop for cities wanting a team bad enough to subsidize a 9 figure stadium.

As far as a team's income is concerned, the gate, ticket price, is only about 35-40%.

You are correct in a way, the reason the Cubs held their prices steady was a lessening demand and lower TV ratings, a sort of boycott due to poor performance. Yet, they still were sold out before the season started and have been for years.

Don't be fooled, the owners cry poor but they are making money hand over fist. Before it opened I got a tour of the United Center (Bulls, Blackhawks.) The teams rent the arena from an ownership group that also owns the team. The teams pay for security, ushers, parking, concessions, maintenance, etc. from different corporate entities owned by the same people, all at inflated prices. The team books look like they're just breaking even but the owners are raking it in from the ancillary businesses. The Wirtz family (Blackhawks owners) made their fortune in the liquor distribution business, and they supply the alcohol to the spin-off company who does concessions.

I'd rather have the players get their fair share, since they are the show, what people come to watch.

[genie_weenie]

20. No.

The question is why do Americans allow themselves to be browbeaten to believe that a sports star can renigoate his contract whenever he please but a person in the military is under pain of imprisionment if he contemplates not fulfilling it to the letter.

Once why I was in Iraq for the second time, I jokingly told my gunny I was going to request a trade to the Air Force. I had, had a good year. Prior Deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, with a little piece of colored ribbon on my chest each time to show for it and now this deployment.

[PVnRT]

22. Are people paying $75 bucks a day to go to public school?

No, they aren't.

So long as the owners can afford it, athletes will continue making that money, and they will continue to afford it so long as people (and NOT just Americans) are willing to fork over a lot of money to watch a sporting event. They are worth what we are willing to pay for them, and we are willing to pay quite a bit.

On the other hand, there are few other professions in the world where white people pay blacks millinos of dollars a year.

[baldguy]

23. The average length of a pro sports career is 3 years.

Usually ending with a lofe-long catasrophic, crippling injury.

Don't take the few hundred people who play professionally as the norm. Those are the best of the best. For every guy on the field at the Super Bowl or the World Series, there are millions of others who wanted to play, tried to play - and failed.

[madrchsod]

24. they are paid market value

and in most instances they work 10-15 years to obtain the money they are paid. it really does`t concern me how much they are paid.

[ecstatic]

26. No, but the owners and general managers are

But as far as the actual athletes are concerned, they have a demanding schedule and are forced to perform for millions of people every week. Why is it that the coaches and general managers get to stand on the sidelines and get paid more for doing less?

[mondo joe]

31. They're FORCED to perform?

Wow - I didn't realize that!

[jakefrep]

44. In most circumstances in pro sports....

...the coaches are paid less than the players playing for them.

[mondo joe]

52. And even if coaches are paid more, the response is still that they

earn what the market will pay for their work.

[ecstatic]

27. And don't get me started on the slavery involved in college sports!!!!111 nt

[MyNameGoesHere]

28. Maybe

CEO's are overpaid and all they do is rape the common man. At least these guys entertain some of us.

[Philosoraptor]

32. Amazing how many got this one wrong. The correct answer is YES.

These guys make way too much money, but I got the same responses when I first proposed this question to the populace way back in 12 B.C. The gladiators and their fans were highly insulted, and I was severly stoned.

[ProfessorGAC]

34. Too Convenient By Half

Know what they say? Don't ask the question if you don't wanna hear the answers.
The Professor

[mondo joe]

36. You are outvoted in the democracy of the market.

If enough people thought they were overpaid, they'd earn less.

[jgraz]

80. The "democracy of the market"

That quote right there shows a severe misunderstanding of how markets work -- especially the faux market we have in this country. The fact is that most people DO think athletes are overpaid, just like the overwhelming majority of americans think CEOs make far too much. Has that had any effect on their salaries?

In our "market", raw numbers don't count if the "right" people don't want them too. Look at gas prices -- how many people want them hovering around $3 a gallon? Did we get a vote on that? Does that price reflect the real value of gas in our society? Or is the system being rigged by OPEC and our beloved oil companies?

The system is also rigged when it comes to CEO pay. Once again, I don't recall getting a vote on the pay of any CEO. I don't even get a vote in companies in which I'm a shareholder. The CEO picks the board of directors, the board determines the CEO's pay. Shareholders have no say in this.

As far as athletes go, yes, in the rarefied world of teams bidding on atheletes, they seem to be making what they can in an open market. But then you have to ask -- where did all that money for athelete salaries come from in the first place? Only a portion of it comes from the over-inflated ticket prices. Much of it comes from the tax breaks communities are forced at economic gunpoint to provide in order to keep a team in the region. Much of it comes from the cheap labor that pours your beer and cleans the stadium and helps direct your car out of the lot. And once you get into endorsement contracts, their compensation is directly related to the fact that 14 yr old girls are working 70 hour weeks, being paid pennies to sew those $200 sneakers.

Outrageous compensation is only a symptom of the real problem. Anytime you see someone being paid an obscene amount of money for something that makes no tangible contribution to society, you really have to look at the thousands or millions of people who are being forced into poverty in order to pay that salary. That quarterback isn't just taking home a paycheck for those touchdown passes, he's also taking home money that could have gone to giving your local police a raise, and money that could have paid a working mother enough that she wouldn't have to take that third job, or money that could have gone to giving a fourteen-year-old worker an education instead of a life of menial labor.

[mondo joe]

83. If people were unwilling to buy $200 sneakers or fill the stadiums, the athletes

wouldn't make that money.

[jgraz]

85. Sadly, it's not that simple

Markets rely on information, and few consumers have all the information on what goes into making a $200 sneaker. Furthermore, the sales of these sneakers are driven by advertizing to teenagers, whose critical thinking skills may be less than optimal when it comes to resisting flashy new clothes.

And of course, you're ignoring the insane tax breaks and depressed wages that also feed into the money pile used to pay these athletes.

The faith in markets that you're espousing is just that: faith. You're expressing a religious view, not an economic or logical one. You might as well say "they wouldn't make that much money if God didn't want them to."

The real picture is far more complicated, and has little to do with a consumer's reasoned choice to pay $200 for $5 worth of sneakers or $75 for nosebleed seats.

[mondo joe]

86. Bullshit.

Teens are subject to their parents.

Adults have the right to vote.

