1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Aaron's jersey expected to sell for $200K, or $40K less than his highest salary

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Steak Snabler, Apr 22, 2011.

  1. Steak Snabler

    Steak Snabler Well-Known Member


    Aaron's rookie-year jersey (when he wore No. 5) is expected to sell for $200K at auction. For perspective's sake:

    1. His salary that year (1954) was $5,000.

    2. He didn't break $100,000 until 1967, his 14th year in the majors. He already had a World Series ring, 12 all-star appearances and five Top 5 MVP finishes by then.

    3. He didn't make $200,000 until 1972, when he had 600 career homers and was coming off a .327-average, 47-homer, 118-RBI season.

    4. His highest salary was $240,000 with the Brewers his final two seasons (1975 and 1976), after he'd already broken Babe Ruth's home run record.

    5. Bottom line: If ballplayers are ridiculously overpaid nowadays, they were woefully underpaid just 35 years ago.
  2. Smash Williams

    Smash Williams Well-Known Member

    You adjusted all those numbers for inflation?
  3. spikechiquet

    spikechiquet Well-Known Member

    With inflation:
    1. $5000=$40,086.32 in 1954
    2. $100,000=$645,657.4 in 1967
    3. $200,000=$1,030,488.67 in 1972
    4. $240,000=$908,796.31 in 1976

    So is rookie jersey will essentially sell for 5 times what he made that season.
  4. Steak Snabler

    Steak Snabler Well-Known Member

    Aaron in 1967 was basically Albert Pujols today. In 1972 he was similar to Manny Ramirez last year.

    Pujols makes $14.5 million (and will be up to about $30MM next year). Manny made $18 million last year.
  5. Cubbiebum

    Cubbiebum Member

    Say hello to television and the better understanding of how to maximize revenue. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think ball players were vastly underpaid in the 60s and 70s. Sports just weren't as ridiculously lucrative as they are now.
  6. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Interviewing him was one of the best days of my career.

    About 30 minutes into the interview, after I called him Mr. Aaron for the 100th time, he said, "You can call me Henry."

    I laughed nervously and said, "No, I can't..." and he laughed like he understood.

    One of the classiest people to ever play any sport.
  7. Steak Snabler

    Steak Snabler Well-Known Member

    That and free agency, which gave players more recourse than to just hold out in spring training (which Joe DiMaggio did nearly ever year).
  8. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    The 1927 Yankees drew an average of 15,020 fans per game.

    I don't think TV, radio and licensing/merchandise revenue added anything to the meager pot, either. Maybe those ads on the outfield fences brought in a bundle.
  9. dooley_womack1

    dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

    No one had credit cards to put game tickets on. People had much less leisure time. Sports was not as much the obsession it is now. The eras are not comparable.
  10. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    Teams may have actually paid radio stations to carry their games back then. And local TV games weren't an everyday occurrence until TBS and WGN went on the bird.
  11. Cubbiebum

    Cubbiebum Member

    I'm confused. Are you saying TV, radio and licensing/merchandise revenue doesn't add much to the meager pot not or in 1927? If you mean now you are just simply wrong. if you mean then you're obviously right considering TV didn't exist, radio was still new and in everyone's home and people didn't buy jerseys back then.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page