Is a FOOTBALLER worth £500,000 a WEEK?

Cuttooth wrote:

Skarjo wrote:I doubt any one of you would, if offered a job that would pay you hundreds of thousands of pounds would say 'What?! God no! £40Ks more than enough for me thanks!'.

Well no of course not, but if anyone were to receive £26 million a year before tax they should give a vast amount of it to charity. I know I would.

To be fair, many highly paid sports persons do just that.

Cal wrote:

Skarjo wrote:I doubt any one of you would, if offered a job that would pay you hundreds of thousands of pounds would say 'What?! God no! £40Ks more than enough for me thanks!'.

If you say you would you're either an idiot or a liar.

Doesn't make it any less offensive, though, does it? You honestly think these idiots are worth the money? Really?

I have trouble accepting the ridiculous amounts of money top-dollar flm stars earn, too. Yes, I can appreciate there is considerably more talent involved in acting, but recieving several $million for a few months work (and they might pack in two or three such gigs a year)... F*ck me, they then have the f*cking gall to lecture the rest of us on feeding the world's f*cking poor.

And don't even get me started on that multimillionaire knobend Bono...

How is there considerably more talent involved in acting? If we use the logic that's been posted in this thread and apply it to actors, all they do is memorise a few lines and repeat them in front of a camera.

They're getting paid in regard to their talent. The more talented the moneymen regard the people they're paying, the more they'll pay them.

Tom Cannon said he'd be earning a third of Man City's turnover of last season!

The actual fee is likely to be £350,000 a week, as if it makes much of a difference in principle.

I just don't get why they have to more than double the current record. I remember laughing at Chelsea putting in £100m for Ronaldinho, this is terrible.

Octoroc wrote:It's probably best not to think about it, but I'm with Marx on this one.

Not Richard Marx, the other one.

Groucho? He was a funny man.

Cal wrote:

Skarjo wrote:I doubt any one of you would, if offered a job that would pay you hundreds of thousands of pounds would say 'What?! God no! £40Ks more than enough for me thanks!'.

If you say you would you're either an idiot or a liar.

Doesn't make it any less offensive, though, does it? You honestly think these idiots are worth the money? Really?

I have trouble accepting the ridiculous amounts of money top-dollar flm stars earn, too. Yes, I can appreciate there is considerably more talent involved in acting, but recieving several $million for a few months work (and they might pack in two or three such gigs a year)... F*ck me, they then have the f*cking gall to lecture the rest of us on feeding the world's f*cking poor.

And don't even get me started on that multimillionaire knobend Bono...

I don't understand why it's offensive. Define 'worth' the money. Will Smith, for instance, is a massive crowd-puller. You can usually assume that more people will see your movie if Smith is in the leading role rather than that dude who was in Cloverfield. As such, you'll make more money with Smith than the other guy, so he can ask for more money to appear in your film. Same for footballers, same for singers, same for all sporting/entertainment roles. You get paid based on how much you can potentially earn the person paying you.

I don't find basic economics offensive.

Cuttooth wrote:

Skarjo wrote:I doubt any one of you would, if offered a job that would pay you hundreds of thousands of pounds would say 'What?! God no! £40Ks more than enough for me thanks!'.

Well no of course not, but if anyone were to receive £26 million a year before tax they should give a vast amount of it to charity. I know I would.

How do you know they don't?

Fergie's shocked at the news, calling the whole situation "pretty mad"

Skarjo wrote:

Cuttooth wrote:

Skarjo wrote:I doubt any one of you would, if offered a job that would pay you hundreds of thousands of pounds would say 'What?! God no! £40Ks more than enough for me thanks!'.

Well no of course not, but if anyone were to receive £26 million a year before tax they should give a vast amount of it to charity. I know I would.

How do you know they don't?

I just meant that as a generalisation of anyone who made that much annually, I know a lot of people (including Kaká for one) do give back to charities.

Alright, to take another sporting example: Formula 1. Everyone knows by now that it's a millionaire's club. F1 drivers make huge amounts of money, not just from driving, but from endorsements and the like (often twice the amount of their F1 contract). But I have less trouble accepting this, although I do still struggle - at least I can see that F1 drivers are being paid danger money. It takes an enormous act of bravery to be a top-notch F1 driver (likewise a Rally driver), to deliberately push the very edges of safety every time you race to try and stay ahead of the pack, etc. Drivers have been killed or very, very seriously injured. I can sort of see why they are paid what they are.

The same cannot be said of footballers. It defies explanation.

Cal wrote:The same cannot be said of footballers. It defies explanation.

I JUST EXPLAINED IT FOR YOU.

