Sixteen teams head into this weekend’s fifth round of the FA Cup, their fans celebrating shortening odds of a Wembley semi-final appearance and, in turn, final glory. 

Most will be oblivious to the £2m prize for the ultimate winners of the trophy. Club owners will likely consider this a paltry reward in itself, although broadcast revenues from a cup run and the lure of a Europa League place are handy augmentations.

Prize money is a distorting determinant in a world increasingly under the influence of wannabe sporting powers, both sovereign states and financial moguls. 

As the sums on offer to competition organisers, club owners, athletes and their agents swell, it is no surprise that heritage events come under pressure to choose whether to ante up or risk a slide into second-rate status.

For those of us who will never be blessed with elite athletic abilities, the thought of winning, say, Wimbledon, the Open or a final at Wembley might appear motivation enough to knuckle down and chase the dream if one had the requisite skills. 

But relentlessly, year by year, the direct financial rewards for success in pinnacle events inflate. Such is the power of competition within sports.

Grand slam tournaments need to ensure they continue to sit above the rest of the calendar. Lesser events without the cachet of history may offer bigger prizes, but the traditional leaders must offer sufficient rewards such that – when combined with the kudos (and consequent commercial benefits) of victory – they remain on top of a sport’s status pyramid. 

LIV Golf may offer riches beyond those many of those available on the established tours, but its contracted golfers still want access to the four major tournaments. Would they if the majors only paid peanuts though?

Winner’s prize money sampled

• Wimbledon £2.7m. Six Kings Slam $6m
• ICC Men’s Champions Trophy $2.2m. IPL $2.3m
• Super Bowl $171,000 per player. NBA Cup $500,000 per player
• World Darts £500,000. World Snooker £500,000
• World Athletics $70,000. World Aquatics $20,000
• The Masters $3.6m. Each LIV Golf event $4m
• Champions League €25m. Premier League £62m
• World Chess $2.5m. World Monopoly $20,580 (equal to the total money in the board game)

A $3m reward for the winner of last year’s Open golf is hardly peanuts. After all, it exceeds the FA Cup winner’s purse. The Olympics, by contrast, has got away with paying no prize money at all until, at Paris last summer, track and field gold medals triggered $50,000 payments from World Athletics.

The International Olympic Committee has long taken advantage of the minority status of most of the constituent sports in the Games. Athletes have few opportunities to win cash prizes elsewhere, but Olympic success is a possible (but far from guaranteed) route to celebrity status that might be monetised. 

The fuss about the interest (or lack of) shown by leading golfers, tennis players and (some) US basketball stars is but a side show. Fifty grand would hardly make a difference to their bank accounts. Next up, the world’s leading cricketers in Los Angeles.

Owners of heritage sporting assets cannot afford to rest on their storied pasts to secure the goodwill of athletes.