Thx WVU, I forgot to mention I love yours too. I used to work in WV and worked with a lot of nice people there when I traveled in.
By the way, I agree they are out of control, but it is the fans that make it that way. As long as owners can charge more to pay the players and themselves more, they will continue to do so. It will only stop when the fans stop coming to games and to a lesser extent even stop watching on TV.
Great post, Rigucho! You hit points with which I agree 100%.
OPINION ALERT! OPINION ALERT!
I don't have stats for this -- just personal opinion -- but many times it appears to be some of these athletes get these huge bucks for what they did last year, then get complacent or the injury bug or whatever, and their numbers drop like rocks. I don't watch MLB -- probably have a bias AGAINST MLB! -- but it seems to happen most often to bball players. "Last year, Tommy Tentpeg signed a five-year, $600 million contract, but this year has suffered major injuries such as a hangnail, a stubbed toe, and chapped lips (caused by kissing his reflection in the mirror). We can't wait for him to get back into the line-up, where he has to stand in the outfield for three hours, twice a week."
"You're worth what someone is willing to pay you. That's why pro athletes are paid so much. The owners gain large amounts of revenue with good teams and star players who fans are going to come watch, buy merchandise of and follow. It's no different than any other job."
WISportsFan .... don't forget collusion. Pro athletes are paid what they want to be paid and if the owners don't cooperate, the union sues for collusion. The problem with some of the arguments here is that people are thinking in terms of the real world and what they would experience as employers or employees. Pro sports do not follow those normal rules of business.
pabama .... players supplemented their incomes with other "real" jobs back before the tv contracts were so huge, so the owners were not necessarily keeping some inordinate amount of cash. Besides, the owners are the employers so they should keep a larger portion of the "pie." Also, if the industry is rewarding performance, could you explain the Barry Zito contract?
When I said that not many people can do what Braun can do, I was referring to him being a person who can play major league baseball at a superstar level. I wasn't just saying he was a baseball player. Hell, you and I can do that, but nobody is going to pay to see it.
Athletes, actors, and top level musicians make the money that they do for a reason- people pay money for their work and the pool of people who can do the same thing on a comparable level. Supply-demand, period. There are a lot of actors and movies, and most of them suck. That's why you see the same people over and over in large productions. Once DeNiro established himself as a quality actor who sold tickets when he was in a movie his salary went up accordingly.
How many people wanted to go to see replacement players playing major league baseball when they were talking about that happening back in 1995? I wasn't paying $100 to see some fat, beer swilling, softball playing truck driver taking his hacks against some former high school pitcher who thinks he should be in the bigs if he hadn't gotten screwed by his coach. And I'm not paying to see Hank Steinbrenner pitching to Arte Moreno either, so why should they put all of the riches in their pockets when the world's finest players are the ones who make the product?
Conversely, nobody cares who mines the coal or makes the hamburger; they just want the product. And anyone can pretty much do that job unless you are a total weakling or a retard. That's why those people don't get millions no matter how fast they can make a BK Stacker or fill an ore cart.
Hey Fear The Munky ... interesting discussion wasn't this? I think some of us just have some philosophical differences on this issue. While I don't necessarily care who mines the coal or prepares my food in a restaurant, I don't really care who plays a sports game, if I'm watching the team that I like.
"Conversely, nobody cares who mines the coal or makes the hamburger; they just want the product. And anyone can pretty much do that job unless you are a total weakling or a retard. That's why those people don't get millions no matter how fast they can make a BK Stacker or fill an ore cart."
Also, I never said that coal miners, etc should be paid millions, just that pro athletes are paid more than they should be paid, imho of course.
"Athletes, actors, and top level musicians make the money that they do for a reason- people pay money for their work and the pool of people who can do the same thing on a comparable level. Supply-demand, period. There are a lot of actors and movies, and most of them suck. That's why you see the same people over and over in large productions. Once DeNiro established himself as a quality actor who sold tickets when he was in a movie his salary went up accordingly. "
Also, please ... don't try to bring microeconomics into this. Supply and demand have very little to do with this. Otherwise, explain this. In economics, generally speaking, if demand decreases, the equilibrium price should decrease. In the case of baseball free agents for instance, if demand among the owners decreases, they get threatened with lawsuits for collusion. Also, no one was offering A-Rod 30 mill last season, but that's what he wanted, calling it the "market price." Sports and entertainment salaries are what they are ... I understand that and it really isn't my business, but the whole salary structure really has very little to do with economics. I believe that was the point of the original post too.
