They didn't really get bent over on the system is my point *[if they got their demands actually met which I'm assuming since we have a deal]
Im not sure that they players were guaranteed 57% of BRI under the old agreement but rather after the owners spent over the guaranteed limit that they got 57%. i have been trying to point that out but i am not sure that people understand what i am trying to say.
Under that idea they did not surrender 7 points but simply made it much more difficult to get there this time.
Yes they did without a doubt...About damn time they came to there senses.
Ball
Deepy, rollin' over now thats it's done.
You , you.
But, that ain't what we've been told the last six months. We were told they did get 57, and that each point was worth $30 million.
& yes, I'm quite confident Media will push your above equation now that the deed is done. But, make no mistake about it, when it was fluid it was 57-43 and everybody was signed up.
There is going to be a lot of rewriting history now that we're all friends again.
^ You've been singing that this never was about the BRI, but now it is? You old fart you.
My favorite part was the "no Dwight Howard to the Lakers" clause that says that players traded in the last year of their contract cannot be re-signed with Bird rights.
When you piss it (a billion dollars) away without so much as a by your leave it's obviously of trace concern or consequence.
You really can be an idiot sometimesDeepy, rollin' over now thats it's done.
You , you.
You never cared about the billion dollars... your religion has been about the luxury tax...
Exactly. He doesn't understand this stuff so he just goes back and forth showing his ass.
I blame the dilution (not drop off) in fan support on the ability to change channels and watch something else. You can watch anything you want now, even during the regular season you can watch the Finals from last year or you can watch any other sport. That's a dilution, not a drop off. The leagues make much more now than they ever have.
I think the way it worked out was the players paid something like 9% of their salaries into an escrow fund which was then given to the owners if the league's net of salary ever exceeded 57% of the net BRI. If it didn't hit 57% (such as last season), the owners had to refund the escrow money as well as the difference between 57% net BRI and the net salary paid out. I'm not sure if the 9% escrow was prorated or it was an all or nothing deal.
It's never as important when the team is an embarrassment and not in the super bowl half the decade anymore.
Precisely. And the players never cared about the billion dollars either. Or, the luxury tax for that matter.
I'm a trend setter.
I set trends.
At least I don't go cryin' to my aunt everytime somebody peeks up my moo-moo.
* Fish never cared. He was set to deliver to the owners and he did.
Anybody/everybody that bent over for the owners on this CBA shares the guilt.
On the plus side, it should be hilarious when Garnett goes and suckerpunches Fisher in the first Celtics-Lakers matchup of the year.
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
One vet player texting me, doubting he'll vote to approve deal. "We (bleeping) caved," he said. He's been entrenched on issues entire way.
& vice versa.
Lmao Garnett.
finally
Anyone know another business that caps what employees can earn?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