They can vote for candidates on issues, like minimum wage.

People make choices - you may not like them, but they make them.

That is democracy.

[jgraz]

87. You can believe that if you want

But you clearly have no evidence for what you say beyond Fox news and your high-school social studies class.

Go read a few liberal analyses of the real economic situation in this country. I'd suggest starting with "Screwed" by Thom Hartmann or "Nickel and Dimed" by Barbara Ehrenreich.

[mondo joe]

88. Put away your ad hominems.

I'm sorry you're frustrated enough to stoop to insults.

The FACT is that people make choices.

You simply dislike their choices.

I'm reminded of my mother in law who thought THE PEOPLE were too ignorant to be entrusted with voting. You have the same attitude.

[jgraz]

89. Attacks on your reasoning or lack of evidence are not ad hominem

You are simply asserting things without evidence. Saying FACT in capital letters is not a reasoned argument.

You are confusing Democracy and Capitalism as if they were both a system of governance. Capitalism and consumerism have nothing to do with voting rights -- and informed choice has little to do with modern capitalism. We're no longer talking about a small town and your local cobbler.

Like I said, it's difficult to have a reasoned debate with you if all you're going to do is spew dogma. Go educate yourself on what really goes on in this economy, then we can talk.

[mondo joe]

96. Accusing people of watching FOX news is an ad hominem.

The fact remains, people make choices. They may be ill informed, they be to their own detriment, but they make choices.

The market will change when the people decide to change it.

[SanCristobal]

94. Lets look at the positive benefits you list in your post.

Take this paragraph for example:

As far as athletes go, yes, in the rarefied world of teams bidding on atheletes, they seem to be making what they can in an open market. But then you have to ask -- where did all that money for athelete salaries come from in the first place? Only a portion of it comes from the over-inflated ticket prices. Much of it comes from the tax breaks communities are forced at economic gunpoint to provide in order to keep a team in the region. Much of it comes from the cheap labor that pours your beer and cleans the stadium and helps direct your car out of the lot. And once you get into endorsement contracts, their compensation is directly related to the fact that 14 yr old girls are working 70 hour weeks, being paid pennies to sew those $200 sneakers.

Sure, you seem to think that it would be better to kill of the profitability of pro athletics, but what do large number of stadium employees think? Would they like to look for a new job so we could have a better sense of "economic justice"? Or would they rather have a job that lets them associate with a sport they probably love?

How about the communities? I'm sure they would love to see the team disappear, after all they only found its presence valuable enough to give it beneficial tax status. How about the people who have jobs in the supporting industries? The beer companies, the transport firms, the memorabilia sellers, the ticket dealers? What would they think of shutting down the sports industry?

How about the poor little kid stitching shoes for pennies? Surely she wants to she the team fold, then she could go to school and live a normal child's life. Or maybe she lives in a terrible third world society where she doesn't have those options and where she has to work to support her family. Maybe she is grateful for her job because she thinks working a sewing machine is better then working the streets.

What a bitch! If all these people could just let their selfish interests go, we could finally give them some of that good old economic justice wealthy Americans who fell asleep in econ 101 always love to talk about.

[jgraz]

147. As usual, the false choice of the laissez faire capitalist

This one is easy: we've had thriving, profitable professional sports teams for years in this country. Many were some of the best teams with some of the best players in history. They got no taxbreaks from the towns they played in, they paid their workers a living wage and their shoes were made in the US by union laborers. Oh, and the players made far less as a multiple of the minimum wage than they do today.

I don't recall that any of this "killed the profitability" or "shut down" the sports industry. It was still every kid's dream to play in the NFL or the major leagues. The stands were still full on game day. Maybe I'm misremembering, but i don't recall any big league teams folding due to lack of profits. In fact, it seemed that the leagues were expanding into new markets, bringing that lovely sports-based economy to more and more people.

You think I'm against the positive effects of business and entertainment, but really I'm just against the negative effects of senseless greed and profitmongering. I grew up down the road from Green Bay, WI and I saw first hand the beneficial effects of having a team with close ties to the community who treated all of its employees, players and investors with respect. Oh, and I seem to remember us winning a shitload of games and titles while we were doing it.

Today, there are very few teams that have that same sense of community that the Packers did (and still do). Have teams abandoned this approach because they were in danger of folding? Or was it because they weren't winning games or attracting top talent? No, they just realized that if they paid their support staff shit, got rid of the unions, held their community hostage and generally gave the stiff middle finger to anyone who asked them to behave responsibly, the owner of the team would make a lot more money.

So in the end, whose selfish interests are more important? The greedy, selfish concession worker who wants to feed her children? The greedy, selfish firemen or policemen or teachers who would like to get a cost-of-living increase in their salaries? Or is it the upstanding, responsible millionaire athlete who just wants to buy that new Bentley and the second home in Big Sur. Or maybe it's the big-hearted, magnanimous billionaire owner who only wants to squeeze another hundred million from his business so he can have a bigger bank balance than his neighbor?

I know whose side I'm on. Do you?

[flashlighter]

97. Of course not!!

and why is it any of our business what anyone makes??

[ProfessorGAC]

33. A Couple Of Problems With Your Premise

First, it doesn't matter if you individually care, Raptor. There are millions who do, so the market is there. So, any single person not caring about their endeavors isn't going to matter much. There are more than 150 million americans who consider themselves sports fans. That's a giant client base.

Secondly, these guys aren't just throwing and running, etc. They're doing it better than nearly everyone else in the world. So, they're being paid for an ability that is far beyond those of typical folks. The payscale for excellence is always higher. Geez, it was even so in the Soviet Union! Better houses, more spending cash, nice car, etc.

This is one case where the "what the market will bear" argument actually applies. (We hear that all the time, but in many cases, it just doesn't make sense because the competition just isn't genuine.) For pro athletes, the competition is fierce, and unless one is a superstar, the job might be over in a year! So, the competitive side makes the "market force" argument more logical.

Now, they might be lucky. What if the guy with the potential to be the greatest basketball player ever was born in the famine stricken Sudan? So, sure some luck is involved in that an NBA player was born to a culture that not only wasn't beneath subsistence level, but could support organized sports! On that point, i think we agree. Luck is involved.

Lastly, nobody is forcing the owners to pay, forcing the networks to program the games, forcing me to watch them, or forcing anyone to buy tickets. If the prices get too out of control, eventually an equilibrium has to be reached.

