Hey that’s about what most engineers graduating from college get. And they won’t be able to do sponsorships and ad deals. I would say $76k is a much more appropriate salary to start with than what the men make in basketball. That is just crazy
It may go down in the WNBA. Caitlin Clark isn’t the first player who was expected to make the WNBA popular (Maya Moore, Brittany Griner, etc). It’s far too early to tell if she will have any impact on WNBA viewership.
The issue is that NIL money is also a way for boosters to pay players to stay instead of the shadowy back door deals that used to happen. Now NIL just allows boosters to pay players through a legitimate channel.
A lot of NIL money during the off-season is booster money, yes. That’s money that basically will only go to athletes signed with a particular school.
But there’s also a lot of NIL money for actual big budget TV/print advertising from national corporations for ads produced by major ad agencies. That’s money that follows the athlete.
Not all of it will follow the athlete to the pros (and not every athlete goes pro), especially since the WNBA seems to have lower viewership than NCAA women’s basketball. But if anyone is gonna be making good money on sponsorships in the WNBA, it’ll be Caitlin Clark.
I’m not gay, but 20k is 20k. Agreed the extreme disparity between ownership and median player pay is out there, and the disparity against other leagues is off the wall.
I always push back when I hear people say athletes get paid too much. The money’s on the table. It either goes to the owners, who likely inherent the team or are independently billionaires, or the players. The players are lucky to get 5 years to make as much money as possible, they deserve it way more than the owners.
Do you actually know anything about sports economics? Ticket sales are determined by the individual teams and are a separate pie from the money used to determine players salary. The salary cap is determined by the tv deals which have nothing to do with the points you thought you were making.
Useless idiots should try to learn a little bit about what their talking about before they show their ass in a comment section.
Ticket sales are determined by the individual teams
…what? Ticket sales are determined by the number of people who buy tickets. What exactly are you trying to argue? If ticket prices are lower, patrons pay less and profits go down. This means patrons have more money than if ticket prices are higher.
This is very basic stuff that has no room for ambiguity.
Useless idiots should try to learn a little bit about what their talking about before they show their ass in a comment section.
It’s clear you’re just going to twist your brain into knots to avoid acknowledging simple facts about reality.
I see it all the time and don’t expect more from you people at this point.
Hey that’s about what most engineers graduating from college get. And they won’t be able to do sponsorships and ad deals. I would say $76k is a much more appropriate salary to start with than what the men make in basketball. That is just crazy
She has north of 3m in sponsorship deals right now, and we can only assume that number will go up in the WNBA
It may go down in the WNBA. Caitlin Clark isn’t the first player who was expected to make the WNBA popular (Maya Moore, Brittany Griner, etc). It’s far too early to tell if she will have any impact on WNBA viewership.
The issue is that NIL money is also a way for boosters to pay players to stay instead of the shadowy back door deals that used to happen. Now NIL just allows boosters to pay players through a legitimate channel.
A lot of NIL money during the off-season is booster money, yes. That’s money that basically will only go to athletes signed with a particular school.
But there’s also a lot of NIL money for actual big budget TV/print advertising from national corporations for ads produced by major ad agencies. That’s money that follows the athlete.
Not all of it will follow the athlete to the pros (and not every athlete goes pro), especially since the WNBA seems to have lower viewership than NCAA women’s basketball. But if anyone is gonna be making good money on sponsorships in the WNBA, it’ll be Caitlin Clark.
76k is barely enough to get by in a lot of urban areas … this is a shameful compensation for one of the best players.
I barely make 20k and would do a lot of things to nearly 4x my yearly income
The problem is that the NBA pays way too fucking much
I’m not gay, but 20k is 20k. Agreed the extreme disparity between ownership and median player pay is out there, and the disparity against other leagues is off the wall.
I always push back when I hear people say athletes get paid too much. The money’s on the table. It either goes to the owners, who likely inherent the team or are independently billionaires, or the players. The players are lucky to get 5 years to make as much money as possible, they deserve it way more than the owners.
Or tickets could cost less and patrons would have more money in their pockets after a show.
But that would cut into profits, and useful idiots can’t have that.
Do you actually know anything about sports economics? Ticket sales are determined by the individual teams and are a separate pie from the money used to determine players salary. The salary cap is determined by the tv deals which have nothing to do with the points you thought you were making.
Useless idiots should try to learn a little bit about what their talking about before they show their ass in a comment section.
…what? Ticket sales are determined by the number of people who buy tickets. What exactly are you trying to argue? If ticket prices are lower, patrons pay less and profits go down. This means patrons have more money than if ticket prices are higher.
This is very basic stuff that has no room for ambiguity.
It’s clear you’re just going to twist your brain into knots to avoid acknowledging simple facts about reality.
I see it all the time and don’t expect more from you people at this point.
So she needs more money so landlords can make more money?
When does this cycle end?
based on what