Should NFL Players get Paid More?
 

I was thinking about how little these guys make in comparison NBA and MLB and came across the below article. What do you guys think?


Giants receiver Odell Beckham thinks the $10.4 million he’s guaranteed over the first four years of his rookie contract is not enough.

“I think that we should make more money, personally,” Beckham told The Huffington Post when asked what he’d change about the NFL.

Beckham says NFL players should get paid more than baseball or basketball players because football is a more dangerous game.

“I understand that basketball plays 80-something games, baseball plays this many games, soccer plays that many games, but this is a sport where there’s more injuries. There’s more collisions. It’s not even a full-contact sport, I would call it a full-collision sport. You have people running who can run 20 miles per hour and they’re running downhill to hit you, and you’re running 18 miles per hour. That’s a car wreck. It’s just the career is shorter. There’s injuries that you have after you leave the game, brain injuries, whatever it is, nerve injuries.”

The truth, however, is that the danger inherent to a profession has little to do with the pay within that profession. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, logging is America’s most dangerous profession. If people were paid according to the risks associated with their jobs, lumberjacks would make more than NFL players. But that’s not how it works.

In reality, NFL players make less money than baseball and basketball players primarily because baseball and basketball have smaller rosters. The players’ percentage of the league’s revenue is similar in all three sports, but in the NFL that money is divided among a much larger pool of players — more than twice as many players as in Major League Baseball and more than four times as many players as in the National Basketball Association.

As a result, it’s unlikely that NFL players will ever make as much, on average, as MLB or NBA players. No matter how much Beckham thinks they should.

Relative to basketball and baseball and even hockey players, football players are underpaid. Would you rather stand in center field for 20 years and make $200 million, or get buried running up the middle by 1,500 pounds of steroid defenders, make $20 million, and retire when your knee starts bending the wrong way?

Having said that, football players are overpaid compared to other professions, but that's the perquisite of working in a field where you're essentially a national celebrity to some degree. When you think about most players, though, they're not even really national celebrities. I bet Marcus Peters or Jeremy Maclin or Alex Smith could visit 95 percent of the country in anonymity and they're among the bigger stars of the team.

They are making a living from doing something they supposedly love. Even if they have an average career-they could make more than most do in a life time.

If Odell wants more money-work harder until that next contract and cash in from a team that will over pay for your stats. It will come with a huge guaranteed amount and bonuses. This will at least put all the financial risk back on the owner. You are set for life if you are injured.

or

Retire now-don't risk your health. Take the money you have and invest it.

Excellent point. They also use that status to make millions from endorsements.

Now I'm wondering why non-stars are paid so much. I understand Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers making millions because they're the faces of the league. But why does a special teams linebacker make $300,000 a year, and a nickel back and a third-string guard? Why does a punter make $900,000 a year? Presumably they're making that money because they're on a national stage, but no one knows who they are off the field and they're wearing a helmet on the field.

Is it because a Super Bowl win is worth a lot of money to an owner, and therefore they're truly being paid based on talent? What's a Super Bowl win worth in the modern NFL, other than some t-shirt sales and slightly higher attendance? In 1950, winning probably carried a strong bottom-line benefit, but that's not the case any more.

Or is it because these supporting characters are necessary to protect the stars and make them look good? Maybe Tony Romo wouldn't be a celebrity if he didn't have a decent team around him, so they have to pay the supporting cast. Still, that seems like a lot of money.

Or maybe it's a long-term thing where the league knows that people will stop watching if the punts go 20 yards and the special teams linebackers can't tackle, so it's a long-term investment.

Or maybe it's a simple union thing. The NFL is so awash in money that it doesn't really matter what the non-stars get paid. If they're going to gripe, throw a few hundred thousand at them and make them happy.

Why do non-stars get paid so much?

It's relative. Like a CSR at Staples making $9/hr while the CEO makes millions. Even Tom Brady couldn't win a game if he was playing with JUCO players.

Why does Sam Bradford make so much?

Our last QB from N.E. signed a huge contract, never lived up to it-then has signed a couple of more based on What?

That is the loophole for the players- you can play the system and make a good living-without ever really doing anything. It is the Chase Daniel clause. Look like a football player, practice hard, make a couple of plays if you get a chance, hold that clip board and cash those checks.

