Steve Jobs catches the bus to work everyday
Tu Stultus Es
walks up hill both wayseleven bravo wrote:
Steve Jobs catches the bus to work everyday
doesnt even take the elevator
Tu Stultus Es
Oh yeah, I think it was Gilchrist who got some massive bid on him when it started, something like $1.8 million wasn't it?Spark wrote:
I wasn't thinking Olympics because there the highest paying prize is also probably the biggest honour as well - I'm thinking stuff like IPL of which Jaekus will be awarePoseidon wrote:
That's a really dumb analogy. Would a CEO stay at his job if he earned less than a typical cubicle zombie? Of course not.11 Bravo wrote:
would kobe stay in LA if he was paid less than i dunno...some bench player?
no
And as Spark mentioned, what about the olympics? Athletes barely get paid for anything there. The only athletes who really get anything are gymnasts, swimmers, etc who don't get much attention outside of the olympics so they get a lot of endorsement deals. USA Hockey, USA Basketball, USA Baseball, etc... make very little money for competing in the games.
They recently had the IIHF world championships in hockey, and there was a big argument whether John Tavares should go on the Isles forum I frequent. He went because he loves the game and wanted to improve his skills.
The player gets a lot of that sum, but in doing so it means he is held in very high esteem by his colleagues.
and gives ipods and ipads to the poor
Gilchrist had retired... Clarke was the first high-profile opt out, then Ponting and Johnson, now Bopara and possibly Swann. Not many, but a few.Jaekus wrote:
Oh yeah, I think it was Gilchrist who got some massive bid on him when it started, something like $1.8 million wasn't it?Spark wrote:
I wasn't thinking Olympics because there the highest paying prize is also probably the biggest honour as well - I'm thinking stuff like IPL of which Jaekus will be awarePoseidon wrote:
That's a really dumb analogy. Would a CEO stay at his job if he earned less than a typical cubicle zombie? Of course not.
And as Spark mentioned, what about the olympics? Athletes barely get paid for anything there. The only athletes who really get anything are gymnasts, swimmers, etc who don't get much attention outside of the olympics so they get a lot of endorsement deals. USA Hockey, USA Basketball, USA Baseball, etc... make very little money for competing in the games.
They recently had the IIHF world championships in hockey, and there was a big argument whether John Tavares should go on the Isles forum I frequent. He went because he loves the game and wanted to improve his skills.
The player gets a lot of that sum, but in doing so it means he is held in very high esteem by his colleagues.
Last edited by Spark (2011-05-24 08:51:59)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Ah yeah, when I was typing Gilchrist I was thinking maybe it was Clarke instead
he even lets his room mates use his computer11 Bravo wrote:
and gives ipods and ipads to the poor
Tu Stultus Es
not to mention the olympic committee get hookers, fine meals, and expensive ass hotels to choose a city
expensive fine ass hookers
Tu Stultus Es
Yeah. First year his dad had cancer but after that it's been "you're going to have to pay me a stupid amount of money to convince me to play IPL" and no one has.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
i think oil ceo's do their job because they just love drillingeleven bravo wrote:
he even lets his room mates use his computer11 Bravo wrote:
and gives ipods and ipads to the poor
tobacco lobbyist do their job because they love cancer
Tu Stultus Es
PsyOps grunts choose that specialization because they like mindfucking people.
it sure aint for the shit payTrotskygrad wrote:
PsyOps grunts choose that specialization because they like mindfucking people.
Tu Stultus Es
dont hate the playa hate the game
bring back jordan
bring back jordan
Athletes are paid way too much.
Last edited by Stimey (2011-05-25 09:19:31)
no one wants stupid leagues like the EPL or MLB where two teams spend more money then everyone else and win every yearJay wrote:
What's wrong with the players wanting more money? Here's a novel idea: get rid of the salary cap. Then you don't have to worry about percentages and other bullshit.
the players don't lock out the owners, the owners lock out the players. the owners have been planning to lock out the players for years nowlowing wrote:
I did.Poseidon wrote:
So I just listed some of the biggest names in sports - all who signed for less money to either stay loyal or have a better chance at a championship - and you tell me "explain everyone else"? What, you want a list of every free agent signing since 1947?
