11/17/24
October 13, 2006
Covering the Bases After a Player's Death: If Corey Lidle was piloting the plane when he died earlier this week, his survivors won't collect a $1.05 million accidental death insurance policy that covers all Major Leaguers. The plan excludes players from "any incident related to travel in an aircraft ... while acting in any capacity other than as a passenger." His wife and son will receive a yearly "widow's benefit" of $166,250.
I think the Houston Chronicle's hed is misleading. They have no quotes from anyone in the Union office saying they "may not pay" -- only their own seemy-sounding supposition. It would have been more prudent to say: Union could contest payment of Lidle's insurance policy Meaning the Union might have the legal standing to withhold payment if it wanted to ... even though they'd be total dicks to do so.
posted by wfrazerjr at 10:03 AM on October 13, 2006
Hopefully he planned ahead and had his own coverage that would kick in where baseball's may not.
posted by dyams at 10:10 AM on October 13, 2006
"...while acting in any capacity other than as a passenger" would seem to cover the situation whether Lidle was actually in control of the aircraft or not. If he was not actually flying, he was still a "pilot under instruction", and certainly not merely a passenger. Does the Union actually underwrite the policy? I would think that it is the underwriters who determine whether or not a policy is paid.
posted by Howard_T at 10:12 AM on October 13, 2006
Insurance companies do one thing,and only one thing really well:they try to find any reason they can not to pay.to hell with em.
posted by mars1 at 11:13 AM on October 13, 2006
He was been making between $2 mil and $4 mil a year for the last five years. I hope they've socked some away; if so, then that extra $1 million may not mean a whole lot, all things considered.
posted by diastematic at 11:13 AM on October 13, 2006
He got into the plane, not the union, not the insurance company, not the Yankee's ball club! Lidle is responsible for his actions and the possible consequences of those actions.
posted by americanleague at 11:22 AM on October 13, 2006
Unfortunately I agree with you
posted by wdminott at 11:32 AM on October 13, 2006
In that case, americanleague, just wipe out insurance altogether, because if you can find a loop hole in that to deny discharge of benefits, you can find a loophole in anything to discharge benefits.
posted by jerseygirl at 11:35 AM on October 13, 2006
I am sure he had an agent to advise him on his contract - maybe the agent should cover the "loophole".
posted by americanleague at 11:44 AM on October 13, 2006
Its not a loophole, its a specific exclusion. Why should they pay it? Plus Howard_T is right, its probably not up to the Union, unless they wanted to pay. I didn't know he was a replacement player. I wonder if anyone on the teams he played for actually cared?
posted by sfts2 at 11:44 AM on October 13, 2006
After Lidle was traded this season from Philadelphia to the Yankees and ripped the Phillies on the way out, Arthur Rhodes said: "He is a scab. When he started, he would go 5 1/3 innings and (the bullpen) would have to win the game for him. The only thing Cory Lidle wants to do is fly around in his airplane and gamble. He doesn't have a work ethic. After every start, he didn't run or lift weights. He would sit in the clubhouse and eat ice cream. ... He shouldn't say that, he shouldn't say anything like that because he is a scab. He crossed the line when guys like me, Flash and Mike Lieberthal were playing. He is a replacement player." So to answer your question, yes they cared.
posted by Venicemenace at 11:47 AM on October 13, 2006
Arthur Rhodes is a fucking turd.
posted by wfrazerjr at 11:51 AM on October 13, 2006
Insurance companies do one thing,and only one thing really well:they try to find any reason they can not to pay.to hell with em. As someone who works for a large insurance corporation, let me add a nice note to that statement: Policy holders do only one thing really well: they try to find any reason to cheat insurance companies out of their money. To hell with them. Obviously, I don't believe that, but I can tell you that there are FAR more cases handled where the insured person is lying about damages/injuries than there are cases where the insurance company is withholding legitimate insurance payments.
posted by grum@work at 11:52 AM on October 13, 2006
I can't blame Rhodes or any other Major Leaguer for disliking Lidle because he crossed a picket line. I can't blame Lidle for taking the opportunity to play where he could get it, but if I were a player, I'd feel the same way about the scabs.
