What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Athlete, Actor, Or Musician? (1 Viewer)

Who Would You Rather Be?

  • Athlete

    Votes: 44 25.9%
  • Actor

    Votes: 64 37.6%
  • Musician

    Votes: 62 36.5%

  • Total voters
    170
Athlete by far.

Short shelf life but you have enough money to retire by your mid 30's.

Also, the thing that people are most glossing over, being an athlete would actually be fun. I think most of us would play football for free. Being an actor is glamorous and all but it doesn't seem like it's typically a ton of fun. Not as much as playing quarterback every day for your career would be, at least.
A top actor gets to choose roles, and experience a lot of different things. I think I'd enjoy the diversity.

 
If I'm just going to be good, I'd be an athlete.

If I'm going to be one of the best in the business, I'd be an actor. do triathlons and start a flag football league or something to get my thrill of competing athletically.

 
Top male actors have the longest shelf life and have the most chance to age gracefully while performing their craft. While there are exceptions, most athletes and musicians are a shell of themselves when they are older. Now, a lot of musicians can still bring it on stage when

they age but aging rockers never look quite right. Of course , this can happen to actors as well (Hi Mr. De Niro!) but a much better chance you can be like Anthony Hopkins and still kill it late in life.

Not to mention a top actor will make the most money, have the most control over his schedule while having to dedicate the least amount of time to mastering his craft. Additionally, they

can get away with being a doosh by playing the tortured artist card. Finally , while all three choices get to pull mad tail, a top actor appeals to the widest range of hot chicks so he has the most options in terms of nailing super hot trim.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A guy like Derek Jeter has made 100's of millions, hasn't taken a massive beating, & can bang anything that walks until he dies.
You could replace that exact sentence with DiCaprio although he hasn't taken any beating. And you could argue DiCaprio is at his peak. Dicaprio will make more but I guess at that point, the money doesn't matter as much. I do wonder if baseball players have lingering issues with their arms. Beyond that, his ankle could be an issue. Certainly not in terrible shape. Of course, this ignores the thrill of winning which I'm sure many of us would give anything to win a World Series or Super Bowl. That thrill is probably worth any risk.
Acting probably gives you the least amount of instant gratification.....as the other definitely get their egos boosted by real time adoration when they are performing.
Stage actors get just as much instant gratification as musicians and athletes.
A standing O at the end of a stage play is a far cry from rocking Wembley Stadium to a wild crowd in terms of "real time adoration." And chicks aren't ripping their tops off for Nathan Lane in The Nance.

 
Guys like Leo, cruise, will smith get more than 20 million to make a single movie in a year. Work for 3 months, do whatever you want te rest of the time. Not sure how any athlete makes out better.

 
A guy like Derek Jeter has made 100's of millions, hasn't taken a massive beating, & can bang anything that walks until he dies.
You could replace that exact sentence with DiCaprio although he hasn't taken any beating. And you could argue DiCaprio is at his peak. Dicaprio will make more but I guess at that point, the money doesn't matter as much. I do wonder if baseball players have lingering issues with their arms. Beyond that, his ankle could be an issue. Certainly not in terrible shape. Of course, this ignores the thrill of winning which I'm sure many of us would give anything to win a World Series or Super Bowl. That thrill is probably worth any risk.
Acting probably gives you the least amount of instant gratification.....as the other definitely get their egos boosted by real time adoration when they are performing.
Stage actors get just as much instant gratification as musicians and athletes.
A standing O at the end of a stage play is a far cry from rocking Wembley Stadium to a wild crowd in terms of "real time adoration." And chicks aren't ripping their tops off for Nathan Lane in The Nance.
I'm not sure Nathan Lane would want that.

 
Guys like Leo, cruise, will smith get more than 20 million to make a single movie in a year. Work for 3 months, do whatever you want te rest of the time. Not sure how any athlete makes out better.
And I'm pretty sure they can afford to golf whenever they want.