Explain how a lockout is going to up their stats or win them championships. That, after all, was the point of my comment. They are not fighting saying: Hey, this isn't about money, 18 million a year is fine, lets just get out there and win a championship. They want MORE than their already exuberant benefits provide, and a championship isn't mentioned.
You are nuts if you do not think they know a championship win increases their money intake. That is all they want a championship for. Fame and fortune, not for the love of the game.
The premier league isn't a two horse race with two teams spending more money than everyone else... it is the fairest league in terms of wealth distribution with regards to television rights and funding from the FA.HaiBai wrote:
no one wants stupid leagues like the EPL or MLB where two teams spend more money then everyone else and win every yearJay wrote:
What's wrong with the players wanting more money? Here's a novel idea: get rid of the salary cap. Then you don't have to worry about percentages and other bullshit.
United spent £6mil on Hernandez, £10 on Smalling last year and won the league, Liverpool spent more than that in January alone, City spent a £10 mil more in January and tens of millions more in the summer previous, Chelsea spent £100mil this year on Torres, Luiz and Ramires, Spurs spent about £20 mil on players.
You're thinking of La Liga and the Scottish Premier League.
how is it you know so little?HaiBai wrote:
no one wants stupid leagues like the EPL
???11 Bravo wrote:
how is it you know so little?HaiBai wrote:
no one wants stupid leagues like the EPL
Teenagers know everything
explain these?Sturgeon wrote:
The premier league isn't a two horse race with two teams spending more money than everyone else... it is the fairest league in terms of wealth distribution with regards to television rights and funding from the FA.HaiBai wrote:
no one wants stupid leagues like the EPL or MLB where two teams spend more money then everyone else and win every yearJay wrote:
What's wrong with the players wanting more money? Here's a novel idea: get rid of the salary cap. Then you don't have to worry about percentages and other bullshit.
United spent £6mil on Hernandez, £10 on Smalling last year and won the league, Liverpool spent more than that in January alone, City spent a £10 mil more in January and tens of millions more in the summer previous, Chelsea spent £100mil this year on Torres, Luiz and Ramires, Spurs spent about £20 mil on players.
You're thinking of La Liga and the Scottish Premier League.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/footbal … 888167.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ … 908394.ece
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/st … mp;cc=5901
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/footbal … 384247.stm
you're right though, la liga and other leagues without salary caps are great examples of how unbalanced and shitty the league will become when there's no salary cap
Thank god my parents never introduced me to spectator sports. Argument about sports team and leagues are dumber and more boring than religion debates
"Breaking up the Premier League's Big Four"
A four and a half year old article about an elite group of clubs (United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool) being better than the rest which is no longer relevant as Spurs, City, Liverpool, United, Chelsea and Arsenal all had a great shout at the league until the last few months
A three year old article before City came into money and Spurs broke the "top four" talking about the "top four" which isn't fucking relevant either.
None of those articles back your claims of it being dominated by two teams who spend more than the rest.
The biggest spenders in the past two years have been City followed by Chelsea followed by Spurs followed by Liverpool followed by United, guess who's won the league the most recently?
Yeah the team that spent the least.
Watch the premier league before you spout bullshit about it.
A four and a half year old article about an elite group of clubs (United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool) being better than the rest which is no longer relevant as Spurs, City, Liverpool, United, Chelsea and Arsenal all had a great shout at the league until the last few months
A three year old article before City came into money and Spurs broke the "top four" talking about the "top four" which isn't fucking relevant either.
None of those articles back your claims of it being dominated by two teams who spend more than the rest.
The biggest spenders in the past two years have been City followed by Chelsea followed by Spurs followed by Liverpool followed by United, guess who's won the league the most recently?
Yeah the team that spent the least.
Watch the premier league before you spout bullshit about it.