Devante Qualls

Ms. Rodier
English 4/3B
December 15, 2014

Rhetorical Analysis
Topic: Are Professional Athletes Paid Too Much?
America is home to some of the most lucrative and affluent businesses in the entire
world. Our country is built on taking rather simple ideas in todays time and capitalizing on
them; thus creating billion dollar industries out of those ideas. These very ideas and industries
eventually become a foundational part of our society whether we realize it or not. The
entertainment industry has quickly risen to be come on of the basic building blocks of our
society. You would be hard pressed to find a soul in this country who hasnt seen a television
screen and perhaps maybe even pressed harder to find a soul in this country who hasnt heard of
the New York Yankees. Ladies and gentlemen, the professional sport industry has risen to
become the backbone of American society. If not the backbone, then the left arm or the pinky
toes of American society; meaning that it has become a crucial part of the world we know. The
fact that the professional sports industry in America is a multi-billion dollar entity is evidence to
that statement. With all of that profit being made, you often see athletes being rewarded with
multi-million dollar contracts. Which raises the question: Are professional athletes overpaid,
considering the value of their profession to the society as whole? In an article titled Do
Professional Athletes Get Paid Too Much Money? author, Mihir Bhagat discusses his reasoning

on why he believes the answer to that question with a resounding yes. In an opposing article
titled Pro Athletes Are Not Overpaid Austin Williams, the author defended the athletes
salaries, predominately using the NFL as an example. This is indeed an issue in todays world of
sports and this paper will be elaborating on this issue as we are witnessing contract records being
broken all the more often.
One of the points that Williams made in in his article is that the premier sports leagues
and associations in America that pay substantial amounts of money are multi-billion dollar
companies and the pay to the athletes is proportional to the overall profit. In the article he used
the NFL as an example stating, The NFL averages $9+ billion in annual revenue. He also went
on by basically stating that players of the NFL receive approximately 47%-48.5% of that
revenue pie according to the new collective bargaining agreement. Williams took the stance that
the players of the NFL are simply just getting their piece of the pie, which is a valid argument;
especially when you compare the wages in terms of percentage to other business with employee
unions. The percentages are basically identical in many cases.
Williams went on to make his second point by basically concluding that pro athletes are
benefitting from their professions marketability. The more marketable a business is, the more
money they will bring in. He describes this philosophy as simple business. This is basically
the model of what Americas economy is based off. Williams stated the NFL is vastly popular,
which leads to the key word, marketability. This is an example of capitalism at its finest. This
again, is another valid point. He attributes the fact that most of us are not in a business that is
anywhere near as marketable to the NFL or other sports businesses to the gap in salaries from
athletes to the average working American. Since most businesses do not generate anywhere close
to $9+ billion in revenue, the salaries realistically arent going to mirror each other.

Another point that the author, Williams made is that if the players were to cut back on the
amount of money that went into their salaries, it would only likely go into the pockets of the
team owners. He suggested the notion that the money left over from any players pay cuts would
end up in the pockets of the average American is unrealistic. The article reads, Even if the
players were to cut back on salaries, it's not like that money would suddenly come out and go to
the people working their butts off doing manual labor for $15/hr. That cut in player salaries
would only result in an increased salary for the team owners. Considering the circumstances,
this again is another valid point. The likelihood of an NFL owner to relinquish millions of dollars
generated from their business to the general population is fairly low. The author continues to ask
the question, Wouldn't you rather see our beloved hometown players who are out there
performing on the field continue to get that money rather than add more to the already
approximate 51.5% of revenue NFL team owners receive? This is a the rich get richer or fight
the power type of ultimatum, if you would.
Next, Williams addressed the argument of citizens working as police officers, firefighters,
and other jobs more important to everyday living, being paid less than these athletes are. Those
jobs are more important in everyday life. But they don't generate billions of dollars in revenue
that can be paid out to those employees. Again, it is the factor of marketability and numbers.
47-48.5% of 9+ billion dollars spread out over approximately 1,700 employees is going to be
significantly more than 48.5% of a business with a $1 billion in annual revenue spread out over
200,000+ employees. The author suggest that unless people are going to start paying over $100
a ticket to watch a police officer or any other government official perform their job, we will
never see these government officials salaries match those of the athletes. Both of these situations
are almost wildly unlikely. It is just the reality of business.

