[Hong Kong Spireite]

mincemeat, on 22 June 2011 - 10:05 AM, said:

Sorry, mate, but for keeping fit, kicking a ball around and is most cases plenty of adulation from your fans, i think £800.00 per week (which is really at the bottom end) is plenty! You need to tell that to people who earn minimum wage, working a 40 hour week, pal!

That equates to circa £3200.00 per month..........oh, my, how hard done by they must be feeling; you need to get in the real world, pal!

I am living in the real world, it's you that's not. I've been there too earning minimum wage and I've had to work damn hard (and have my fair share of luck) to get to where I am today. I agree with you that 800 quid a week might sound like a lot of money for kicking a ball around and doing something you love but salaries are determined by market forces and not by how hard or how many hours you work. I would actually bet that a large percentage of footballers in league two are on less than 800 a week but of course you'll always get the odd few that earn much more. Also, trust me, 800 quid a week is not THAT much money and when you put a mortgage, food, petrol, kids etc into the equation it doesn't leave enough for you to save up and retire early! You tend to live to your means and let's not forget that a lot of footballers (not all) are not that bright and are unlikely to get highly paid jobs after their career has finished.

At the end of the day, as others have said, playing football is a job and it IS a short career. This doesn't justify the ridiculous salaries of premiership stars but if you know that you can only do a job for 15 years or so then you are going to want to earn as much money as you can. Also, when the day comes to retire, you are going to be accustomed to a certain standard of living and unless you managed to earn enough to save a lot of money then you're not going to be able to maintain that standard of living after you retire. Even if they spent their spare time studying and gaining qualifications rather than playing golf and p1ssing about on twitter, 35 is an old age for someone wanting to change to another profession and earn good money as most people will have 10-15 years headstart in terms of experience which leaves them at the bottom of the pile in the junior ranks. Also, not everyone can become a coach or manager and most of the managers and coaches in the lower divisions don't earn big bucks either.

As I said, this doesn't justify their salaries at all and I agree that others work much harder for less but it is what it is and people can not blame footballers in the lower divisions for chasing the cash. I think we'd all do the same in their situation and you're lying if you say you wouldn't.

[RPL42YEARS]

Hong Kong Spireite, on 22 June 2011 - 03:43 PM, said:

I am living in the real world, it's you that's not. I've been there too earning minimum wage and I've had to work damn hard (and have my fair share of luck) to get to where I am today. I agree with you that 800 quid a week might sound like a lot of money for kicking a ball around and doing something you love but salaries are determined by market forces and not by how hard or how many hours you work. I would actually bet that a large percentage of footballers in league two are on less than 800 a week but of course you'll always get the odd few that earn much more. Also, trust me, 800 quid a week is not THAT much money and when you put a mortgage, food, petrol, kids etc into the equation it doesn't leave enough for you to save up and retire early! You tend to live to your means and let's not forget that a lot of footballers (not all) are not that bright and are unlikely to get highly paid jobs after their career has finished.

At the end of the day, as others have said, playing football is a job and it IS a short career. This doesn't justify the ridiculous salaries of premiership stars but if you know that you can only do a job for 15 years or so then you are going to want to earn as much money as you can. Also, when the day comes to retire, you are going to be accustomed to a certain standard of living and unless you managed to earn enough to save a lot of money then you're not going to be able to maintain that standard of living after you retire. Even if they spent their spare time studying and gaining qualifications rather than playing golf and p1ssing about on twitter, 35 is an old age for someone wanting to change to another profession and earn good money as most people will have 10-15 years headstart in terms of experience which leaves them at the bottom of the pile in the junior ranks. Also, not everyone can become a coach or manager and most of the managers and coaches in the lower divisions don't earn big bucks either.

As I said, this doesn't justify their salaries at all and I agree that others work much harder for less but it is what it is and people can not blame footballers in the lower divisions for chasing the cash. I think we'd all do the same in their situation and you're lying if you say you wouldn't.

In the end the marketplace is establishing the salary levels.

I guess we need to take care given the Football League rules that will soon cap the amount of income to be spent on pay.

