Reply With Quote
As always, thanks for the info, Bruno.
With Holt leading the owners in talks there may not be an NBA season until after 2014. The same season RJ's contract runs out.
As always, thanks for the info, Bruno.
There will be many thousands of people that will be out of work because of the millionaire vs. billionaire feud. None of these folks have a clue what it's like to lose their rent money for the month, nor do they really give a $^^ about the guy parking cars, selling tacos,or checking tickets (despite their pla udes). I believe that a union needs to support it's workers and get the best deal possible, but at what cost your fan base, your workers, and perhaps yourself, if the owners aren't willing to cave. All of these folks have enough cash to not really care when the season starts.
Bring back the ABA! Cut off Stern and the Gilbert-style owners and start a parallel league!
http://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA/st...54064881942530
http://twitter.com/#!/KBergCBS/statu...65746204262400The NBA will re-evaluate the suspension of the final two weeks of October preseason games by October 1, league sources say.
http://twitter.com/#!/KBergCBS/statu...66373177212928NBA players holding another regional meeting Tuesday in Miami.
Many out of the loop Thurs-Fri due to Jewish holidays. Stern, Silver, Klempner, Berger.
So to sum up, both sides have two days left (Monday and Wednesday) to find an agreement before the cancellation of the full preseason. It's somewhat safe to say that the full preseason will be canceled.
Some "good" news today:
http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.co...38893/32284158
NBPA has cancelled its meeting in Miami on Tuesday. They will instead negotiate with the union that day and possibly on Wednesday too. Latest owner proposal is 46% of the BRI that is to say players taking almost a 20% pay cut.
They'll settle it the week before the regular season starts.
hope u're right
why not change it to 50 or 51%. but put a limit on max contract length and get rid of MLEs.
effect of revenue split wouldn't matter as much if owners weren't stuck with long and expensive contracts. Granted they gave them out, but they have to compete with other teams, etc. Unless they collude and everyone refuses to offer deals longer than 3 years.
Doubtful.
Once the owners and the players union come to an agreement, it will still take a while for the lawyers to pen things out and get the actual CBA ratified.
At which point, they would have to allow at least a week for Free Agency, since no team has been able to touch the free agent market yet.
Then I'd assume there would have to be some sort of training camp so rosters could be figured out and players could try to get in some sort of game shape. Can't just throw a whole bunch of players right into games unless they want the teams to end up injury-riddled.
So assuming they could fit all of that into two weeks (which is being gracious)....I'd say that leaves them about two and a half weeks to get things figured out before regular season games will start being lost.
Looking like we're going to have a 50 game season again, if any. But at least we assess an asterisk to whomever wins the le this year, which kinda makes me hope it's the Lakers
Today and tomorrow will show how smart or stupid the players are.
The more games they lose, the worse % they will get. The more games lost, the less revenue the league will earn as a whole for years after the public backlash in this garbage economy. Then they will make even less, as a lower % of even lower revenues will be brutal.
They can't outlast the owners, they should just recognize that and fold their hand. Take a deal now and save some income . . . but they won't because these guys probably just don't get it.
But but but, they're all united and steadfast in their resolve!
I didn't think it was possible to hate Derek Fisher any more, but having that bag at the forefront of these discussions is just the icing on the cake.
These guys don't get it? Getting it is apparently bending over and taking a huge paycut?
It's going to happen either way, whether they take the paycut now or later.
Owners have other means of income. Players don't, unless they decide to go overseas, but even then those leagues can only accept / support so many players. So yes, I believe the owners can wait out the players in this, even if that means crippling the image of the league.
It's no secret that like 70% of the teams are taking losses on profits, and the remaining 30% aren't going to just pony up to make up for that. Revenue sharing will help, but it's not the only answer, and neither is jacking up the prices of already over-priced tickets and merchandise.
The players are getting overpaid, period. I don't expect them to be happy about taking a paycut, but it is what it is. They need to be less-overpaid.
