Players and Money

[finneh]

Not in this aspect. Footballers earn millions with far less effort and money/livelihood on the line than say, someone who starts a business with their savings. They're not automatically that kind of character just because they're earning millions. They can earn that straight out of the academy if they look bright early on and get a lucky break.

Natural talent very rarely gets you to a position where you're earning millions per year, especially not over a 20 year period. You might get the likes of Ravel Morrison who will probably earn £6-7m throughout his footballing career; however that isn't the kind of salary you can retire on. Bear in mind even at 18 many footballers have spend thousands of hours of time honing their skills, often at the expense of learning other skills that would be valuable in life.

I think people often incorrectly treat footballers differently compared with for example a concert pianist or high level surgeon. Both have usually spent thousands of hours to get to the top of their professional and deserve to be rewarded accordingly for that dedication (alongside natural ability). However the former is often treated like a hobby combined with a huge amount of luck in terms of natural talent; whereas the latter are treated with far more respect due to the level of commitment and dedication. It's probably because one is generally a working class pursuit, whereas the others are not.

I imagine the majority of footballers who end up earning enough to retire for life (say £15m+) have worked incredibly hard often since they were in primary school and have invested thousands of hours honing their craft. They are seeing the same return on that time investment as the other examples given.

 

[roonster09]

Because they have contract. Nobody forced xy player to sign 4 or 5 years contract.
1) When contract is near the end = player is in charge. Club can sell or lose the money
2) When player is out of contract, he is again in charge.
3) When player is in the middle of the contract, club can't sell player if player doesn't want to go. So it should go in both ways. If player wants out, club can say no. But today when club say no, then crying and sulking starts and some players even go on strike.

Players are not loyal and they have absolutely no reason to be because it is just business for them and the club, but player power today is too big and i don't like it.

You can say the same reason. Players have contract which club offered and still players are sold when clubs want to.

Re players having too much power, there are examples of players who didn't want to leave so were not played at all and left to play for reserves.

 

[Skills]

Natural talent very rarely gets you to a position where you're earning millions per year, especially not over a 20 year period. You might get the likes of Ravel Morrison who will probably earn £6-7m throughout his footballing career; however that isn't the kind of salary you can retire on. Bear in mind even at 18 many footballers have spend thousands of hours of time honing their skills, often at the expense of learning other skills that would be valuable in life.

I think people often incorrectly treat footballers differently compared with for example a concert pianist or high level surgeon. Both have usually spent thousands of hours to get to the top of their professional and deserve to be rewarded accordingly for that dedication (alongside natural ability). However the former is often treated like a hobby combined with a huge amount of luck in terms of natural talent; whereas the latter are treated with far more respect due to the level of commitment and dedication. It's probably because one is generally a working class pursuit, whereas the others are not.

I imagine the majority of footballers who end up earning enough to retire for life (say £15m+) have worked incredibly hard often since they were in primary school and have invested thousands of hours honing their craft. They are seeing the same return on that time investment as the other examples given.

This.

 

[VeevaVee]

Natural talent very rarely gets you to a position where you're earning millions per year, especially not over a 20 year period. You might get the likes of Ravel Morrison who will probably earn £6-7m throughout his footballing career; however that isn't the kind of salary you can retire on. Bear in mind even at 18 many footballers have spend thousands of hours of time honing their skills, often at the expense of learning other skills that would be valuable in life.

I think people often incorrectly treat footballers differently compared with for example a concert pianist or high level surgeon. Both have usually spent thousands of hours to get to the top of their professional and deserve to be rewarded accordingly for that dedication (alongside natural ability). However the former is often treated like a hobby combined with a huge amount of luck in terms of natural talent; whereas the latter are treated with far more respect due to the level of commitment and dedication. It's probably because one is generally a working class pursuit, whereas the others are not.

I imagine the majority of footballers who end up earning enough to retire for life (say £15m+) have worked incredibly hard often since they were in primary school and have invested thousands of hours honing their craft. They are seeing the same return on that time investment as the other examples given.

Not the kind of salary you can retire on? Most people earn less than 1.5m their entire lives.

They are different to those, especially the surgeon. Life isn't a graft for a footballer who makes it. If lucky they get picked up early, they train relatively hard but it's fun and essentially doing what you're told as a kid. If you look brighter than the other kids, eventually you get picked for a first team outing. As soon as that's happened a few times there's a very high chance you're earning millions in your life. Unless you totally lose focus and do a Macheda.
You're not necessarily going to turn out way better than a guy who's not been seen and struggling through the ranks of a League 1 team or lower.

