Thruthefog
Can'tre Member
If you're not carrying any debt, you can live pretty sweet on 60k.
seriously...why cant every NFL player do this with their first contract, rather than piss it all away on 42 cars and 3 houses for mamma...and be working at starbucks after a knee blowout at 24?
Ryan Broyles: Detroit Lions Wide Receiver Says He and His Wife Live on Roughly $60,000 Each Year
Broyles, who signed a four-year contract worth more than $3.6 million in 2012, told ESPN that he and his wife set the budget to ensure that he will have enough money for after his career ends.
Getting large sums of money at an early age is usually a bad thing...it really has little to do with sports (see Todd Bridges, Paris Hilton, many lottery winners of various ages, etc.)
NFL players though...because the average career is so short these guys don't have time to rebound from foolish money decisions they made @ 23, thus the 70% go broke figure is legit....whereas MLB, NBA, NHL guys have longer careers, they can recover from bad financials deals unless you invest it all into a video game that goes up in smoke...Curt Schilling.
I guess I was more responding to the poster calling him "Cheap." While yes Broyles has taken things to the extreme opposite of many of these players I would still rather see more players lean this way than what we have seen. Too many stories have been told of these guys broke and almost living on the streets even within say 5 years after their career. So I guess to me this type of guy is one I would rather lift up for what he is doing than criticizing his decisions as what he is doing is at least setting him up to have a roof over his head for the next say 30 years or so. Like you said it is extreme and if I was making the kind of money he was (as it is still a nice take home pay) I would probably spend a little more than he is but I also commend him for his decision to let his money work for him instead of just blowing it on the first cute girl that gives him the time of day like many of these guys do.
I would say the other part of that is those other leagues have a lot more security built in for the players such as fully guaranteed contracts. If they do get hurt early on in a deal they still get the full value. Now they have lower risk of injury compared to the NFL so it makes it easier for teams to feel comfortable signing a player to a long-term fully guaranteed deal. It is why you see some of these 10-year type contracts where in the NFL pretty much the longest a deal ever really is is around 5-years but really closer to 3-years.
That's true. If he initially bought a house and a car straight up he wouldn't have too many payments. It would mostly be living expenses like food and gas with a few insurance premiums. He should get his wife into extreme couponing. I bet that would save a lot for them.If you're not carrying any debt, you can live pretty sweet on 60k.
I've long said...the NFLPA is the worst union in pro sports, the bottom feeder contracts imo SHOULD be fully guaranteed... you blow out a knee as a ST guy, you're most likely going to get cut...whereas as 1st or 2nd rd pick...blows out a knee...the team is not going to cut him.
OH I agree...Players thought this new CBA would be great for them with lowering the rookie contracts to give more of a pool of money to the other players. All it did was give the top players on rosters bigger contracts and make it easier for teams to want to cut the middle guys pay wise in the hopes that a rookie or 1st contract player can play just as well but at a cheaper cost. Then throw in like I said the lack of fully guaranteed contracts and really NFL players compared to other major sports have really lost out on quite a bit.
The players have misrepresented the rank and file for many yrs. The NFLPA looks at the top of the food chain down instead of the other way around. Rookie contracts reward potential, but punishes those who overachieve.
Fully guaranteed contracts...I'm typically pro player in all pro sports when it comes to contracts, but I think fully guaranteed deals is bad business...a portion should be, but 100% the day you sign? Complacency would have to set it at some point.
Oh I like that the NFL doesn't have fully guaranteed contracts as a team could be hampered for years all because of injuries maybe even 3 years ago to a certain player. I'm just saying that the NFL by not having a more guaranteed contract definitely shows that they are behind the other leagues in the sense of how much power the players have. Right now the NFL is by far the most owner driven league of any of the major sports. It is not even close in my opinion.
What you are asking then if pretty much for him to live off of what he is living off of. $900k a year minus taxes, money paid to agent, and other expenses that come out of that pretty much he would end up with around $500k in actual take home pay. While $3.6 million sounds great on paper it is not what he actually takes home at the end of the day. That is part of what gets these guys in trouble is they act like they are getting the full amount of the money but don't understand how the whole expenses that come out of that type of money plays into this whole thing. So again him only spending about $60k a year is about equal to him putting $500k away a year. Throw in that is 4-years worth so really around $2 million in actual money. No guarantee he gets anymore than that in his career. So essentially that type of money living at the same wage would put him into his early 60's. Obviously he can find another job in that time but again that money doesn't go as far as a lot of these players think.