Personally, i think it's ridiculous when a .500 pitcher is getting $11 million per year. But, the market seems to be set by the suberbly successful. So, the mediocre get pulled along in the wake.

But, they are paid what people are willing to pay them. If that is an indictment on our society (or world society for that matter), so be it. I wouldn't agree, in that i see nothing wrong with organized diversion and entertainment.

Should teachers get paid better? Sure. (My wife was a teacher for 30 years. I know they don't get paid squat.) Should cops and firefighters? Probably. Should the minimum wage be higher? Yes. But, there is no real correlation between these issues. The only connection is they are paid in the same currency.
The Professor

[Philosoraptor]

37. Great answer.

[tomp]

84. if these market forces were real...

...nurses would be making what sports stars are making.

the u.s. has been suffering for some time with a severe nursing shortage. people overwhelmingly demand quality health care but seem unwilling to pay what it's worth. nurses are not in control of the market. a nurse cannot make individual deals with hospitals. the market is manipulated and people are brainwashed.

[mondo joe]

117. Correction: People SAY they want quality health care, but when push comes to

shove they speak otherwise with their $.

[tomp]

160. correction: people not only want, but demand quality health care

take it from someone on the front lines.

the fact that they are demanding two mutually exclusive things (flawless AND inexpensive health care) hasn't sunk in yet.

[Tyo]

38. They are entertainers

And like top professional singers, musicians, and actors, pro sports players generally make a lot of money. People pay to see them perform. They make money for the corporation and themselves. That's just the way it works.

[DinahMoeHum]

39. IMHO: Basketball and baseball players, yes. Football, NO.

Pro football (NFL football) is probably the one sport where I absolutely do not begrudge players going for whatever $$$ they can.

Players who get into the NFL-caliber ranks of pro football are the less than 1% of those who once played college ball. LESS THAN 1%.

Now consider this: Assuming they're good enough to be drafted or go to training camp as a free agent, nearly half of those players will be cut before training camp is over.

Those who survive this process play pro ball for an average of 3.4 seasons. Seasons, not years.

Due to the nature of the game, pro football players, more than other pro athletes, live on the edge of a precipice, never sure if the next $100-grand check or even the next play on the field could their last. There are dozens of ways to die out there, from spinal-cord/neck injuries to heat stroke. Out of those that do beat these odds and get an NFL pension (usually after 3 seasons)
most players will have some kind of permanent disability for the rest of their lives, and the medical bills that go with it.

As a NY Giants fan, while I am disappointed that star running back Tiki Barber has announced he wants to leave the game while he's in his prime, I understand why he wants out: He's got a wife and kids, plus he's still in good health, and he wants to enjoy his family while he's still in good health. Plus, he has other career options he wants to pursue. One can't play pro football forever.

:evilfrown:

Google the words NFL+pensions+benefits sometime. There are an awful lot of eye-openers out there.
I also suggest reading (from your local library) books by sportswriter John Underwood titled "The Death of an American Game" and "Spoiled Sport"

:evilfrown:

Just a few weeks ago, the family of NFL Hall-of-Famer Mike Webster won a disability lawsuit against the NFL regarding brain injuries the Pittsburgh Steeler center endured during his career and thereafter.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/football/nfl/12/15/webster.suit.ap/index.html?eref=si_topstories

:evilfrown:

Like I've said, I don't begrudge the $$$ pro footballers get because the price they pay for their glory and $$$ is often a prohibitively high one.

:evilfrown:

[PaDem]

81. I tend to agree with your sentiments regarding football..........

anyone interested should look into Mike Webster's post-football life, or Earl Campbells for that matter. ESPN.com did a 3-4 part series on Mike Webster sometime last year. It was incredibly touching. Of course these guys choose to participate in simulated car crashes every week. But, as you said the average NFL player plays a few years and moves on to the real world. If he's a mediocre player he might make a million dollars in that time frame.

[slackmaster]

40. No, they should be able to negotiate whatever the market will bear

If fans aren't sufficiently entertained by watching the games, they'll stop watching.

How's that for a first thing in the morning lessaiz faire Capitalist manifesto? :-)

I will clarify and qualify it by saying that professional sports should not be subsidized with public funds.

[Rosemary2205]

42. Yes, they are worth it IF they perform.

Charismatic players make their owners A LOT of money. I'd like to see contracts written so that players make less money if they fail to meet the level of play they were hired to perform though.

[JCMach1]

43. Hell yes, all sports should be amateur...

Having moved to a non-american sports culture, I haven't missed anything at all. I now found all the sports channels an annoying waste of airspace.

[Homer Wells]

45. YEP!!!

Next question?

[leftofthedial]

47. anyone who makes more than 40-ish times the minimum wage

is overpaid.

the debate about the relative worth of different occupations is another legitimate concern. Our society is so fundamentally corrupt that we are incapable of engaging in this debate.

[mondo joe]

48. That is the nature of democracy.

The society determines the priorities.

[leftofthedial]

50. as long as capitalism prevails

this is not democracy

we are "free" only in the same sense that capitalist markets are "free" (which is not at all)

[mondo joe]

51. In what economic model do you find democracy?

Thank you.

[leftofthedial]

55. I don't believe you can find a political model "in"

any economic model.

Clearly though, traces of democracy seem to exist in democratic-socialist systems like some of the governments in Europe and have existed from time to time even in America when the capitalists were extremely heavily regulated.

Unfettered capitalism is antithetical to democracy. Inevitably it fosters an oligarchical, virtually feudal, system.

[SanCristobal]

95. Capitalism is the economic system MOST likely to foster democracy.

Capitalism requires the right to private ownership of property, which only exists if protected by government. Property owners have a higher stake in the game then non-property owners, and are more likely to demand political participation. Historically this led to the collapse of old aristocracies unable to exist under the pressure of a capitalist created middle class.

This is the reason that virtually all democracies are capitalist states, although the reverse is sadly untrue. Private property ownership and capitalist economics are histories greatest democratizing forces.

[Joe Bacon]

149. Yep, Chile under Pinochet was a real democracy, RIGHT??????

Milton Friedman and his Chicago boys boasted of all the freedom their pal Pinochet doled out with that deregulated free market, didn't they??????????????