Have you seen professional footballers? Most of them are not super human with a ball. Their brains work in a way that's suited to the game and they have a good understanding of it, but many of them would get given a game by players supposedly well below their level. Players in the PL and the like are put on a pedestal that I don't actually believe most of them are at.

Everyone else who reaches the stage of leaving the academy, say the equivalent in a professional career setting, still has a very long way to go.

 

[Devils11]

Money and success. Those are two primary ( and only) things in every career. Every player plays for that. We bought Pogba because we offered him big money. If we offered less, he would sign for City or Juve or Psg. Money talks.
Best example is RVP. He was payed a lot in Arsenal and played for big club. But in United he won PL title and earned more money. And it was not 10k or 20k more. It was around 10mil more. Tell me, who would be crazy to refuse 10mil pounds? No matter how much you earn at that moment, 10 mil is 10 mil.
Loyalty is past in football. If you want best players, you must pay them.

But clubs must take a stand also. When players under contract( huge contract) start to cry how they want to leave, clubs must say; NO. You will leave when we say so.

Agreed except the last paragraph. Football is big business now. It is all in the hands of the player and his agents. You can't afford to let your players to run down his contract and leave for free. Either you pay him more (Pogba) or sell him now (Hazard) if he is not interested in renewing.

Also when a player head are turned by bigger clubs' offers, and their request to leave are rejected, they might turn up late for training, or not giving their all in training or matches. It will be a lose lose scenario for both.

And lastly we have the infamous Winston Bogarde scenario where he virtually train in Chelsea reserves and youth team but refused to leave because of his huge contract. Chelsea couldn't get rid of him and have to pay out his remaining contract.

 

[finneh]

Not the kind of salary you can retire on? Most people earn less than 1.5m their entire lives.

They are different to those, especially the surgeon. Life isn't a graft for a footballer who makes it. If lucky they get picked up early, they train relatively hard but it's fun and essentially doing what you're told as a kid. If you look brighter than the other kids, eventually you get picked for a first team outing. As soon as that's happened a few times there's a very high chance you're earning millions in your life. Unless you totally lose focus and do a Macheda.
You're not necessarily going to turn out way better than a guy who's not been seen and struggling through the ranks of a League 1 team or lower.

Have you seen professional footballers? Most of them are not super human with a ball. Their brains work in a way that's suited to the game and they have a good understanding of it, but many of them would get given a game by players supposedly well below their level. Players in the PL and the like are put on a pedestal that I don't actually believe most of them are at.

Everyone else who reaches the stage of leaving the academy, say the equivalent in a professional career setting, still has a very long way to go.

Most people live consistently on a similar salary. The amount of people who earn £5-6m between the ages of 18 and 30 and who would also be both frugal enough and wise enough to invest it in a way that allows them to live off it forever would be slim to none. In theory it's enough to live off forever but practically speaking it isn't.

I disagree with your assertion that it's majority based on luck, it's majority hard work and talent. I'd also say that most people who earn great salaries enjoy what they do, so footballers are no different. I have friends/family who are Surgeons, Barristers, Managing Directors etc... They all enjoy what they do and most would not trade it to become a footballer (assuming the same salary).

I completely disagree with your assertion that Premier League players would get given a game by players below their level. Premier League players are like tour golfers but without the objective score that makes it easy to see their level. Premier League players in Golfing terms are the kind of talents that roll up to your local golfing club after a heavy night out and shoot a 10 under par round. I went to School with Matty Fryatt who ended up being a decent Championship striker. He murdered every single level he played at until he reached League One level... In a manner that it looked like he was playing a completely different sport. By the time he got to the Championship it was a different story - he became a 1/3 scorer and in the Premier League he couldn't get a game, such was the difference in standard.

The difference in level is such that you put someone like Josh King in League One and he'd score 40+ goals. You put Harry Kane in a League One team and that team win the league irrespective if he stays fit.

 

[Lentwood]

We keep talking about the 'tail wagging the dog' and the supposed 'fact' that clubs can no longer inspire loyalty or fear in players....well that's only true if you allow that to happen by being as badly run as we are!

Chelsea are another example tbf, they've crumbled to player power so often that it's no wonder that Hazard comes out and demands a new contract every year!

