The argument about footballers getting paid too much

[Pete the Greek]

I've heard both sides of the argument and to be honest, I can totally see both sides of the coin.

On the one hand, it is quite a strong viewpoint that footballer's pay has only increased in the way it has over recent years because of the collosal amounts of cash the sport generates and that salaries are actually small in comparison to the amounts made by bigwigs, clubs and directors etc.
In some ways, there could be a point for supporters of this view that footballer's salaries need to increase not decrease, in line with a fair reflection of their overall worth in the big picture of the game.

Of course, I equally see the point that the salaries earned by premiership players is obscene and far too much for any individual to command in any society.

But what I'm thinking is that there is a direct correlation to a sportsperson getting alot of money for their profession, and them becoming laxidaisical, lazy and ultimately shit.
I can't help but think of the footballers who make it to the big time on a crest of glory, displaying incredible skills and wowing the media, only to stuff their bank accounts with money gleaned for massive contracts....and then become absolutely rubbish overnight. I'm no massive expert of football so I wont even try and tussle it out with footy fans on urban, but I am aware that after Beckham, Scholes, Owen, Rooney and others made it big and got settled with WAGS and flash Aston Martins, they more than lost their real spark.

I am a boxing fan traditionally. In the sport's heyday, you could expect to see legendary fighters step in the ring once a week/fortnight with the best. Now, any top flight fighter, even domestic scrappers, only fight rarely. The top 20 fighters will consider it a busy year if they fight twice or three times. This is a recent phenomena. Why? Because why fight so often when the purses are huge (the modern era of pay TV etc etc)

What comes with this trend in boxing, and in football I believe, is a state of affairs where people don't value the pride and honour of the sport but lose themselves in the dollar signs and basically get lazy and complacent. The quality of boxing now compared with 15,20 plus years ago is incomparable. The sport is in decline, except in those parts of the world where people view the importance of feeding their families and attaining pride and glory are highest (Latin America, East Europe).

Is footy the same? Has quality decreased and if so, is it as a result of the collosal salaries?

Perhaps a solution could be that they continue to earn ever increasing contracts, but that they be expected to give a percentage of it to a charity of their choice.

I do believe that £50,000 a week for doing essentially a hobby you love is a bit of a piss take. Surely some good can be done with all that money. It's too much for one person/family, surely??

Here, I'll whack on a poll just to gauge the general urban feeling.

Thanks folks.

Yours
Pete the not so knowledgable about football.

 

[tangerinedream]

Surely something could be done with the money paid to anyone who earns above the average wage - I really can't see your point about footballers in particular

 

[Pete the Greek]

Surely something could be done with the money paid to anyone who earns above the average wage - I really can't see your point about footballers in particular

You can't see my point??
How many other jobs are out there that pays as much as a top flight footballer? And of those jobs that do pay as much as a top flight footballer, how many of those people consider what they do as a massive labour of love, as opposed to a 12 hour a day stink fest in an office, or some such other profession that bleeds their souls dry?

I choose football because, as John Terry has openly confessed, it pays silly money and its for what is essentially a hobby.

I could possibly posit the view that if you earned a shit load of money bleeding your soul dry, you possibly deserve every penny.

 

[tangerinedream]

You can't see my point??
How many other jobs are out there that pays as much as a top flight footballer? And of those jobs that do pay as much as a top flight footballer, how many of those people consider what they do as a massive labour of love, as opposed to a 12 hour a day stink fest in an office, or some such other profession that bleeds their souls dry?

I choose football because, as John Terry has openly confessed, it pays silly money and its for what is essentially a hobby.

I could possibly posit the view that if you earned a shit load of money bleeding your soul dry, you possibly deserve every penny.

Should nurses be paid more than Alan Sugar - yes, in my opinion.

Should they be paid more than footballers, yes, in my opinion.

Do I resent Rio Ferdinand earning more than Alan Sugar - no, not at all.

Don't forget too, that most profesional footballers don't earn millions and many end up on the scrap heap, jobless and broken. Course, you only ever read about the successes.

 

[Pete the Greek]

Should nurses be paid more than Alan Sugar - yes, in my opinion.

Should they be paid more than footballers, yes, in my opinion.

Do I resent Rio Ferdinand earning more than Alan Sugar - no, not at all.

Don't forget too, that most profesional footballers don't earn millions and many end up on the scrap heap, jobless and broken. Course, you only ever read about the successes.

Of course, which is why I concentrate my post upon the "top flight" footballers and boxers. As someone who knows a bit about the noble art, I'm fully aware of what happens to those that fail to nail the big time. I'm sure football is no different.