How many of us would turn down 10%, 20%, 30% ... etc more simply to play in a higher league?

Back to the original question - Ajose everytime - a better long term prospect. I'd have to settle for just one creative centre midfield player because we would still need 2 centre forwards.

[Misnomer]

s42blue, on 22 June 2011 - 11:12 AM, said:

Well said. We exist in a society full of people with chips on their shoulder. People have the same opportunity to progress as each other (with a few exceptions of family money and old boys network) and there are many many examples of people starting with nothing and making something. What the successful people have is drive and determination and an idea...all siupplied by themselves.

So for the argument about working harder and for less money do something about it...it's only ever in your hands. Sadly most people moan about it not being fair etc...blah blah blee din heart rubbish.

Academically I didnt do the best but Im happy, comfortable and a Spireite.

The question of whether pursuit of money leading to happiness however is a whole different topic.

Do they really have the same opportunities to progress? I think many many people will disagree with you; children are nurtured (sometimes, fortunately gifted) in a household that doesnt value education, uses what vices they feel necessary to quell their misery, no prospects of manual work that pays a good wage (like the miners had)these children are left to their own devices and ultimately don't make anything of themselves; i should know, i've taught hundreds of them.

As for 'do something about it'; what exactly, do what? My point relating to footballers was that they DO have the opportunity to better themselves more than others; they have the money, the time, the contacts....i want to do a Masters degree...do you know how much that will cost me? £5'000.00 i can't afford that and the Government or local authorities won't contribute a penny towards it...not even a loan; if i was a footballer i'd have no problem doing it.

This post has been edited by mincemeat: 22 June 2011 - 07:58 PM

[Misnomer]

Crooked_Spireite, on 22 June 2011 - 11:12 AM, said:

Completely agree.

Money talks, as in all careers salary is ultimately one of the top few motivators in selection of job.

I'm sure there are certain thresholds. For instance:

If Donaldson is offered £2k a week here (completely random figure) = salary of £104,000

If he is offered £2,100 at Crawley = 109,200 salary. In terms of take home this is not a vast amount of extra money after tax etc so is probably offset by playing in a higher league, in a nice stadium, in front of big crowds etc etc.

However, there will reach a point where the 'value' placed on playing for us vs. Crawley becomes offset by £££.

If Crawley offer £2,500 a week then its is a complety different kettle of fish.

Obviously there is the factor of how playing for Crawley as opposed to us may impact future earnings, however if he is offered a 3 year deal then that covers pretty much half of his remaining playing career.....

There are the same opportunities for Donaldson to do his coaching badges and develop his future career at Crawley as there would be at CFC (ish). So unless he wants to learn from JS (or Norm or Jack etc) and places a value on this then why would he not go to Crawley for extra money?

If I were choosing between 2 clubs which I had no affiliation or fondness for then salary would be a massive decision point.

You see, i just don't get this...for the sake of an extra £500 a week....my argument is centred around footballers earning 'enough' money as it is; i guess at the end of the day it is how one has been brought up, ones' values and ones' ethics.

[Spired]

mincemeat, on 22 June 2011 - 07:57 PM, said:

You see, i just don't get this...for the sake of an extra £500 a week....my argument is centred around footballers earning 'enough' money as it is; i guess at the end of the day it is how one has been brought up, ones' values and ones' ethics.

£500 per week = £26k per year (before tax deductions) which is more than the national average wage.

If he put that money into a pension and had a 3 year contract for example...then I would (especially if I had a young family/wife/mortgage) do that.

[Misnomer]

Spire 12345 (Rotherham 0), on 22 June 2011 - 07:59 PM, said:

£500 a week is a lot when only earning £2000 a week

I hope that's a sarcastic comment, mate?

[Crooked_Spireite]

mincemeat, on 22 June 2011 - 07:57 PM, said:

You see, i just don't get this...for the sake of an extra £500 a week....my argument is centred around footballers earning 'enough' money as it is; i guess at the end of the day it is how one has been brought up, ones' values and ones' ethics.