My solution would be as below;

- Player X demands new contract, tell Player X there will be no new contract whilst we are languishing in 6th place. If you want a new contract, earn one.

Outcome A: Player X accepts this and knuckles down. Precedent set, problem solved, message sent.
Outcome B: Player X throws toys out of pram, put said player in reserves for duration of their contract or until they apologise in front of their teammates and to the fans. Precedent set, problem solved.

Now I fully appreciate that in order for this to work, the Board need to be 100% totally behind the manager and firm in their principles. They also need to be willing to write-off losses on players if necessary in order to establish precedent.

Imagine you are Paul Pogba, 26 years old, three years on your deal. You angle in the press for a new deal. Your manager tells you there's more chance of hell freezing over than you getting a new deal after we've just lost to Wolves and sit outside the top four. You throw your toys out of the pram, you tell your agent to look for a new club. Your manager says 'OK Paul, please report to see Mr. Sbragia in the morning you are no longer part of the 1st team squad'. Now at that point, the club hold all the cards. If you get a good offer, sell this waste of space and find someone who does want to play for the club. If you don't receive a decent offer, leave the player to rot in the u23s. Fine them a week's wages every time they fail to report for training/matches. Don't give them ANY game-time at any level under any circumstances.

I expect that after 6-12mnths of this, the player would start to panic and realise they are pissing away their career when they should be at their peak. Yes, they might still be getting their weekly salary but their sponsors wouldn't be happy as they'd be getting zero exposure and the players potential to negotiate a newer, better deal with a new club is disappearing fast.

In reality, some suit somewhere would say 'we absolutely can't just write-off an asset worth £250m (fee + wages over three years), however, what you're actually doing is something absolutely priceless - you are establishing a precedent that it's our way our the highway, nobody is bigger than the club and lucrative contracts are a privilege to be earned.

All of the above is not to say you can't reward players and that players shouldn't be allowed to haggle. If Pogba (or any player) gives the club 100% and then angles for a raise at (or approaching) the end of their contract, then fine! What I object to is this constant angling in the press for more money, holding the club to ransom when performances on the field are unacceptable and this 'he's getting X so I should get Y mentaility'

Believe me, there are 23 footballers in the world who would feel privileged to represent Manchester Utd or Chelsea or Liverpool or City and the mercenaries who sell their services to the highest bidder are a poison these clubs could well do without

EDIT: Please don't make this all about Pogba....I'm using him as an example only as the most recent player to start flirting with another club (again!)

 

[TRUERED89]

Players like aguero,silva and toure would never even have heard of city before the oil money rolled in.

I remember the first time City played Barca in their history, Dani Alvez said 'Who is this City? United is the only Manchester anyone has ever heard of' .

 

[VeevaVee]

Most people live consistently on a similar salary. The amount of people who earn £5-6m between the ages of 18 and 30 and who would also be both frugal enough and wise enough to invest it in a way that allows them to live off it forever would be slim to none. In theory it's enough to live off forever but practically speaking it isn't.

I disagree with your assertion that it's majority based on luck, it's majority hard work and talent. I'd also say that most people who earn great salaries enjoy what they do, so footballers are no different. I have friends/family who are Surgeons, Barristers, Managing Directors etc... They all enjoy what they do and most would not trade it to become a footballer (assuming the same salary).

I completely disagree with your assertion that Premier League players would get given a game by players below their level. Premier League players are like tour golfers but without the objective score that makes it easy to see their level. Premier League players in Golfing terms are the kind of talents that roll up to your local golfing club after a heavy night out and shoot a 10 under par round. I went to School with Matty Fryatt who ended up being a decent Championship striker. He murdered every single level he played at until he reached League One level... In a manner that it looked like he was playing a completely different sport. By the time he got to the Championship it was a different story - he became a 1/3 scorer and in the Premier League he couldn't get a game, such was the difference in standard.

The difference in level is such that you put someone like Josh King in League One and he'd score 40+ goals. You put Harry Kane in a League One team and that team win the league irrespective if he stays fit.

I think you're way off and it's getting a bit daft to compare a footballer with a regular profession to be honest so we may as well stop there. It's easy when you can come straight of college age and make millions though. I'm not saying it's easy to make it. I'm saying being thrust into it if you're good enough, is far easier than carving out a career for 10 years before you're even making enough to save for a house.
And I didn't say it's mostly based on luck, it's being good enough with a massive amount of it. Anyone who makes it big at something will attest to this.
I simply don't believe most footballers are on as high a pedestal as many put them on.

