Reply With Quote
He didn't lie. Fish just picked & worked a Christian like a part time job.
tee, hee.
yeah! the same way he(fisher) lied to Utah.
He didn't lie. Fish just picked & worked a Christian like a part time job.
tee, hee.
Giuseppe, it'll end worse for the players later than sooner. And there is no "financial doom" when you make as much on average as they'll still make.
It's real simple. They either take a bad deal now, don't lose another cent that they won't recoup and don't contribute to doing further damage to the league or they take a worse deal later, lose more money and do further damage to the league.
The Spurs haven't had a problem keeping their talent. I'm not talking about that though, I'm talking about getting the next Duncan in the first place. They can make it more accommodating for the smaller markets all they want, but without an all-time great, it's not going to matter, as it pertains to a championship.
A lot of fans seem to have this idea that through lottery luck and shrewd management, they'll be able to get back to the top. But it doesn't work that way in a small market. What we've witnessed in the Duncan era is an aberration. The league has no reason, at this point, to give San Antonio another all-time great in the making via the draft and no all-time great in their prime is going to sign in San Antonio, either. No system change is going to change that.
Don't expect an all time great to drop in our lap. Never said I did.
All I said was given the chance to compete for a championship. Fielding a solid team. A good team can make it far in this league. May not get to the finals, but can get to the 2nd round or conference finals from time to time.
It may take 5-8 years, but its possible.
Not sure how you figure this is the only way this can play out?
Why should the players, and only the players, be responsible for this?
Maybe those successful owners should've said NO when voting to expand the league. Maybe what they should start discussing is contracting the league. I think the hit should come evenly for both sides. Whoever is asking the other side to eat the whole pie is being an asshole.
Like teams tanking entire seasons? Why shouldn't the owners that decided to do that not be financially penalized?
tbqh, the only side that has made concessions here (from the last CBA, which SHOULD be the reference, since it was the last agreement a league run on) are the players. They went from 57% to 52.5%. Over a 10 year period, that's a boatload of money. Offered to cut a year off the contracts (IIRC). What else do the owners want?
True. They sat out last time and got a lopsided deal.
They want the hard cap. That fixes everything. No more negotiating:::just throw the $45 million into a room where the 15 man roster is and let them divy it up.
Spurs fans surprisingly quiet on that piece of news
holt
Im watching the press conf on NBA TV
What a cheap bas
Speaking of NBA TV, they are running and re-running labor talk press conferences in place of the scheduled Hardwood Classic games
FUUUUUUUUUUUUCK
from twitter
Woj is big time RT @BreakingNews: Source tells @YahooSports NBA negotiations have broken off in NY, no new meetings scheduled - @WojYahooNBA
The small market owners want a hard cap. They know it's an uphill battle trying to compete with the old CBA. Those big market teams will always be able to take more risks then their counterparts. Their revenues allow them not to be hit hard by poor decisions. Smaller market teams don't have the same buffer. Unless the smaller market team has a billonaire as an owner you ain't gonna see them willing to toss good money away on hunches.
check this article out and the responses and the article writers rebuttals to these comments.
http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.co...ds-a-hard-cap/
Giuseppe cracks me up. He obviously knows the Lakers are ed if somehow the owners get the hard cap they are looking for. Or any team for that matter that likes to shoot far north of the cap. Not saying it won't hurt the Spurs to some degree, but overall it would make the league a much more leveled playing field.
It works for the NFL; no reason why it wouldn't work in the NBA.
Highly su ious of this. Doesn't sound like something the man in charge of the Spurs organization would say. But, none of us were there.
I agree, I'm a little su ious, but he did seem flustered during the interview like he was having to think of what to say vs the players who just spoke freely.
I know where my bread is buttered. I don't portend to be altruistic.
The flaw with the "hockey model" is that hockey isn't NEAR as popular as the NBA is, and neither are the players.
Time to de-certify. It's crystal clear that the owners are not anywhere near negotiating, and are simply taking advantage of their anti-trust exemption. 'em. I guarantee they lose that little suit they filed to attempt to stop the de-certification of the union. In the mean time, barnstorm your asses off and make bank, NBAPA. That's something the hockey players really couldn't do.
The NBA also has to pay back the TV revenue advances they are receiving, which is why they are -bent on making the deal worse as time goes along. Good luck with that. I'd actually like to see another league form, and put David Stern in his grave.
You have upset the canadian in me
The NFL clubs share north of 60% of NFL revenues. The NBA clubs share south of 30% of NBA revenue. If they followed the NFL revenue sharing model, no clubs would lose money.
Exactly. As much as the players want to make it seem like they are the only ones making concessions they were the ones that made out like bandits since the last CBA. They're trying to bargain from their position of power and make it seem like the owners are the the only unreasonable guys. Players will try to use players that are being underpaid for their arguments but it seems there much more players that are overpaid and sometimes overpaid by alot. Some of it is on the owners for agreeing to those contracts and that's why they're trying to address it through the CBA. You only need one crazy spending or badly managed team to inflate the market value for players.
Look, the owners are right to make this fair, but the players are just a little spoiled. They will take the hit on the split, but they don't want a hard cap. The league wants both, because I think they don't want to end up like MLB. where the haves>havenots every year.
Kansas City had a great team during the George Brett years, now that MLB is a who got the most money league you never see them anymore......it is sad.
for all teams to be compe ive, the league has to do this. If not it becomes more of joke then it already is to some people.
Fisher is a sorry ......cries to the league to let him go to LA, and now he back stabs them.
"Paul Allen, Peter Holt, Wyc Grousbeck, Robert Sarver and Dan Gilbert are all hardliners. They are stopping the progress," said NBPA source.
The same source said that several owners from larger markets, specifically James Dolan and Mark Cuban, seem ready to make a deal.
http://twitter.com/#!/AlexKennedyNBA
Now Mavs fans can hate Spurs fans even more for having a cheap owner
well maybe Dan Gilbert can dissolve the league and really show Lebron who the boss is.
Well obviously lol. James Dolan and the other big owners can get back to making money while Mark Cuban with his deep pockets and championship team can also get back to fame and fortune. The people who stand to lose the most is the small market owners if they give in. Unfortunately going after a hard cap also hurts the players in some respects. At least in comparison to the living standards they were accustom to under the previous CBA."Paul Allen, Peter Holt, Wyc Grousbeck, Robert Sarver and Dan Gilbert are all hardliners. They are stopping the progress," said NBPA source.
The same source said that several owners from larger markets, specifically James Dolan and Mark Cuban, seem ready to make a deal.
http://twitter.com/#!/AlexKennedyNBA
Now Mavs fans can hate Spurs fans even more for having a cheap owner
You notice how Holt talks about staying compe ive. He's right. It's a vicious cycle going after talent in the NBA. The more money some of these owners toss at NBA talent the more every other owner has to follow suit to keep up. It's futile for a lot of these owners to try and keep up with the joneses.
I want to see NBA basketball as much as the next guy, but I get where the owners are coming from. This is all about smaller market teams having a fair chance at competing for a championship without needing to go deep into their pockets to do so. Unfortunately the players are caught in the crossfire and probably stand to lose the most from this.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