He could if every team was playing with JUCO players, though. So it must be a talent war that's about winning. But does winning justify the high labor costs these days?

If the NFL starts thinking about it, we may start seeing them import cheap linemen from China and Latin America. Keep Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers for the fans, but go low-cost everywhere else.

Hell no. They make enough to be set if they are smart. They can easily my buy into successful franchises that don't fail. Even at the vet min they can do this and be set for life. If anything baseball and basketball get paid to much.

A few thoughts:

I don't think it's all to do with being a star. It's more about what you, your efforts, and contributions are worth to the team/league under the salary cap.

People make a big deal out of Goodell making $30-$40m every year, but consider that a commission on the Billions in Revenue the NFL produces every year... well, it's not as much as you'd expect at a typical sales job that's for sure.

I think the union needs to do a better job of getting these guys paid. NBA union is making the case for no salary cap, so guys like Lebron can collect their value. Where you at NFLPA!?

the good players get paid. 10 mill for a season? stfu odell. shoulda played qb or baseball if you want 25 a year

I think this is key when comparing the different leagues. The amount of money spent on players total per team is probably somewhat close but when you have so many more players to pay, they each will get less. Simple math at that point.

I don't think football with star qb, and a handful of random star position players infilled by JUCO talent would be fun to watch or effective.

I know this might now be a popular thing to say but when I see the contracts baseball players get I can understand where he is coming from.

Why should baseball players get more when football is by far the more popular and dangerous sport?

Most of these guys would be lucky to make it at a minimum wage job with out the sport *cough Talib cough*

Their pay is fine and in line with other "sports entertainment" like WWE

I agree baseball salaries are crazy. But that doesn't affect football. I'd argue league minimum for FB is too low. Especially considering an agent's cut.

Only the older players get paid more in Baseball. The younger guys I would hazard to say get paid less. Last year the slot 1/1 was something like 8 million bonus and are forced to play with that team for 6 years or more(depending on minor league time vs getting moved up quickly) before they hit free agency. The slot money goes down pretty quick if you are not the 1/1 pick. Just a few years ago the best player in baseball and MVP of the league was making less than a million a year.

I think I should get paid more.

See how that works Odell? Wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which one fills up first.

Primarily due to two factors -- the CBA and the fact that wins increase a franchise's value.

no. teachers should get paid more.

I will be lucky if I can hear in 10 years, if the stress does not kill me.

Bring that up with your union Odell.

But on the other hand NFL is a 16 game season. MLB is 162 . Look at Salvador Perez and tell me what kind of shape his knees are going to be in when he's 50. He'll be in a wheelchair.

Yes, they should.

The salary cap is set on a % of league income. It's growing quite steadily right now, should help.

Nope. They get paid less but have more employment opportunities. 22 starting positions (not including ST) is more than 4 times the size of basketball. If they don't like it, go try and play baseball or basketball instead.

They get paid more under the table like Brady anyway. Cap circumventing cheating eastwards.

Yes/No. Only less than 1% can play in a professional sport. A much higher percentage can manage to be a teacher. Now if they want more passionate and qualified teachers I wholly back increasing salaries of teachers. (No is to the possible thought they should make more than athletes)

An extremely small group of players get such so called treatment

The cheating gets worse as you go eastward too.

Interesting.. I have never thought of it this way before.

Hitting a baseball and pitching takes more skill than football. Playing basketball is more athletic and more skills than football. Football is more dangerous, but for the most part it doesn't take the skill as baseball and basketball.

If the football salaries are lower due to larger roster sizes, maybe the players should argue for decreasing the roster size. I for one would enjoy watching a 15-man NFL roster with 60-minute players.

Agreed. Teachers and Law Enforcement.

It's already ridiculous that football players get paid what they do. The people that educate kids and keep civilians safe are getting shafted.

NBA salaries are the worst. I saw some guy making 70mil the other day I've never ever heard of

They get all the publicity, but I think the people doing market research and strategy should be paid more. They make the world a better place by optimizing all sorts of things, and no one pays any attention to them at all.

shit, you got that part right, for sure..

They are already paid too much to run around and catch balls.
They are basically paid to work out.

Revenue for 160+ games is a whole lot more than revenue from 16 games. It's more dangerous but if that was an issue, you could have played another sport.

