Jump to content

Superstars are far more greedy than the owners


SkippyX

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Vorsutus said:

Ok so the guy who costs enough to make another guy only make 600k is a bigger *** than the guy who takes home 200mil for doing nothing? With a few exceptions like jerry jones.

If you think creating the NFL, running all the teams, working out TV contracts, and stadium deals, managing day to day operations, working with the cap, getting the right players in, getting the right GM and coach, and everything that goes into running an NFL franchise is doing nothing? ...

You are following the teachings of Karl Marx.

Edited by SkippyX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SkippyX said:

If you think creating the NFL, running all the teams, working out TV contracts, and stadium deals, managing day to day operations, working with the cap, getting the right players in, getting the right GM and coach, and everything that goes into running an NFL franchise is doing nothing? ...

You are following the teachings of Karl Marx.

Interesting that you mention Marx in a derogatory fashion when you are advocating a very Marxian philosophy. 

NFL players just like everyone else should be allowed to bargain for their fair value of their services

The fact that you are against that makes you a communist off principle alone since you see to cap or impede their ability to engage in an active market agreement with NFL owners. 

 

You should really stop now. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2020 at 11:20 PM, AntonChigurh said:

Interesting that you mention Marx in a derogatory fashion when you are advocating a very Marxian philosophy. 

NFL players just like everyone else should be allowed to bargain for their fair value of their services

The fact that you are against that makes you a communist off principle alone since you see to cap or impede their ability to engage in an active market agreement with NFL owners. 

 

You should really stop now. 

This is a classic straw man.

The idea that the OWNERS are GREEDY but the SUPERSTARS are just getting what is fair is the obvious hypocrisy.

There is nothing Marxian about a guy like Aaron Rodgers being capped at 10 million plus incentives plus whatever he can get from endorsements plus playoff money.

A guy like that could still make 500 million easy, and that's anti-capitalism to you?

If salary caps offend your distorted view of capitalism then why do you support any American professional sports league or team? xD

 

The NFL is a collectively bargained entity in which the capitalist owners share most revenue with each other and they share that revenue with the players.

They all get rich (except for the 3 year bottom guys, but this CBA fixes that or it least takes massive steps forward)

Every single player is only in the league because of a free market system where the best players get to make rosters and get paid.

Every owner is an owner because of capitalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2020 at 9:49 AM, ET80 said:

The Players Association would have a field day with anything that could be perceived as the league withholding funds from players. 

I don't disagree with the premise, but I don't see it as realistic.

I think its a step too far but I like the idea to say the least. It may be perceived as withholding funds but as long as they receive X in a predetermined amount of time, I think it could work

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

There is nothing Marxian about a guy like Aaron Rodgers being capped at 10 million plus incentives plus whatever he can get from endorsements plus playoff money.

A guy like that could still make 500 million easy

This was just a made-up number, right? Not actually serious? 

Tom Brady’s net worth is $180M. Brees is $130M. The only player or coach to hit that figure is Roger Staubach and he’s nearly 80 years old, no one else comes remotely close. It’s definitely not something a player could easily do, especially if you’re wanting to cap his salary at less than a third of it’s current value.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

This was just a made-up number, right? Not actually serious? 

Tom Brady’s net worth is $180M. Brees is $130M. The only player or coach to hit that figure is Roger Staubach and he’s nearly 80 years old, no one else comes remotely close. It’s definitely not something a player could easily do, especially if you’re wanting to cap his salary at less than a third of it’s current value.

I never mentioned net worth. Net worth is meaningless for this discussion. The NFL does not pay players in net worth.

Latrell Sprewell's net worth is 50k. Does that mean the NBA did not pay him enough?

 

A simple Google search shows that Rodgers earned 90 million in 2019.

It would have been 50 million if you cut his bonus and 2019 salary in 3rds to hit that 10 million instead of 30 million. (then add back in 2-4 million in incentives.

He would have to survive on 53 million in the signing bonus years and 42-44 million in the non-bonus years.

Now he plays for 20 years (15 at max earnings after a rookie contract)

  • 150 million from those 15 years
  • 25 million from the first 5 years
  • 50-110 million in incentives (factoring in that he would be eligible for more incentives in years 1-5) - lets say 85 because he is Rodgers (awesome but occasionally injured)
  • 5-20 million a year in endorsements, lets say 190 million
  • That puts him at 450 million before playoff money and NFLPA royalties
  • That does not count a huge pension and all other gold star treatment he gets.