posted by rcade at 12:28 PM on October 13, 2006
You got a job you really love and millions of people would kill for? I advise you to not walk off it, especially in the middle of the job ('94 players strike). Someone will step in and gladly relieve you. Arthur Rhodes is a fucking turd indeed.
posted by mjkredliner at 01:13 PM on October 13, 2006
but I can tell you that there are FAR more cases handled where the insured person is lying about damages/injuries than there are cases where the insurance company is withholding legitimate insurance payments. but that doesn't mean it isn't done with frighteningly regularity (although the other is just as deplorable). It's just disgusting to me that someone can pay $100/month for protection for years and then when you finally need that protection having it rejected on some technicality. That's the whole reason you were paying the money! (not that this applies to this case, since I doubt he paid any charge for this AD&D as a major leaguer).
posted by bdaddy at 01:20 PM on October 13, 2006
If I'm the insurance company for the accidental death benefits coverage, I would deny the claim. The company wasn't collecting a premium for this type of exposure. If the insurance company was getting paid to insure novice pilots, there wouldn't be an exclusion for non-passengering a plane into a building. Maybe the Union wants to pay the tab?
posted by garfield at 01:21 PM on October 13, 2006
rejected on some technicality But, as mentioned before, this isn't a technicality. It's behaviour specifically excluded from coverage by the policy. If your house insurance doesn't cover damage from floods, and then your house floods, it's not really fair to blame the insurance company when they won't pay for a new basement. Same deal here. It sounds like his policy explicitly does not cover him piloting an airplane. Now if they can't prove he wasn't just a passenger, then that's another story...
posted by fabulon7 at 01:29 PM on October 13, 2006
You got a job you really love and millions of people would kill for? I advise you to not walk off it, especially in the middle of the job ('94 players strike). Someone will step in and gladly relieve you. Arthur Rhodes is a fucking turd indeed. Yeah, a selfish prick just like Curt Flood. Those players should know their place and be thankful for what they have. It's only through the owners' largesse that they even get to play a game for a living!! From the way these spoiled brats behave, you'd think their work product generated billions of dollars of revenue or something! /sarcasm
posted by Venicemenace at 01:34 PM on October 13, 2006
It is only because of the fans that they even get to play a game for a living.... /sincerity
posted by mjkredliner at 01:38 PM on October 13, 2006
Markets (ie. the demand of fans for pro baseball games) create jobs. The most elite jobs require very specialized skill sets. People with very specialized skill sets demand high wages and benefits. When employers refuse to adequately compensate their skilled employees, those employees have a right to go on strike. It doesn't make them "fucking turds". Just capitalists.
posted by Venicemenace at 01:58 PM on October 13, 2006
And, there are other 'capitalists' waiting in line to do the job that doesn't compensate you enough, and it doesn't make 'em scabs. I'd cross a picket line, too, for a chance of a lifetime, and obviously, Lidle had what it takes to play major league ball.
posted by mjkredliner at 02:07 PM on October 13, 2006
Then you would be a scab. That's the (a) definition of the word - a person who replaces workers on strike. Doesn't matter if they are miners or baseball players. There are nicer terms for it - "replacement worker" - but that's besides the point. Officials almost certainly will be able to determine who was flying the plane, from what I know. After accidents, there are certain injuries one expects to find in someone sitting in the pilot seat that you don't expect to find in the person in the passenger seat. And, as several people have pointed out, this is hardly a technicality. Major league teams have long made it clear that they do not want players to fly small planes or participate in other activities that are more dangerous than everyday activities.
posted by spira at 02:19 PM on October 13, 2006
Yes, Mr. mjk? I've got Samuel Gompers on line one, George Meany on two and a whole shitload of people who got stomped by business-owned cops back before WWII holding on the rest of the lines. If you can't see the abstract point about labor unions because of the empirical dollars involved, let's just agree to disagree about you being wrong and move on.
