i guess i'm just surprised that it goes up by so much. making 200k for 20-years experience at any job without the le ceo/president is doing pretty good for most folks.
The 2 guys who created YouTube worked 1 year and got 1.8bill U$S.... they are cleary overpaid.
Anyone can become a teacher or a soldier (sorry, but it's true), only a very few can become NBA ref's and almost no one can become billonares for a years work... either you deal with it and try to become a billonare or cry, like most, and get paid crap on a y work
Offtopic: My first post, i had being reading the forum for years, i just decided to finally register.
But your not stunned by the fact that entertainers like Lindsay Lohan, Jessica Simpson, etc get paid millions for "singing/acting" and way more than a cardiologist makes for saving a person's life?
That's the way society is built.
pick a different thread to read, problem solved.
stop responding, man. it really is that simple. i've only continued when someone brings up some new point or when you continue to hammer this one. you have said, ad naseum, that the nba can do what it wants and believe it is because of supply-demand. i disagreed. but you have gone out of your way to disagree with the fact that i disagree. i don't get it.
i don't bring up actors for the same reason i didn't bring up athletes. both make millions because they generate the audience for the advertisers, which is fine. no one is going to the sport to see the ref.
it was an analogy. your entire tirade is built on 1. the nba set it up this way 2. i shouldn't complain about/question/be surprised by it because i don't pay the bills. the analogy i drew was that the nba is a company dealing with its employees much like the spurs are a company dealing with its employees, but you don't go around saying people shouldn't comment on what the spurs offer their players but insist i not comment on what the nba pays its refs. and i haven't said anything about striking or who demanded what, all i've said is that they're overpaid and wondered why that might be.
Why is this a cop out? What the Spurs do individually has nothing to do with how the NBA runs the league! Are the Spurs paying the salary of the referees like they had to for Scola? Does that come out of Holt's personal bank account? IT IS HOW THE NBA IS STRUCTURED!!!!!! You act like the referees demanded this to make that kind of money or they would strike!
that's not worth discussing? i mean, seriously, this threat was meant as a way to get behind the obvious (the nba pays a lot because it can) and get to the meat as to why that is and how that relates to the ref scandal (as previously pointed out). instead of going in that direction, you insist on this same line of reasoning of saying "this is how it is, deal with it."So pay them less so we they can be easier for them to influenced? If someone has a gambling addiction it doesn't matter how much money they make, they will still gamble it away. Example John Daly.
so when you do it, it's giving an opinion. when i respond to that opinion, it's whining? and for all this stuff about how i won't just get over it, it takes two to tango and you've been just as adamant not to concede. either we're both whiners or both justified.We give our opinion...your the one that won't let this thread die. You are the one that keeps whining about how much they get paid. You are the one that keeps bring up different professions and comparing it the NBA. You are comparing apples to oranges.
you miss the point. i grant you every point you just made, but it only bolsters the fact that there are plenty of people willing to be a ref, thus there is plenty of a supply out there, so the idea of supply/demand dictating the salary doesn't hold up. as i said, i think this gambling thing is the real reason behind the big salary. that's all i was saying.Who are you stay that someone is qualified to ref a NBA game? It is a selective group that makes to the NBA. There might be a ton of applicants but if they were so qualified they would be in the NBA right now! The people that are in the NBA for better or worse are the best at their profession and should be paid accordingly. They are the cream of crop and have worked years to get to where they are. The salary isn't high, it's high for the average worker but their job is unique that is what you don't understand. IT IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO BECOME A NBA REFEREE!!!!! With Thousands of professionals of Referees worldwide and only about 30-50 in the NBA! If someone who is in the NBA for over 20 years and is a good official he should get paid that much. He has paid his dues and worked his ass off over the years. It’s not like he was at the local YMCA and out of the blue and he went to a camp and all of a sudden he is a NBA official!
because you keep doing the same. and again, in regards to your example, those folks have a direct impact on the audience/customer either by creating something marketable (you go to see ben afleck or someone) or the product (the ceo, usually, who if nothing else directs which direction a company goes in and thus what products are put out).I know why you started the thread..I don't know why you keep harping on it over and over again? Maybe you should start complaining about actors who make millions for reading lines and being adored by fans... or about Ceo's who make 100's of millions of dollars in severance packages while doing nothing to improve stock prices!
