Top 10 Players Wages

m.j.w

TOP 10 BEST PAID PLAYERS IN THE WORLD

1 S Eto’o (Anzhi) £15.91m
2 Z Ibrahimovic (PSG) £11.54m
3 W Rooney (Man Utd) £10.98m
4 Y Toure (Man City) £10.34m
5 S Aguero (Man City) £9.95m
6 D Drogba (Shanghai) £9.55m
7 F Torres (Chelsea) £8.6m
8 D Conca (Guangzhou) £8.4m
9 L Messi (Barcelona) £8.35m
10 C Ronaldo (R Madrid) £7.98m

Just after seeing this, didnt realise messi and ronaldo were so far down the list but who is Darío Leonardo Conca and why is he getting paid so much. Obviously Guangzhou must be minted but why are they paying him so much, he hasnt even played for the argentine national team. Anyone ever hear of him?

Jax Teller

Doubt Ronaldo is that low on list.

Seaneh

Ronaldo and Messo probably take home more than any of the premier league players. They also make a **** ton more in sponsership and image rights.

In reality, Ronaldo and Messi make several times more than Eto'o per year.

Seaneh

Jax Teller wrote: »

Doubt Ronaldo is that low on list.

in just wages, he probably is.

That's gross though, in net terms, he'd be alot higher.

Kess73

Crazy list if the figures are correct.


I wonder if people were to make top ten lists of who they though were the best players in the world, how many of the other 8 (assuming Messi and Ronaldo made the majority if not all lists) would be on the majority of lists.


I think it does show that the best in the world don't always have the best agents or the most greed.


As for that Conca guy. Can only assume that his agent tricked the Chinese into thinking that Conca was another way of spelling Messi.

m.j.w

Dont know if thats true, dont know if you can believe this though coming from the daily mail.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2210575/Cristiano-Ronaldos-wage-demands-open-door-Manchester-City-Chelsea.html

Oat23

Conca is paid so much for the same reason as Eto'o - To get a good player to go to the backarse of nowhere you have to make it worth their while. Anzhi HAD to pay Eto'o so much money to get him to move there and Guangzhou had to pay Conca that much to get him to move to South China.

Neither of them are worth what they are on.

Conca is also a very tidy player and was the centrepiece of Fluminense during his time there. I think he's leaving China in January.

Pinturicchio

I heard this list somewhere else recently (Football Weekly podcast maybe?) and it was the first time I'd ever heard of Conca.

Kess73 wrote: »

I wonder if people were to make top ten lists of who they though were the best players in the world, how many of the other 8 (assuming Messi and Ronaldo made the majority if not all lists) would be on the majority of lists.

Ibra and Toure are probably the only two who would make mine.

m.j.w

Oatesy23 wrote: »

Conca is paid so much for the same reason as Eto'o - To get a good player to go to the backarse of nowhere you have to make it worth their while. Anzhi HAD to pay Eto'o so much money to get him to move there and Guangzhou had to pay Conca that much to get him to move to South China.

Neither of them are worth what they are on.

Conca is also a very tidy player and was the centrepiece of Fluminense during his time there. I think he's leaving China in January.

I understand that but surely if they had have offered Conca half that they would have got him. He would have been getting no where near that money at Flum. He never got into the argentina squad so he cant be that good. Eto was up with the best players in the world and althought he is not worth his wages you can see some justification for it.

3hn2givr7mx1sc

Conca absolutely bossed it for my Newcastle team in FM2011, so he deserves every penny.

Dante

If you look at the actual highest earning sportspeople in the world according to forbes, Ronaldo (#9) and Messi (#11) are by far the highest paid footballers in the world when you include endorsements and bonuses (Excluding Beckham). The only other player that even comes close is Rooney at #37.

magma69

I wonder how many starving Cameroonians could be fed and sheltered on Eto's wage. It's not right people on this kind of money imo. But that's capitalism for you. Football is a business.

srfc19

magma69 wrote: »

I wonder how many starving Cameroonians could be fed and sheltered on Eto's wage. It's not right people on this kind of money imo. But that's capitalism for you. Football is a business.

I wonder how many starving Cameroonians can play football like Eto'o??

Pudsy33

I don't believe Rooney is that far up the list

Bodhisopha

Not sure about that list. Pretty sure Ronaldo is on higher wages than Messi but Messi is the higher earner.

m.j.w

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Not sure about that list. Pretty sure Ronaldo is on higher wages than Messi but Messi is the higher earner.

messi got a pay rise there last month tha put him ahead of ronaldo

ThunbergsAreGo

magma69 wrote: »

I wonder how many starving Cameroonians could be fed and sheltered on Eto's wage. It's not right people on this kind of money imo. But that's capitalism for you. Football is a business.

