Inefficiencies In Sports

At the beginning of the twentieth century and the outset of the professional sports industry the existence of underpaid players at the premier level of athletics was a legitimate problem. It was this problem that played a role in the fixing of the

In this paper we will examine the history of the salary cap structures in sports focusing mainly on the version that the NFL uses. We will also take a in-depth look at the four different areas that makes up the salary cap (Salary Cap, Active Spending, Dead Money and Cap Space) and impact the cap has had on the players themselves. As well as how it has reshaped the teams and leagues itself to help the NFL to grow into the Multi Billion Dollar sports empire that it was become today. Who would have thought that making the decision to place a limit upon spending and giving everyone the same opportunity for success would have such a profound effect on the growth and popularity of the sport?

Anyone who has been involved in an organized sport, whether it is backyard football or a high school sports team, knows that these sports all have organizations that are responsible for setting rules, determining conditions of play, and penalizing individuals who infringe the rules. Some of the organizations like the National Football league and the MLB are familiar to most people, the rules they follow are not generally understood by anyone who is not closely associated with the sport. Most fans and sport critics assume that what is happening inside these organizations are of little concern to them. However, this is not the case. In the MLB, the New York Yankees spend an excessive amount of money every year to obtain big name players. A

By embedding the pro-con list into his article, the author bring to light the things people do not think of when making an argument for or against college athletes getting compensated for their work. Malcolm makes strong assumptions that if players are paid than they will not play as hard as before and he brings up numerous questions surrounding the whole debacle such as “Will each player receive the same amount? “ “How would players be compensated?” and “ Will this cause problems or envy between teammates that would potentially make more money?”(Lemmons).

This project investigates how salary and performance of offensive players in Major League Baseball are linked. We believe this is an interesting problem because it is traditionally believed that professional athletes play with hopes of earning a high salary, yet it often seems a batter’s performance is not linked to their salary (Jensen). Therefore, it seems as if the link between a player’s performance and their salary is different than their true performance. Performing a statistical analysis of this conundrum will give us great insight as to if it is accurate to say that performance changes salary drastically. Studies that prior statisticians have done differ from this study because their studies focus on salary and team performance rather than on the performance of individual players (Jane). Our study focuses on salary and individual performance in the current season. While there is extensive data on both game performances in the MLB and salaries, we can contribute to the statistical community by comparing how salaries are affected by different performance indicators for randomly selected individual players. Essentially, our hypothesis is an examination into how a batter 's game performance affects salary. We expect that the better a player’s statistics are, the higher their salary will be.

There are five major sports leagues in the United States; Major League Baseball, Major League Soccer, the National Basketball Association (which has what is known as a “soft salary cap), the National Football League, and the National Hockey League. Of these five, only baseball lacks what is known as a salary cap. A salary cap is the upper limit of the combined salaries for a team’s players. In the other four sports I mentioned, having to work within the boundaries of a salary cap is a balancing act, to gain an advantage at one position requires you to be at a disadvantage at another position. For example, to have a top tier quarterback in the NFL like Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers and the large salary they command, a team might lack the funds to sign a top tier linebacker or cornerback. With Major League Baseball lacking a salary cap, this balancing act vanishes and teams could sign anyone and everyone they wished. This causes a competitive imbalance that is hurting the sport. Too often we see the same teams making the playoffs and winning championships like the San

Free agents demand for very high compensation and this takes away major chunk of available salary. Every team has to come up with good balance of rookies and veterans to meet salary cap.

With the passing of another academic year, fans were able to enjoy yet another nail-biting NCAA Basketball Tournament and a highlight filled football season. Most would agree that the NCAA provides competitive sport as popular as the professionals. In fact, its annual revenue makes that point clear. College football and basketball generate more than the National Basketball Association, a total of more than $6 billion yearly.[1] There is one major difference between the two associations, however. NBA players get paid for the revenue they help bring in, while NCAA athletes receive no monetary compensation. The promise of a free education is not enough anymore if the NCAA wants to act as a money making business, and not reward those who help make it profitable. If the NCAA does not want to pay college athletes, than it should not hold these players back from entering the professional game. However, colluding with the NBA and the NFL, athletes are restricted when it comes to joining the pro ranks. With these two ideas combined, athletes are drawn to the college game out of necessity, and not always desire. Some writers, like Stanley Eitzen, have even compared the system to indentured servitude or a “plantation system.”[2] Concerning the revenue sports of men’s basketball and football, the players should be entitled to some monetary compensation for their work, as well as the right to enter the professional leagues at an age that suits their abilities.