I remember Ulises De la Cruz used to give over half his wages to charity every week. I know he wasnt a great player and he wasnt on mega bucks but I really had a lot of respect for him doing that. He was probably on about 10k a week (still a lot of money but despite what others around him earnt, he still realised it was more than he needed and had the generosity to give away that he didnt need) If only more footballers followed this lead.

Cuttooth wrote:

Skarjo wrote:I doubt any one of you would, if offered a job that would pay you hundreds of thousands of pounds would say 'What?! God no! £40Ks more than enough for me thanks!'.

Well no of course not, but if anyone were to receive £26 million a year before tax they should give a vast amount of it to charity. I know I would.

He's the Ambassador 'Against Hunger for the United Nations' World Food Programme' and helps with a number of charities. He's also a devout Christian so I'd imagine he won't use the £26 million just on hookers and ice cream.

Poncho wrote:

Cuttooth wrote:

Skarjo wrote:I doubt any one of you would, if offered a job that would pay you hundreds of thousands of pounds would say 'What?! God no! £40Ks more than enough for me thanks!'.

Well no of course not, but if anyone were to receive £26 million a year before tax they should give a vast amount of it to charity. I know I would.

He's the Ambassador 'Against Hunger for the United Nations' World Food Programme' and helps with a number of charities. He's also a devout Christian so I'd imagine he won't use the £26 million just on hookers and ice cream.

I would totally spend £26mil on hookers and ice cream.

Cal wrote:Alright, to take another sporting example: Formula 1. Everyone knows by now that it's a millionaire's club. F1 drivers make huge amounts of money, not just from driving, but from endorsements and the like (often twice the amount of their F1 contract). But I have less trouble accepting this, although I do still struggle - at least I can see that F1 drivers are being paid danger money. It takes an enormous act of bravery to be a top-notch F1 driver (likewise a Rally driver), to deliberately push the very edges of safety every time you race to try and stay ahead of the pack, etc. Drivers have been killed or very, very seriously injured. I can sort of see why they are paid what they are.

The same cannot be said of footballers. It defies explanation.

Footballers risk career ending injuries and dying while playing football (Marc-Vivien Foe wasn't it?). Like in F1, it rarely happens but that element still exists.

Try reading what Skarjo's saying as it makes sense.

Cal wrote:The same cannot be said of footballers. It defies explanation.

Meh, as long as the punters will pay for their Sky subscriptions, season tickets, replica shirts, footballers will be paid extortionate wages.

Move to China, if it bothers you.

I think (as Gandalf already said) you should be comparing him to a Hollywood Actor, plain and simple. It is technically an entertainment job, in a game that is watched around the world by millions. How many of you complain that they get paid too much?

Is it a good thing? No, but the Premiership is all about money and who has the most, which is why it is a case of the "Big Four" every year, as they have the most money, and can keep their place. I am betting the people most upset will support one of those clubs and realise that they could lose their place in the top 4 and then life will be very different. As for the rest of us, it has always been broken, this is nothing new, just a grander scale.

El Diablo Rojo 52 wrote:
Footballers risk career ending injuries and dying while playing football (Marc-Vivien Foe wasn't it?). Like in F1, it rarely happens but that element still exists.

Foe, had an undiagnosed heart condition. He'd have died anyway, regardless of whether he was playing football.

Drunken_Master wrote:

El Diablo Rojo 52 wrote:
Footballers risk career ending injuries and dying while playing football (Marc-Vivien Foe wasn't it?). Like in F1, it rarely happens but that element still exists.

Foe, had an undiagnosed heart condition. He'd have died anyway, regardless of whether he was playing football.

You're not helping my argument.

Although there's a lot of risks involved with football. Different risks than compared to F1 but risks that still have to be accounted for.

El Diablo Rojo 52 wrote:

Drunken_Master wrote:

El Diablo Rojo 52 wrote:
Footballers risk career ending injuries and dying while playing football (Marc-Vivien Foe wasn't it?). Like in F1, it rarely happens but that element still exists.

Foe, had an undiagnosed heart condition. He'd have died anyway, regardless of whether he was playing football.

You're not helping my argument.

Although there's a lot of risks involved with football. Different risks than compared to F1 but risks that still have to be accounted for.

To be fair, I wouldn't compare the risks of playing football and the risks of formula 1. As there is no comparison. F1 is a fuckload more dangerous. End of.

I think what Fergie's complaining about is the precedent City are setting; Man City aren't paying what the player's worth according to the market, they're offering way over the odds, so the player and the club pretty much have to take the offer (or at least consider it very seriously). Potentially, every other club is going to have to match those prices if they want to compete.