Saw this yesterday and felt it was a bit disingenuous. They kept comparing tennis pros to pro athletes in team sports. Yet, the most apt comparison would be golf pros. Guess what? Same outcomes!...
Saw this yesterday and felt it was a bit disingenuous. They kept comparing tennis pros to pro athletes in team sports. Yet, the most apt comparison would be golf pros. Guess what? Same outcomes! The 200th ranked PGA tour golf pro in 2022 made about $220,000. After paying his caddie, coach, travel for him, his caddie and other expenses, I'd be shocked if he kept any money. Probably lost money. Very, very good golfers can't make much money unless they are in the top 100 or so either. The $10M earned by the top tennis pro would have placed him at about 6th in the 2022 golf rankings. So, similar.
I'd assume because a third string QB doesn't have to pay for their travel and other expenses? I guess I'd say it's like comparing a salaried employee's salary to a freelancer who needs to bring...
I'd assume because a third string QB doesn't have to pay for their travel and other expenses?
I guess I'd say it's like comparing a salaried employee's salary to a freelancer who needs to bring all their own equipment.
Right... the freelancer is typically paid much higher because of all those expenses, but in the case of tennis it's the opposite. Like why is it invalid to look at player pay as a percentage of...
Right... the freelancer is typically paid much higher because of all those expenses, but in the case of tennis it's the opposite. Like why is it invalid to look at player pay as a percentage of overall revenue across different sports and think that tennis players are getting a raw deal?
There's no inherent value to being good at tennis or any other sport. What it really boils down to is that individual sports get less viewers than team sports, even when adjusted per capita for...
There's no inherent value to being good at tennis or any other sport. What it really boils down to is that individual sports get less viewers than team sports, even when adjusted per capita for the additional people. Less viewers = less advertisements = less money to everyone.
There's a multitude of hypothesis why: maybe team sports means more personalities, more room for drama; maybe there's just a deep seated part of our monkey brain that enjoys watching people work together; maybe having more people just allows for more complicated, enjoyable games.
Regardless of the reason, viewership for tennis and golf are several orders of magnitude lower than basketball, baseball, football, soccer.
There's no question of why we like to watch team sports more. We monkeys like when our monkey tribe beats other monkey tribes. That's why we shriek and scream and hoot and howl when our tribe...
There's no question of why we like to watch team sports more.
We monkeys like when our monkey tribe beats other monkey tribes. That's why we shriek and scream and hoot and howl when our tribe beats the other tribe. We must watch so that we know if our tribe is stronger.
Maybe because it's a bad comparison due to the added costs involved. Just going off of the information I can find online, Patrick Mahones has a ten year, $450M salary. That's $45M a year. I don't...
Maybe because it's a bad comparison due to the added costs involved.
Just going off of the information I can find online, Patrick Mahones has a ten year, $450M salary. That's $45M a year. I don't know if that's the 'top' salary overall but SportsTrac says he's 'Cap hit'.
By comparison, Golf Digest says Phil Mickelson makes $102.9M but that's with $75M bonuses and $26M in off course pay (endorsements and such) - meaning he only made about $1.9M on the course.
As long as Mahomes doesn't break his contract, he gets that money. Mickelson does not. To compare their salaries directly we'd have to pay Mahomes for completed plays in won games or something similar.
Tennis has less viewership than football. We can't expect all athletes to be paid the same regardless so we find a more comparable sport in terms of viewership and costs required.
This doesn't mean that golf, and by proxy tennis, pro players aren't getting the shaft or that we should just accept paying them unfairly as a 'fact of life' or anything. You're free to still think they're getting a raw deal. Just that comparing them to football players is a little silly.
Just my opinion and stuff, I'm not much of a sports guy.
Yes I did. I agree tennis and golf are most similar in pay structure. But why is it invalid to compare those sports with other professional athletes pay as a percentage of overall revenue?
Yes I did. I agree tennis and golf are most similar in pay structure. But why is it invalid to compare those sports with other professional athletes pay as a percentage of overall revenue?
Saw this yesterday and felt it was a bit disingenuous. They kept comparing tennis pros to pro athletes in team sports. Yet, the most apt comparison would be golf pros. Guess what? Same outcomes! The 200th ranked PGA tour golf pro in 2022 made about $220,000. After paying his caddie, coach, travel for him, his caddie and other expenses, I'd be shocked if he kept any money. Probably lost money. Very, very good golfers can't make much money unless they are in the top 100 or so either. The $10M earned by the top tennis pro would have placed him at about 6th in the 2022 golf rankings. So, similar.
Why is it disingenuous to compare tennis and golf pros to other professional athletes?
I'd assume because a third string QB doesn't have to pay for their travel and other expenses?
I guess I'd say it's like comparing a salaried employee's salary to a freelancer who needs to bring all their own equipment.
Right... the freelancer is typically paid much higher because of all those expenses, but in the case of tennis it's the opposite. Like why is it invalid to look at player pay as a percentage of overall revenue across different sports and think that tennis players are getting a raw deal?
There's no inherent value to being good at tennis or any other sport. What it really boils down to is that individual sports get less viewers than team sports, even when adjusted per capita for the additional people. Less viewers = less advertisements = less money to everyone.
There's a multitude of hypothesis why: maybe team sports means more personalities, more room for drama; maybe there's just a deep seated part of our monkey brain that enjoys watching people work together; maybe having more people just allows for more complicated, enjoyable games.
Regardless of the reason, viewership for tennis and golf are several orders of magnitude lower than basketball, baseball, football, soccer.
There's no question of why we like to watch team sports more.
We monkeys like when our monkey tribe beats other monkey tribes. That's why we shriek and scream and hoot and howl when our tribe beats the other tribe. We must watch so that we know if our tribe is stronger.
Maybe because it's a bad comparison due to the added costs involved.
Just going off of the information I can find online, Patrick Mahones has a ten year, $450M salary. That's $45M a year. I don't know if that's the 'top' salary overall but SportsTrac says he's 'Cap hit'.
By comparison, Golf Digest says Phil Mickelson makes $102.9M but that's with $75M bonuses and $26M in off course pay (endorsements and such) - meaning he only made about $1.9M on the course.
As long as Mahomes doesn't break his contract, he gets that money. Mickelson does not. To compare their salaries directly we'd have to pay Mahomes for completed plays in won games or something similar.
Tennis has less viewership than football. We can't expect all athletes to be paid the same regardless so we find a more comparable sport in terms of viewership and costs required.
This doesn't mean that golf, and by proxy tennis, pro players aren't getting the shaft or that we should just accept paying them unfairly as a 'fact of life' or anything. You're free to still think they're getting a raw deal. Just that comparing them to football players is a little silly.
Just my opinion and stuff, I'm not much of a sports guy.
Football, basketball, baseball, and hockey are all unionized. They collectively bargain to get a better deal. Golf and tennis are not.
I think that's the primary reason for the relative pay discrepancy.
Yes I did. I agree tennis and golf are most similar in pay structure. But why is it invalid to compare those sports with other professional athletes pay as a percentage of overall revenue?