Playing in the NBA/NFL/MLB/NHL is a privilege?

[steve]

People often refer to this "playing professional sports is a privilege" statement when a player is holding out for an extension or a rookie won't play for the team that drafts him. 

When you have a talent that 99.9% of humans don't have and you have been working hard all your life at being the best then it isn't a privilege to play in the NBA.  It's like saying that the Big Mac should be lucky to be on McDonald's menu.  The Big Mac is the menu.  Now I understand if the Fish Fillet starts acting like a pre-madonna then he'll get cut in a heartbeat but that's just the nature of business. 

Sports figures aren't employees of the league.  They are the product of a business.  They make the league money and in turn they have the right to make as much money as they can.   

My point is that it is neither the player's privilege or the league's privilege to have each other.  It is a symbiotic relationship based on worth. 

The league's aren't some holy establishment.  The NFL, for example, is dooming itself by not respecting the players.       

[Roy Hobbs]

How is the NFL not respecting the players?

I agree that professional sports leagues are symbiotic, in that the teams need the players, and the players need a stage to showcase their skills, which in turn earns everyone money.

I don't understand, though, why the NFL is the league you're criticizing.  Aren't they the most successful sports league in the country?  I'd *love* if other leagues conducted business like the NFL does, with a hard salary cap, non-guaranteed contracts, and revenue sharing.  The only thing the NFL needs is a rookie salary slotting system (like the NBA).

[Chris]

Ummm, I think I am missing your point.  How is the NFL disrespecting its players?

With the strength of unions in pro sports, the players always have the ability to change things.  But they know they have a [dang] good deal. 

Anyways, can you be more specific about what the problem is?

[steve]

The rookie scale.  The owners are making the money while the veterans are getting their jobs taken by rookies because the rookies make more money.   

Also I don't think Nonguarunteed contracts are good at all.  When your league is tops in profits how can you justify a player getting cut and not paid.  The owners should be responsible for the contracts they sign.  Like every other sport. 

Also it feels like these guys are getting fined a lot for doing minute things. 

Basically if there is a lockout then I blame the NFL not the players.   

[Chris]

Blame the NFLPA, not the owners.  They agreed to, and likely pushed for no rookie scale, without actually thinking about how it would affect the veterans.  Do you really think the owners wouldn't love for there to be a rookie pay scale, so that they don't need to pay ridiculous amounts of money to guys who have never played a down in the NFL?

I agree about the non-guaranteed contracts though.  However, I also chalk that up to terrible negotiating by the players association. 

When it comes down to it, its a business.  The owners are paying the players millions of dollars.  There is a CBA in place that was agreed to not only by the owners, but by the players as well.  If things favor the owners in it, it doesn't mean they are evil, it just means that they did a better job of negotiating.

You are right about one thing, the players are the product, and in that sense, they should get more respect within the CBA...but that is only going to happen if they are united, and they negotiate it. 

[Roy Hobbs]

Guaranteed contracts in the NFL would be horrific for the league.  There are just too many injuries in football for them to be practical.  The ability for teams to distance themselves from their mistakes is one of the things I love about the NFL.

[Fan from VT]

I at least believe that if a league can justify non-guaranteed contracts, the contracts should be non-guaranteed both ways, that is, a player can void his contract under the same guidelines a player can if he thinks he is underpaid.

[Roy Hobbs]

I at least believe that if a league can justify non-guaranteed contracts, the contracts should be non-guaranteed both ways, that is, a player can void his contract under the same guidelines a player can if he thinks he is underpaid.

I think people are misunderstanding the idea of a "non-guaranteed" contract.

Teams and the players negotiate deals.  They *agree* to the portion that is guaranteed (through a signing bonus, roster bonuses, and guaranteed salaries).  Players and their agents get a say in that, and they're absolutely allowed to hold out and not sign if they can't find an acceptable deal.

Once that contract is signed, though, both parties are bound by it.  Neither one should be allowed to breach.  The owners don't:  they pay what was agreed.  It's the players who are breaching their contracts; they agreed to play for a sum, and if they decide they don't like it, they'll sit out. 

People make it sound like it's a one-way street in favor of the owners.  These players are getting paid, and then they're asking to get paid again.  If the players who outperform their contract should get raises, what about the players who underperform?  Should they have to give back their signing bonuses?

[nickagneta]

Non-guaranteed contracts and profit sharing and a hard cap are what makes the business model that is the NFL great. If baseball and basketball could mold some of those ideals into their CBA the leagues would be much better for it.

[Rondo2287]

I wouldent say playing in the NHL is a privilege, more of a punishment really..

[Roy Hobbs]

I wouldent say playing in the NHL is a privilege, more of a punishment really..

I don't know, man.  Some of those players make a *lot* of money.  They're really not that far behind the NBA in that regard.

[Rondo2287]

Ya but that all goes to dentistry!  I wasnt really serious, but between the physicality of that sport compared to the minimal padding its not something I would want to do.  I mean Compare Eric Lindross vs Gerald Wallace.  Both concussion prone, how long do you think each would have lasted playing the others sport.  I think Lindross would have lasted much longer in the NBA.  And Wallace maybe a week. 

[wdleehi]

You can forget about the rookie scale.  The 1st couple picks in the draft help drive up the price for franchise tagged players. 


I love a sport that doesn't allow player to sit back on there contract and not work as hard.  (Better then watching Mark Blount suck up money and roster spots)


I love a sport that allows the flexibility to turn a team around within a season or two without getting lucky in a draft lotto. 


And I love a sport where it is team first instead of superstar first.

[Hoyo de Monterrey]

I wouldent say playing in the NHL is a privilege, more of a punishment really..

I don't know, man.  Some of those players make a *lot* of money.  They're really not that far behind the NBA in that regard.

Strong disagreement here.

The NBA has 9 players making over $20 million in 2008-09, and 17 making at least $15 million (almost 18, as Bibby made $14.98 million)

The NHL highest salary in 2008-09 was Dany Heatley at $10 million, a far cry from KG's $24+ million. The rest of the top 50 ranges from Ovechkin and Crosby's $9 million to $5.625 million to goaltender Cristobal Huet.

The NHL has $1.9 million to the NBA's $5.396 million average salary in 2008-09.

The NHL veterans minimum in 2008-09 was $475,000
The NBA veterans minimum in 2008-09 was $750,000

The upper, middle, and lower classes of the NBA are all significantly better off then their NHL counterparts.

[Cman]

People often refer to this "playing professional sports is a privilege" statement when a player is holding out for an extension or a rookie won't play for the team that drafts him. 

When you have a talent that 99.9% of humans don't have and you have been working hard all your life at being the best then it isn't a privilege to play in the NBA.  It's like saying that the Big Mac should be lucky to be on McDonald's menu.  The Big Mac is the menu.  Now I understand if the Fish Fillet starts acting like a pre-madonna then he'll get cut in a heartbeat but that's just the nature of business. 

Sports figures aren't employees of the league.  They are the product of a business.  They make the league money and in turn they have the right to make as much money as they can.   

My point is that it is neither the player's privilege or the league's privilege to have each other.  It is a symbiotic relationship based on worth. 

The league's aren't some holy establishment.  The NFL, for example, is dooming itself by not respecting the players.       

It is a privilege, just like any other job.  If you don't like your job, you can quit and find employment elsewhere.  You might not be hired anywhere else, but that is on you.  I certainly don't feel sorry for NBA players.  They make a ton of money playing here in the US (and Canada).  If they want to, they can play in Europe instead and still make a ton of money.