Sunday, July 3, 2016

Salaries: Basketball vs. Football--The Insanity of it All

The following article from Fox Sports highlights the disparity between basketball and football salaries that only serves to show just how completely ridiculous the salaries of both sports have become--and they'll only get worse! Following the article is my response.

The Reasons Why NFL Players Make Less Than Their NBA Counterparts

"Thanks to new, extremely lucrative television deals, the NBA essentially handed out $24 million to every team in the league to spend on free agents this summer.
The way that money is being used has many in and around the NFL irked.
NFL players are complaining, claiming they picked the wrong sport. Football-leaning media members are bewildered at the value of the deals being tossed around. People are really mad all around the internet.
It's hard to blame anyone for being up in arms about the NBA's spending. Matthew Dellavedova is set to sign a four-year, $38 million deal, and Timofey Mozgov is poised to put pen to paper on a fouryear deal worth $64 million. Neither soon-to-be former member of the champion Cavs played a minute in Game 7 of the NBA Finals.
But you can't fault any player for taking a big ol' contract if it's offered, and if a general manager and owner want to spend $64 million on a frequently injured, not-exactly-versatile center who was relegated to the bench for the second half of last season, that's their prerogative.
That kind of stuff happens in the NFL too, lest we forget.
So NFL players and media members complaining about the NBA's spending spree should channel their frustrations and bewilderment into fixing a problem that has been exposed instead.
Yes, NFL players are underpaid. But that's their fault.
The NBA's salary cap was $70 million last season. It will go to $94 million next season, and will likely level off at to $107 million for the 2017-18 campaign. The NBA is a closed economy — increasing the available money by 50 percent over a short span (three years) while maintaining the same supply (players, 15 on each of the static 30 teams) is a textbook definition of inflation. Contract values were going to go up dramatically; there was no way around it.
The NBA didn't want it to be this way. They wanted to spread out the increase in the cap over five — or, better yet, 10 — years. The NBA Players Association pushed back.
"[The dramatic salary cap increase] is not something that we modeled for," NBA commissioner Adam Silver said at February's All-Star Game. "There will be unintended consequences from all this additional cap room this summer. I just don't know what those consequences will be."
The NBAPA got what it wanted. But ultimately, it will have to face internal political backlash, as the short-term increases in the cap threaten to disproportionally aid those on the free agent market this summer. Spreading out the windfall could have prevented a situation where Mike Conley receives the largest contract in NBA history.
The most expensive NBA contracts are done by percentage of the salary cap — a "max" deal is worth between 25 and 35 percent of the salary cap, depending on how long the player has been in the league. On top of that, the league has a "soft" salary cap, where teams are allowed to go over the cap to re-sign their own players.
These two factors are huge positives for players: It puts more money in their pockets, and it came about through tough negotiations over the league's collective bargaining agreement.
NFL players could also have salary-cap percentage deals — and a soft cap, too — but they'd have to fight for them in their collective bargaining agreement.
CBAs are incredibly complicated, but their most critical component is the divvying up of league's revenue pie. The money all goes into the owners' pockets to start. And they give the players their slice of the pie, mostly through player salaries.
That's why when the NBA signed a nine-year, $24 billion (with a "b") television deal, the salary cap spiked. The revenue pie became much larger and the players negotiated to receive roughly 50 percent of that pie.
NFL revenue doubles the NBA, even with the hoopers' new TV money. The NFL salary cap is $155 million — 60 percent higher than the NBA's.
But considering that NFL rosters are 3.5 larger than NBA rosters (53 to 15), that 60 percent difference is paltry.
If you cut up the NBA salary cap 15 ways on all 30 teams, each player would make $6.25 million. Next year, that number will go above $7 million.
If you split up the NFL's salary threshold equally — $155 million, 53 ways — you get an "average" salary of $2.9 million. You can do the math — that's less than half the NBA's number.
NHL "average" salaries exceed the NFL's, too. Split up the NHL and every player gets $3.17 million. The last time the "average" NBA salary was less than $3 million was 2005.
So absolutely, NFL players are underpaid. But that's in large part because of the deal they signed.
NFL players get — at most — 48.5 percent of the league's revenue, as agreed upon in the 2011 collective bargaining agreement. In 2016, the player percentage is 47.2. But not all of that $6 billion-plus is translated into the salary cap. The players have to use a good chunk of that money to pay for pension and health costs, as outlined in Article 12 of the CBA. The remaining sum is more or less (it's some complicated stuff in that 301-page document) split up 32 ways to determine the salary cap.
Even if NFL players had a 50 percent cut, they'd only be seeing a 3 percent increase in pay. The NFL would have to double its revenue to pay players as much as the NBA pays theirs.
That, or the NBA could double the amount of players in the league.
Neither seems likely.
The NFL's CBA runs until 2020, and there are no opt-out clauses for either side included in it. This is the deal the NFL players signed.
And while it's highly unlikely that "average" NFL player salaries will be able to match NBA player salaries in 2020, there are things that the NFL Players Association should be looking to have included in the next treaty that NBA players have.
Things like guaranteed contracts for players who have been in the league for a few years. Currently, NFL players can have their contracts canceled at any time, for any reason.
Things like a soft salary cap. A hard cap artificially limits player salaries and hampers earning potentials — that's why the NBA owners wanted to implement one in 2011.
NBA players fought for both guaranteed contracts and a soft salary cap and won, and now they're reaping the benefits.
NFL players might have fought the same battles, but they clearly lost, and now they're only left to complain. They'll have a chance to actually something about it in 2020.
Until then, they need to remember what then NBA commissioner David Stern said during his league's lockout in 2011: "From where we sit, we are looking at a league [the NFL] that was the most profitable in sports, that became more profitable by virtue of concessions from their players."

