Reply With Quote
lol. Dude, seriously, sucking Rupert Murdoch's traitorous ? Really?
I guess money isn't an advantage
lol. Dude, seriously, sucking Rupert Murdoch's traitorous ? Really?
Players did agree on 50/50... not somewhat. The financials were pretty much worked out: owners get $3 billion give back for the duration of the agreement. The thing is, for that kind of concession you would think they would be flexible with the system.
Pierce backin' away from Artest doesn't hurt an iota.I guess money isn't an advantage
tee, hee.
I wonder if this money not being advantage is common throughout other sports.
brb...checking the mlb
Just tend your crock of , Body.
I was trying say they at least somewhat agreed on the reasons for a 50/50. Thus they agreed to it.
I find it hilarious how Stern says "we were very close and the players decided to blow it up".
didn't Stern say that if they didn't accept this offer there was no more negotiating and they were going to get a worse offer?
Couldn't have been that close if that was the case. Close isn't good enough either per Stern. It was accept this deal or go way backwards. By his comments there was no more room to move forward so how were they close if the deal wasn't acceptable and he said that if it wasn't there would be no more forward negotiating?
So players agreed to reduce costs for the owners... because I would've sworn you just posted:
"Shame on the owners for seeking profit by reducing cost."
Here's a hint: you don't always get everything you want in a two-way negotiation.
It's sad but really, I don't give a . I wish that I could see Tim Duncan play another year because that dude is all class....
Not like these other ing assholes like Carmelo, Wade, Jason Terry, LeBron, and Bosh. They probably ed it up for everybody else...
I really do lmao when I see Bonner and Mason standing there with the top dogs of the NBA.... ing hilarious.
I don't really give a anymore, most of the teams were unwatchable and the top teams were full of greedy ass.....you knows......
Why is that all the top people of the NBPA were sorry ass players?
Because the big players don't want the burden of the responsibility & because if you get weaker guys it makes it easier for Hunter/Fisher to control the room (just my 2 cents).
Yeah Stern ed it up with his threats.
yeah, i really think that things would be different if Duncan, Garnett, Bryant, Kidd and Stoudemire were negotiating...
instead you have terry, bonner, fisher and other players like that... , they don't command respect from anyone...It would be different if Duncan and Bryant were sitting across the table.....
then to hear terry and billups with their comments...they don't get it...
Not sure why you quoted that.
Anyways I do fault the owners for not meeting the players a little more on the system issues.
So then you blame the owners for everything then, right? If the player gave way more than they needed to on the money, and the owners didnt give anything really on the system, it's on the owners, correct?
No, I said a little more. And "way more" is a stretch.
Nathan eating his own words and complaining about the taste.
Basketball ability doesn't always correspond to business ability?
Hussein Obama, exhibit A.
No I am not.
Nathan eating his own words and complaining about the taste.
Because the claim always been that it's easier to be a hard-liner if you're one of the top rich guys in the league, and the rank-and-file suffer the most.
So the union decided to fill up the executive comittee with rank-and-file, so they could see first hand the offers and defend their position.
Basically, the union was trying to tame the "look at those greedy players" line a bit.
Really?
We can see your posts.No I am not.
Yeah, I didn't contradict myself.Really?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