Well, owners can't ask too much to players because, at the end of the day, the basis of the whole NBA business is fans paying to see great players. The $4B generated per year by the NBA are almost solely generated by the players. Without top players, NBA franchises are just empty s s worth nothing especially for the ones who don't own an arena.
If the lockout goes as far as the whole season cancelled, owners could end up as the biggest losers. Players and agents will then seriously truing to create a new league and be sure that some new rich guys will pop up to replace current owners.
This may be a player's league, but does that give them the right to monopolize profits to the point where the majority of teams aren't making money? If so, what gives the owners incentive to be an owner in the first place? Are they supposed to throw money out the window just so they can call themselves NBA owners?
I will readily admit that it's the bed that the owners made for themselves. They are the ones who agreed to the current CBA structure, and they are the ones who handed out all of these outrageous contracts in the first place (although some would say it was due to compe ive necessity. If you wanted to be able to keep up with other teams, you almost had to bend the rules as much as possible, or go over the tax like Holt did with Jefferson).
Now that business model is failing, and they want to backtrack on those decisions. That's definitely not fair to the players. However, I'm just not sure where else adjustments can be made.
It's like they started with ten slices of pizza, told the players they could have seven slices while the owner kept three, and now they are realizing those three slices aren't enough to feed them. They want to go back and split the pie fifty-fifty, but the players are all used to having a damn pizza party now.
I can see the argument on both sides, but I guess that's why the whole thing is so complicated. If it were simple, they'd probably have reached a decision by now.
Last edited by Dex; 09-27-2011 at 04:27 PM.
^^ The players have already offered to take deeper cuts than they did the last two times the CBA was changed(1999, 2005). The owners want them to go about 3 times further with those cuts, though. A large chunk of the league's claimed "losses" are bull accounting tricks anyway(financing, interest on the purchase of the team itself). Hence the impasse. I think the players would probably cave in to a 50/50 split of BRI eventually, if the league agreed to have what it considers BRI to be reviewed by the NBPA legal team regularly. But the 43% that's been offered would be the worst deal for players in any American pro sports league.
The league and the union will met again tomorrow and it looks like it's going to be key meeting:
http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.co...38893/32315251
And@ Ken Berger for the cake.
Sheridan weighs in.
http://sheridanhoops.com/2011/09/27/nba-lockout-update/
This lockout is similar to what happened in the Debt Ceiling talks. Both parties have a side and they are taking a hard line approach. I use this analogy because like the Republicans the Owners are the ones who are causing the further delay of this thing. Republicans like the owners added to the deficit by decreasing taxes and waging war. Democrats later had to infuse more money into the economy with healthcare and financial policies. This is similar to owners giving outrageous contracts to their players. Free agents have a choice, this is America. If someone offers you that kind of money you have every right to take that money. Since when in America do you see business men saying, Okay I'll give up money, throw away this contract. It doesn't happen in the real world, why should it happen in the NBA? We all know there is a dilemma. The owners should be more transparent and they should concede that this negotiation is to be profitable going forward and not to recoup past mistakes. Those contracts were signed fair and square. But, players are willing to give up some money, but everytime they inch forward, owners scoff at their moves and say, "its our way or the high way". I expect real negotiations to start taking place around Mid November, when Owners want to see holiday games get going.
Sigh. Billionaire crooks being themselves just like the NFL owners.
"Revenue is gonna increase year to year, but we don't want to increase your pay at all for at least the next 7 years. Aren't we generous?."
Sigh. Billionaire crooks being themselves just like the NFL owners.
"Revenue is gonna increase year to year, but we don't want to increase your pay at all for at least the next 7 years. Aren't we generous?."
http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.co...38893/32327585
If owners are really offering a 50-50 split, lockout could end up very quickly.There is a feeling among two people who have been briefed on the talks that the owners will come forward Wednesday with an enhanced version of the concepts proposed Tuesday. According to the sources, among the additions could be a proposed 50-50 revenue split, which to this point the league has not reached in terms of the players' average share over the life of a new CBA in its previous proposals.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
