Reply With Quote
Just because it has not changed, does not mean that many owners did not want it.
If Manu announces he is ready to leave the spurs and test FA market, spurs fans say it's normal NBA is a business after all. Now if TP announces the exact same thing, spurs fans say you TP piece of ! Trade his ass for Biedrins and a filler.
If Manu says I will play next summer, it's a: well this is how it works, it's important for Manu, 2 pages thread. Now TP says the same it's a 10 pages meltdown thread.
As for me, I agree with Bruno when you sign TP or Manu a contract extension you know they will play for their NT and there is nothing you can do about it. Spurs FO accepted the whole package, fans should do the same.
Just because it has not changed, does not mean that many owners did not want it.
The only problem I have with that is that there are no other options. They can't legally not make them play.
Of course they are going to pay them, because they are great players.
Not nearly enough to push for a change.
Or perhaps the owners are granted other things in order not to press this issue because it helps the NBA promote their global brand.
I am not saying I really care one way or the other, but what would it hurt to allow for NBA teams to put that in contracts?
Would Manu turn down tons of money? Dirk? I doubt it and the best players could still get it in their contracts.
Or at least allow them to make their contracts non-guaranteed if they get injured for their NT. Same with USA players.
Of course there are other options, a franchise can choose to not pick int players or trade them for american players who have less chances to make the US NT.
I'm pretty sure spurs could have traded Manu instead of signing him an extension but they also know with Manu risk is higher but the reward is also much higher. It's just a business decision to make: a risky investment has a higher potential payback than a safe solution. At the end it's a managerial decision.
Allowing contract's clause that allow NBA teams to forbid their players not to play for their NT has nothing to do with the new CBA. It is related to the NBA/FIBA agreement.
I don't know what is the structure of this agreement but one thing seems sure: FIBA will never signs an agreement with the NBA if this agreement allow NBA teams to forbid players to play with their NT.
You can imagine a NBA that works without an agreement with FIBA but it means that there won't have a single NBA player playing international basketball.
I know it gets repe ive, but this is why I keep going back to the CBA.
Every five years or so, the owners and the players negotiate the terms of their relationship. Both sides are then bound by those terms. If it is important enough to ownership, they'll negotiate for limitations on NT play. So far, it hasn't.
Well, in the basic sense, of course there is a choice. But not signing elite talents is not realistic.
What is the problem with allowing the owners to have the option to negotiate national team play? Then both parties would have a choice.
I am worried.
Fans anger is partially misplaced. What they perceive is a sometimes furious will to play for the NT, even the most irrelevant of the tourneys.
The reasons for that I explaned in the famous post....
Personally I would introduce a restriction allowing players to take part only in the major events, WC Euros and Americas tourneys.
To see Parker getting hurt last year on a "qualification" campaign against Finland was ridiculous.
Sure, I get that. It is a part of a bigger picture, not just the CBA, but the NBA & FIBA and their working relationship.
If the owner's really wanted it, they could probably get it, but obviously they don't care that much. They might be annoyed, and I really don't care. I am just speaking about the theoretical application of allowing this to be negotiable and who is winning/losing in this deal.
Even though the owners appear to be losing in this particular singular area, that means they and basketball have gained else where.
It would be nice to be able to see the exact terms of this agreement. The provisions in the CBA relating to NT participation are easy enough to find.
At any rate, you're right. The NBA benefits from this arrangement. They're not pulling their players out of FIBA events.
As long as it is the same for American players. I don't see near as much grousing about American NBA players playing in international compe ion. There is a double standard at play. Foreign NBA players are not being treated equally by some American fans. Why are American players not being held to the same standard of criticism as foreign players?
I'd be curious to see the figures of the sales of Spurs items in the whole US, except SA, compared to France and Argentina. Or even Slovenia.
These rules should be for every NBA player and their NT. The reason there seems to be a double standard is because the "foreign" players seem to have suffered more injuries. There are a lot more of the foreign players playing for their NT's that play in the NBA as well.
More for you to worry about. I agree completely with this sentiment as a reasonable basis for compromise among all parties involved.
Then it is really time to go to bed.
The league send a memo to NBA teams when Spurs asked Manu not to play:
http://www.fiba.com/pages/eng/fc/new...9079/arti.html
This is a reminder that, under the NBA's agreement with FIBA, NBA teams are required to permit their players to play in certain major national-team compe ions, provided that adequate insurance is obtained.
[...]
These include the Olympics, world championships, continental championships [such as the European Championships], and relevant qualifying tournaments.
[...]
The NBA/FIBA agreement also provides that NBA teams may not take any steps that are intended to deter players from playing in such compe ions
There doesn't "seem" to be a double standard, there is a double standard. It's ethnocentrism at it's worst. Americans cannot relate to a foreign player being as committed to his NT as an American player. Nobody complained when Duncan played for Team U.S.A., or if they did, it was nowhere near as vitriolic as it is with Manu and Tony.
Thanks.
I'm too lazy to look it up now, but the CBA contains identical, or nearly identical, language as to which events qualify. There's also a part about health/injury which, I believe, is what allowed the Spurs to recall Tony for examinations/tests last summer and allowed Philadelphia to recall Nocioni this summer.
There's some of that, to be sure. There are also some who oppose any NT participation as a general rule. Among Spurs fans, the opposition to Manu and Tony playing in the summers has greatly increased as they have aged and suffered injuries. Without the injuries, there would be much less noise.
Actually, the blame goes to Boris Stankovic, who is now the Secretary Emeritus. for FIBA. He was the one who started working with David Stern in setting up pre-season games between NBA teams and Europe. It was his proposition that started the vote to allow NBA Players in International compe ion. That vote was passed on April 7th, 1989.
I blame society.
What about the government . . . Oh, and Jesus!
HERES MY SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM :
i say if you play for your national team and you get hurt you dont get payed that year or time your out from the NBA. depending on the severity of the injury is how long you go without pay. now if the injury is done after well you deal with it regularly. people from other countries can have all the pride they want which i think is great but they cannot go out there and play like they dont have an employer thats just the way it is like it or not when you have a job you have certain responsibilities that doesnt exclude the nba period. so this will put the decesion on them and will also allow the player to show that much more pride in their country (if thats what it is) or do they really do it because theyre afraid of losing fans??? my suggestion and rule will bring truth and consequence as well as showing you love your country that much more. manu is not excluded if he gets injured and is useless for the spurs they need to have consequences its just not fair. if his national team gets him they need to pay for his living as well
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