His last argument was that it was our as fans blame for the amount of money being
generated by these professional athletes. If we didn't love these sports and our hometown teams,
the TV deals wouldn't exist, teams wouldn't be profiting from ticket sales, jersey sales, etc. There
would be no market for these sports... This argument is both logical and rational. The as the
truth is, the intended audience and foundation for any sports business begins and ends with the
fans. He also states that teams generate money also from the sale of memorabilia and
merchandise which is consumed by mostly fans.
Contrary to the many arguments made representing the pro side of professional
athletes enormous pay, author Bhagat disagreed. One of the first foundations of his argument
was the belief that one should be paid according to the jobs economic importance and their
value to society. He used the element of morality (right and wrong) to assist in his argument as
it can be argued fairly easily that a person whose day job is protecting society and service should
be paid more than a basketball player. This can be argued simply by assessing which profession
is more integral to the survival and important to the overall success in society. He also suggests
that pay should take into account the risks that the job requires as well. This was an emotional
but also logical approach.
Bhagat went on to argue his argument based on the worth that many professions are to a
society, compared to that of professional athletes. Teaching is one of the most economically
important occupations because our future economy relies on the education of its youth, yet
teachers are paid astronomically less than the average professional athlete is. In fact, each basket
Kobe Bryant scores earns him equivalent to the average classroom teachers yearly salary. Here,
he addressed the flawed wealth distribution system that you find in American society. The author

suggested that teachers are fundamental to the community as a whole and should be paid as; or at
least paid more than professional athletes pay.
Next, the author points to the salary of the president of the United States (the most
important figure in American politics, perhaps the world), compared to that of even a rookie
pitcher in the MLB. The president, who makes critical decisions that affect the entire world
every day, only makes $400,000 a year. While President Obama is hard at work reviving the
economy, the unproven rookie in the MLB is earning way over that figure. The author takes the
fact that even the most important figure of the countrys pay doesnt even compare to that of a
MLB rookie pitcher. This aids even more to the argument that even the pinnacle of American
professions pay doesnt even compare to the salaries of a majority of todays athletes.
Bhagad next pointed to the fact that many of todays highest paid athletes arent exactly
earning their pay even in professional sports standards. Think about Jamarcus Russel, the
former No. 1 overall pick in the '07 draft. He is on a six-year $68 million contract, with $31
million guaranteed. In simpler terms, that means that despite currently being recognized as one
of the biggest busts of all time, and even if he were to get injured tomorrow and never play
again, he will still have $31 million in the bank. In any other job, if you don't perform to your
expectations, you're fired. There is no guaranteed money. In this statement he basically
considered it to be egregious that players with similar stories are being rewarded with millions
of dollars for essentially riding the bench. He points that with the immense amount of money
teams are able to put into these player contracts, teams are often caught crippling their franchises
because of this very issue. This, is a valid point as there are plenty of stories around in every
major sport where players arent considered to be earning their wages exactly.

Lastly, Bhagad argues that players shouldnt be paid if they arent portraying themselves
as good role models for the young who look up to them. He also points that if these athletes are
going to get paid that enormous amount of money, they should at least try to represent
themselves and their profession in a more positive fashion. If Alex Rodriguez earns the same
amount of money as it would take to feed the nation's poor for a year, he cant cheat and take
steroids. What kids learn from successful ballplayers like him is that Its okay for me to use
illegal substances, because in the long run, it will pay off by earning me an enormous
contract. This argument can be considered a warranted one, if our fans care about the integrity
of the game for further generations.
Both authors represented both sides of the argument well. The contrast in styles was
evident. While one, Williams decided to take a more logical approach and base his argument off
of the strength of the logistics in the business world. Bhagad decided to take a more ethical and
personal approach. His argument was centered on the struggles of the average working citizen,
compared to the relatively privileged lives of the high paid professional athletes. When you read
both sides and study the pros and cons, each side makes a tantalizing point. At, the end of the day
to each his own and it comes down to each persons personal values. Do you believe pro
athletes deserve the pay they receive?