As for not being given a game by lesser clubs. Well there's so much evidence of this I don't know what to say. I'm not saying there isn't some level of difference, it's just not this crazy super human level people often make out.

And anyway, the whole point of this is money. So back to that. Being a footballer does not automatically mean you have an insatiable drive to earn, like someone who's ruthless in business might. And the person in a regular career who makes £30k and wants to make more does so because that opens up more possibilities for enjoyment. The person who makes £5m a year and wants to make £7m a year is just greed. There's no growth there. They've not taken a risk with their business, or made a smart decision. It's the fans who have ended up paying for this greed.

 

[TRUERED89]

Not the kind of salary you can retire on? Most people earn less than 1.5m their entire lives.

Was thinking the same!

 

[Needham]

I remember the first time City played Barca in their history, Dani Alvez said 'Who is this City? United is the only Manchester anyone has ever heard of' .

For a brief window that was the ultimate mind games. It was literally as if an Athletico Barcelona had appeared from nowhere armed with a billion Euros and world class players. Then again, I'd respect the quote more if it came from a Xavi, a Cruyff, a Horst Hrubesch, or an Adrian Heath. Alvez has always been militantly cnutish. On topic, I could still maintain a respect for a working class man done well when top footballers lived in middle to upper middle class areas, an era that ended somewhere around the mid 80s. Now most elite players are simply quiescent members of the Kardashians.

 

[Bestietom]

It is the way it is now. More money paid is where the players go.

 

[finneh]

And anyway, the whole point of this is money. So back to that. Being a footballer does not automatically mean you have an insatiable drive to earn, like someone who's ruthless in business might. And the person in a regular career who makes £30k and wants to make more does so because that opens up more possibilities for enjoyment. The person who makes £5m a year and wants to make £7m a year is just greed. There's no growth there. They've not taken a risk with their business, or made a smart decision. It's the fans who have ended up paying for this greed.

I think most people who first strive to and then go on to achieve being in the top 0.0001% of their field have that inate insatiable drive to get where they are. The example I used of a Championship striker that I knew from School put in as much effort as both my surgeon and barrister friends, albeit to the layman it was "easier" effort. Instead of studying for difficult exams, he watched hundreds of hours of his own performances to see how he could improve his technique. Instead of spending hundreds hours in the theater or in mock courtrooms advocating, he spent hundreds of hours on the training pitch and in the gym. He wouldn't leave the pitch until he'd scored 10 free kicks in a row, just like my barrister friend didn't leave the courtroom until their bail application was objectively as close to perfect as it could be.

I completely disagree in terms of your definition of greed. The desire to want to better ones self financially irrespective of current earnings has resulted in advances we've made as a society and the country we live in. If there were no desire to earn more than a few hundred thousand per year then this country would look like a third world nation. The advancement of technology for example has predicated itself on that technology earning billions for the people who have driven that innovation. The advancement of drugs has been predicated on being able to charge huge amounts for these drugs... Otherwise the R&D costs and the gambles companies make wouldn't be worth the time or effort. You take away that incentive and you take away the desire and the dedication of the people who change societies with their gifts. Whether that be through the phone in your pocket or the life saving drugs in your medicine cabinet.

From the point of view of someone who knows some very wealthy people, their first desire is a very comfortable life for themselves. Lets assume that a £250k annual income for life achieves this (say £12.5m over a lifetime). Their next desire is that their children as a minimum have this as a safety net. Naturally this requires a £25m buffer. Their next desire is the same for their grandchildren which requires a further £50m buffer (based on 2 kids each). Great grandchildren requires another £100m. Once the first goal has been achieved, the next one is created and there is never a final goal. Once their families are taken care of they often move towards charity and in the case of Bill Gates bringing drinking water to the poorest nations in the world. If he'd have stopped at £250k per annum not only would everyone's lives be more difficult due to the innovations he's driven, but Nations would be worse off and (likely tens of) thousands of people who're currently alive would be dead.