Should teachers be paid more?
I'm not so sure. All they do is teach children how to be institutionalized.

I saw this 20 year old on Periscope the other day and he made an interesting point.

He asked to go to the bathroom...I'm not sure what grade he was in?...6th/7/8/9?...teacher wouldn't allow it. So he gets the trash can in class and urinated right there in it.
The next thing you know he's being prescribed Ned's and forced to go to counseling because he's an independent thinker who didn't follow an unnecessary rule.
There may be good teachers but only the ones who teach outside the system

Hard to take this guy seriously when so many haven't seen a raise in years and compensation is going down.

Elitist prick.

He's all yours displacedinMN. :)

:rolleyes:

Let me guess. He's a teacher and he'll have a hisdy fit about an opinion. I have plenty of teacher friends I know are good.
I also have teacher friends who are so dumb the talk to adults the wah they talk to the 6th graders they teach

You know they are

Pats will do anything they can to push the rules, they love pissing the league off. They flaunt their cheating and dare the league to get enough concrete evidence to prove it.

Is there any wonder why the league wants to hammer that organization.

Smelly every one should be paid more....except entertainers and "athletes who are also actors"

I haven't come up with a way to stop it, either. You could make the contracts more simple and transparent, but that would only address cheating within the system, not the stuff that happens outside it.

You could enact rules to keep teams from "hiring" former players to front-office positions after their playing days, but that doesn't seem quite fair since a lot of those guys are legitimately working.

Even if you had the league handle payrolls, you still couldn't stop the scenarios where Pat Bowlen gives Elway a suitcase of cash to pay for league minimum.

It's a huge problem, and it's why we see so few teams in AFC side of the Super Bowl over the past few decades. Cheating confers an advantage.

100% yes. It always amazes me that people hate football players making more money but are okay with owners making a gazillion dollars.

I believe in trusting the market. If an owner is willing to pay Jamaal Charles 75m, that'd how much he's worth. The fact that owners get to cap wages below market value, owners are getting one hell of a return on their investment.

While I'd love to bitch about them making more than me, I can be replaced tomorrow by a million other people and nobody is paying my employer $100 to watch me work

As much as CC is annoying gunt, he does have a point.

Baseball = skill
Golf = skill
soccer = conditioning
Basketball = athleticism
Football = Body size/durability, willingness to exchange pain for success

Different sports have a different primary category needed. Of course you need hand/eye coordination and athletic ability etc in all pro sports but the primary need is vastly different.

:rolleyes:

Salary cap for coaches/staff too?

Sorry dude, but you know it's true

Belichek revels in the anger and disdain of the league and fans. He loves saying "**** you, just try and stop me"

In what way does the skill of a pitcher differ from that of a quarterback? Except the "constant fear that a 300 pound monster is trying to kill you" thing that makes a QB's job a bit more difficult.

Sure, linemen don't need to do anything with the ball -- hit or throw or catch, but they need to win their battle in the trenches, which is far more than body size/durability and ability to withstand pain. If it was just that, it'd be a bunch of behemoths that can't run in there. Instead it's a combination of size plus leverage plus hand-fighting techniques, plus speed, plus alot of other things.

If you are seriously suggesting that golfers are better "athletes" than NFL players, then I don't really know what to tell you. Golf is barely a sport. Any "sport" that doesn't really require an ounce of sweat doesn't much qualify in my book.

Oh come on and admit it you homer sumbitch

I don't know.
But you know what would be fun?
Every NFL Team has to start an everyday kind of dude, every play. You know, an office type of guy, 30-35 years old.
God that would be entertainment. Watching some pudgy dude on the field with Pros.
Pay him the big money because he isn't going to last the season, let alone walk again.

WHAT are you talking about? Are you reading impaired?

I said golf was a skill ... not athletic.

Do you know what the word skill means?

Before you argue maybe you should read the dictionary.

You don't actually understand him at all. He doesn't give a crap about the NFL. The "LEAGUE" itself -- and the stuffed shirts that run it -- corporate types not football men -- means nothing to him.