[SanCristobal]

169. No, although Chile did eventually democratize.

China would be better for your example. Unfortunately not all capitalist countries are democratic, but all democratic countries are capitalist. Capitalism requires the protection of individual civil liberties and property rights, the surest way to preserve a democratic system.

This article, by Manuel Cereijo, does a far better job of making my case then I could. While I don't agree with everything he writes, he does a very good job explaining the capitalist/democratic relationship.

"Capitalism is the social system based upon private ownership of the means of production. However, the primary premise of capitalism, the one that I consider most important, is that is based on individual rights. It is the only politico-economic system based on the doctrine of individual rights. This means that capitalism recognizes that each person is the owner of his own life, and has the right to live his life in any manner he chooses as long as he does not violate the rights of others."

http://www.amigospais-guaracabuya.org/oagmc175.php

[Bill McBlueState]

53. how do you come up with 40?

'Cause the people who make 40x the minimum wage are going to argue that 60x should be the cutoff.

[leftofthedial]

56. that's why I said "-ish"

I think that is about the level at which capitalism trumps democracy and collectivism becomes impossible.

Obviously, I don't get to decide. Much debate and analysis would be needed to define the specific level.

[nolabels]

49. The question should be where does all the money come from

If someone can pay them type of salaries and not steal or go bankrupt in doing it, then no.

I am more than willing to pay for good entertainment that is safe and sane.

[Larry Ogg]

57. Professional athletes are shamefully overpaid. But there’s a greater cost

that most people don’t think about, and that is the distraction from what is going on in the world. I think if more people new about what was going on with the political leaders in Washington and the rest of the word things would be quite different. I heard it said that, “Americans are the most entertained and the least informed people on the planet”. Such as it were for the well off people in the days of the Roman Empire.

[truebrit71]

60. You hit the nail right on the head...

...(you can add fattest to that as well...probably because instead of PLAYING sports they prefer to sit on their ever-expanding arses and WATCH sports.....)

[truebrit71]

58. Ya think? And I don't really care because it won't change a thing...

...They are MASSIVELY, OBSCENELY overpaid...

[regularguy]

61. I was thinking of a Babe Ruth quote.....

"Listen, a man who works for another man is not going to be be paid any more than he's worth. You can bet on that. A man ought to get all he can earn. A man who knows he's making money for other people ought to get some of the profit he brings in. "

In any event, there's nothing wrong with "overpaid" people that can't be cured with a progressive tax policy.

[Superman Returns]

62. no

Absolutely not. They are making what the market determines. All the people who go to games, buy team merchandise, and other related items create a billion dollar revenue. Who should get that? The team owners, the managers, why not the players? What about the physical injuries and the toll on your body? What about the constant pressure to perform well in front of millions nearly every week? What about the work you do besides the games, the practices or the team outreach to community or other events? What about the demanding schedule? I talked about this matter with an avid Nets fan who follows the players very close. Atleast with basketball players, he told me that a 7/8 o clock game can get you back to your house, after the locker room and interviews around 1 o clock at night. Sometimes you have an aftertoon game the very next day, so your basically getting very little sleep and when your at away games, you hardly get to spend time with your family. So no, I think the sports players cliche of too much pay is indeed wrong. On the other hand, CEO's who determine their own pay...thats a travesty.

[bluewave]

63. Just baseball. I haven't watched in years and wont' until salary cap

[never cry wolf]

75. So you want the owners to make even more profits?

As it is a player is drafted and is an indentured servant to an organization for years, if not decades. Yes, a well paid servant IF he makes it to the bigs, but still with no options as to where he can work. Top lawyers or IT peeps, or anything else coming out of college have a choice. They can go for the most upfront money, the best long term situation, somewhere close to home, something they love or some combination of the above.

A baseball player goes where he is told. Baseball owners have a legal monopoly due to their anti-trust agreement. A player cannot control his destiny until he has enough time in for free agency and most player's careers don't last that long.

Good lord, it's a sellers market. If the players were not worth their salaries, the owners would not offer them. The owners are making money hand over fist and no one pays to see the owner.

[never cry wolf]

64. No. would you rather have the fat cat corporate owners make more profit?

If the players were paid half of what they get now do you think the Owners would start to charge less for tickets or ask for less from television? Ticket price has very, very little to do with the player payroll. Owners will charge as much as the market will bear. The Cubs have spent $300 M this off season on 6 free agents yet they have announced that ticket prices for '07 will not be raised. Why? Because they had a lot of no shows last year and pre-season demand is way down. Conversely on the south side the White Sox probably made more money last year than they ever have. Record attendance, highest local ratings, huge merchandise sales yet they have made no major deals and just dumped Freddy Garcia for 2 kids to get rid of his $10M salary. Oh yeah, due to continuing high demand, they have raised their ticket prices. Gate receipts only account for about a third of revenue and player payroll a bit above half of expenses.

Of course the owners cry poor but despite the fact that there are many potential host cities clamoring for a team how many of them are looking to sell? These are savvy business people and they are not losing money. Their books may show it but they have many ways to hide revenue and steer overinflated team expenses back into their own pockets. That does not even take into account the tens of millions they make every year due to the added value of their franchise and the sweetheart stadium deals paid for by local governments.

The players are the draw, they are what people pay to see. They are among the 1,000 best in the world at what they do and half don't make millions. As long as people will pay to see them they deserve the lions share of the revenues.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

65. Overall? Nope. Not At All.

They are paid for the entertainment value and ability to draw crowds and push merchandising. They are paid according to this ability and their popularity/talent. It is a free market so they can be worth as much as the society is willing to pay to have them perform. Quite simple premise really.

Anyone who would put forth the argument that their pay is solely compensation for their effort while at \'work\', such as game time played and how often, would be making an argumented that would be richly rooted in ignorance.

As long as the public craves the star and continues to be willing to pay, then their salaries are deserved. There is nothing wrong with being paid what you are worth.

[One_Life_To_Give]

66. Do they bring in more than they are paid?

Appaarently they are worth their salaries. At least when viewed from the perspective of what the franchise stands to make with or without the big name/high priced talent. Now as a society is any given sports figures contribution on the same scale as say Nancy Pelosi?


As a society we have placed a higher value on sports/distration/oppiate for the masses, than we place on the leaders of our country or on those who search for a cure to cancer/aids/heart disease or to those who design our buildings/bridges/automobiles.