My Response:


Wealthy players whining about not being wealthier for a sport that has 16 games per year (+ playoffs, if they are lucky, and for which they receive additional pay above their contracts), as well as official practice times (OTA’s, Training camp, etc).
When is the money ever enough for these guys?


I absolutely detest the money these athletes are making; especially in football.  If anyone deserves more money in sports, it is baseball players. They play 162 games per year (10 times as many as football, and twice as much as basketball!), plus nearly two months of training camp that features an additional twenty five games, or so,  yet they make a per game average that is a fraction of what football and basketball players make.
I remember when Dale Murphy of the Atlanta Braves became the first athlete to get a $1M per year contract. Everyone thought it was too much. Compared to the demands of the athletes these days, Murphy’s contract was a steal.


It used to be that only top tier athletes received the big monies. Now, you have bench players making huge amounts, and superstars earning hundreds of millions.


I ask again… When is the money ever enough for these guys?

Hillary Clinton as Possible President

An article from 'The Hill,' an online blog that focuses on issues in Washington D.C., today focused on the interview Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic Nominee for President, had with an FBI investigative team that was looking into serious charges against Clinton regarding her personal (and illegal) email account and server that she used while Secretary of State. As usual, the Clinton team spun the interview as "Voluntary." Yet, the investigation is a criminal probe. Just how such an interview is "Voluntary" rather than compulsory, I just don't understand.
Anyhow, the comments that followed the article were either slamming or supporting Hillary, while totally ignoring what she re[presents if elected. I wrote the following response:

And her followers blindly accept every word, every excuse as truth. I am an Independent. I vote for whomever I believe to be best suited for the job instead of blindly going all in as a Democrat or Republican. From everything I've read, Hillary is a train wreck waiting to happen. This country is already floundering as Obama has trampled all over the Constitution. With the Clintons ready to take the Whitehouse once again, we, as Americans, could be seeing some dire years ahead as the latest iteration of the Democratic Party leads us all further and further from the country our Founding Fathers created, wherein the Federal Government was small, the President merely a spokesperson for Congress, States maintained a modicum of self-governing, American rights were more important than illegal immigrants and the Bill of Rights was followed and revered as [basically] sacred rules for every citizen to live by.

Look at the state our Country is in today. The Constitution is barely recognizable anymore as King Obama does whatever he wants while Congress sits by and does nothing to stop him. The Bill of Rights are no longer enjoyed by ALL Americans as individuals and small groups use the Courts to force everyone else to adhere to THEIR beliefs and way of life, The Pledge of Allegience is no longer uttered in our schools for fear of 'offending' someone (Seiously?!), Big Government just gets bigger and bigger, individual privacy is gone, the true history of our Founding is no longer taught as secular revistionists declared that Christianity played no role in the lives of the Founding Fathers and played no role in the formation of this great country. Now too, we read that Illegal Immigrants are being given food, housing, medical care while our President ignores our war veterans, our homeless and the citizens of this country, in favor of illegal immigrants--he is FAILING to uphold the law! The very law he has twice sworn to uphold and protect.

For the record, I don't care about immigrants to this country. Aside from the Native Americans, we are ALL here as a result of immigration. However, when immigrants from the South choose to ignore the laws, as established by Congress, and enter this country illegally and then use the systems in place meant to help the actual citizens of the United States, then I draw the line.

No, I'm probably NOT going to vote for Trump...He's just the wrong choice, as well.  But to have Hillary Clinton as President would be disastrous for this country. Freedom, once enjoyed by all Americans, is now more of an illusion than a reality.
This country is teetering, folks, whether you recognize it, or not. Trump is a terrible choice; but Hillary is even worse. I only hope that the next four years do not see us as a nation crumble under the weight of our complacency as we blindly follow leaders who, speaking like a snake oil salesman, tell us "I know what's is best for you. Follow me..."  (And the blind and ignorant will follow)