Why does an athlete need $30m instead of $20m?

Rayman70 · Jun 19, 2019

ESisback said:
I get it, and I agree for the most part. I’m just tired of entitled athletes crying about their struggle, followed by highly paid actors posing as journalists advocating on their behalf.

well said

ESisback · Jun 19, 2019

Mr_C said:
I agree, but the real shame is the owner making billions and having the tax payer subsidizing their stadium.
https://www.google.com/search?q=spo...dium&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
Luckily for them they have legions of fanboys and girls that cheer on these excesses and, in fact, get triggered by even the use of words like excess.

Yeah, I’ve griped about that for YEARS. Why do taxpayers need to pony up?

408Cowboy · Jun 19, 2019

Red Dragon said:
People keep using this analogy. As Esisback pointed out, it is not a suitable one because there is a massive difference, in terms of livelihood and making the household budget ends meet, in someone who earns $21/hour versus $14/hour. Whereas there is no meaningful difference in livelihood for someone making $20 million/year versus $30 million/year. Such a pro athlete need never worry about rent, groceries, tuition, insurance, loans in either case.

There's a real difference in options going forward for each one as well. You don't know what goals they have beyond football or what they might cost to attain.

ABQCOWBOY · Jun 19, 2019

IrishAnto said:
Not really!
Are Stephen or Jerry going to suffer brain damage due to multiple concussions?
Did any owner suffer paralysis due to a dirty hit?
The list could go on...

No, they may die of something else that the odd Football Player might not die of. It might be from a heart attack, sitting at their desk or what have you. The point is that nobody is pointing a gun to anybodies head and making anybody do this. You can't use the argument that a ball player might suffer from concussion syndrome and that somehow that makes them more deserving because they are making a conscious decision to do that all on their own. They are receiving benefits for it, long after their careers are over. That doesn't make them more deserving of receiving a more lucrative contract then a guy who is simply better or more experience or what have you. That's just not reasonable.

Rayman70 · Jun 19, 2019

Beating a dead horse...but if the players had mandatory healthcare coverage...my guess is the whining wouldn't be as bad. Its a big deal you all. Players are correct on that issue. But the max deals will kill the league if the owners don't change something. In my opinion, the answer is offer the players healthcare...at least put the discussion on the table. Let the 2 sides agree on a package that they can live with. Right now, the player has nothing. It saves the league money by having healthcare and in turn, the player feels like they have something tangible.

kskboys · Jun 19, 2019

Rayman70 said:
Beating a dead horse...but if the players had mandatory healthcare coverage...my guess is the whining wouldn't be as bad. Its a big deal you all. Players are correct on that issue. But the max deals will kill the league if the owners don't change something. In my opinion, the answer is offer the players healthcare...at least put the discussion on the table. Let the 2 sides agree on a package that they can live with. Right now, the player has nothing. It saves the league money by having healthcare and in turn, the player feels like they have something tangible.

I think they already have it. I know they put a retirement plan in place a few years ago.

Rayman70 · Jun 19, 2019

kskboys said:
I think they already have it. I know they put a retirement plan in place a few years ago.

first I heard about that...I know about the retirement plan...you sure it includes full medical etc?

kskboys · Jun 19, 2019

ESisback said:
Yeah, I’ve griped about that for YEARS. Why do taxpayers need to pony up?

Because of the enormous benefits of the stadium.

kskboys · Jun 19, 2019

Rayman70 said:
first I heard about that...I know about the retirement plan...you sure it includes full medical etc?

No, not sure at all, but I had thought they already have it.

Rayman70 · Jun 19, 2019

If the player has healthcare currently..then I recant and think the player should NOT whine ABOUT MONEY. Sounds to me like Greed all way round..

Rayman70 · Jun 19, 2019

kskboys said:
No, not sure at all, but I had thought they already have it.

could be wrong ksk..but I don't think they do..

ABQCOWBOY · Jun 19, 2019

Rayman70 said:
Beating a dead horse...but if the players had mandatory healthcare coverage...my guess is the whining wouldn't be as bad. Its a big deal you all. Players are correct on that issue. But the max deals will kill the league if the owners don't change something. In my opinion, the answer is offer the players healthcare...at least put the discussion on the table. Let the 2 sides agree on a package that they can live with. Right now, the player has nothing. It saves the league money by having healthcare and in turn, the player feels like they have something tangible.

Well, so long as you know that ultimately, it is you and I who are going to bear the brunt of the cost it takes for providing healthcare to all players. It's not going to be the owners because their business is essentially derived from the League. The league will pass those costs on to the networks and the fans. The networks will pass it on to the consumers and at the end of the day, it's you and me who pay for that. Mean while, I will make far less then the below average Pro Athlete and will be responsible for paying my own health insurance for life.

For everything, there is a cost.

408Cowboy · Jun 19, 2019

kskboys said:
Does that difference keep us from winning a super bowl?

That's a fans view and a fans concern. Anybody that says they would feel the same way if they were in the league I would call a liar. Only thing to make me change my mind about that would be to start seeing some of these star players start resetting the market at significantly lower rates.

Rayman70 · Jun 19, 2019

ABQCOWBOY said:
Well, so long as you know that ultimately, it is you and I who are going to bear the brunt of the cost it takes for providing healthcare to all players. It's not going to be the owners because their business is essentially derived from the League. The league will pass those costs on to the networks and the fans. The networks will pass it on to the consumers and at the end of the day, it's you and me who pay for that. Mean while, I will make far less then the below average Pro Athlete and will be responsible for paying my own health insurance for life.

For everything, there is a cost.

WE WILL SEE

Rayman70 · Jun 19, 2019

TAXPAYERS don't need to fund healthcare for the NFL players. That's not going to happen. They can bake that into the next CBA.

ABQCOWBOY · Jun 19, 2019

Rayman70 said:
WE WILL SEE

We will see? We have already seen. That is exactly how it works and that's been shown to us for many, many years. Just saying.....

kskboys · Jun 19, 2019

Rayman70 said:
could be wrong ksk..but I don't think they do..

I do know that any player w/ at least 3 years in the NFL automatically receives a minimum pension of over 20 grand/year. That's pretty durn generous, and a nice addendum to any career after football.

ABQCOWBOY · Jun 19, 2019

Rayman70 said:
TAXPAYERS don't need to fund healthcare for the NFL players. That's not going to happen. They can bake that into the next CBA.

The CBA is an agreement that the players have with the League but the money that drives the league comes from the fan base. I mean, the CBA has nothing to do with who actually pays for things. That's all us.

kskboys · Jun 19, 2019

408Cowboy said:
That's a fans view and a fans concern. Anybody that says they would feel the same way if they were in the league I would call a liar. Only thing to make me change my mind about that would be to start seeing some of these star players start resetting the market at significantly lower rates.

Absolutely.

Why did you take my quote out of context? Wasn't that part of a post where I first posted a disclaimer that I'm only concerned w/ how it affects my team, and that on a personal nature I'm not concerned?

C'mon, dude, that's cheap.

408Cowboy · Jun 19, 2019

kskboys said:
Absolutely.

Why did you take my quote out of context? Wasn't that part of a post where I first posted a disclaimer that I'm only concerned w/ how it affects my team, and that on a personal nature I'm not concerned?

C'mon, dude, that's cheap.

In all honesty I missed that post. My bad.

Why does an athlete need $30m instead of $20m?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Joe....

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Joe....

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Joe....

Well-Known Member

Regular Joe....

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member