posted by yerfatma at 02:30 PM on October 13, 2006
It's only because of clients that any business, regardless of the zeroes, stays in business. If that's your argument, that's no argument at all. (I'd like to nominate "Players are rich so they shouldn't complain" for inclusion in the same group as "_____ isn't really a sport" and "No one cares about your stupid game" as pointless tropes that have been paved parking-lot thick and are officially done to death on SpoFi.)
posted by chicobangs at 02:43 PM on October 13, 2006
Comparing the average compensation and working conditions to those labor unions in the years you refer to and what MLB players were enduring is akin to comparing beans to prime rib. My point is that the players could, and should, have settled their differences with the owners after the conclusion of the 94 season, I feel they owed it to the fans, and I daresay I am not alone in that respect.
posted by mjkredliner at 02:43 PM on October 13, 2006
I'll second that nomination, Mr. bangs.
posted by jerseygirl at 02:44 PM on October 13, 2006
I second that emotion, chico on preview: ah, thirded? I really don't get to call enough people 'chico' in my life.
posted by garfield at 02:46 PM on October 13, 2006
My point is that the players could, and should, have settled their differences with the owners Yes, the millionaires could have could have accepted less from the billionaires. It's a very persuasive argument.
posted by yerfatma at 03:30 PM on October 13, 2006
Reagardless I think the fact that crossed the line should be at least partially diminished being that it's 12 years later! If he was just a scab that couldn't cut it, I doubt he'd be getting contracts 12 years later.
posted by wisportcheese at 04:11 PM on October 13, 2006
that extra $1 million may not mean a whole lot I don't care how rich someone may be; I still think that $1 million means a whole lot.
posted by graymatters at 04:12 PM on October 13, 2006
Another thing to consider: Player solidarity is one of the reasons that Lidle's family has that six-figure yearly benefit -- and the seven-figure insurance benefit he'd have received without the plane clause. He crossed a line that stood together to achieve better treatment for all Major Leaguers. As for whether the labor concerns of millionaires deserve fan support, I've been on one side ever since reading Eight Men Out, Eliot Asinof's book about the Black Sox scandal. Baseball owners had a century of douchebaggery before free agency gave players their first chance to get a real portion of the profits of the game. I don't pay for a ticket to see owners own.
posted by rcade at 04:50 PM on October 13, 2006
He crossed a line that stood together to achieve better treatment for all Major Leaguers. It should be pointed out that the "scabs" that crossed the "picket lines" of the MLBPA would have received zero benefits if the MLBPA received the concessions for which they demanded if they remained in the minor leagues. The MLBPA does not cover the minor leagues. I don't pay for a ticket to see owners own. Mark Cuban might be the only one that I'd consider paying to see "own".
posted by grum@work at 05:00 PM on October 13, 2006
Going back to scabs,or replacement players, Whether it be playing a game, or any other type of work, but mainly sports. Getting to play a game since one has probably played as a kid,and to get paid for it no less is a dream come true for such people as Cory Lidle. Maybe people that do cross picket lines are considered betrayers of the certain union,or what ever the situation is. But to play a sport professionally, can you really blame him? And as wisportcheese wrote above, I don't think he would still be getting contracts and big money if he wasn't any good.
posted by Ghastly1 at 05:06 PM on October 13, 2006
fabby, garfield, grum, rcade, grey, fatty, jg, chico, and venice - Yep. I agree.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:21 PM on October 13, 2006
Another article on Lidle that gives us some insight on his 'scab' play: When he finally hooked on with the Brewers, it was just in time for the labor war. Milwaukee brass gave him a choice to cross the picket line or be released. Lidle was scared. And naive. He offered to join the replacement players without being paid, somehow imagining it would make him less of an offender. Eventually, he suited up for two spring training games. He pitched one inning. And, for some, he became a permanent pariah.
posted by wingnut4life at 07:33 PM on October 13, 2006
you'd think their work product generated billions of dollars of revenue or something! WORK? Give me a break. These a$$holes wouldn't know work if it hit them in the nuts. $166,250 a year pension for how many years of putzing around playing a game a few months a year? How would these dirt bags like to have worked for 37 years at a real job only to have the company fold? Screw ALL these overpaid athletes.
