Do you think sports figures should be paid so much when middle class families can't aford to go to games?

Question

It is crazy to give some illiterate basketball player $50 million to put a ball in a hoop. Why do we think it's okay to pay him more than a teacher who teaches our children or a policeman who protects us, or a doctor who ehlps us when we are sick...you get the idea.
I realize they are entertainers and we need sports in our society (I'm a huge sports fan) BUT - I do not think they are worth what we pay them and I wish it would stop.

Answer Man - not bitter - just frustrated. I live a good life with a husband who makes a lot of money but I remember what it was like when we were just starting out. I can afford front row to any game I want - just don't WANT to do it.

Answer 1

Absolutely not. Regular families cannot afford to take the kids to a ball game any more.

Answer 2

What makes it OK is that there are people who are willing to pay the high ticket prices to SEE the high paid athlete. It is almost that simple. Add to that, that there are TV networks willing to pay the big bucks for the right to broadcast the game the rest of us are willing to watch, despite the constant commercial breaks.

If you like the SPORT so much, then you should be willing to settle for the more reasonable prices of local college and high school games.

But it's not the sport, is it? It's the high paid athlete you really want to watch, and, if you want that athlete to play for YOUR team, then the owner's had better be willing to put up the money or do without him. And, if the owner goes the cheap route, he won't generate the ticket sales, or demand the multi-million dollar TV contract, and be willing to lose the audience, and so on.

It is what the traffic will bear and is all part of the free market system. You benefit in many ways by this system, because it is precisely this type of competition that gives you a variety of products and prices to choose from. It is just the nature of the beast that most cities cannot afford, nor support more than one major sports frachise.

Answer 3

It's not crazy. If the players got a fraction of the money, do you think the owners would lower the ticket prices? No, they'd just pocket more money. I think it's better that the money goes to the players rather than the owners.

Look at how many former pro athletes from the past ended up with little or no means to support themselves after their careers were over, back in the day when salaries were "reasonable". These athletes have very short careers and need to try to set themselves up for life. The ones that make 50 million are pretty rare.

If you are fussed about the ticket prices go to NCAA games, they are cheaper and in a lot of cases more exciting anyway. I think your characterization of athletes as 'illiterate' is unfair.

Answer 4

The problem is no one is willing to pay $100 dollars to see a doctor perform a procedure or a teacher teach a class. It is a free market system. If people stopped going and watching games the salaries wouldn't be so high. Also, anyone can be a doctor or a teacher that is willing to do the work and go to school. Not everyone can dunk a basketball or fun faster then everyone else. It is just supply and demand. There is a HUGE supply of teachers and very little supply of gifted athletes.

Answer 5

Amen! I agree with you wholeheartedly and I think that there needs to be some kind of reform in the sports market. The problem is that there will always be people who will go see a game at any cost and will continue to support the teams regardless of what the players are paid. It is a sin what they get paid and frankly, I wish there was more that we could do about it. The best way to make a difference would be to stop going to games...no money coming in...no money for salaries!

Answer 6

I fully agree with your thoughts that they are paid far more than they should be and their relative worth to society (as opposed to a teacher, policeman, fireman, etc.) is not even close.

The reality of a capitalistic society is that (in general) people are paid in proportion to how hard they are to replace.. for example the reason a taxi driver does not make as much as a 747 pilot is that there are very few qualified and able 747 pilots compared to millions that could drive a taxi... get the point.. The same is true of pro athletes.. very few qualifed and hard to replace people can play/compete on the pro level... and since so many people are addicted to entertainment they milk the pocketbooks of fans for as much as possible..

Answer 7

People get payed what they deserve. Some rich owner should not be able to make all the profit off the athlete, when it is the athlete that is generating billions of dollars of revenue. You sound like a bitter person that is angry that your own physical attributes did not allow you to make a lot of money through sports. Should actors not get all the money they do? Doctors make a ton and actually rip off their patients by charging ridiculous amounts, at least with sports you know what you are paying for.

Answer 8

This is a direct portrayal of American values. This shows that we think it is much more important to be an athlete than it is to be a neruosurgeon, even though the neursurgeon does difficult work that saves people's lives. It's a screwy society that does this, and I don't mean this in a humurous fashion.

Answer 9

No - they're grossly overpaid and it needs to stop. If you're a baseball fan, try boycotting the pro teams and go see minor league action. We went to a minor league baseball game the other night and it was a heck of a lot more entertaining (and much cheaper!) than going to see our pro ball club.

Answer 10

Unfortunately, there are enough people who are willing to pay the high prices. It can't continue forever though, because owning a sports team is generally a losing proposition.

Answer 11

Unfortunately, when people realize that money, advertising dollars, are being exchanged due to something that they do for a living, they want to find a way to tap into the exchange and get paid for it.