Why do players care if they make say 8 million or 12 million?

[scott99]

Haha I don't feel one ounce of sympathy for people that stupid.

I hate to say it, but 70% of the NFL is THAT stupid. In the case of Revis, he's already made over 100 mill, so if he leaves for say, the Jets, for 2 mill more, I say see ya, go **** off. Different players have different mindsets. I'd say the NHL is the best when it coms to loyalty and the dreaded hometown discount. And, as someone said, sometimes they want to move to the new area, because it's where they are from, for example, a lot of hockey players want to move to Minnesota, because they are from there. NHL players are the least greedy, NFL and NBA are probably the most.

 

[50-yard-line]

What if they want to donate what they make over 8 million to charity? Or just donate 25%? Does it matter then?

No, because they don't, or VERY RARELY do. Other than tithing to churches, which is a business arrangement (Mormons, Scientology, many mega-churches, etc.) more than a charitable arrangement, you'd be very hard-pressed to find wealthy people doing something like you describe.

And "charity" is a funny term....when the heads of non-profits take 500k-2m +, such a donation is a hill o' beans.

A lot of athletes front charities because they can deduct their time/signed merchandise at outrageous rates - on the net, they hugely profit from their "charities."

But yeah, I'll agree in principle to what you said: If an athlete went to a team paying 10m instead of 9m and gave that extra to worthy charities, it'd be a big deal. Of course, said athlete could have afforded such a gift before moving to the higher bidder anyway.

 

[50-yard-line]

Actually, there isn't but I can't find the study I read that proved it so you'll just either believe me or not.

But the study indicated that quality of life did not have a dramatic change between different thresholds (I think the thresholds they used were like 60k and 90k)

Essentially people with 60k who were able to pay their bills lived according to their means. People with 90k lived according to their means as well but showed no distinct increase in quality of life because, like all of us, people who make 90k a year are still idiots about money. The 90k income people spent more money on stupid ****, on average, and did not have a net worth that, percentage wise, as high above the 60k people as it should be.

The reason why I brought up the dirt farmer is because, relatively speaking, you and I (i assume) are dirt farmers compared to someone making millions. And likewise I'm sure if some poor person living in Thailand crammed into a shack with a bottle of water jammed into the roof for solar lighting would look at my lifestyle and see nothing but waste and excess.

That's why these conversations where people get self-righteous about how much athletes earn crack me up.

You're referring to the happiness-index, which says that people at around 75K are as happy as people with more, and that's very true.

In practical matters, however, 120k allows a family to do more (no college loans, for example) than 80k.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

I can understand the sentiment. If you have say $6M after taxes, that should be enough to give you and your family a great "upper middle class" sort of life assuming you spend conservatively and invest the money wisely.

Problem is, as your net worth increases, your appetites increase. In addition to this, throw in a few bad business decisions, friends and family to support, a divorce or two, child support, taxes, agents, ect and that $6M doesn't seem like much money anymore.

It is what it is.

 

[IllegalContact]

I'm sure they do...? Not sure what that had to do with my post though.

their instinct is to get all the money they can because it can end with one hit

 

[IllegalContact]

You, and others, are severely missing the point. No one is arguing these guys should play for free. No one is trying to say money is a bad thing or any sort of nonsense. Only that there potentially are other factors with equal or greater utility than the hypothetical 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th million dollar in this scenario, and that it's not ridiculous for someone to consider those factors.

Brady is a perfect example because he easily could've made 25% more money over the course of his career if he wanted to. He shouldn't play for free because that would be asinine, and he's capable of making decisions that involve some level of complexity. Unfortunately, that's something people here seem not to have the attention span for.

bullsh*t......who is anyone to say anything about 'what is enough' or what is reasonable?

would Brady's life today be any different if he didn't get another dime from playing football? NOPE

Brady's not even the primary income-earner in his house.......if you're basing things about the certain point that becomes 'what difference does it make?', then Brady should be the first one to play for the minimum

 

[IllegalContact]

the players need to go for every nickle whenever they can because there comes a day when the wilforks and the mayos of the world eventually get told to take a paycut on a contract they and the team signed.

the biggest stupidity of it all is that fans actually have the nerve to say this guy or that guy should make less because the fan wants to see one more win

 

[IllegalContact]

Just when you begin to redeem your existence here with a string of fairly plausible posts, comes this. Back on the sauce, eh?

just calling out silliness and stupidity when I see it


and I saw it

 

[JarOfMayo51]

Money isn't "God" to everyone, especially after a certain point. Why is that so hard to believe?