It can't go unoticed however, that even top flights sportsmen and women didn't earn that much pre early nineties, and that the umbrella covering those that earn obscene levels of cash is wide and widening, due to how massively commercial sport has become.

Thanks to Sky and pay per view packages, lots more footballers and boxers who are lucky enough to get a sniff of the top get large large contracts. Even championship league players get sorted out very well, although obviously not in the same realm as your Prem lot.

 

[tangerinedream]

Of course, which is why I concentrate my post upon the "top flight" footballers and boxers. As someone who knows a bit about the noble art, I'm fully aware of what happens to those that fail to nail the big time. I'm sure football is no different.

It can't go unoticed however, that even top flights sportsmen and women didn't earn that much pre early nineties, and that the umbrella covering those that earn obscene levels of cash is wide and widening, due to how massively commercial sport has become.

Thanks to Sky and pay per view packages, lots more footballers and boxers who are lucky enough to get a sniff of the top get large large contracts. Even championship league players get sorted out very well, although obviously not in the same realm as your Prem lot.

Sorry Pete, didn't read the op quite properly. Yes, it's wrong, but only in the way that oil barons (especially hereditary ones) are wrong too. In fact, not as bad as them.

As for your other point about a decline in quality, hmm - I think you could say there is a decline in romance, certainly - I can't feel the same feeling seeing John Terry as tales of Tommy Lawton and so on evoke, no. Certainly the influx of cash has bred a new era of less imediate sports stars, once who are hidden behind layers of agents, lawyers, advisors and so on. Certainly, I am aware that when I see match of the day (very rarely watch it) that you are seeing the soundbites of very rich young men, going through the motions for the press most of the time. I do think the essential notion of 'footballer' has lost some of it's appeal for me, some of it's conotations of 'bloke' (but then again is it just cos i'm older, I look at them more cynicaly?)

I dunno really, I'm not old enough to remember say, the 50s when the game wasn't commercialised and wages were limited.

 

[stavros]

I think the argument that the money is in the game runs a little hollow when you think about where the extra cash has come from; I don't have precise figures but the escalation in ticket prices over the last 20 years must have a direct correlation with the salaries. Yes you can say no one's forcing them to buy tickets but football occupies a unique position in this country's culture and it would a tragic day if we ever divorced ourselves of nearly 150 years of history. The money men have twigged to this and are willing to flog us for all we've got, knowing tradition will guarantee income. The players' salaries are relative small change for the takings they can skim off after so if they can keep the price:wages: profits ratios the same, an increase of one means ultimately more cash for them.

One would like to think thay higher authorities could protect the electorate from such dispicable profiteering but alas I think EU trading law forbids them from interveining. Something I do remember however is being in North America three years ago and going to some MLB games. Same sort of wages and exposure, but tickets were around the £10 mark. Makes you wonder a little.

 

[Pete the Greek]

Agreed Stavvie, ticket sales certainly is a massive factor in footy, although for boxing less so....the price of ringside tickets are high of course, but for the stalls and outer seats (which is where you'll find me) the prices are very reasonable even for mega fight nights.

It's a TV thing mostly from what I can see. Sport monopolised for the benefit of business - tradition has been abused beyond all realms. Shame.

 

[muser]

lets push things forward

Remember the fight between leavander johnson and jesus chavez which cost him his life. Boxers don't get enough, in fact if you watch boxing pete you know the whole thing is a farce. How can you have the pound for pound king
(floyd mayweather) cherry picking opponents. Shouldn't he be fighting his mandatories. Imagine Man Utd informing the FA that they don't want to play chelsea but they'd be happy to play sheffield utd - at home no less

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Surely something could be done with the money paid to anyone who earns above the average wage - I really can't see your point about footballers in particular

I can't think of any jobs that pay as much as footballers, and sportsmen (and very occasionally women). Of course other people earn more, but in terms of wages - getting paid a set amount week in week out for doing a job as an employee of a single company - I'd have thought they must be right at the top.

 

[tangerinedream]

I can't think of any jobs that pay as much as footballers, and sportsmen (and very occasionally women). Of course other people earn more, but in terms of wages - getting paid a set amount week in week out for doing a job as an employee of a single company - I'd have thought they must be right at the top.

I don't see the the distinction between employee and entrepenuer/owner though. Business owners and tycoons get rich from taking more than their fair share of profit from employees so I don't see why I should worry that it is 'unfair' that a group of employees earn lots.

