Some have included calls for players to Play rep games for nothing, or that Players earn too much, or we are tired of sports stars whingeing etc.
Well, Id like to educate a few of you on the Statistics of the Career of the average First Grade Footballer.
Since 1959 :-
*36 per cent of players have played fewer than 10first-grade games.
*56.8 per cent played less than 30 top-grade games.
*A staggering 82.2 per cent played less than 100.
*The average career spans only 49 first-grade games and 4.2 years.
Out of every single player who has spent most of their youth pursuing a dream, those that actually go on to making a proper living out of the game is minimal.
Please also consider these stats :-
* Players out of the game after a year (depending on injuries, suspensions etc): 65 per cent.
* Out of the game after two years: 75 per cent.
* Out of the game after five years: 88 per cent.
The reality is that Kids who aspire to become first grade footballers more often than not, dont realise that failure is a high possibility. The assumption that players go on to have long careers and make heaps of money is entirely false!
Out of the 20-25 or so kids that come through each year, aspiring to be first grade players, usually two or three of the 20 players might go on to play first grade. Of those that play first grade, only 20 per cent have a career longer than four years. Of those, probably
half make a good living out of the game.
Since 1908, only approx 8870 players have played first-grade rugby league.
So, many people on here have questioned, how much is the average footballer really worth? Do they deserve to be paid well for doing what they do?
They are the product we all support, they make the game what it is today. They are the reason we look forward to Friday Night... or Sunday afternoon.
So how much is the average First Grader really worth... I cant answer that, but what I do know is that when you consider how little time they have to earn money off what they do well, Im all for them earning as much as they can. The great players of our game such as Greg Inglis, or Darren Lockyer, or Nathan Hindmarsh or Benji Marshall, they are entitled to as much financial reward as the game can support.... but what about those who never make the lofty heights of these guys? Darren Lockyer put it best once when he agreed that the stars of the game are entitled to earn as much as they can, but for their less fancied team mates, they are worth a lot more than they get paid!
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
Replies
It would be interesting to see how those figures are scewed if you take out stats from players who play less that 30 games.
Anyway, I have no doubt whatsoever that NRL players are underpaid. Price is a function of supply and demand. When you look at the playuers that have left our shores or moved to union you can't deny the game needs to pay players more.
Where I do agree that the players should be able to earn as much as they can and what the game can support, they should not also expect it!!!!! Surely every player must know that at most, they will be lucky enough to get 10 years at the top level, thus covering their bases earlier on with fall backs. Instead, it appears with some, there is an expectation to be set up for life.
I find the argument, from another post, comparing our game to NFL, basketball, round ball et al, as completely naive. We don't have the sponsorship opportunities here and we don't have the density of population to generate as much marketing to just name a few. A bit hard to get blood out of a stone.
I'm sure 99% of kids playing the game keep at it because they love it, not because of a future payday/career out of it! That well and truely changes some where, why have we become a society of looking for easy riches.
As Ydidisayido says the old 80/20 rule pretty well appplies to everything.
A stat that I came across a few years ago shows that less than 1% of proffessional sporting hopefuls (all pro sports) ever make it to the top.
IMO third party deals should not be part of the salary cap.
Players have a contract with their respective club and the NRL which says they will receive so many $'s per year (from the club and NRL) to play Rugby League and be available for rep games.
If the club, or the player's manager can secure extra funding for a player OUTSIDE of the club to enhance his contracted price then what the hell has that deal got to do with the NRL.
As long as the player meets his contractual requirements to his club and NRL then where's the problem?
The NRL saying it must sanction every dollar a player receives appears to me to be a restrictive trade practice.
A top line player is a commercial product - no more - no less, and as such can be bought and sold for as much money as people are prepared to pay for that product.
If the players ever got their act together then I believe they could successfully challenge the legitimacy of the NRL saying how much they are allowed to earn - regardless of the source.
If some are good enough (or lucky enough) to secure massive bucks from sponsors outside of the NRL network then good luck to them - if not - As Bozzo Fulton said so many years ago "Winners can laugh and the losers can please themselves"
I think this type of system would take a lot of pressure off the clubs and perhaps free up a bit of their salary for up and coming players they want to hang on to.
I agree with you that they should be able to earn as much as possible but the game has to generate enough income to pay for it, this is where i think the NRL should allow unlimited third party payments to 3 or 4 players for each team. After all if big companies are willing to pay players shit loads of cash why not, it's not costing the league anything. This could free up more money to pay the bottom end players, after all they are the one's missing out.
I know I complain all the time about my financial situation, but the bottom line is, is that I have a wardrobe overflowing with clothes, a car and blew too much money on an Allanah Hill headband last week!
In this case, I don't think the debate is about whether sports stars and musicians etc get paid too much! Society places significant value on the talents of such people and they are paid as a result of it. Too much? You tell me, but this is a situation which does not look like changing anytime soon.
The debate which we can actually have concerns the keeping of our players. When you look to players of other codes earning 3 times what you are, then of course there are going to be complaints! This goes for any industry - if you see a person doing a similar job to you being paid 3 times the amount, then questions need to be asked.
The important question in this debate is how RL is to stay competitive and keep its most important players.
Mal, everyone complains, here's a qoute from a popular TV comercial "I'm a single mother with a daughter". haha.
I would like you to prepare some figures based on the last 10 and 20 years as you are including irrelevant figures from an era where it was not a professional sport.
Also, If you could remove the word average from the subject it would be appreciated as these players are exceptional in my mind.
In my opinion they should be rewarded well for their efforts and i prefer to hear stories about well paid sporting champions than fat cat bankers getting millions for increasing fees.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next