Much ado will be made in the next few months about certain free agents in baseball who will be shopping around for bigger and better contracts. Each of them will inevitably claim that they’re trying to do what’s best for their family, and then when they’re signed for the maximum possible amount, they’ll say that they look forward to doing everything possible for their (possibly new) team.
But is that really true? Especially when we’re talking about mega-contracts, those that can exceed $200 million (spread out over many years).
Let’s start with the first claim: That family comes first. Of course that’s true, and I have no problem with it.
My problem is the idea that you need $200 million to take care of your family. If so, you need a new accountant. That’s an obscene amount of money. How much do you really need to take care of you and your family for the rest of your life and theirs? Even if you live an extremely opulent life, that number is far less than $200 million.
Then there’s the second claim: That these mega athletes are team players despite the mega contracts. I think those are contradictory concepts. If you really want your team to win, you should accept less money so your team has more money to attract other top-quality athletes. If a championship is your goal, why not help the team with finances by accepting far less than market value?
Now, that’s easy for me to say–I’m not the one having $200 million waved in my face. But it just seems hypocritical to me that mega-athletes claim that they’re a team player when their salary has a major impact on the rest of the team.
What do you think? This is your last chance to get those comments in for tomorrow’s Comments of the Month entry!
Oh, also, congrats Megan L. to for winning the Ireland blog giveaway!