Last edited by td4mvp3; 07-25-2007 at 10:49 AM.
actors/entertainers = pro athletes ( , their job is to entertain us through the sport)
makeup artist = ref
and just overall, it's pretty lame to ask why i bring up the subject and then get upset that i actually answered your question. in list form, no less.
What are doctors then compared to actors/atheletes in your lineage?
i'm pointing out the reason why i haven't brought up actors and made the analogy to show that athletes and entertainers make a lot of money because they generate the audience while the periphery folks (refs in one, makeup artist in the other since there is no comparable position in the actiing field to a ref) make less because they don't generate that audience. thus, the entertainer deserves a sizable piece of the pie, the periphery don't.
they create the product or do the service. but the office staff doesn't, thus get much less. at least you get the analogy, which is a relief. the issue is not that an athlete makes more than a doc, but that a ref makes more than a doc. the doc and athlete shoulder huge responsibilities or generate huge audience, thus deserve a big payback. i just think the ref salary is more than what he shoulders or generates.
and to this point, i bet becoming a makeup artist to the big hollywood stars is just as difficult as becoming a ref in the nba. there's a sentence i never expected to write.
I feel three degrees more metro just for reading it...
i'm sending the eye guys your way right now.
Heck, I'm having lunch in Montrose today, so just tell them I'll meet 'em down there!
i'm sending the eye guys your way right now.
Being an nba ref is more difficult(difficult in that not as many people can do it) then being a soldier so it demands more pay.
i didn't know whether to laugh or cry at that statement.
Good first post. I agree with you.The 2 guys who created YouTube worked 1 year and got 1.8bill U$S.... they are cleary overpaid.
Anyone can become a teacher or a soldier (sorry, but it's true), only a very few can become NBA ref's and almost no one can become billonares for a years work... either you deal with it and try to become a billonare or cry, like most, and get paid crap on a y work
Offtopic: My first post, i had being reading the forum for years, i just decided to finally register.
And no sense just sitting back and lurking. Join in, its more fun that way.
outside of the traveling, that sounds like a pretty cushy job. even the travel may not be that bad, i'm sure they can afford first-class. outside of the 2 or so hours on the court, a lot of it is just sitting and reading or watching tv.
Only a select few can be good enough to be an nba ref. They take only what 30 to 50. The military takes 100s of thousands.
i didn't know whether to laugh or cry at that statement.
then you mean it is more difficult to become a ref, not that it is more difficult being a ref.
Both. A higher % of refs could be in the military as compared to the % of military people who could be nba refs.
based on what, exactly? precisely because so many are in the military gives them a better chance of having more people qualified to be a ref than vice versa. just because they didn't doesn't mean they couldn't. and to be a ref just requires watching games and calling fouls, not being shot at or rebuilding a city. that's just silly.
you do realize that you're now berating me because i said being a soldier is harder than being a ref, right? because the guy said this
to which i replied
Both. A higher % of refs could be in the military as compared to the % of military people who could be nba refs.
and if you read it, i didn't say how easy it was to be a ref, merely that it's much harder to be a soldier. and if you truly think being a ref is harder than being a soldier, i need you to answer the question as to which place you'd rather be right now: iraq/afghanistan or reffing the bulls/pacers.based on what, exactly? precisely because so many are in the military gives them a better chance of having more people qualified to be a ref than vice versa. just because they didn't doesn't mean they couldn't. and to be a ref just requires watching games and calling fouls, not being shot at or rebuilding a city. that's just silly.
seriously, it's like you'ree looking for things to argue with me about and this last bit is reprehensible.
and if a soldier does a good job ... you live in a free country. which job is harder? yeesh.
people chose to be a soldier so they can go to colledge for free
then what exactly is your point in responding to what i wrote? my post was to say a soldier has a tougher road to ho than a ref and to correct what seemed an obvious misstatement by the other guy. if you're not going to address the point that was being discussed, seriously, why are you saying anything? i try to be civil on this thing but that pissed me off, to go off on some tirade and miss the whole point of the discussion and then not even compare which life is tougher, the ref or the soldier, when that was the point.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