I mean, Gaydamark, Abramovich, Lerner, Glazer and so on are worth far more than your average footballer and it really doesn't bother me any more that a footballer earns a lot than the fact they earn a lot. Their position within a hierarchy isn't relevant to me.

Stopping footballers earning money isn't going to suddenly redistribute the wealth of the 4 people above is it? It's a dead argument as far as I am concerned, we won't have a maximum wage in football any more than you'd have a maximum wage in a biscuit factory.

I do think it's obscene, but no more obscene than any other kind of personal wealth, in fact, rather less obscene than say, the fortune of the Bush family or other such persons. Ashley Cole may be an absolute cock, but he's probably never started a war to give his mates and family access to new business markets.

As such, his wealth doesn't really keep me awake at night. The fact premier league ticket prices are grossly inflated is wrong, but not anything like a shitty as the export credit guarentee system, which is very, very shitty and also cost me money. At least I can choose whether or not to watch a football match, but to not pay my taxes is a bit more difficult.

I also think it's not actually the footballers fault. It's a bit like blaming a punk band for making Richard Branson rich, or getting cross at a PC for making Bill Gates rich. They are valuable commodities - their value is not inherantly worrying, it's the fact they are commodified that is more so. That takes us back into the construction of 'brand footballTM' and the same old points I always make.

 

[Pete the Greek]

Remember the fight between leavander johnson and jesus chavez which cost him his life. Boxers don't get enough, in fact if you watch boxing pete you know the whole thing is a farce. How can you have the pound for pound king
(floyd mayweather) cherry picking opponents. Shouldn't he be fighting his mandatories. Imagine Man Utd informing the FA that they don't want to play chelsea but they'd be happy to play sheffield utd - at home no less

Its true that the lighter weights get paid less than heavier ones, and that they often tend to feature latino fighters who are by nature more gutsy and inclined towards giving it their all to the final bell. Its terrible when fighters succumb to ring injuries, but it is something that smaller guys suffer from as a rule...so maybe due to the risks involved, they should be subsidised with bigger purses.

I completely agree with you regarding cherry pickers. A problem that has always existed in boxing, but never as severely as it does now. Again, this is because they are lazy and can afford to do this. Why fight the tough nuts for a million when you can take out cream puffs for three hundred and fifty grand a pop? Or in the case of Mayweather and fighters of his standard, the same million dollar check.

Money ceases to provide that carrot and stick effect when you get over a certain line, and that line is probably somewhere around the million squid mark, give or take.

I have to repeat, who the fuck needs that sort of money...as a one off amount, never mind continual payments??

It does piss me off. As I suggested, I feel that everyone who makes silly money out of sport should be pressured to give most up to charity.
And don't get me started about that cunt Bono.

 

[Relahni]

Nice thread ptg.

Yes they do get paid too much and I think it's a disgrace. I watched Soccer AM a few weeks ago and they were slagging people like me off. Their argument was footballers don't get paid enough and reeled off top stars like Tiger Woods and how much they earn.

Here is the problem with football.

20/30 years ago. If you had a family with a few kids etc you could easily afford to take a few adults with a few kids. Apart from cup finals, it was easy to get tickets also. Most of us football fans were introduced to football this way.

Now - many kids will miss out on this opportunity because they are being priced out by clubs. Why are they being priced out? What had changed? All seater stadiums will have effected things for sure, but why do we have to pay £50 now for a seat at a top flight match, when 10 years ago we paid £15-20?

What is the difference? Players wages. Surely if football clubs slashed all their players wages, giving them one tenth of what they currently get, tickets would be much much cheaper as clubs would be able to afford to reduce ticket prices? Or is it just a supply and demand thing? Demand is high, so ticket prices increase? I'd argue it was more to do with players wages.

 

[muser]

Nice thread ptg.

Yes they do get paid too much and I think it's a disgrace. I watched Soccer AM a few weeks ago and they were slagging people like me off. Their argument was footballers don't get paid enough and reeled off top stars like Tiger Woods and how much they earn.

Here is the problem with football.

20/30 years ago. If you had a family with a few kids etc you could easily afford to take a few adults with a few kids. Apart from cup finals, it was easy to get tickets also. Most of us football fans were introduced to football this way.

Now - many kids will miss out on this opportunity because they are being priced out by clubs. Why are they being priced out? What had changed? All seater stadiums will have effected things for sure, but why do we have to pay £50 now for a seat at a top flight match, when 10 years ago we paid £15-20?

