- Thread starter
- #21
GoJets9096822
New member
matfanofold said:
Sorry about that...meant to give dates...
I am talking about from the 1850-1920ish...the dead ball era.
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
Why I cant stand todays baseball players....
- Thread starter GoJets9096822
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Sorry about that...meant to give dates...
I am talking about from the 1850-1920ish...the dead ball era.
matfanofold
Active member
- Aug 10, 2008
- 7,645
- 1
GoJets9096822 said:
It's ok, I somewhat figured this is what you meant. I could of assumed otherwise, but that just made no sence so I gave you enough credit to know what you were talking about. And despite what you are reading here, atleast you and I seem to know the history of baseball and when it turned from a game to a business. There is no question that to 99.9% of all the players up to and including the 20's, made little to VERY little money. Not enough to keep a living and certinly not enough suplimental money to compensate leaving their families. It was a game, a game they loved to play.
- Thread starter
- #23
GoJets9096822
New member
Thanks so much for agreeing with me.
Hallsgator
New member
And......
"At the beginning of the 1900s, the average ballplayer was making $5,144 per year, according to Michael Haupert, a University of Wisconsin-La Crosse economics professor who has collected data on historical salaries. That was a lot of money back then, roughly the equivalent of $189,500 in 2002 dollars and about eight times what the average manufacturing worker pulled in. But it's nothing compared to the amount of money today's pros take home. "
http://www.forbes.com/2002/03/26/0326al ... rners.html
Baseball players have been making bank since they went professional. Plenty of money to have a comfortable life.
"At the beginning of the 1900s, the average ballplayer was making $5,144 per year, according to Michael Haupert, a University of Wisconsin-La Crosse economics professor who has collected data on historical salaries. That was a lot of money back then, roughly the equivalent of $189,500 in 2002 dollars and about eight times what the average manufacturing worker pulled in. But it's nothing compared to the amount of money today's pros take home. "
http://www.forbes.com/2002/03/26/0326al ... rners.html
Baseball players have been making bank since they went professional. Plenty of money to have a comfortable life.
Hallsgator
New member
Here's a pretty graph too.
Mr.Whipple
Banned
They played for the money back than, Thats pretty obvious. But they also played to not work in the fields of mines as their families did. Plenty of palyers have talked about that and how their families pushed them to play pro ball. a lot of players also had jobs in the off season to help pay bills.
Owners had more control of a player back then over now, Players were pushed and forced to play with injury and such. Spahn would talk about playing 10+ inning games because they had no relievers or he was up against another big picther. Most picthers would get two days rest if they had to face another big player. Koufax retired early because of things like this, His body was just exhausted from it. Mantle played with plenty of injuries also, Because was expected to do it. Curt Flood and Reggie Jackson changed a lot of these aspects of the game. But players back then played a different game than most players do today.
Owners had more control of a player back then over now, Players were pushed and forced to play with injury and such. Spahn would talk about playing 10+ inning games because they had no relievers or he was up against another big picther. Most picthers would get two days rest if they had to face another big player. Koufax retired early because of things like this, His body was just exhausted from it. Mantle played with plenty of injuries also, Because was expected to do it. Curt Flood and Reggie Jackson changed a lot of these aspects of the game. But players back then played a different game than most players do today.
Hallsgator
New member
You cans say that about today's players. These guys dedicated their lives to baseball so they could avoid working at everyday jobs and some played so they could get out of bad neighborhoods and situations. Parents push their kids today to, paying for travel ball, playing in tournaments every weekend, sending them to showcases, etc.Marro said:
And then you have many minor leaguers who have to work in the offseason as well.
bricewaynebisel
New member
GoJets9096822 said:
I'm gonna beat a dead horse, but here's my two cents.
1. Yes, at times, non-hustle is very annoying, however, not a human being alive could be expected to run out every single ball put in play for 162 games straight. The non-hustle is the minority action, it doesnt happen all the time.
2. Fans want a show. Baseball players show off after home runs at all ages. Heaven forbid someone should get excited about doing something big. Name a sport where there is no celebration involved when something good happens?
3. After two shoulder surgeries, the need for tommy john surgery, losing my collegiate baseball career and my roster spot in the Cape Cod league, I believe it is much better to err on the side of too cautious with an arm than to push it as far as possible. Pitch counts are for a reason. A better pitcher will learn to be more efficient with pitch selection. True major league pitchers pitch to contact the majority of the time, thus bringing down pitch counts and increasing innings. If this weren't the case, then there would be no need for anyone to be behind the pitcher in the field.
4. The beauty of baseball is the ability to "match-up." Apparently you've never played much ball yourself, as it is the finer points of the game such as this that make this game so special. That "one pitch" that you speak so sorely of can oftentimes be the difference in a win and a lose, if executed properly or improperly.
5. Then don't pay money to visit them.
6. If the sport is such a problem, I've heard that curling is picking up a following across the country, so maybe there's a shot for you.
And finally, your assertion that players have ever "played just for love" of the game is absurd. Getting battered, spending months away from home, and being hounded by the media and fans is not something many people would volunteer their time to do.
At the risk of sounding like a complete *******, which I probably already have with the above post, I think there's a good chance that your one-sided view of the game is blinding you to many of the things that are still so beautiful about baseball.
Mr.Whipple
Banned
Hallsgator said:
I am talking about players who families lived below the poverty level and had very dangerous jobs. Parents today who push kids also do it for other reasons than money, Most do it because they couldnt get to the next level themself. Some of the things you talk about didnt exist back in the day, They just hoped a scout would come through town and watch their kid play. I do agree with the bad situation thing though. I think players of latin heritage strive to play the game better are the same of players from the 1900-1960's, The oppurtunity to better the lives of them and family members. From going to shows and my father who would hire retired players to be casino hosts, Meeting a lot of players and seeing who was grateful and who wasnt of playing pro. Makes me think that players from the pre-unrestricted age are a lot more grateful for getting the chance.
JoshHamilton
Well-known member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 12,205
- 320
GoJets9096822 said:
That's because in the 1850's there was no professional baseball. So yeah, it wasn't all about the money...they didn't get paid
Halonut
Active member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 4,106
- 0
jrinne said:
using terms like "most" and "many" is a little much in this case. since the 20's, the average ball player made more than the average working american and quite often, especially from the 50's on, ball player's off season jobs were token spots at car dealerships, sporting good stores/companies, etc.
Hallsgator
New member
Did you miss the chart on the last page? Since at least 1892, ball players have made considerable more money per year than the average workers.Halonut said:
NYCrulesU
New member
jrinne said:
Exactly. While they enjoyed the lifestyle that came with being a ball player, they weren't that far and above the average working stiff. Nowadays, these spoiled athletes whine and cry if they only get $10 million a year and not $20 mil. Just pathetic.
What's even more pathetic is that so many "fans" side with the athletes and feel they are worth what they get paid. While education continues to drop in this country because teachers "aren't worth" $35,000-$45,000 a year, grown men sit and argue that baseball players are worth or entitled to $20, 30, 40, 50 million a year. Ass backwards if you ask me. I know, apples and oranges. Anyone with the slightest resemblance of common sense will understand my analogy and my point.
Hallsgator
New member
The average salaries tell a different story.NYCrulesU said:
jgro85
Active member
I don't like the long, baggy pants that go over the spikes.
Yeah like Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig. Even the best played for money after the season was over. It was about the money. Well what about the ***** leagues? They played for the love right? The story goes that Satchel played on more teams than any player ever. He would get an appearance fee by showing up to pitch a couple innings then scoot over to the next town and pitch a couple the next day. Face baseball players were hustlers "back in the day" as well.jrinne said:
