- 12/12/2013, 11:07AM ET
HighwayCrossingFrog said 12/12, 11:07 AM
If you win a slam, you get alittle over a million dollars..
But the slams bring in an insane amount of revenue..
Being realistic they should be getting closer to ten million dollars..
And the guys ranked around 100, can barely afford the plane tickets and hotel costs..
Someone is taking a huge piece of the pie here and it's not the players..
2. Track and field..
It's huge in Europe.. And the revenues are fantastic..
But the athletes make peanuts..
The top players only make a million dollars a year..
When you compare this to other major sports, it's not a lot..
4. UFC fighters..
Compared to boxers, the UFC guys make nothing..
5. College football players..
They risk injury for life..
And there games are always sold out..
The revenues are very scary..
But they get free sloppy joes in their cafeteria and all the ice cream they can eat?
Guys like Barry freaking zito are making 15 million a year..
Colon will only get 10 million!
kalbrecht17 said 12/12, 12:02 PM
Here's what I've got:
1. College football players: not here to start the arg of if they should be paid or not, but they generate insane revenue for their schools for free tuition. pretty dang good deal for the school
2. NHL players: the guys lay it all on the line night in and out to the tune of salaries that are 1/4 that of NBA players despite the league generating around 75% of the same revenue
3. NFL practice squad guys: these guys get lit up just like the actual pros, but are only making, in many cases, around 100k a year to do it where their counterparts on the actual team make a minimum 400k.
4. college basketball players: the revenue is much less than that of football, but the idea is the same.
5. I'll agree on UFC fighters. Top dogs make some good bank, but the guys waiting in the wings who may never make it are hurting bad.
Honorable mention: T & F- but it's more about the love of the sport it seems
Comments: On tennis, those guys make far more than that for a slam. just like golfers make far more for a major. it all comes from endorsements after. definitely not underpaid. rugby doesn't generate enough revenue to justify salaries.
HighwayCrossingFrog said 12/14, 01:32 PM
Every year the slams give away more and more prize money cause they know the players are getting under paid..
The ATP players know this and often flirt with going on strike..
There's a reason the slams don't publish how much revenue they generate cause they know the players would call bloody murder..
The big problem with rugby is that the international games are waaaay more popular than club level.. So the countries have total control over players salaries..
One way to increase revenue would be to have the World Cup every year, instead of once every 4 years..
The rest of our list is very similar..
kalbrecht17 said 12/16, 02:23 PM
Look I know nothing of rugby and won't pretend to do so, so I'll leave that one be as it is.
In regards to tennis, the US Open offers out 34.3 million this year, good for a 37% increase over last year with the men's and women's champions each taking home 2.6 million compared to 1.9 million for last year. (source is Forbes) Needless to say, tennis is kicking out plenty of revenue for its top players, especially when you consider that the salary they make for winning is chump change compared to advertising revenue. Take Federer for example on the downswing of his career. From June 2012 to June 2013 he earned 71.5 million. Care to guess how much of that was in prize money??? 6.5 million. Less than 10% of his money. the ATP knows that the players that succeed on the court will make tons of money in endorsements and will be able to continue to lure people to play due to this. There is no way that they need to be paying them more. Tennis is just like other individual sports where it's all about marketing yourself and making endorsements.
HighwayCrossingFrog said 12/17, 04:51 PM
The year Pete Sampras retired, back in 2002..
Up until the us open, his last tournament of the year..
Sampras had only made 1 million dollars in prize money..
That is total pennies, when you compare how much money the ATP made off Sampras's name..
The top ATP players have flirted with the idea of going on strike, cause they know they are getting a small piece of the pie..
kalbrecht17 said 12/17, 11:41 PM
Look. You might bring up a valid point if this wasn't the case in EVERY SINGLE INDIVIDUAL BASED REVENUE SPORT. The players always will get less of the money when they're competing by themselves. the way these sports are set up isn't in a manner that allows for one guy to be bigger than the sport hence you can't pay them as thus. Just think if they forked over extra money to their stars who make the ATP money, they'd have to do the same for the little guys. Then ultimately how do you denote who gets paid what? Do you try do this UFC style where you get a part of the gate? OR do you sign each player to a contract with clauses in it that require them to play in certain tourneys? None of that would work in a sport like tennis where the talent pool from #20 to #400 in the world isn't that great.
All of these guys enter the tourney for the chance that one year they play lights out in a major and break through. The hope is to get your name out there and become one of the big dogs. How much do you think Sloane Stephens is worth now? The answer is 1.5 mill with 1 career win. And that's her WORTH, not prize money. And all that came from one year breaking through.
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia