 |
SimpleSimon
?
Registered: Dec 2002
Location:
Posts: 17013 |
Thuper Frank ruleth! We need a video clip of the advert in question, Phil.
__________________
When I was young I used to read about the decline of Western civilization, and I decided it was something I would like to make a contribution to. — George Carlin
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
08-28-2005 03:07 PM |
|
|
|  |
 |
CHiPsJr
Ginger-headed Troll
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7504 |
The two footballs might be the only sports in which I LEAST agree that the athletes are overpaid. In American football, pretty much everyone who plays more than a couple of seasons lives with chronic pain for the rest of their lives, often debilitatingly severe pain. And in the globe's version, with a worldwide talent pool and dozens of leagues bidding for the services of players, it's natural that the prices would be super-high, particularly at the top.
BASKETBALL, on the other hand, involves some jaw-droppingly stupid salaries, particularly for the fourth and fifth guy off the bench.
Not that this is really relevant to your main point, or anything. I'm just saying, is all.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
08-29-2005 08:23 PM |
|
|
|  |
 |
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35917 |
Footie is relatively free-market with regards to wages and transfers (although not completely, although big restrictions are often struck down by the European courts).
I don't think that an argument can be made in terms of the pain that, say, American Football players may suffer in later life. Pretty much anyone would trade that for the money (in which case, the money's too high as the trade-off for it). The argument can only be based on how much money they bring in, based on negotiation between the player or their representatives and the employer. If cities choose to subsidise franchises (as happens in the US) then the players can eye a cut from that, too (which they get, of course, in many cases). Players unions and cross-franchise agreements are anticompetitive, as a rule, but they may act to keep the game more even (the generally socialist nature of US pro sports does allow for a wider distribution of trophies than is the case in more free-market sports).
__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
08-29-2005 08:51 PM |
|
|
|  |
 |
funkyrooster
King Leer
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: Just to the right of the moon
Posts: 3141 |
Unfortunately, both the Ashes series and the Super league Grand Final proved beyond doubt to any neutral observer that football is shit. Dull, overhyped stupefying drivel played by witless moronic fairies wearing diamond earrings who engage in 90 minutes of mindless effort and play acting for a 0-0 draw, followed by a spot of nightclubbing and rape
__________________
Ein Reich
Ein Volk
Ein Rooster
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
08-30-2005 09:16 AM |
|
|
|  |
 |
Lightbulb
Blarg. I'm dead.
Registered: Jan 2001
Location:
Posts: 1163 |
quote: followed by a spot of nightclubbing and rape
So some redeeming qualities at least?
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
08-30-2005 09:33 AM |
|
|
|  |
 |
CHiPsJr
Ginger-headed Troll
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7504 |
quote: Originally posted by Smug Git
I don't think that an argument can be made in terms of the pain that, say, American Football players may suffer in later life. Pretty much anyone would trade that for the money (in which case, the money's too high as the trade-off for it).
I don't agree. There isn't any amount of money I'd take to be Daryl Stingley or even Chuck Badnarik right now. We really are talking about continual debilitating pain; I don't know what value monetary security has to people who have no real capacity for enjoyment thereof. Bear in mind, also, that more or less EVERYBODY who plays pro football for more than a couple of years winds up in this state--maybe those who pull down $50M over the course of their career can be said to be adequately compensated, but there are others who wind up with $1-2M career or less. To say nothing of thousands of college athletes who wind up with less severe levels of lifetime discomfort in exchange for NO pay.
The top contracts are effectively buying the participation of all of the above into the system; they're all chasing the same monetary dream, and given the return on the investment I wouldn't call it overpayment by any stretch.
quote: Originally posted by Smug Git
Players unions and cross-franchise agreements are anticompetitive, as a rule, but they may act to keep the game more even (the generally socialist nature of US pro sports does allow for a wider distribution of trophies than is the case in more free-market sports).
As strange as it seems to me to say it, I'm not sure I'd say sports revenue sharing and salary caps are socialist. Those Yankee TV broadcasts which rake in so much cash depend on there being TWO teams present; logically, even from a market perspective, at least half that cash isn't theirs to start with.
I grant you that American sports are MORE socialist than their European counterparts (which is ironic as hell), but without promotion/relegation, some level of revenue equity is pretty much the only way a league can hope to function.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
08-31-2005 03:55 AM |
|
|
|  |
 |
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35917 |
I think that most people would take, say, 20 million dollars to end up like that. Fuck, we could end up like that anyway. How many players do end like that, anyhow (because clearly, there is a risk/cost calculus at play)?
Regimented salary (from point of view of employer and employee), shared revenue, worst team gets first draft, no relegation or promotion, it's a socialist dreamworld. It works, of course, because it's a contained system.
The idea that 'half the cash isn't theirs to begin with' is silly. The Yankees are the biggest part of the draw and the major contributor to the audience. It's like saying that Tyson at his peak could have fought your granny and only gotten a half share of the purse and that would have made sense, from the marketing perspective.
__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
08-31-2005 06:47 PM |
|
|
|  |
 |
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35917 |
In which context, your granny (Kansas City) looked to be beating the Yanks the other day. Didn't see the end of the game, but I imagine they won?
__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
08-31-2005 08:38 PM |
|
|
|  |
|