posted by joromu at 08:25 PM on October 13, 2006
Ahh wingnut I was just about to link to that. I thought the article was very well written, something that should be definitely checked out.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 08:26 PM on October 13, 2006
These a$$holes wouldn't know work if it hit them in the nuts. $166,250 a year pension for how many years of putzing around playing a game a few months a year? How would these dirt bags like to have worked for 37 years at a real job only to have the company fold? Screw ALL these overpaid athletes. How about putting your body through such physical abuse that when you are forced to retire at the age of 29, you are unable to walk properly because of the various knee surgeries? How about having the press infiltrate your life to the point where the facts about your marriage crumbling around you are broadcast as the 4th story on the news, every hour on the hour? How about passing up an education because some team gave you a chunk of change when you were 18, only to toss you aside before you turned 23 because your skills never got any better, leaving you with no job, no training and no education to help you try and feed yourself and your family for the next 40 years? How about working hard at your craft since you were 12 years old, getting the chance to finally earn a living doing it, and still being booed and cursed like you were some villian in a silent film, all because some wonderkid is able to smack your best pitch into the bleachers every fourth time he sees you? How about having to work out every day of your life, knowing that if you took a couple weeks off just to "relax" someone is going to tell your boss that you aren't trying hard enough, and you'll probably lose your job and your reputation will be ruined to the point where no company/team will ever hire you?
posted by grum@work at 09:08 PM on October 13, 2006
i think it is a moot point anyways..since he crossed the line he isnt allowed to be a member of the union... i saw a piece on scabs on ESPN some time ago...they cant be in team photos and miss out on alot of bonus money for post season and stuff like that...but anything that MLBPA is involved with..they cany participate...as for the phillies player being a jerk...Lidle said some pretty bad things about the phillies organization shortly after he was traded and those comments were in response to what Lidle said
posted by skippy76 at 10:17 PM on October 13, 2006
Grum, you may be getting the facts right (thought citing specific athletes rather than some theoretical situation would do a much better job of making your case) but you're missing the point. The opportunity to be a pro athlete is a privilege. One most of us ordinary people would trade their left eye for. And a pro athlete chooses to be a pro athlete. As far as your specific claims: How about having the press infiltrate your life to the point where the facts about your marriage crumbling around you are broadcast as the 4th story on the news, every hour on the hour? A risk all celebrities face. And pro athletes are celebrities. It comes with the salary. But you know what, if you're a really private person, then find another profession. You know, with the free education you get on scholarship. How about passing up an education because some team gave you a chunk of change when you were 18, only to toss you aside before you turned 23 because your skills never got any better, leaving you with no job, no training and no education to help you try and feed yourself and your family for the next 40 years? Again, a choice an athlete makes. You don't think colleges are salivating over high school superstars? If a high school athlete chooses to forego college for the big bucks and doesn't pan out, does that make them worthy of my sympathy? In most cases, they're just greedy. If my kid was lucky enough to get a college scholarship, I'd make damn well sure he'd graduate. How about working hard at your craft since you were 12 years old, getting the chance to finally earn a living doing it, and still being booed and cursed like you were some villian in a silent film, all because some wonderkid is able to smack your best pitch into the bleachers every fourth time he sees you? I work in a very competitive industry (as, I'm sure, do most of us). If one competitor was continually taking me to lunch, I would be STRONGLY enouraged to do better. Or replaced. How about having to work out every day of your life, knowing that if you took a couple weeks off just to "relax" someone is going to tell your boss that you aren't trying hard enough, and you'll probably lose your job and your reputation will be ruined to the point where no company/team will ever hire you? Cry me a river. That's why you earn the big bucks. I get one week of paid vacation a year. If my job were to stay in shape 24/7 and the reward was playing baseball/football/basketball and making millions per year, I'd goddamned well stay in shape!
posted by cjets at 10:21 PM on October 13, 2006
Mr. Grum, I think you just had a moment.
posted by tselson at 10:25 PM on October 13, 2006
Anyone who gets paid $166,250 per year (for the rest of their life?) for doing absolutely nothing, should be taxed at 50% and have to give another 25% to charity. There are millions of people who WORK for a living and won't see that much cash in five years. Six figures for doing nothing is obscene.
posted by TerpFan at 10:46 PM on October 13, 2006
Grum, I have to agree with cjets, you really missed the point. First, any baseball player that bypassed college got a contract of some sort. So it's not like they weren't paid. How many 19 year olds get money thrown at them to go play a game? As to abusing your body to the point that at 29 you can't work...very few pro players are really at that point, and besides, people get hurt at all sorts of jobs. Construction workers get injured everyday, as do workers in every industry. Hell, more fast food workers are hurt each year than ball players! I have no time to listen to pro players whine about how hard they have it. If it's that bad don't do it. While my heart goes out to his family, I do not care if they get any insurance money if he was in violation of even the most minor point in the policy's wording.
posted by dviking at 12:06 AM on October 14, 2006
As to abusing your body to the point that at 29 you can't work...very few pro players are really at that point, Really? How about taking a survey of all the retired NFL players? Since the average career in the NFL is about 5 years, and most of them don't make it until after at least 2 years of college, I'm betting that there are quite a few ex-NFL'ers who are retired because of injury by the time they are 29. And what about baseball? Ask around and see how Brien Taylor is doing nowadays... First, any baseball player that bypassed college got a contract of some sort. 99% of them don't get million dollar contracts right from high school, and even those that do, most of them wash out before getting a second contract, so they better have saved money and not tried to live the lifestyle of someone who WAS worth millions. the reward was playing baseball/football/basketball and making millions per year Did you check the rosters of the MLB/NFL? Did you see how many of those players are NOT making "millions per year"? Mr. Grum, I think you just had a moment. No, what I had was enough of people assuming that the life of an athlete is all "fun and games" and that they don't deserve big money. They are entertainers with a skill that 99.99999% of the world cannot hope to match. They perform in a business where millions of dollars are made based on their work. To suggest they don't deserve a piece of that multimillion dollar pie is ridiculous. Do people freak out about George Clooney, Jennifer Anniston or Jim Carrey making over $10million/movie? No, everyone seems to think that's acceptable. But suggest that a baseball player make $3million/season by throwing a baseball over 95mph (and doing it around 3000 times, not including warm-up pitches, off-day pitching, and off-season practices), and it's like they are stealing the money from an convent. It seems that people would rather the owners keep all the money and that the athlete play for only $50k/year.
posted by grum@work at 01:13 AM on October 14, 2006
The opportunity to be a pro athlete is a privilege. One most of us ordinary people would trade their left eye for. And a pro athlete chooses to be a pro athlete. You can play the "they got it good" game with anyone, not just pro athletes. People in Africa are starving; show some gratitude for how fortunate you are and finish your vegetables.
posted by rcade at 10:02 AM on October 14, 2006
yerfatma:your omission of the last part of my sentence in the one you italicized, makes your argument very unpersuasive. I have long thought that bottom rung MLB players were not compensated equally, and I also believe that owners should have the right to reserve the right to make money, it is a business, after all. In several posts about golf I have made the same point that grum did: that the players are entertainers as well as athletes, and that they deserve their share of the pie that TV revenues bring in, after all, they are the product. I just felt that the timing of the '94 players strike was handled poorly, that the players, regardless of their beefs with the owners, owed it to their fans to finish the season, rather than walkout in the middle of it. spira, If Lidle was a scab, then I suggest that "scab" is not so demeaning a term as the true meaning, and not the slang term, as I thought previously.