[0rganism]

67. The more important question is, are the rest of us *undercompensated*?

You may be able to make an argument that professional athletes are overpaid, and you can certainly construct a much better one that CEOs are overpaid. But that will forever fail to resonate with Americans at large.

Personally, I don't begrudge the few who make it all the way to the top with their athleticism their financial rewards; they are reaping what the market for their performance provides. It is the same for actors, musicians, and entertainers of all stripes. So very many come from impoverished backgrounds, and only arrive at their high salaries by virtue of a lifetime of dedicated labor and being top-notch in their areas of endeavor. Let them enjoy their monetary success.

As Chris Rock puts it, "Shaquille O'Neal is rich. The man who signs Shaq's paycheck is wealthy." Let's deconstruct that before venting on the guys from the hood who signed a contract with some big numbers.

What we really need to address is the quality of life for those who don't have the good fortune, genetic predispositions, heritage, and mentorship to excel. That's where you'll find most of us out here in Dumbfuckistan, as you put it. We need better health care, better transportation, better housing, better schools, and better food. On top of that, we need self-esteem, a sense of self-worth, and external recognition that our efforts are in some small way worthwhile. It is the lack of these things in the context of the vast successes of the invincible wealthy that leads so many to despair, addictions, and crime.

It would be much easier to swallow the idea of an uberjock getting millions to throw a ball if everyone had access to affordable healthcare, if no one went hungry or homeless, if our public schools weren't overcrowded and underfunded.

[Kickin_Donkey]

69. Nope.

They're selling their services in an open market. They're worth whatever they can get.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

70. No.

People want to see athletes pay, and they're willing to spend that much money on tickets and merchandise and so on.

People always like to gripe about how much other people get paid. Just to be drama kings and queens.

[jmowreader]

72. Let me tell you why they're NOT overpaid

Think back to the old Mel Brooks movie Spaceballs...specifically, the scene where they meet Yogurt. They asked him what he does for a living. "Moichandising. Where the REAL money of the film is made!"

In this case, the real money of the sports world.

Out there is a kid walking the street right now. He's wearing an Emeka Okafor (he plays for the Charlotte Bobcats) t-shirt his mom paid $15 for. And there's ten thousand other kids wearing the same shirt.

Add to that the shoe revenues, the Gatorade revenues, the personal appearances...a lot of people are making a lot of money off the back of Emeka Okafor. I figure Mr. Okafor deserves a healthy cut of that.

The guy who really figured this shit out is Dale Earnhardt. When NASCAR first started getting popular outside the deep south, Earnhardt founded a NASCAR-only sports marketing firm. It's called Sports Image, and for several years he was the only game in town. Earnhardt could have parked the 3 and lived very well off what he was making from Sports Image. (Earnhardt's also the guy who noticed people walking away from the speedway carrying used tires and decided people would pay $20 for them. He was right, and now all teams sell their used tires to fans. Serious race fans love used stock car tires. In addition to making the perfect wall hanging, you can make the most darling end table for a NASCAR-themed rec room out of a used tire and a piece of wood to bolt to the top of it. It looks better than it sounds.)

[tammywammy]

79. Interesting

I didn't know that they sell the used tires. That's a very smart idea.

[Blue_In_AK]

73. Yes.

[geek tragedy]

74. NFL quarterbacks aren't.

Their entire team depends upon them, they have to be both very intelligent and athletic, and 11 supercharged athletes spend their time trying to hit the quarterback as hard as possible.

[jgraz]

77. Sorry, but every NFL quarterback stops working around January

and nobody really notices. What would happen if our nurses, police, janitors or garbage collectors took 6 months off a year?

Until we figure out how to get compensation in line with actual contribution to society -- not just contribution to a corporation's bottom line -- many of the salaries for many jobs will be obscenely over-inflated.

[mondo joe]

82. But contribution to society doesn't pay wages.

People decide with their $ on how to vote for who earns what.

[SanCristobal]

93. So NFL stars are kind of like teacher?

Teachers only work around 9 months of the year, always have weekends off, have very secure jobs and get more regular vacation time then any other profession I can think of. Should we start knocking teachers for being over paid?

Hmmm, maybe we should...

[dsc]

106. I work ten months not nine

and spend many of my vacations and weekends either planning or grading or both. I have a Masters and make an annualized 45k, if that.

[SanCristobal]

108. Ouch, ten months a year!

WOW, sounds like slave labor! Is that even taking into account all the Christmas, Thanksgiving and Spring break weeks, or all the Federal holidays you get off?

Teachers have it made. They make more money for less work then many professions requiring similar or greater education levels. Having to bring work home isn't impressive, almost everybody does that. The difference is that they work year round without the benefit of people clamoring that they are underpaid.

The three greatest lies are as follows:

1. The check is in the mail.

2. Iraq has nuclear weapons.

3. Teachers are underpaid.

[jgraz]

113. And I'm sure you know this because you've devoted your life to teaching

And why not? They make so much money, it's obviously the profession of choice for the upwardly mobile. :sarcasm:

[dsc]

114. The 45k is annualized

ie I already took it into account. I have close to 6 years of education and 5 years of experience and make 45k (actually less than 40k but it would be 45k if I worked 12 months) that is lots of things, overpaid, isn't one.

[GaYellowDawg]

150. You don't know squat about teaching.

Almost everybody brings home work? Bullshit! Name another profession that brings home 2-3 hours of work per night. And it's not just grading. There are conferences and lots of administrative duties. And planning? That soaks down most of the vacation time that you blithely refer to, along with professional development.

Teaching is such a difficult profession that 50% of first year teachers leave to do something else. Can you name another profession with that much attrition?

You sound like a damn freeper. You get in the classroom and try it yourself. I've heard of plenty of people from other professions getting into teaching because they think it's a nice, easy second career. Most are gone before the second semester rolls around. Problem is, ignorant people like you watch movies like Mr. Holland's Opus or Dead Poet's Society and think teaching is a breeze. It's not, and I'd bet you wouldn't last 10 weeks in the classroom.

[mitchum]

124. You're an ass

[geek tragedy]

100. No, they don't.

They have off-season workout regimens, have to spend hours and hours and hours daily going over video and a playbook the size of the NYC phonebook.