What is the difference? Players wages. Surely if football clubs slashed all their players wages, giving them one tenth of what they currently get, tickets would be much much cheaper as clubs would be able to afford to reduce ticket prices? Or is it just a supply and demand thing? Demand is high, so ticket prices increase? I'd argue it was more to do with players wages.

30\40 years ago you wouldn't have families at a football stadium due to all the violence on the terraces. you omitt to mention the circumstances that brought about all seater stadiums, as well the fact that pricing some elements out of the game is not necessarily a bad thing. There was a 5 year waiting list for Arsenal and liverpool season tickets a few years ago, without rising prices to discourage the current season ticket holders, the average fan wouldn't have the chance to see matches.

 

[Dr. Furface]

What is the difference? Players wages. Surely if football clubs slashed all their players wages, giving them one tenth of what they currently get, tickets would be much much cheaper as clubs would be able to afford to reduce ticket prices? Or is it just a supply and demand thing? Demand is high, so ticket prices increase? I'd argue it was more to do with players wages.

Players wages are certainly the main reason why ticket prices are so high. Clubs spend in the region of 80% - and more - of their income on paying their players, so it has to be. Demand for tickets is a factor at certain clubs perhaps, but by no means the majority - attendances at most Premiership clubs so far this season are down, though admittedly only by 1 or 2% in most cases.

However, slashing player wages as you suggest is completely impractical and would just lead to a revolt and an exodus of the best talent to foreign leagues. In order to prevent that happening, UEFA would have to impose salary caps across the board, but they can't do that because of EU anti-trade regulations.

The fact is that players will continue to screw as much out of their employers as they can, and the clubs will continue to pay them as much as they can afford to - so long as the tv money keeps rolling in and attendances stay at an acceptable level.

 

[stavros]

I can't really add any more to the main debate than what I already have above, except to say how much I hate it when a footballer or their "representative" uses the excuse that "it's a short career", as if it prevents you upon retiring from the game from ever doing any other kind of employment ever again and so they have to earn 50 years wages in 10 or less. Lots of us normal folk have changed careers, I'm sure it's not beyond you either.

 

[Relahni]

30\40 years ago you wouldn't have families at a football stadium due to all the violence on the terraces. .

well that wasn't the case with my family? And we are posh.

Witnessing a punch up after the match, just added to the excitement to a certain 7 year old boy.

But have seen some horrible scenes too in the 70s and 80s.

 

[ch750536]

Voted 'No, Points to follow'.

Who should get the money from sky and from the turnstiles etc? The agents, the club owner or the players?

Being a socialist I would say better that ALL the employees in the company share the rewards equally, second best is that the players get 80% of the revenue than it goes to shareholders.

 

[stavros]

Who should get the money from sky and from the turnstiles etc?

If I had my way that money wouldn't exist because the top division of our national sport would be a terrestrial-protected event as it's of national importance. It's only because the Government are scared of Murdoch and The Sun that they don't do it.

 

[stavros]

I had a conversation with my faltmate tonight on this issue and when I suggested that upon retiring from playing a footballer could get another job he asked what sort of job Wayne Rooney could get with no qualifications. i replied that he could go adult classes to gain them and was promptly told, tongue firmly out of cheek, that I wasn't living in the real world, and that ticket prices and hence wages were down to supply and demand.

 

[lunatrick]

the whole thing has turned into an oscene pantomine.......and the inequalites are ridiculous....the fact if the matter is that all the top clubs are losing a fortune...chelsea lost millions last year.....however still have a fortune to buy players...in my opinion competion and monopoly laws should apply to football the same as they apply to business...surely artificially propping up these teams for success should be illegal as it is elsewhere?

on a different note - i just think the players have moved into a superstar world where endorsements and fashion spreads are just as important as results....how hungry are the england players? lets face it they get paid silly money wether they perform or not don't they? pretty much every single player in the team plays in the premiership so on paper they should be one of top teams in world......but time and time again they have proved this is not the case....whats the incentive for them to excel for the country? more money? don't be silly....more big houses/ cars...er nope......more kudos? hmm.......whats that word mean....

I don't think the situation has been helped by the so called 'prawn sandwich bridgade' eulogising about the beautiful game etc etc.......vomit....

who cares what roony and the like does after? should somebody get paid in a week what the average man does in three years? they'll certainly have done better than their immediate peers no doubt, and lets be honest most people woudn't give a second thought about your average non footballing rooney apart from the further away from me the better....

 

[stavros]

should somebody get paid in a week what the average man does in three years?

Except footballers don't work anywhere near a full working week, with a training session maybe 4 mornings a week and a maximum of 2 games, a total they still moan about "because they'll get tired".