Sports players can make MAD cash. Football may not be the best sport, as there are strict Salary Caps on teams so that no team may spend over a certain amount of money.
Even with said caps in place, key football stars can make 10 million dollars or more a year, and that number goes up with longer team contracts -- such as Michael Vick's $130 million contract for 10 years with the Atlanta Falcons.
$130 million is a lot, especially for just pure playing salary. While professional atheletes have much less free time than actors, especially during game season, they do have enough to earn extra income by taking in side projects and investments - which can raise their income even more.
The problem with being a sports star is that while the money is much more stable while you're able to play, and for the most part better, the player's physical condition is a very key factor, as is age.
Many of the great actors and actresses are able to span their careers over many decades, while sports star's careers can be ended quickly and completely.
2007-01-13 18:51:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Tonx 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If by football you mean what some countries also call soccer then no the footballer makes more money.
David Beckham has just signed a contract for approximately $70million US per year for 5 years to play in California. No actor can guarantee that they will make $70million every year for 5 years.
See current events and sports section of your newspaper.
www.news.com.au
2007-01-14 03:09:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by Maple Leaf 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Famous Actors
The average NFL player makes 1.25 million/year and their careers last an average of 3.5 years.
Really famous actors (I'm thinking: Brad Pitt, Julia Roberts, Bruce Willis, Tom Cruise & Mel Gibson [before crazy town], etc.) make 15-25 million a picture and they make about one movie every 1-2 years
slightly more "B-list" celebrities make about 5-10 million a picture (kirsten dunst, ben affleck, jennifer aniston)
Obviously the less famous you are the less money you make...
2007-01-14 02:52:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tiff 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Don't know, but some go both routes like O.J. Simpson and Joe Namath.
2007-01-14 02:41:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by o 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
All I can say is, he would be a 'footballer', not a 'footballist'.
2007-01-14 02:40:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