Here's a basic hypothetical to illustrate:

Choice A: Work and live in San Diego near extended family for $4 million annual salary on a job maximizing your creative potential.

Choice B: Work and live in Fargo N.D. for $8 million salary as personal assistant to a morally bankrupt slave-driving boss.

Which would you choose?

Thats easy for me, I'd choose A every time.

I had the pleasure of working for a morally bakrupt slave driving boss at my lost job for only $60k a year..

Literally had no life, was expected to come in early, leave late, check emails and phone calls until all hours of the night, had to set my alarm for 1 or 2 in the morning to run scripts and check on processes etc to ensure they were still running.. had to work on weekends, holidays, my days off, etc.. was screamed at infront of other employees for not answering emails fast enough over a long weekend once..

I asked for more money after a year of that and they laughed at me...

Now I make more money and have a normal schedule of 40 hours a week and I'm much happier, bUT I wouldn't go back to my old job even if they offered me 1 million a year

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Also, if my playing career is over by the time I'm in my 30's and, after all those hits to the head, my brain is a lump of scrambled eggs and I've lost so much IQ that all I'm qualified to do is be an analyst for ESPN, I want the big payday in my peak years.

 

[PatsDeb]

Life is expensive. As your money grows, so do your expenses (just think about your own lives - in college you are living (renting) in a dump with 3 roomates; you won't want to do that if you are a working professional, so you buy a nice house to live in). There is a big difference, over a lifetime, between 8 million dollars and 12 million dollars, particularly if you are only going to make that kind of money for 5-10 years, but you are going to live another 50 or 60 years. Players who go somewhere else for a difference of a few hundred thousand don't make sense (after you add up the costs, time and money-wise to move and get situated in a new area/with a new team), but for several million dollars, we all might make the switch.

 

[BradyManny]

the biggest stupidity of it all is that fans actually have the nerve to say this guy or that guy should make less because the fan wants to see one more win

No one is saying this at all.

 

[Sicilian]

their instinct is to get all the money they can because it can end with one hit

A strange example, considering Seau played in the league for 20 years.

Regardless, my point was on a known and studied psychological bias. There are, of course, many reasons someone might do a thing.

 

[BradyManny]

bullsh*t......who is anyone to say anything about 'what is enough' or what is reasonable?

All I want to say: what a given player takes for a contract should be a function of more than just money, and that is a very reasonable thing. What part of that do you argue with?

Some players make the mistake of not considering other factors.

 

[Tunescribe]

just calling out silliness and stupidity when I see it
and I saw it

What -- you've got a mirror mounted above your computer?

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Why? Well, in the specific case cited, 4 million dollars is a lot of money. So is 1 million. So, too, to most people is a few hundred thousand.

I'm amazed at how fast we can be to suggest that these guys shouldn't maximize their brief period of high earnings potential (it's been pointed out already that the average NFL career is around three seasons). For most NFL'ers, these are the years when they can save for their future and that of their children. These are guys whose careers can end in a second on the practice field, let alone on game day.

Few will be "high profile" enough to be able to earn significant money by doing corporate outings or speaking on the rubber chicken circuit, where high profile guys can get between $10,000 and $100,000 for playing a round of golf with their host's clients and speaking at dinner that night. Not many of them have a skill set for which Corporate America will pay a lot of money. So, for most guys "this is it" in terms of their maximum earnings potential.

As a result, I fully understand why a player will make a move for "only" 4 million dollars and also understand guys who do it for a lot less. But, at the lower end of the spectrum, "other factors" could indeed come into play. But, for a guy like Revis, I could understand him drawing a line at how much he'd be willing to give up to stay with a particular organization and I wouldn't blame him if, over the life of his contract, it was a lot less than 4 million.

 

[Tunescribe]

Easy, you have more than I have = frivolous excess

I have more than you have= I have needs

Nah, even in our grossly materialistic society there are limits to what even the wildest imagination considers "necessary to lifestyle." I think.

 

[IllegalContact]

What -- you've got a mirror mounted above your computer?

oh jeezus....I know you are but what am I?

 

[IllegalContact]

Nah, even in our grossly materialistic society there are limits to what even the wildest imagination considers "necessary to lifestyle." I think.

in the name of what? your football watching happiness?

 

[Tunescribe]

oh jeezus....I know you are but what am I?

A quickly aging soulless old fool?