posted by mjkredliner at 10:32 AM on October 14, 2006
I also believe that owners should have the right to reserve the right to make money, it is a business, after all. Oh, I know that. You come down on the side of the owners every time it comes up. I just can't relate to it. It always sounds to me like Michael Palin's prison character in The Life of Brian, logning to be spat at in the face by the rich old men who run the game. Even George Will (in Ken Burns' Baseball) has said, "In baseball, I am a Marxist." Sport is one of the few industries where the value of the end product is (almost) 100% the result of the efforts of the labor, which is why I am mystified by those who would complain about players asking for a bigger slice of the pie. Remember the magic words: salaries do not affect ticket prices. As to your discussion of unions and the meaning of "scab" (and don't think I don't appreciate the attempt to redefine the word to make it better fit your argument), I'm still waiting for a sports fan to explain to me how sports unions are fundamentally different from other labor unions. Why do the zeroes in the numbers make a difference?
posted by yerfatma at 11:53 AM on October 14, 2006
Grum, you really don't get it...you get mad, but you don't get IT! No one said that NO pro players get injured, but the number of players that are "unable to walk properly" is very low. Are you aware of how many workers in "normal jobs" are killed each year? All occupations have their risks. As to the contract offered to kids right out of high school, again, No One said "millions" (other than you). What they get is good, or great, amounts of money to go play a game, in hopes of making it to the majors and then fantastic amounts of money. Yep, not all make it, for those that don't, it's back to school, or heaven forbid, a real job. You are correct in that they should save some of their money to fall back on...great common sense for anyone. Lastly, They are entertainers with a skill that 99.99999% of the world cannot hope to match. They perform in a business where millions of dollars are made based on their work. To suggest they don't deserve a piece of that multimillion dollar pie is ridiculous. Do people freak out about George Clooney, Jennifer Anniston or Jim Carrey making over $10million/movie? No, everyone seems to think that's acceptable. I , nor cjets, ever said that they don't deserve their money, we just don't want them to gripe about how bad they have it. And remember, even the very best players can be replaced with little effect on the game. A-Rod has one of the top salaries in baseball, but does taking him out of the picture change the game at all? You can take the entire All-Star teams away, and in one year the game will be back to normal, as there are always players in the wings waiting for their shot! The same is true of movie stars, and by the way, those three make well over $20million a movie. Relax man...maybe decaf for the rest of the weekend?
posted by dviking at 12:47 PM on October 14, 2006
No one said that NO pro players get injured, but the number of players that are "unable to walk properly" is very low. Fair enough. Maybe they can walk. But maybe they can't throw, or have headaches, or back troubles, or post-concussion syndrome, or can't stand up straight some days, or have joints that grind like millstones. I used "walking" as an example. The number of retired players with life-long injuries is probably a lot higher than for which you give credit. And remember, even the very best players can be replaced with little effect on the game. A-Rod has one of the top salaries in baseball, but does taking him out of the picture change the game at all? You can take the entire All-Star teams away, and in one year the game will be back to normal, as there are always players in the wings waiting for their shot! The same is true of movie stars, and by the way, those three make well over $20million a movie. I have no idea what point you are trying to make here. What does "replacing" players have to do with how much they earn? Mr. Grum, I think you just had a moment. Grum, you really don't get it...you get mad, but you don't get IT! Relax man...maybe decaf for the rest of the weekend? I'd love to see the evidence that suggests I was "ranting" or "yelling". No all-caps moments, fully coherent sentences, and no excessive use of exclamation points (in fact, I didn't use a single one). And for the record, I don't drink coffee.
posted by grum@work at 01:21 PM on October 14, 2006
we just don't want them to gripe about how bad they have it. Red herring? You're the first one from both sides of the discussion to bring this up. Not a single quote of a player complaining about his work conditions has been part of this discussion. The argument really is about whether or not they deserve the money they're getting for the kind of work they're doing, and tangentially, whether or not they should still be allowed to form a union now that they make orders of magnitude more money than the average Joe. It's pretty clear on which side you are. For the record... I'd like to nominate "Players are rich so they shouldn't complain" for inclusion in the same group as "_____ isn't really a sport" and "No one cares about your stupid game" as pointless tropes that have been paved parking-lot thick and are officially done to death on SpoFi. I vote for this.
