Jenkinsbball wrote:
I agree 200000% that pro sports players are over paid (Arod), but there's nothing you can do to change it. It's pretty pathetic that some baseball players get $13 million contracts and are subpar player (Juan Encarnocian sp?). That guy gets 3 year/$13 mil and he's a career > .300 batter, has absolutely no clutch ability, no power, and a weak arm. Pretty sad.... he gets all this money when the real heros out there get shiznit for what they have to put up with everyday (people like me).
Well first off, i never said i was going to change it, nor would I believe it was possible. Entertainment and greed simply rule in the job market and genuine value does not...were it so, nurses, who do the majority of work in hospitals, would get more money than doctors. But this world says that 4 more years of medical school makes you worth more. And in some cases it may be true..but your average emergency room..not so.
Also, i was going to debate your talent rebuttle by simply stating that it's not fair of me to say "no-talent" because it's not really something that's easy to judge in comparison to other talents (athletic or not), and further, i realize that it's hard to throw 99mph and hard to hit that little aspirin coming at you that fast..and place that ball over a fence into McCovey's Cove (or whatever that place is called). Stealing a base requires quick decision making and of course blinding speed. But since many of the highest paid players are all roid babies (according to my well substantiated opinion), it kinda ruins the whole sport and talent aspect in the name of cheating. As with the case of Bonds, you physically cannot improve with age as he's done.
And more on the 'talent' debate....it's too vague a label to use in a debate like this. For instance, how can I say performing a root canal is a more "talented" discipline than say leaping over a wall to catch a ball? I can't because they are completely different things with enormous ranges of variables, scopes, etc. I'm no stranger to physical discipline having acheived high accolades in a few sports (volleyball, soccer, track&field). I understand the vigors of training your body, teaching memory to muscle movement, manipulating your body so it will perform better (legally, of course), etc. But I also understand scholastic aptitude, focus and attention to detail, and other talents required to do non-athletic things..like fix computers. I work in a law firm with some of the highest billing and most successful land use, real estate, environmental lawyers in the country..and i marvel at how stupid they can be with their computer applications and basic understanding of technology. Do I compare their law degrees and experience with the law to my technical knowledge? I can't because of the obvious variables and depth of study/experience.
Anyway, sorry so long winded. But that's my thoughts. Sorry for being the thorn in the thread again.