Pretty sure Etoo is massively involved with fighting poverty

not justifying the wages but at least hes using his profile

Bodhisopha

m.j.w wrote: »

messi got a pay rise there last month tha put him ahead of ronaldo

I read that on here but can't find anything about it online.

EuropeanSon

magma69 wrote: »

I wonder how many starving Cameroonians could be fed and sheltered on Eto's wage. It's not right people on this kind of money imo. But that's capitalism for you. Football is a business.

Eto'o gives a large chunk of what he earns to help starving Africans (not necessarily Cameroonians (or even Africans for that matter, they may come from elsewhere)), as far as I'm aware.

Also, what would be "right" in your opinion, then, and why?

magma69

EuropeanSon wrote: »

Eto'o gives a large chunk of what he earns to help starving Africans (not necessarily Cameroonians (or even Africans for that matter, they may come from elsewhere)), as far as I'm aware.

Also, what would be "right" in your opinion, then, and why?

I wasn't singling out just Eto'o, just felt he was the best example to use for how messed up football has become. I'd be interested to know about this large chunk of his wages he gives to charity.

I think it's immoral to pay someone over 10k a week to run around a field for a few hours. That's my opinion.

srfc19

magma69 wrote: »

I think it's immoral to pay someone over 10k a week to run around a field for a few hours. That's my opinion.

Why 10k? Why is that the limit??

And if its not paid to the players then the owners just keep money generated from ticket sales and merchandaise.

ColeTrain

m.j.w wrote: »

I understand that but surely if they had have offered Conca half that they would have got him. He would have been getting no where near that money at Flum. He never got into the argentina squad so he cant be that good. Eto was up with the best players in the world and althought he is not worth his wages you can see some justification for it.

Maybe the likes of Real offered him half that but Conca doubled it so they could get him, I doubt he would have signed for them if they only offered him 10% more. Makes sense in a way.

magma69

srfc19 wrote: »

Why 10k? Why is that the limit??

And if its not paid to the players then the owners just keep money generated from ticket sales and merchandaise.

I thought it an appropriate number. You have to draw the line somewhere. Also I think the majority of the money generated should be put into the community and the sport, not the pocket of the owner. I'm in favour of fan/community ownership of clubs.

I realise that's all very idealistic and not realistic in this day and age, but I was asked my opinion and I gave it. When a sport turns professional, it's just another product of Capitalism.

bucketybuck

magma69 wrote: »

I think it's immoral to pay someone over 10k a week to run around a field for a few hours. That's my opinion.

You are probably one of these people who thinks that if that money stopped going to Eto'o, that ten hospitals would suddenly spring up out of the ground.

In other words, you have no clue about economics.

magma69

bucketybuck wrote: »

You are probably one of these people who thinks that if that money stopped going to Eto'o, that ten hospitals would suddenly spring up out of the ground.

In other words, you have no clue about economics.

No, I don't think that. Very illogical of you to come to that conclusion.

Where To

Surprised Yakubu isn't on that list.

bucketybuck

magma69 wrote: »

Also I think the majority of the money generated should be put into the community and the sport, not the pocket of the owner. I'm in favour of fan/community ownership of clubs.

I realise that's all very idealistic and not realistic in this day and age, but I was asked my opinion and I gave it. When a sport turns professional, it's just another product of Capitalism.

You realise of course that were the money generated to be put back into the so-called community, that the levels of money generated would be nowhere near the sums generated with sport as private enterprise?

You think clubs owners are negotiating multi-million pound TV deals unless there is something in it for them? You think they are arranging sponsorship deals with DHL if they have to just give the money away? Of course not. If the sport was set up differently then the millions of pounds paid to the likes of Eto'o wouldn't exist, it wouldn't have been generated in the first place.

Its not capitalism, just simple economics.

NIMAN

Wages are only a part of what these guys earn, and I think its common knowledge that Messi is now the worlds biggest earning sportsman, so obviously he earns plenty outside of his basic wage.

These figures take no account of tax rates in the various countries either. Zlatan will have some shock if Hollande pushes through this 75% tax rate on millionaires!!

A2LUE42

NIMAN wrote: »

Wages are only a part of what these guys earn, and I think its common knowledge that Messi is now the worlds biggest earning sportsman, so obviously he earns plenty outside of his basic wage.