 
I think a top musician has the most fun, im choosing that. Can't even imagine an entire stadium cheering for you with no reservations. Athlete, you screw up and the boos start flowing. Actor is too much of a sterile environment. I don't think there's anything comparable to being a rock god in their prime.

 
Guys like Leo, cruise, will smith get more than 20 million to make a single movie in a year. Work for 3 months, do whatever you want te rest of the time. Not sure how any athlete makes out better.
a top golfer only plays, 20 events a year.plus endorsements and i love golf :shrug:

plus you can be off the radar easier

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Current Net Worth:

Tom Cruise: $250 million

Peyton Manning: $145 million

Tom Brady: $120 million

Actors definitely make more bank, but once you're up over $100 million how much does that really matter? I'd take the Superbowl ring and early retirement (Cruise has been working for 15 years longer) over that extra cash that I'm never going to be able to spend anyway.

That's not even to mention that this is a football forum. How many of us here grew up dreaming about playing the Super Bowl compared to dreaming about being in a movie? I'll definitely take enough money to be set for life while doing what I always dreamed of doing rather than taking a little bit more to do something I never really cared about.

ETA: of the three, I think that actors are the least remembered historically as well. I'm 30 and I can barely name an actor that wasn't relevant during my lifetime. I can name plenty of football players that were.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Guys like Leo, cruise, will smith get more than 20 million to make a single movie in a year. Work for 3 months, do whatever you want te rest of the time. Not sure how any athlete makes out better.
a top golfer only plays, 20 events a year.plus endorsements and i love golf :shrug:

plus you can be off the radar easier
That's big. I have no interest whatsoever in fame. Would enjoy the fortune but fame would suck.

 
A guy like Derek Jeter has made 100's of millions, hasn't taken a massive beating, & can bang anything that walks until he dies.
You could replace that exact sentence with DiCaprio although he hasn't taken any beating. And you could argue DiCaprio is at his peak. Dicaprio will make more but I guess at that point, the money doesn't matter as much. I do wonder if baseball players have lingering issues with their arms. Beyond that, his ankle could be an issue. Certainly not in terrible shape. Of course, this ignores the thrill of winning which I'm sure many of us would give anything to win a World Series or Super Bowl. That thrill is probably worth any risk.
Acting probably gives you the least amount of instant gratification.....as the other definitely get their egos boosted by real time adoration when they are performing.
Stage actors get just as much instant gratification as musicians and athletes.
A standing O at the end of a stage play is a far cry from rocking Wembley Stadium to a wild crowd in terms of "real time adoration." And chicks aren't ripping their tops off for Nathan Lane in The Nance.
I'm not sure Nathan Lane would want that.
:lmao:

 
Current Net Worth:

Tom Cruise: $250 million

Peyton Manning: $145 million

Tom Brady: $120 million

Actors definitely make more bank, but once you're up over $100 million how much does that really matter? I'd take the Superbowl ring and early retirement (Cruise has been working for 15 years longer) over that extra cash that I'm never going to be able to spend anyway.

That's not even to mention that this is a football forum. How many of us here grew up dreaming about playing the Super Bowl compared to dreaming about being in a movie? I'll definitely take enough money to be set for life while doing what I always dreamed of doing rather than taking a little bit more to do something I never really cared about.

ETA: of the three, I think that actors are the least remembered historically as well. I'm 30 and I can barely name an actor that wasn't relevant during my lifetime. I can name plenty of football players that were.
Bono net worth 600 million

 
Current Net Worth:

Tom Cruise: $250 million

Peyton Manning: $145 million

Tom Brady: $120 million

Actors definitely make more bank, but once you're up over $100 million how much does that really matter? I'd take the Superbowl ring and early retirement (Cruise has been working for 15 years longer) over that extra cash that I'm never going to be able to spend anyway.

That's not even to mention that this is a football forum. How many of us here grew up dreaming about playing the Super Bowl compared to dreaming about being in a movie? I'll definitely take enough money to be set for life while doing what I always dreamed of doing rather than taking a little bit more to do something I never really cared about.