I know someone who is now nearly 90 years old whose fortune was around the £150m mark. With that he wants to ensure that the grandchildren of his great-grandchildren have a safety net if they ever fall on hard times. To achieve that he's had to set up dozens and dozens of discretionary trusts all to the tune of a low 7 figure amount. All which hold assets that should accumulate wealth and due to the discretionary nature of them the trustee's will only release funds for "worthy" causes. These funds will provide private education from cradle to grave, private healthcare from cradle to grave, a first home for every descendant, a £20k annual stipend for anyone 18+ and in full time education (or without a job through choice or otherwise)... For 5 generations at a bear minimum (he has 13 grandchildren so do the math on how many great-great-great-grandchildren he's likely to have).

He himself is one of the least greedy people I've ever met, he fled Eastern Europe during WW2 and set up a business in the UK. He's led a frugal life and wants security for his descendants because any wealth his father and grandfather created were seized during that period. I'd urge you not to assume greed when often the accumulation of wealth isn't done to buy a 15th £200k car. These people want to create the kind of life for numerous generations than in a utopian society the government would provide.

 

[VeevaVee]

I think most people who first strive to and then go on to achieve being in the top 0.0001% of their field have that inate insatiable drive to get where they are. The example I used of a Championship striker that I knew from School put in as much effort as both my surgeon and barrister friends, albeit to the layman it was "easier" effort. Instead of studying for difficult exams, he watched hundreds of hours of his own performances to see how he could improve his technique. Instead of spending hundreds hours in the theater or in mock courtrooms advocating, he spent hundreds of hours on the training pitch and in the gym.

I completely disagree in terms of your definition of greed. The desire to want to better ones self financially irrespective of current earnings has resulted in advances we've made as a society and the country we live in. If there were no desire to earn more than a few hundred thousand per year then this country would look like a third world nation. The advancement of technology for example has predicated itself on that technology earning billions for the people who have driven that innovation. The advancement of drugs has been predicated on being able to charge huge amounts for these drugs... Otherwise the R&D costs and the gambles companies make wouldn't bt worth it. You take away that incentive and you take away the desire and the dedication of the people who change societies with their gifts. Whether that be through the phone in your pocket or the life saving drugs in your medicine cabinet.

From the point of view of someone who knows some very wealthy people, their first desire is a very comfortable life for themselves. Lets assume that a £250k annual income for life achieves this (say £12.5m over a lifetime). Their next desire is that their children as a minimum have this as a safety net. Naturally this requires a £25m buffer. Their next desire is the same for their grandchildren which requires a further £50m buffer (based on 2 kids each). Great grandchildren requires another £100m

I know someone who is now nearly 90 years old whose fortune was around the £150m mark. With that he wants to ensure that the grandchildren of his great-grandchildren have a safety net if they ever fall on hard times. To achieve that he's had to set up dozens and dozens of discretionary trusts all to the tune of a low 7 figure amount. All which hold assets that should accumulate wealth and due to the discretionary nature of them the trustee's will only release funds for "worthy" causes. These funds will provide private education from cradle to grave, private healthcare from cradle to grave, a first home for every descendant, a £20k annual stipend for anyone 18+ and in full time education (or without a job through choice or otherwise)... For 5 generations at a bear minimum (he has 13 grandchildren so do the math on how many great-great-great-grandchildren he's likely to have).

He himself is one of the least greedy people I've ever met, he fled Eastern Europe during WW2 and set up a business in the UK. He's led a frugal life and wants security for his descendants because any wealth his father and grandfather created were seized during that period.

I'd urge you not to assume greed when often the accumulation of wealth isn't done to buy a 15th £200k car. These people want to create the kind of life for numerous generations than in a utopian society the government would provide.

Mate, these replies are getting longer and longer. I know someone whose dad is a billionaire. He's giving most of it away when he dies. His children all work, admittedly with a great headstart on their business and no worries about what'll happen if they fail. He doesn't agree with the rich-poor divide yet he's money motivated and good at it. He's gentrifying a part of London single handedly at the moment. He can just stop and probably should because he doesn't need the money from it.
But why are we even talking about this? This is off topic. The point was business is driven by money, so it's understandable, up to a point, that someone would use it as a barometer. A footballer doesn't need more money and securing an unbalanced world with a rich-poor divide for as long as possible isn't a good reason in my opinion. I get that that's why some will want to do it though.
Anyway, this is boring. It's going nowhere. Let's just agree to disagree.

 

[wolvored]

Players like aguero,silva and toure would never even have heard of city before the oil money rolled in.

Toure was quoted as saying he thought he was signing for Utd. Oh if only it had been true at the time