Possibly.

That £500 could be the difference between a better education for children, or a fast car, depending on your preference.

Everyone has their own motivation. I would think very hard about a 20% pay rise whatever my situation though.

Plus why would me choosing one employer over another, of which I previously stated I had no preference for/ affiliation with, based on salary inform you of my ethical standpoint?

That's just my opinion.

This post has been edited by Crooked_Spireite: 22 June 2011 - 08:15 PM

[Misnomer]

Spire 12345 (Rotherham 0), on 22 June 2011 - 08:07 PM, said:

Your point only as any sense if the player say was offered say 5000 and 5500

But even then would you turn down 78,000 over three years??

Personally, i'd say £8000.00 a month is plenty but i'm a humble man with simple means and little in the way of ego...........obviously, there are many of you who are different in thought to me and that's fine; we all have our own views.

[Misnomer]

Crooked_Spireite, on 22 June 2011 - 08:08 PM, said:

Possibly.

That £500 could be the difference between a better education for children, or a fast car, depending on your preference.

Everyone has their own motivation. I would think very hard about a 20% pay rise whatever my situation though.

That's just my opinion.

I'd possibly say, £8000.00 per month, plus fees, plus bonuses, circa £100'000.00 - £120'000.00 per year would be enough to buy a nice house, nice car and pay for a private education for the children.

[Crooked_Spireite]

mincemeat, on 22 June 2011 - 08:14 PM, said:

I'd possibly say, £8000.00 per month, plus fees, plus bonuses, circa £100'000.00 - £120'000.00 per year would be enough to buy a nice house, nice car and pay for a private education for the children.

Man alive. It was an example.

Ok the difference between having capital to start your own business after football then (as several we know have) or not..

Does that example suit you better?

(and I'm not arguing with you that £100k a year is not 'plenty' just that you don't have to be an egotistical, uber capitalist to make a decision to move elsewhere for more)

This post has been edited by Crooked_Spireite: 22 June 2011 - 08:23 PM

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

bluesocks, on 22 June 2011 - 10:03 AM, said:

well if that turns out to be true, then he would be best off going to crawley. i think it was oldhams manager that said if the players ultimate motive is money then they arent for him. and that should go for us too as surely, we only want players who are going to be proud to wear the blue shirt and be part of mr sheridans vision

The Oldham manager said that as he had fk all chance of signing him. In English he said "we've made him a p.ss poor offer compared to everbody else, so he won't be coming. I've got to make out i want a team of fighters playing for the shirt so let me have a mardy and say fk him"

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

mincemeat, on 22 June 2011 - 07:57 PM, said:

You see, i just don't get this...for the sake of an extra £500 a week....my argument is centred around footballers earning 'enough' money as it is; i guess at the end of the day it is how one has been brought up, ones' values and ones' ethics.

You mean he's sensible, financially aware and looking after his future and family. Sounds like a right plank. As I see it that's probably his mortgage paid with the extra. Anybody that prefers values and ethics for their current employer over looking after their future and family for me has the wrong values.

Whichever club he signs for, if he doesn't perform, at the end of the contrct, or before, he will be out the door. Their will be no loyalty or sentiment from the club involved, just a thanks for the effort and goodbye, you're not wanted.

[toddhopper]

s42blue, on 22 June 2011 - 11:12 AM, said:

Well said. We exist in a society full of people with chips on their shoulder. People have the same opportunity to progress as each other (with a few exceptions of family money and old boys network) and there are many many examples of people starting with nothing and making something. What the successful people have is drive and determination and an idea...all siupplied by themselves.

So for the argument about working harder and for less money do something about it...it's only ever in your hands. Sadly most people moan about it not being fair etc...blah blah blee din heart rubbish.

Academically I didnt do the best but Im happy, comfortable and a Spireite.

The question of whether pursuit of money leading to happiness however is a whole different topic.