Forbes says “If payment begins and there is no cap, the bidding war among colleges for some players will be hard to control. Are people ready for the few colleges with the financial resources (which would be ten to twenty schools) getting virtually all the best football and basket players? (Forbes) With pay to the coming to the student the want and drive to play in the NFL. There would not be any incentive to play in the professional league, when they are making good money in the college level. College is an amateur sport and should be treated that that way and not glorify the students athletes.

Over the decades, Division I college athletes have been pouring their heart and soul into the game they love. Their passion for sports has allowed them to attend and play for a university of their choice. College sports is similar to a business, especially at the Division I level and the athlete’s job is to bring profit and revenue to their school. In recent years, there has been an ongoing conflict in collegiate athletics: should college athletes get paid? In this essay, I will discuss the effects of paying college athletes, and reveal on how much each athlete is really receiving.

While the NCAA may be making most of its money off of college football it would be unruly to not pay other sports such as soccer, lacrosse, and basketball for both men and women. A plan proposed for the payment of college players known as the “Free Market Plan” is the idea to let the market decide how much the players make (Dohrmann). Rather than allow schools to give stipends under the watchful eye of the NCAA, advocates believe athletes should be free to make as much money as they can on their own and accepting whatever lucrative inducements an agent might offer in the hopes of landing him as a future client . A problem with this plan is the NCAA’s approval due to the fact that the more affluent schools would be able to purchase the players that they want. This would leave schools with less money to essentially have worse teams which goes against NCAA’s policy of “one school should not, because of affluent boosters or rule-breaking coaches, have an unfair advantage over another” (Dohrmann). The only way to let the free market decide while maintaining some semblance of a level playing field is to have a clearinghouse for endorsement deals and payments from agents. It would also make sure that no deals are made just to give a program a competitive advantage and that none of a player's compensation is being facilitated by

In the world of major league baseball, the Oakland A’s defied the laws of baseball economics. The team spent only $34 million (the 2nd lowest payroll) had won 102 games and lost only 60 in 2001. On top of this, they finished first in their division and made the playoffs. Major baseball teams would hire high school players rather than college players. This made high school players costly. The Oakland A’s strategy is to hire college players to save on resources. They argued that college players have already gained substantial exposure and

Do Major League Baseball teams with higher salaries win more frequently than other teams? Although many people believe that the larger payroll budgets win games, which point does vary, depending on the situation. “…performances by individual players vary quite a bit from year to year, preventing owners from guaranteeing success on the field. Team spending is certainly a component in winning, but no team can buy a championship.” (Bradbury). For some, it’s hard not to root for the lower paid teams. If the big money teams, like Goliath, are always supposed to win, it’s hard not cheer for David. This paper will discuss the effects of payroll budgets on the percentage of wins for the 30 Major League

The passages present a discussion about arguments concerning whether or not professional athletes are overpaid. This is an important debate since professional sports represents a multi-billion-dollar-per-year industry. The two positions argue whether or not professional athletes should be paid the large yearly salaries they are paid. Both viewpoints have valid claims warranting consideration. For example, evidence suggests that people with far more important jobs are paid much less than professional athletes; in contrast, opposing evidence suggests that since professional athletes generally have short careers and must train very hard to build and maintain their skills, the higher salary is justified. While both sides of the issue have valid points, the viewpoint that professional athletes are not overpaid is the best-supported position, the position supported by the preponderance of the evidence cited in the passages. The strongest and best reasons supporting this position are that professional athletes must endure grueling and intensive training, they generally have short careers that often end in injury, and the amount that they are thought to be paid is often inflated. Accordingly, these reasons and opposing viewpoints will be discussed next.

If I could pay someone $25 million a year to get him/her on my team and generate $30 million, why not hire that player? The salary cap for the NFL is $102.5 million per team, and we currently have 32 teams, so we the public are paying 3.28 billion to those teams. Currently America is in a 11 trillion dollar debt, if athletes could get paid $150,000/year then we could save 1 billion dollars a year. The monetary worth of athletes exceeds the value that any one individual is actually worth. League officials should be using salary caps, negotiations, and legal tactics. Athletes' salaries are in increasing problem for the economy of our modern world. Although the sports have their own equal distributions, the overwhelming salaries of the leagues' highest paid players have made the average of salaries higher and higher each year.