100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 21 - 23 out of 90 pages.
by this process underlayed the division within the NBAPlayers Association this past year and will likely be seenby other leagues in the future.A second related example is in the collegiate rankswhere a cartel, the NCAA, has set the rules for studentathletes who have no control whatsoever over theprocess. The cartel then negotiates with 17-year-olds,who are prohibited from signing with an agent. Collegiateplayers will continue to be exploited until this currentsystem is dramatically changed.Third, even among teams in the league, there aredivisions. Consider the NFL, a league generally withoutsome of the economic difficulties confronting otherleagues. Even there, we see major distribution implications.When the Rams moved to St. Louis, their revenuesincreased by about $30 million. The salary capimplies that about 60% of that, or $18 million, goes tothe players. Salaries increased by about $600,000 perteam. The bottom line was that the Rams ended up gainingabout $29.4 million. The players in sum ended upgaining about $18 million and each other team ended uplosing $600,000 as a result of that change.Fourth, it’s similar with colleges. Let me pick onmy school, Notre Dame. When Notre Dame pulled outof the TV contract and signed a separate arrangementwith NBC, Notre Dame’s revenues increased by $35642121million. The rest of the alliance revenues dropped by$35 million. Is that good or is that bad? Well, there isn’ta simple answer to that. In any event, my conclusionhere simply is that the distributional consideration, howlittle is too little, will likely be the next major conflict inthe economics of sports. While prior conflicts have beenover how to split a growing pie, future conflicts will
focus more on the distribution of a stable pie, makingthe conflicts much more intractable.RICH McKAY: I will be extremely brief. I went toPrinceton; I did not go to Yale. Therefore, I’m a marketcapitalist as opposed to one that would see distributionin another way. I really struggle with the concept of howmuch is too much. I believe that sports in its purest formis entertainment. I struggle not with the fact that JimCarey makes $20 million per movie or Demi Mooremakes $15 million per movie or Tom Cruise makes $22million per movie, but with the fact that Barry Sandersmakes pretty much $300,000 per episode. But that’sbecause I’d just rather see Barry Sanders.To me, the number one thing that drives this questionand gets it off track is that way too much attentionis paid to those that make it big and those that make bigmoney. Not enough attention is paid to those that do notmake it, to those that take the risk and fail. All you needto do is drive down Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood, goto any bistro you like, and you will see actors uponactors upon actors who are making $4.95 an hour.