ETA: of the three, I think that actors are the least remembered historically as well. I'm 30 and I can barely name an actor that wasn't relevant during my lifetime. I can name plenty of football players that were.
Not sure where they get their numbers, but with endorsements, Manning is earning over 30-35 million a year. Pretty sure he's a bright guy too, Id venture to say he has a lot more than that.

Plus I hear the guy owns an individual Papa Johns franchise $$$$$

 
Guys like Leo, cruise, will smith get more than 20 million to make a single movie in a year. Work for 3 months, do whatever you want te rest of the time. Not sure how any athlete makes out better.
And I'm pretty sure they can afford to golf whenever they want.
Actor would have waaaay more free time than an athlete. If you are a top athlete you have to train most of the time to stay there.

 
Vike Me said:
Limp Ditka said:
Abraham said:
Guys like Leo, cruise, will smith get more than 20 million to make a single movie in a year. Work for 3 months, do whatever you want te rest of the time. Not sure how any athlete makes out better.
And I'm pretty sure they can afford to golf whenever they want.
Actor would have waaaay more free time than an athlete. If you are a top athlete you have to train most of the time to stay there.
Until you're 35, at which point you have 24/7 365 worth of free time for the rest of your life.

 
fruity pebbles said:
FreeBaGeL said:
Current Net Worth:

Tom Cruise: $250 million

Peyton Manning: $145 million

Tom Brady: $120 million

Actors definitely make more bank, but once you're up over $100 million how much does that really matter? I'd take the Superbowl ring and early retirement (Cruise has been working for 15 years longer) over that extra cash that I'm never going to be able to spend anyway.

That's not even to mention that this is a football forum. How many of us here grew up dreaming about playing the Super Bowl compared to dreaming about being in a movie? I'll definitely take enough money to be set for life while doing what I always dreamed of doing rather than taking a little bit more to do something I never really cared about.

ETA: of the three, I think that actors are the least remembered historically as well. I'm 30 and I can barely name an actor that wasn't relevant during my lifetime. I can name plenty of football players that were.
Bono net worth 600 million
:thumbup:

Seriously, everyone seems to be thinking solely of the dollar bills, but they forget Bono's bringing it in, Jay Z's at $500 million, Beyonce's at $300 million, Springsteen $250 million . . . hell, even Adam Clayton, U2's bass player, is at $150 million.

And when you die, your family can still live well and possibly bring more in than when you were alive. Elvis' estate is still at $300 million, and the guy's been dead for 37 years.

 
My dream growing up was to be a pro baseball player - my skills didn't match my dreams. But....I'd still take musician and I can't even play an instrument. Keith Richards is pretty close to 1,000 years old and still making money off of music.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Athlete: Too much work. Constantly in the gym and watching what you eat. Have to adhere to team schedules.

Musician: Too much work. Constantly practicing, touring, recording, etc...

Actor: Can be lazy and fat and still pull in good jobs and hot groupies. Only work when you feel like it.

Actor by a landslide.

 
Athlete. Musician was a close second. Actor a distant third. Days start early, long boring hours, sitting around. Musicians and athletes get to play in front thousands of screaming fans in stadiums.

 
Musician. Been trying to have at least a decent local music career for 12 years. Couldnt think of anything more exciting

All 3 have their downsides but if you love what you do it doesnt feel that way

 
Athlete by far.

Short shelf life but you have enough money to retire by your mid 30's.

Also, the thing that people are most glossing over, being an athlete would actually be fun. I think most of us would play football for free. Being an actor is glamorous and all but it doesn't seem like it's typically a ton of fun. Not as much as playing quarterback every day for your career would be, at least.
You think 2-a-days in the summer are fun? Getting speared in the spine by a linebacker is fun? Getting booed as a visitor is fun?

What kind of non-practicing, 2-hand touch, 16 home games per season NFL fantasy world would you live in?

 
Actor. The money is better , essentially set your own schedule, choose your teammates, choose what to work on. Chris tucker spent a decade making rush hour movies and going to lakers games and sleeping in. And smoking weed, which is a problem for an athlete. Actor by a mile.
This.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Athlete by far.