Sounds to me you've bought the right wing propaganda that's been fed to us for the past few decades & think all our woes are down to the feckless & lazy so & so's at the rump of society.
I'm sorry, but to think our society provides equality of opportunity & that successful people get there through just their own efforts is entirely inaccurate.
As for footballers, I see no chip on the shoulder attitude in pointing out how fatuous the 'short career' explanation & excuse for exorbitant pay packets is. It simply has nothing to do with why wages can be so astrinomically high in football. Football is a very good example of a market out of control & unlike many who have been indoctrinated into thinking free markets are the perfect means on which to base our economy, I recognise that without adequate regulation & control things always & I mean ALWAYS spin wildly out of control until major convulsions occur causing untold suffering to real people, all for the sake of market purity & the wallets of those who are in a position to milk those markets for their own benefit. In the case of football, the fans will be the one's who suffer, as because of their emotional attachments to their clubs, they are asked for & willingly pay ever more money to help finance the obscene extravagance we witness corrupting the people's game.

[rs1978]

toddhopper, on 23 June 2011 - 09:57 AM, said:

Sounds to me you've bought the right wing propaganda that's been fed to us for the past few decades & think all our woes are down to the feckless & lazy so & so's at the rump of society.
I'm sorry, but to think our society provides equality of opportunity & that successful people get there through just their own efforts is entirely inaccurate.
As for footballers, I see no chip on the shoulder attitude in pointing out how fatuous the 'short career' explanation & excuse for exorbitant pay packets is. It simply has nothing to do with why wages can be so astrinomically high in football. Football is a very good example of a market out of control & unlike many who have been indoctrinated into thinking free markets are the perfect means on which to base our economy, I recognise that without adequate regulation & control things always & I mean ALWAYS spin wildly out of control until major convulsions occur causing untold suffering to real people, all for the sake of market purity & the wallets of those who are in a position to milk those markets for their own benefit. In the case of football, the fans will be the one's who suffer, as because of their emotional attachments to their clubs, they are asked for & willingly pay ever more money to help finance the obscene extravagance we witness corrupting the people's game.

I pretty much entirely agree with what you say. I don't think anyone will argue that the earnings of footballers (particularly at the top level) are obscene.

I'm intrigued - there is a lot of money in football, and the reason there is a lot of money in football is that people like it - i.e. paying to attend games, paying for TV subscriptions etc etc. There would be no football without the players. If a big chunk of the money coming into the game didn't go to the players, who should it go to? Administrators, Directors...?

The real issue is that too much money comes into football - ticket prices are too high, TV subscriptions are too high, cost of replica kits are too high. This it what needs to be tackled, but that is dictated - for the time being at least - by market forces. Until something is done about the fans being 'fleeced' it is difficult to suggest that the money should be distributed differently. Fans are taken advantage of by clubs and the wider 'football community' because our loyalty and passion is there for the taking. We choose to pump money into the game - we don't have to...it's a bit like drug dealers increasing their prices once people are hooked!?

[bluesocks]

toddhopper, on 23 June 2011 - 09:57 AM, said:

Sounds to me you've bought the right wing propaganda that's been fed to us for the past few decades & think all our woes are down to the feckless & lazy so & so's at the rump of society.
I'm sorry, but to think our society provides equality of opportunity & that successful people get there through just their own efforts is entirely inaccurate.
As for footballers, I see no chip on the shoulder attitude in pointing out how fatuous the 'short career' explanation & excuse for exorbitant pay packets is. It simply has nothing to do with why wages can be so astrinomically high in football. Football is a very good example of a market out of control & unlike many who have been indoctrinated into thinking free markets are the perfect means on which to base our economy, I recognise that without adequate regulation & control things always & I mean ALWAYS spin wildly out of control until major convulsions occur causing untold suffering to real people, all for the sake of market purity & the wallets of those who are in a position to milk those markets for their own benefit. In the case of football, the fans will be the one's who suffer, as because of their emotional attachments to their clubs, they are asked for & willingly pay ever more money to help finance the obscene extravagance we witness corrupting the people's game.

i dont know if such posts are designed to try and make you look half intelligent, but to me it has the adverse affect.. it makes you look a nob (or is that a knob?)