These figures take no account of tax rates in the various countries either. Zlatan will have some shock if Hollande pushes through this 75% tax rate on millionaires!!

Just find some other loophole, such as paying his salary to a corporate version of himself.

Pinturicchio

On the other hand there is Ibrahimovic, who reportedly earns €14m-a-year (£11m)after tax, which means that the club are paying out roughly €30m-a-year (£24m)for one player.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/sep/20/nasser-al-khelaifi-paris-saint-germain?INTCMP=SRCH

Richard Hillman

magma69 wrote: »

I wasn't singling out just Eto'o, just felt he was the best example to use for how messed up football has become. I'd be interested to know about this large chunk of his wages he gives to charity.

I think it's immoral to pay someone over 10k a week to run around a field for a few hours. That's my opinion.

Wage capping people of incredible skill like Ronaldo and Messi, who earn their employers tens if not hundreds of millions a year is immoral.

NIMAN

If Messi is the top earner, and he earns maybe hundreds of millions for the club, then how come they are in a financial mess?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/european/7877059/Barcelonas-financial-problems-revealed-by-president-Sandro-Rosell.html

Maybe its down to crazy wages? Messi's included.

And just when you thought they couldn't get any greedier
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1175963/cristiano-ronaldo-%27wants-L400k-a-week-at-real-madrid%27?cc=5739

Wages are now a badge of honour with these guys. They won't ever be able to spend what they earn, but they all, especially Ronaldo, seem to be the one who can say "I am the worldest highest paid footballer" as if that means you are the worlds No.1 footballer.

gosplan

bucketybuck wrote: »

You are probably one of these people who thinks that if that money stopped going to Eto'o, that ten hospitals would suddenly spring up out of the ground.

In other words, you have no clue about economics.

Jesus, what the hell is wrong with people on this forum??

The guy is just trying to say it's hard to justify paying someone loads of cash to play sport when there's extrememe poverty in the world ... and people go on the attack???

bucketybuck wrote: »

You think clubs owners are negotiating multi-million pound TV deals unless there is something in it for them? You think they are arranging sponsorship deals with DHL if they have to just give the money away? Of course not. If the sport was set up differently then the millions of pounds paid to the likes of Eto'o wouldn't exist, it wouldn't have been generated in the first place.

Its not capitalism, just simple economics.

Also, not to just pick on you but this is just totally wrong. I think you've a confused definition of the two.

Economics does not mean 'an economic system', it's a social science that studies the making and consuming of goods and services. The ownership of goods and services you've just described is private so it's capitalism. i.e. Eto privatly owns his football ability so he sells his services to a club, who sell a few inches on the front of their shirt to another company, and who also get money from a TV station who now privatly own the rights to broadcast the game and so on and so forth.

NIMAN

Sometimes I cannot understand how the world of football can continue to buck the trend in this world of recession?

It is not sustainable in the correct economic world, then it has sustained itself for much longer than many experts said it could.

Do we think it will ever go bust? Surely the likes of young fans in Spain, where as many as 40% of them are out of work, will get fed up paying to see guys who want £400,000 per week to play for their local team?

scudzilla

m.j.w wrote: »

7 F Torres (Chelsea) £8.6m

Ok, I lol'd

iregk

magma69 wrote: »

I wonder how many starving Cameroonians could be fed and sheltered on Eto's wage. It's not right people on this kind of money imo. But that's capitalism for you. Football is a business.

You do know why Eto'o went there and accepted the large pay packet don't you?

Brain Stroking

gosplan wrote: »

Jesus, what the hell is wrong with people on this forum??

The guy is just trying to say it's hard to justify paying someone loads of cash to play sport when there's extrememe poverty in the world ... and people go on the attack???



Also, not to just pick on you but this is just totally wrong. I think you've a confused definition of the two.

Economics does not mean 'an economic system', it's a social science that studies the making and consuming of goods and services. The ownership of goods and services you've just described is private so it's capitalism. i.e. Eto privatly owns his football ability so he sells his services to a club, who sell a few inches on the front of their shirt to another company, and who also get money from a TV station who now privatly own the rights to broadcast the game and so on and so forth.

If people are willing to pay then they are worth it. If the clubs have enough money to pay them then the clubs are making enough and the money being paid out is justified. All of this comes from people like me and you going to matches, buying merchandise and paying our tv subscriptions. Obviously there is a hell of a lot of people who spend some of their disposable cash on football. Plus because people watch football int heir billions all the Nike's and McDonalds' of this world want to throw their cash at it too. Put all that together and that is a lot of money. Would you rather it was kept away from the players and given to the suits instead?