Short shelf life but you have enough money to retire by your mid 30's.

Also, the thing that people are most glossing over, being an athlete would actually be fun. I think most of us would play football for free. Being an actor is glamorous and all but it doesn't seem like it's typically a ton of fun. Not as much as playing quarterback every day for your career would be, at least.
Pretty much this. I'm going to play baseball, make boatloads of money & retire at 35.

Then, if I want to act or do something on the same - charity work, etc. I'm not tied down to a schedule.

 
How many QBs have fun playing against Robert Mathis or the like.

George Clooney or Joe Theismann vs. LT?

I'm guessing an actor like Clooney works about 3 months a year on avg. and is on set about 10 hours a week. So that's about 120 hours of work per year for what $20 Million per movie? Yeah, I'll do that.

 
You're guessing incorrectly.
Link?
Never mind the fact that he has a production company. Or that he always has a project that he is directing in the pipeline, be it in pre-, production, or post-. They are paid a lot of money to act in films and the director is the boss. Period. If the director wants to shoot 50 takes, you are going to do 50 takes. They generally only have the actors for three months max for principal photography. You think they're getting a film made with the lead only on set for 10 hours a week? No.

Clooney might be the busiest guy in Hollywood.

 
You're guessing incorrectly.
Link?
Never mind the fact that he has a production company. Or that he always has a project that

he is directing in the pipeline, be it in pre-, production, or post-. They are paid a lot of

money to act in films and the director is the boss. Period. If the director wants to shoot 50

takes, you are going to do 50 takes. They generally only have the actors for three months

max for principal photography. You think they're getting a film made with the lead only on set for

10 hours a week? No.

Clooney might be the busiest guy in Hollywood.
Link? ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Can I be a "one hit wonder" musician living comfortably off of royalties?
Been working for KC and the Sunshine Band.
KC and the Sunshine Band had several hits, and KC (along with writing partner & bass player Richard Finch) wrote all of the songs so those two are :moneybag: .

Actor for me. Since I'm near the top of my profession, I already have oodles of money, and I can choose when I want to take on a project, and what scripts I want. It would be fun pretending to be someone else for a few months. It's sorta like Halloween for lengths at a time. I'd have more money than I could possibly need, and with so much spare money I would do what I can to help those in need, especially in the area of animal welfare.

 
Actor.

Athlete gets eliminated easily for many of the reasons mentioned.

I chose Actor over Musician simply because musicians have to deal with being on the road for long periods of time, recording, etc. I feel like they're away from home for most of the year very often. Actors are away to film a movie or something, but when they're between gigs, they just do whatever they want, go to parties, be famous, etc.

 
Athlete first - enjoy the success, then 'retire' to a career as an analyst, coach, etc. (Think of Favre having a great time helping coach the local H.S. team).

Musician second - for me, I'd lean toward jazz or classical music (consistent with my percussion background and experiences). Here again, you can keep performing, but also teach.

Actor - too much of a superficial life. If I've got to take a fake name to make a living (as many do), I don't like it. I wouldn't want photographers chasing me and my wimmen and/or family everywhere.

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Can I be a "one hit wonder" musician living comfortably off of royalties?
Been working for KC and the Sunshine Band.
KC and the Sunshine Band had several hits, and KC (along with writing partner & bass player Richard Finch) wrote all of the songs so those two are :moneybag: .
You got the general idea though? Big difference between KC & SB and the Beatles/Stones/Who/Zeppelin type bands.

 
Athlete first - enjoy the success, then 'retire' to a career as an analyst, coach, etc. (Think of Favre having a great time helping coach the local H.S. team).

Musician second - for me, I'd lean toward jazz or classical music (consistent with my percussion background and experiences). Here again, you can keep performing, but also teach.

Actor - too much of a superficial life. If I've got to take a fake name to make a living (as many do), I don't like it. I wouldn't want photographers chasing me and my wimmen and/or family everywhere.
Just do it Daniel Day Lewis style where you avoid the BS and do a movie every 2 years for 20mil, collect your Oscar.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top