He wants to coach football and win games. If you asked him and he was willing to answer, then I think he'd admit Spygate was really stupid, but that other teams were doing it too and, more importantly, the rules change itself was stupid. What is the difference between taping team's signals and listening to audibles at the line on television from previous weeks to get an advantage on calls, or the MANY other tells that teams scout for all the time?

Whatever. He hates the league, and the league hates him. But you guys have turned that into the Patriots just constantly cheat in every way. :shrug: Sure, whatever makes you happy. But cap violations to further enrich a guy who is already disgustingly wealthy? Whose wife is even more wealthy? Seems more than a little silly.

Sure, golf is a skill. Not even sure what argument you're making though.

Whatever, let's throw it backt o CC. He said:


The only real answer to that is "so what"? Solving a rubiks cube in less than 10 seconds is a skill too, but unlikely to get you millions of dollars.

FYP

Admit that you hate the Patriots for their success? Sure, no problem.

:p

Whatever makes you happy. Keep on hatin' on.

I don't acknowledge cheaters...welp sorry

I remember when the Royals won the WS in 85. At that time there was some sort of competition on TV that pitted them and the Superbowl champs that year in a head-to-head competion. Tug of war, track and field, strength, etc.

Royals won.

Details might be a bit fuzzy.

That is the motto that Belichek has designation for the organization.

Like the Chiefs, you mean? The whole tampering thing... Just terrible.

:p

As if Belichick gives a damn about anyone's opinion, or "mottos"... ROFL

Probably a variant of the old "Battle of the Stars" things they used to do. I remember athletes would sometimes be included, so yeah, definitely possible.

I used to enjoy those shows. Some would have athletes and some would have TV stars. I remember one of the athlete shows, though, and they had a bunch of skills-based contests in the competition - things like tennis and bowling. The winner was some male volleyball player who apparently played a lot of different sports, so he was good enough at the skills-based stuff to pull away from the pack.

That's definitely it. The interesting part was the Royals just yanked them into the water in tug-of-war. IIRC it was pretty even up to that point.

Though this has nothing really to do with which sport is harder. I was just surprised by it.

sure but thats only because we somehow made money a thing and people evaluate their lives with it and have to use it for health etc.

I know,thats way too far off topic lol :)

Play 82 games per year and you can start asking for NBA pay.

I think you could argue that NFL players should have a considerably higher % of the leagues revenue distributed to them than NBA and MLB, due to the following: The low volume of games VS higher probability of injury, there are less players available world wide that can play quality football as apposed to the fore mentioned sports, avg career length is less in NFL and risk of injury is high, and certainly because there are so many players on a roster.

Cough it up Goodell !!!

You're a drooling Mongo that shouldn't be allowed to start threads

NFL players are more athletic than NBA players on average. They're stronger, faster and even jump higher which shocks a lot of people.

Being an owner is the greatest job in the world.

Taxpayers pay for your facility
You can bully the city to build you a completely new facility with the primary intent of making yourself (not the city) more money
And you're allowed to cap your highest paid employees' wages

And every time you provide the team these benefits, the money goes basically directly to the owner.

And to top it all off, people are outraged about the PLAYERS making too much money while the owner rakes in way more dough than he actually deserves.

In what way doesn't it take the skill?
Posted via Mobile Device

I don't know if they should make more money, but I thought it was amazing a few years ago when the owners locked them out to get a bigger piece of the pie and nobody batted an eye. NFL owners can pretty much do whatever they want. People are crazy about football.

They would bat an eye if they got to the point where they marched out replacement players. You could replace every single owner and nobody would bat an eye. Replace the players with second level talent, and you get the XFL.

The owners whined about not having enough money to cover expenses. Yet when they were asked to open their books, they refused.

False. It takes more skill to catch an oddly shaped ball in all weather conditions with a usually more agile defender hanging off of you. You don't even need to be in shape to play baseball. It takes great hand eye coordination for baseball. Actually, hockey may be the sport that requires the most all around skill.

what if you go per game?
I ain't gonna do it but the other sports play a lot more games

that I do not watch because they are boring as shit

it takes very little skill to catch a football then it does to hit a home run. If it's so hard to catch a ball with a defender on you,how come it happens numerous times every week in every game?

Maybe some sports require more athleticism. And certain positions require more thinking and instinct.

But hitting a major league pitch is the hardest technical thing to do in sports and it's not even close.