There are millions of people with the skill set and talent to be a nurse or police officer. There are fewer than 100 who can be NFL quarterbacks.

[jgraz]

101. Missing the point

If every NFL QB quit tomorrow, how long would it take society to recover? Now think what would happen if every nurse or every cop quit their jobs.

Aside from a few hours of mindless entertainment a week, what contribution do these millionaires make to society?

[SanCristobal]

103. I assume it would go something like this:

NFL: Assuming they weren't all replaced immediately, the economy would take a minor hit as marketing revenue from pro athletics collapsed. Within a year we would be fine, and people would watch college ball. College player would no longer have to go to class.

Nurses: Nurses aids would have to fill out paper work in addition to doing all the real nursing the RN's already leave them to do. Health care costs would spike in the sort term, then decline as overpaid and under worked nurses no longer clog the system.

Cops: Gun sales and NRA memberships would skyrocket, and no more innocent people would be killed by overzealous SWAT teams enforcing warrantless drug raids . Traffic accidents would rise and small town ticket revenue would plummet.

[mondo joe]

116. It's clear you don't believe entertainment is a contribution to society.

But society disagrees.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

153. Even Ancient Societies Saw The Value Of Entertainment.

I didn't know liberals believe man was consigned to lead a life of drudgery...

[mondo joe]

164. It's the Puritan streak in liberalism.

I always thought liberalism was about freedom and equality.

In more recent years I came to see that for some it's just another approach to authoritarianism and puritanism.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

175. Maybe They Think Sports Is A Distraction...

Marx would say it's a distraction that distracts man from his real condition in life... Even if that's true man would find distraction in some other activity that arguably could be more deleterious to his condition...

[mondo joe]

178. I don't think that matters. If you respect freedom for others, that includes the

freedom to make your own choices about how you spend your time/money/energy.

There are just too fucking many people who won't extend to others the same respect they'd like for their own choices.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

179. Yes... There Is A Lot Of Elitism....

As I said most of the work I used to do revolved around sports...

I was speaking to a curator at an arts museum... He was bemoaning all the funding that goes to sports....


If watching sports makes someone happy good for him or her....


Also, I'll bet in a nation of 300,000,000 people there are less than 10,000 or 20,000 making a living from professional sports...


A kid certainly is has a better chance of becoming a physician or lawyer, regardless of his circumstances than becoming a professional athlete...

[Roland99]

78. No, not at all. Until fans stop filling the stands and stop watching games on TV...

salaries will keep going up.

[dsc]

91. At least they come by their pay honestly

They are able to rake in much of what they help other people create. It is people like the former CEO of Home Depot whose salary I have a problem with. His salary came from running his company poorly enough to get fired and still get hundreds of millions just to leave.

[blondeatlast]

92. Attending a game is a rich man's privilege. It's off-limits to most

people; in my area, attending an NBA game for the BAL's (only three of us) would cost upwards of $75 just for the tickets alone. Parking is nearly another $15--in a CITY lot.

And yet, I PAID for that stadium in the form of tax-deferments for the corporations who branded that stadium.

Yes, it's brought an economic windfall to the immediate area, but so has the public library (and we have one of the best in the country)--and the librarians aren't making a million a year, nor are the citizens being charged $5 to borrow a book or DVD.

As long as many of the most diehard NBA fans can't afford to see even one game a season in person--yes, athletes (and I would ass movie stars, but they don't perform in PUBLICLY funded arenas) are vastly overpaid.

[mondo joe]

98. Off limits to MOST people? Are you saying the stands are filled with a minority

group of exclusively wealthy people?

[Nikia]

110. I wouldn't call that exactly rich

Working class people go to professional sports games, concerts, amusement parks, and performing arts events for that amount of money and more. $75 for three tickets is only $25 per ticket, but even if it were $75 a ticket, I would say that most diehard fans would be able to afford to go to one game per season.
The average diehard smoking fan spends a lot more on cigarettes during a sports season. Is smoking a rich man's activity?
$25-$75 isn't inexpensive and all except the poorest Americans could afford it once a year or every couple months if it meant something significant to them. Going every week, probably means that the person has a significant amount of money or is obsessed and giving up a number of other things to be able to go.
I don't know if the stadium should get tax deferments, but a lot of other businesses, who probably shouldn't, are getting them too.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

154. You Can Buy Upper Bowl Seats To Many NBA Games For Ten Dollars

If you don't mind walking you can park your car for $5.00..

[mondo joe]

165. Yesterday afternoon, after seeing this thread, I was at the grocery store.

I overheard two young guys working in the produce area talking about going to a game in what appeared to be the recent past.

I almost laughed because they probably didn't know they were RICH MEN according to some.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

172. The Miami Heat Are Defending NBA Champions...

They are struggling this year...


But you can buy upper bowl tickets for around $10.00 ... That's about the cost of a movie ticket...

I'm not a sports economist but I suspect the rich corporate box owners subsidize those who want cheap seats...


I can see the argument that athletes are overpaid but so are many other entertainers...


Fortunately or unfortunately depending on your viewpoint in a market economy you're not worth one penny more than what you are paid...


And the wear and tear on their bodies is more grueling than all but the hardest manual labor...


In my former job I got to go to events with former athletes... I saw former players like Jack Youngblood and Dick Butkus who walked like seventy year old men, at fifty...

[mondo joe]

173. I know so little about sports I don't even understand your post.

That means I'm a better liberal than you!

;-)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

174. The Largest Point Is That Pro Athletes Have Relatively Short Careers And They Take A Pounding...

I once saw a study and it suggested the life expectancy of an NFL player is 61 years... Intuitively that makes sense because the human body wasn't meant to be 6'2 and weight 300 pounds...

Even the wear and tear on a basketball player who allegedly plays a "non-contact " sport is brutal...


My other point is there are always bleacher seats and upper box seats for ordinary working folks...

[Dastard Stepchild]

99. IMO, yes... but I am not a sports fan...

I think it's a ridiculous amount of pay, but I certainly wouldn't do anything to prevent them from making it. If someone wanted to pay me a few million for my job, I'd take it, too. Trite but true, I think it's unfortunate that some jobs pay so little while others pay so astronomically much. Of course, in the grand scheme of things, I'd rather see an athlete getting paid this much than some chump that rose through the corporate ranks on the merit of their personal network alone. At least I can point to what the athlete is personally doing. :)

[EnviroBat]

102. Does a fat puppy poop?

[timtom]

104. Of course they are

n/t

[Egalitariat]

105. Supply & Demand. The demand is high, the supply is low.

That means big bucks. Always has. Always will.