posted by qbert72 at 02:38 PM on October 14, 2006
Do people freak out about George Clooney, Jennifer Anniston or Jim Carrey making over $10million/movie? No, everyone seems to think that's acceptable. Oh, yeah? Ask the studio heads about that. They're doing everything they can to lower salaries. And plenty of us Hoi Polloi find their salaries obscene as well. C'mon, you don't question Jennifer Aniston making $10 million for a film? But suggest that a baseball player make $3million/season by throwing a baseball over 95mph (and doing it around 3000 times, not including warm-up pitches, off-day pitching, and off-season practices), and it's like they are stealing the money from an convent. It seems that people would rather the owners keep all the money and that the athlete play for only $50k/year. Show me what I said that even comes close to suggesting this. The athletes deserve a substantial piece of the pie. No question. Hell, I even think college athletes should be paid for the money they generate for their institutions. This is a societal issue. We put these athletes on a pedestal and literally let them get away with murder (OJ, anyone?). Stephen Jackson's little episode is continuing evidence of this. And their salaries reflect this as well. Do I think they deserve their salaries? No. But rather than having the owners keep all the money, what I would suggest is that the pie they share should be smaller ($10 tickets, anyone?) Maybe some of that money could be redirected to firemen, teacher or rebuilding inner city schools. You can play the "they got it good" game with anyone, not just pro athletes. People in Africa are starving; show some gratitude for how fortunate you are and finish your vegetables. rcade, I ALWAYS eat my vegetables. I'd like to nominate "Players are rich so they shouldn't complain" for inclusion in the same group as "_____ isn't really a sport" and "No one cares about your stupid game" as pointless tropes that have been paved parking-lot thick and are officially done to death on SpoFi. Any vast generalization such as "Players are rich so they shouldn't complain" is not a good topic for any conversation. But like it or not, an athlete's salary is, and should be, a conversation worth having. Why else are we continually talking about A-Rod? Or how about the impact of the Salary cap in the NFL? Besides, I never like censorship in any form.
posted by cjets at 03:39 PM on October 14, 2006
Grum, do you even pause to think before you write? I have no idea what point you are trying to make here. What does "replacing" players have to do with how much they earn? How does that not apply to your comment about the players having a skill that 99.9999999999% of the world can not hope to match? The point is they can be replaced. And qbert, I'd suggest you reread grum's where he goes on about players being booed, and having to pass up an education, or press infiltrating their lives. And, beyond that, reread all of my comments and find the phrase where I said the players don't deserve the money...try real hard because I didn't make that statement. I just don't want to hear them gripe. So, keep your "Red Herring" and "pointless tropes" quotes to yourself until you actually have a point. Thanks for listening, you've been a wonderful audience.
posted by dviking at 03:51 PM on October 14, 2006
reread grum's where he goes on about players being booed, and having to pass up an education, or press infiltrating their lives I agree that grum's comment can be viewed as complaints against baseball players' work conditions. Now you just need to prove that grum is a major league player earning a 7-figure salary. Good luck. Besides, I never like censorship in any form. I never liked vegetables in any form.
posted by qbert72 at 05:32 PM on October 14, 2006
I never liked vegetables in any form. Then maybe you should censor the vegetables.
posted by cjets at 05:57 PM on October 14, 2006
Vegetables shouldn't be eligible for life insurance either.
posted by jerseygirl at 07:26 PM on October 14, 2006
I vote we kill summer squash. need to prove that grum is a major league player earning a 7-figure salary. Good luck. If you figure in his signing bonus, grum makes more than seven figures. Taylor was signed for $1.55 million the day before his classes began Taylor suffered a torn labrum while defending his brother in a barfight. C'mon , you're trying to tell people that this guy deserves what? Risk vs. reward. I take a million now and have a shot at the bigs now... or I take a scholarship and risk my chance at the bigs...later. Either way I can still get an education. If I take the money now I not only will be able to afford a college education later, I will have 20 years worth of salary in my pocket already. How about having to work out every day of your life, knowing that if you took a couple weeks off just to "relax" someone is going to tell your boss that you aren't trying hard enough, and you'll probably lose your job That is a "moment" for me, I don't think too many people can say, "Hey, I need a few weeks off to relax." How about passing up an education because some team gave you a chunk of change when you were 18, only to toss you aside before you turned 23 because your skills never got any better, leaving you with no job, no training and no education to help you try and feed yourself and your family for the next 40 years? If the chunk of change is over a million dollars...that should take care of the education/job/ trying to feed the family thing. You seem to be saying that some athletes are being taken advantage of while it seems to me that Mr. Taylor was paid 1.5 million for nothing. There is risk on both sides. I never meant to suggest that you were ranting or yelling, I just thought you were well, having a moment, logically( according to my sense of logic which is firmly planted right behind my sense of humor, which just got beaten by something called common sense, which tells me to leave grum alone.)