 

Brady chose winning over being the highest paid player. Using him is a straw man.

  • His family 'net worth 'is about 540 million and their career earnings are in the range of a billion.
  • His career earnings through NFL salary are still 235.1 million.
  • He has to get by somehow on 7 million a year in endorsements.

Drew Brees also takes below market contracts and his salaries alone add up to 233.6 million

  • Now add in endorsements (13 million in 2019 alone), playoff money, NFLPA royalties, etc

 

If somehow the multiple hundreds of millions they earn under such an oppressive system is not enough, they can go to memorabilia shows and charge 50 bucks per autograph.

Edited by SkippyX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, I am not even insisting the NFL placing a hard cap on salaries at 5% of the cap. It was an example of what these greedy big-mouth guys deserve. My overall point is that if the CBA vote fails then the rank and file should stick it to the superstars as much if not more than they do to the owners.

  • The owners will fight back and win (likely) or give in a bit on some issues.
  • The superstars should be powerless because they are a very vocal minority with not enough votes to block anything.
    • One problem is that they are likely over-represented in Union representation
      • The NFL players need to make sure their union is representing them and not just A-A-Ron and his agent.
Edited by SkippyX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sure it’s been said but Superstars are why we tune in to watch the games.  I’m happy for players 10-53 for getting more money, but they rarely make the same impact on a game that the top 5-10 make.

Also, without the Superstars the owners wouldn’t be making the type of money the superstars make them.  There is a reason why the XFL and other leagues don’t make much or fold after a few years.  People want to see the stars, same with B-ball, Soccer, Hockey, Baseball etc.  If the stars in the league went from Tom Brady to Nate Peterman the league wouldn’t be nearly as successful.

I think there should probably be a max % of the cap that a player should be able to take up, but Superstars make the league what it is and they deserve to be paid for the success of the league.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

I never mentioned net worth. Net worth is meaningless for this discussion. The NFL does not pay players in net worth.

The NFL pays it’s players in dollars. The dollar amount becomes a variable in net worth. Pretending the two aren’t connected is silly.

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

Latrell Sprewell's net worth is 50k. Does that mean the NBA did not pay him enough?

It means he wasn’t a good spender. 

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

A simple Google search shows that Rodgers earned 90 million in 2019.

Misrepresentation. 

Rodgers got his $67M signing bonus at the end of 2018. Then a $13M bonus in March (12 month span, not 2019). That, plus his estimated $9M in endorsement money/extra money, makes that $90M number. It’s not even close to an indicative of his yearly income. From football money alone he’ll have raked in $313M by the end of his current deal (assuming he plays through it without re-structuring/extending). He’s not going to get another $100M+ at 40 years old. 

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

Brady chose winning over being the highest paid player. Using him is a straw man.

You overuse the “straw man” term the way people around here misuse “literally”. Seeing as Brady has been playing longer and more successfully than virtually any NFL player, on top of being active and in the same bracket as Rodgers, he was used as an example of how superstars don’t get near that $500M mark that you said Rodgers could easily get to. Using Rodgers’ peers to discuss his potential earnings doesn’t make it a straw man. 

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:
  • His family 'net worth 'is about 540 million and their career earnings are in the range of a billion.

Brady’s family = / = Brady.

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:
  • His career earnings through NFL salary are still 235.1 million.

Which isn’t close to $500M, despite playing longer than Rodgers.

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

Drew Brees also takes below market contracts and his salaries alone add up to 233.6 million

  • Now add in endorsements (13 million in 2019 alone), playoff money, NFLPA royalties, etc

Still not close to $500M.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is anybody greedier than anybody else? They all want the biggest share of the pie for themselves. That includes owners, stars, and roster fodder guys. 

There isn't a good guy and a bad guy here. This is just business with all sides utilizing their leverage as best they can. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2020 at 3:38 PM, SkippyX said:

You don't care who the players are as long as they are playing.

Your entire argument just went out the window following the Hopkins trade. You're in Houston, how many people are applauding Cal McNair?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...