[Nikia]

111. I used to think so

But pro sports is a big money business and if players weren't highly paid, the owners, most of who aren't nearly as hard working and talented as the players, would just be getting richer.

[progressivebydesign]

112. They'd be worth around 200k a year for work.. but..

you have to figure in what the corporate overlords make off of them. That's where the big bux come from.. Oh, and the obsession of so many people with FAME.

[fishwax]

115. yes and no

I think they're overpaid, but I think that's part of the overvaluing of sports in general. When there are billions to be made in that particular industry, I think the money is better spent on labor than on management.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

119. Yes, because Americans have been brainwashed to believe that sports

are utterly, earthshakingly IMPORTANT, worthy of 1/3 of the local newscast and a whole section in the newspaper. I can't tell you how often I finish reading the paper in my local coffee shop, and some guy walks up and asks if I'm through with the paper, and if I say yes and hand it to him, he says, "No, no, I just want the sports pages."

Marx had it wrong. Sports are the opiate of the people. No religion influences as many people as do pro sports. No institution in our society has done more to promote cutthroat competition and proud ignorance than professional sports. Nothing else in our society inspires the masses to take to the streets. Nothing has dulled as many minds as sports obsession. Even our alleged educational institutions lionize the student athletes.

Our entire media culture and educational establishment conspire to convince the American public that sports are vitally important, that any male who isn't fascinated by them is to be despised, that they are the only means of promoting teamwork and giving young people a sense of achievement, that they are the only way of keeping at-risk youth off the streets, that they are the best way for youth from a poor family to get out of the ghetto or barrio, and that they are an essential component of a city's "quality of life," trumping schools, parks, libraries, public transit, and the arts.

Pro sports. Bah, humbug!

[mondo joe]

122. Or maybe they actually DO care about sports.

Just because someone has different tastes than you doesn't mean they're brainwashed.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

126. But do they care because they really care, or is there tremendous

peer pressure to care?

I'm not talking about people who are mere fans. I'm talking about the sports nuts, the ones who literally cannot talk about anything else, the ones who don't care a whit about their city's schools, parks, libraries, arts, or economic vitality, but who argue that municipal governments must subsidize billionaire team owners in order to "maintain the city's quality of life."

I'm talking about the kids who disdain the teachers of academic subjects and flout them at every turn but treat the coach's word as law.

I'm talking about schools where any boy who doesn't participate in sports risks being beaten up and called "fag" and where bright kids of either gender can make themselves socially acceptable only if they're on a team.

I'm talking about school districts where parents will easily accept the elimination of music, art, foreign languages, and general physical education (for the majority of students) from the curriculum "to save money" but will hold community-wide fundraisers so that a few kids can continue to play football. (This was presented as a "heartwarming" story in the Portland paper a few years ago. I couldn't help thinking about the poor kids who were talented in music, art, or languages or who needed to get physically fit but would no longer be encouraged.)

Have you ever noticed that teens who are good at sports get mentioned in the media on a daily basis, as do teens who commit crimes, but the ones who are excel in the arts or perform outstanding community service or who win science and math prizes get little 1/2 inch articles at the bottom of the page in the neighborhood section of the newspaper and almost never any recognition in the broadcast media/

No, this goes beyond individual preferences into a deliberate dumbing down of the American public.

[mondo joe]

129. Who are their peers? Other people!

There's a reason the Coliseum was built. There's a reason the BREAD & CIRCUSES model works: because people respond.

I don't give a shit about sports. I don't know what team is what, or even how the games are played.

I do know that a lot of people care a lot about them, and are very excited about them.

It does you no good to assume that people with different values or interests are simply brainwashed.

[mitchum]

127. Those who only consume sports are no better than soap opera junkies...

there is a VAST difference between PARTICIPATING (y'know actually engaging in the physical activity) and just being a fan (short for fanatic)
You do know that most athletes actually have contempt for the latter because of this difference? And that will never change.

[mondo joe]

130. Who the fuck cares what others enjoy in entertainment?

What an ugly snobby attitude.

[mitchum]

139. And who the fuck would buy something just because a racehorse would shill it?

Or who the fuck cares what a racehorse thinks about anything?
Or who the fuck blindly worships a racehorse?
Those overpaid twits are nothing more than racehorses. Except that racehorses don't despise the railbirds.

Ugly? Debatable.
Snobby? So?

[mondo joe]

140. People who feel differently than you.

It's ugly bullshit when cons try to demonize people for drinking lattes or eating sushi.

This is the same.

With all the things people do to HURT one another, bitching about harmless personal preferences is nothing but bigotry.

[mitchum]

123. Yes, but as long as gape-mouthed yahoos are willing to watch grown...

men play a fucking game (like children) the situation will never change

[Gemini Cat]

146. Gape-mouthed yahoos?

:eyes:

[1932]

128. If anyone makes a buck off sports business, it should be the players.

But, despite their big salaries, I suspect corporate shareholders and executives are the ones making the big bucks.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

156. The Interesting Thing Is That A Lot Of Team Owners Don't Make Money...

Some do but a lot own a team because they love the game...

[1932]

161. Many spin off the valuable parts of the business from the team and

make a killing there and then report lower earnings so they can argue to the players that the team doesn't make money.

There was an article in the Times a couple years ago about how the money-making parts of the Yankees aren't part of the team, IIRC (parking, concessions?) and said that it wasn't just the Yankees that did this.

[never cry wolf]

168. You are exactly correct

From a post I made above:

Don't be fooled, the owners cry poor but they are making money hand over fist. Before it opened I got a tour of the United Center (Bulls, Blackhawks.) The teams rent the arena from an ownership group that also owns the team. The teams pay for security, ushers, parking, concessions, maintenance, etc. from different corporate entities owned by the same people, all at inflated prices. The team books look like they're just breaking even but the owners are raking it in from the ancillary businesses. The Wirtz family (Blackhawks owners) made their fortune in the liquor distribution business, and they supply the alcohol to the spin-off company who does concessions.

