Aging Athletes' Commercial Value: A Different Story from On-Pitch Performance

When Cristiano Ronaldo laboured through Portugal’s opening 1-1 group-stage draw with DR Congo, he managed just 25 touches and zero shots on target — his fewest touches in a major tournament game for Portugal in a match he played the full 90 minutes, per Opta. At 41, he looked entirely off the pace. Yet by being on the pitch for the full ninety, he commanded the absolute centre of global broadcasting. This isn’t really a football story or a cricket story. It’s a selection story, and it has a cricketing precedent: MS Dhoni , who at 45 remains a fixture in the Chennai Super Kings XI despite a batting position that has slid down the order across recent seasons, even as CSK’s coaching staff continues to back him on net form rather than match output. The question isn’t whether Ronaldo and Dhoni have earned their place in these squads. The question is narrower and harder: in the specific role they occupy, are they currently as sharp as the players doing that same job for other teams right now? On the numbers, increasingly not. And the honest explanation for why they’re still started has less to do with cricketing or footballing logic than with what their continued presence is worth to a balance sheet. The moment an athlete retires, their commercial value shifts. They go from an active, living cultural phenomenon to a nostalgic legend. For brands, the difference in marketing leverage is steep — and it’s a difference that has nothing to do with whether the athlete is still the sharpest option in their role. Ronaldo earned a record $300 million in the 2025-26 season, topping Forbes’ list of the world’s highest-paid athletes for the fourth consecutive year — the first time any athlete has crossed the $300 million mark since Floyd Mayweather. Of that, $235 million came from his Al-Nassr contract and $65 million from endorsements and commercial partnerships including Nike, Herbalife, and Binance. None of that endorsement income is contingent on shots on target. Brands pay for visibility, and a 25-touch performance against DR Congo still generates millions of global impressions on live television — which is precisely why Roberto Martínez kept Ronaldo on for the full match despite Portugal managing just seven shots, their joint-fewest in a World Cup match, and a 0.64 xG against DR Congo’s 0.82. Martínez’s own justification leaned on presence rather than production: “It makes no sense to get the best goalscorer in world football out in a game that you need goals… the experience of Cristiano in the box is important, the way that he attracts defenders is important.” That’s the tension in one sentence. The justification is spatial and reputational — defenders respect him, so space opens for others — not statistical. Whether that’s still true at 41, against teams who no longer have to respect a player generating zero shots on target, is exactly the question being avoided. Dhoni’s continued presence at Chennai Super Kings is the cricketing parallel. Critics have repeatedly questioned his batting position — he’s spent recent seasons sliding between No. 5 and No. 8, facing only a handful of deliveries most innings. Dhoni’s own framing of this has consistently been team-first rather than form-first: “It’s not about me being there in the top three or four. It’s about making a strong core to ensure the franchise doesn’t suffer.” It’s a generous way of describing a player who is no longer being picked on output. CSK’s coaching staff has backed that framing publicly, often on net form rather than match form. Ahead of the 2026 season — after Dhoni failed to play a single match the previous year due to a leg injury — bowling coach Eric Simons was asked whether CSK remained hopeful about his availability. His response: “Are you seriously asking me that question? We always are. I mean, honestly, he has hit the ball so well… in terms of hitting the ball in the nets, he’s hitting it as well as I’ve ever seen him hit it.” That’s a coach vouching for a 44-year-old’s spot in the XI based on how he looked in practice, not in a match he didn’t play. It’s not dishonest — it’s plainly a captaincy and dressing-room-culture call as much as a cricketing one. But it also means the seat isn’t being held on current sharpness against the wicketkeeper-finishers other franchises are fielding in that same role. The moment that crystallised the question was May 18, 2024. CSK needed 17 off the final over against RCB just to scrape into the playoffs on net run rate — not even to win outright. Dhoni, on strike, smashed Yash Dayal’s first ball for a 110-metre six, then fell to a slower ball on the very next delivery. CSK finished 27 runs short. RCB went through; CSK missed the playoffs for the third time in the competition’s history — and haven’t reached one since. It wasn’t a solitary collapse — Ravindra Jadeja was at the other end and the equation was already steep before the over began — but it’s the moment the finisher’s reflexes were tested with everything on the line, and they weren’t quite there. Off the field, the commercial logic is unambiguous. Dhoni’s 2026 net worth is estimated at roughly ₹1,040–1,200 crore (around $125–145 million), and while his IPL salary has fallen to ₹4 crore — a number he voluntarily accepted — that’s now the smallest line in his income. Industry estimates put his endorsement income from 40-plus active brand deals (Dream11, Mastercard, Indigo Paints, Gulf Oil, Cars24, and others) at roughly ₹100–200 crore annually. The CSK shirt is now a smaller revenue line than the version of Dhoni that shirt keeps visible. Neither Ronaldo nor Dhoni is being questioned on whether they’ve earned a place in these squads — that’s not in dispute, and their careers settle it. The question is narrower: in the specific role they occupy — central striker, finisher-wicketkeeper — are they currently sharper than the players doing that same job for other teams right now? Compare Ronaldo’s 25 touches and zero shots on target against strikers like Harry Kane, who scored in England’s 4-2 win the same matchday, or against the touch-and-chance-creation numbers any in-form No. 9 is putting up elsewhere in this tournament. Compare Dhoni facing single-digit deliveries at No. 7 or 8 against the finishers other IPL franchises are fielding in that exact role — players getting more balls, scoring faster, and not requiring a top-order collapse to even get to the crease. That’s the actual cost. It’s not that Ronaldo or Dhoni don’t belong on the roster — it’s that starting them, specifically in that specific role, makes the XI weaker on a like-for-like basis than fielding someone less decorated but currently sharper in the same job. Martínez and Simons aren’t wrong that there’s value in experience and presence. But “valuable to have around” and “the best option to start in this role right now” are two different claims, and the commercial incentive — broadcast minutes, endorsement visibility, the $65 million and the ₹100–200 crore — sits entirely on the side of the first claim, not the second. That’s the quiet trade their teams are making every time the team sheet goes out: a small, real competitive cost, paid for a large, real commercial gain.