posted by tselson at 11:12 PM on October 14, 2006
I had to scroll back up to see what this thread was about after I read it.
posted by Bishop at 11:19 PM on October 14, 2006
it's never really about what the thread was about now is it? Much more fun to rant about how someone took your point the wrong way. I'm all for eating vegetables. Even if they had to pass up on their college education while they played minor league baseball.
posted by dviking at 12:15 AM on October 15, 2006
Show me what I said that even comes close to suggesting this. I'm not suggesting you said that the owners should keep the money. I'm saying that if you don't believe the players deserve the money, then it has to go to the owners, since they're the only ones who would get it if the players don't. How does that not apply to your comment about the players having a skill that 99.9999999999% of the world can not hope to match? The point is they can be replaced. For the record, the 99.99999% (too many 9s and it'll be 1-in-1-trillion, instead of 1-in-10-million, which is what I was suggesting) is the ratio of major league baseball players (approximately 600) to the population of the world (approximately 6,000,000). So taking away one major league player or even a whole team of them doesn't alter the ratio enough. I'm all for eating vegetables. Even if they had to pass up on their college education while they played minor league baseball. I'm fine with cucumbers, carrots, celery, beans, peas and pumpkin (in a pie). The rest of the damn, dirty vegetables can stay the hell away from me. Especially the ones that will steal my wallet. Mr. Taylor was paid 1.5 million for nothing. Except that it's never really $1.5million. Figure in the taxes and the agent cut, it's probably closer to $850,000. Now, he has to make that $850,000 last him for the rest of his life. He's obviously not "set for life" if he's expecting to live past 60. I'm not suggesting people set up a charity for the guy, but I'm just pointing out that it's rarely the case where a player is "set for life" from their first contract.
posted by grum@work at 07:15 PM on October 15, 2006
the population of the world (approximately 6,000,000) Oops.
posted by qbert72 at 07:49 PM on October 15, 2006
It's a small world after all. Strange fact: tomatoes are a fruit. Broccoli soup? Broccoli is not a flavor. It's a punishment. Who thought of broccoli soup? It's like broccoli cupcakes.
posted by BullpenPro at 09:10 PM on October 15, 2006
I like broccoli soup. You unimaginable anti-vegite bastard.
posted by jerseygirl at 09:14 PM on October 15, 2006
Except that it's never really $1.5million You are correct. By the time you add in SUTA, FUTA, SS employer match, workers comp premiums etc. it was more than likely closer to 1.8 million;) On the flip side, do they take union dues out of signing bonuses? /broccoli knocks on the door, I make sure that it has grum's wallet and let it in. /advises broccoli of it's next assignment... flavoring cupcakes.
posted by tselson at 10:15 PM on October 15, 2006
the population of the world (approximately 6,000,000) Oops. I'm going to blame the lack of certain vitamins found in broccoli and brussel sprouts for my miscount of the world's population.
posted by grum@work at 10:19 PM on October 15, 2006
But since no one knows who was actually piloting the plane (and we probably never will), wouldn't the Union (or whoever) be trying to prove a negative here? An extra million dollars is really not all that much under the circumstances, and for something that happens every thirty years or so, I just don't see this as a big deal. I understand the precedent this may set, especially over a replacement player for whom the union might not be interested in doing any favors, but the PR hit of withholding it might cost more than just cutting Lidle's widow a check and closing the file. But since when has MLB or the Players' Uniion ever knowingly done the right thing.