I would say almost all teams operate this way. The Tribune Corp. for 20 years owned the Cubs along with WGN TV & radio. WGN paid the Cubs peanuts for the broadcast rights, under half the market value while Tribune Entertainment made large profits.

[SammyWinstonJack]

131. It isn't so much their salaries as it is their corporate endorsements.

That is where the real $$$ come from, I suspect. :shrug: I don't think most of them are in it for "the love of the game" so much as they are in it for the corporate endorsements, which far exceed their salaries, right?

[Tektonik]

132. If anything they are underpaid in some leagues

considering what the owners make.

I believe for how profitable the NFL is, it amazes me how low their salaries are in comparison to other professional sports leagues. And I believe in the notion that as long as people show up to the games and unload hundreds of dollars a night, then they should be paid their due amount; however, these players should take it upon themselves to give back to their country and communities because no one possibly needs that much money.

[uppityperson]

133. Of course they are (sports people overpaid)

I have heard arguments like they are risking themselves and don't know if they will get hurt and not be able to work again, but don't understand since this is true of many jobs. I have heard they can only work (play) for 10 yrs then must retire which I don't understand because I would be happy to do this and yes, my body has been hurt from my job. I have heard they are "heroes" and good role models but so should teachers and nurses be.

Hey, I'll work only 7 months a yr, be a good role model, contribute to society and retire in 10 yrs if you give me a brazillion dollars also. Yes, sports people are overpaid by far. Way way way.

[BlooInBloo]

134. Why people care: Because that's a lot of uppity undeserving negroes with some money....

... You don't ever hear people bitching about the white billionaire owners' "earnings" - only the black millionaire players.

Gotta love racist anti-labor screeds.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

135. I don't know--people have complained about overpaid sports starrs

only since the time they started getting multi-million dollar contracts, which is not that long ago. And the color of the player seems not to matter.

Furthermore, there was plenty of antagonism toward "white billionaire owners" here in the Twin Cities this past year when various Minnesota local government bodies decided to build a stadium for the Twins partially subsidized by a rise in the sales tax.

[BlooInBloo]

136. lol! The color NEVER matters, say white folks. Doesn't make it true.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

137. Well, I do remember people complaining about how much Joe Namath was

paid. :shrug:

[mondo joe]

138. I don't think it's the color - but I do think sports stars are looked on with

more disdain by liberals than actors or singers are.

I wonder if you'd see a thread about the Dixie Chicks or Barbra Streisand or Chris Rock being overpaid.

[mitchum]

141. I think ALL entertainers are obscenely overpaid...

and I know that runs counter to common opinion. But, then again, common opinion is...well...common.
Damn, I guess that is snobby.

[mondo joe]

142. So don't go to movies or buy CDs or attend sporting events.

You understand you vote with your $, one hopes.

[mitchum]

144. But when my tax $$$$$$$$$ is used to subsidize those temples...

of brawny glory, I have had no say so in the matter

[mondo joe]

155. Of course you do - you have your say through representative democracy.

Just like every other matter involving tax $.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

158. Or Paul McCartney's Net Worth Of 1.5 Billion Dollars

eom

[ikojo]

159. I will complain that concert tickets and tickets to plays

are extremely overpriced. I go to maybe one or two concerts a year now that ticket prices for name acts regularly exceed $50-$60 for the CHEAP seats. I'd love to see Barbra Streisand perform but she charges way too much and doesn't deign to come near St Louis. A few years ago Bruce Springsteen was here and the cheapest ticket to see the working class hero was $75 (that's before all the fees added on by ticketb*stard), too rich for my blood. When I go to a concert I like to buy a shirt but that has become expensive as well and they don't tend to make them to fit me.

People in St Louis have voted with their feet...attendance at Blues Hockey games is down, way down since the ill performing team and other hockey teams went on strike. A few weeks ago a Rams home game was not televised on local TV because it was not a sell out game. They had't been playing well at that time and people didn't want to pay $69 for a ticket to see a game, plus pay $25 to park a car.

The folks I know who have season tickets to the Rams scrimp and save. With each passing year it becomes more and more difficult for them to afford the ticket. One of my friends has considered getting rid of her season tickets but doesn't think she'd get back what she paid for her PSL (personal seat license, which is a fee they had to pay for the honor of buying season tickets)

[mondo joe]

163. You vote with your $.

When you (not the specific YOU, but the general you) buy tickets you are letting people know you think the show/game/product is worth that much.

[mitchum]

143. Yeah, that's why white racists are always the ones involved in violent...

confrontations with athletes (AKA those "uppity undeserving negroes")
Oops...
I honestly don't know which is more ludicrous. Your assertion that anyone who thinks pro athletes are overpaid is racist or your portraying those athletes as exploited labor. Anti-labor, my ass. What utter bullshit.

[Gemini Cat]

145. No.

They work for it. It's a non-issue.

[B Calm]

148. I wish people showed more outrage at over paid CEO's and executives

while the lowly hourly workers have to work 500 plus years to make what they do in 1 year. Instead they look at sports...

[GaYellowDawg]

151. IMO players' salaries aren't the problem with pro sports.

When public money is used, or eminent domain is used to support the sports industry, as in Dubya's land grab for the Rangers stadium or tax money for a new stadium, that's when I have a problem with sports. If the industry was entirely self-subsidized, then I honestly wouldn't care.

If someone offered me $6 million a year to play some kind of sport, I'd do it in a cold heartbeat, and I can't really complain about someone else who's doing the same thing. They do work hard - if you look at ex-jocks who hobble around like people 20 years older than they are, you realize it extracts a heavy toll - but not more so than a farm worker. Hell, if I could have any job, it'd be an NFL backup QB behind a durable starter. Millions of dollars, but I'd rarely get hit.:)

[moondust]

152. Some are.

Some are paid vast fortunes for little more than weighing 300 lbs or standing 6'8" tall.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

157. There's Over Two Million Men In The World Over Seven Feet Tall

But only a few can play basketball at the NBA level...

[Tight_rope]

162. HELL YES!....They are way over paid!

But what the hell we are American's, our priorities are all fucked up. I mean look that the crooks we keep letting run the government.

[B Calm]

170. Do you think the owners are making a lot of money too?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

177. Some Owners... Some Owners Are Really Rich Fans...

eom

[B Calm]

180. Name one poor owner!

[mdmc]

167. Just examples of what a strong union can do for its workers