Homepage
Facebook
X
Nov 16, 2011, 2:40 am
[quote name='Raze Lupin' timestamp='1321326142' post='36044']
The players finally agreed on 50% of the BRI (basketball related income). Which is a pay cut from 57%. That 7% over the contract period of the new CBA is worth approximately $3 billion(if I'm not mistaken). The players were willing to give up 3 bil... They just didn't agree on some of the system issues that restricted player movement.
How did the owners give away too much? The owners were playing from the high ground since the beginning. The players never asked for more money from the BRI. From the beginning they(players) agreed to take less money. The owners claimed they lost 300 mil last year. The players gave the owners back their lost money twice over in the -7%. Not that I'm on the players side. BUT if you lose 300 mil and someone offers to give say 750-800 mil to cover your losses that's on you i.e. the owners. Also from Stern's account the leagues profits were up some 15% last year. The league "was" in a upswing the player offered to double the cost of the previous years loses plus the players conceded on some system issues like amnesty. Why aren't the owners happy?
Your'e right about the NHL comparison the the players are just going to get a worst deal after a missed year. The players should have just took the deal. I understand their arguments. It's not right how the owners are sticking it to them but in the end they will get even less money and more system restrictions. No wonder many owners wanted them to not take the deal. In the end They'll be the undisputed champs!
[/quote]
The NBA is a mess. It has been a mess for the past two decades. David Stern is absolutely to blame for the pompous glorification of individuals (see Allen Iverson), which makes it all too ironic that he is now leading the owners as they sock it to the players. The NBA is at an impasse led by turds in Miami. If they don't curb the player's power now it will get out of control. The players shouldn't be able to demand where they get traded to, trades should be made by best returning value. With the current trend here is who is going to win the NBA title: LA Lakers, Miami, New York, Chicago and Boston. Where will Chris Paul play? Where will Dwight Howard play? They are going to those markets. For fans of the rest of the league, you better be absolutely horrible for a few years, get a lucky bounce of the ping pong ball, have an absolutely stellar GM like Sam Presti and then you can assemble a competitive team that will be able to keep up with the big markets for a few years before your stud youth becomes free agents and moves to a bigger market. I don't think a team like a San Antonio could compete in the trajectory that the NBA is on, which is ridiculous. The Spurs are by far the best managed team in the NBA, they have deserved every title that they have won and they should be the poster child for every other team in the league as to how you compete.
I don't like American Football but for me the beauty of the NFL is its relative parity. If your a fan of a shitty team, you still have hope that within a few years your team will compete. The Arizona Cardinals are a prime example of this. They had been really bad for many years and then climbed their way to a Super Bowl. Now in the NFL if you are a well run organization you'll be competitive every year like Green Bay, Pittsburgh and New England. If you are horribly run like Detroit you'll suck for an unprecedented period but even they have started to turn the corner. That's where the NBA needs to be and to be fair they are in a much better position than the NFL to get there. Whereas in the NFL you need to build a team of 22 players in the NBA you only need 5 (bench options are always available).
Back to the question of how the owners have given up too much, they started a few weeks ago by proposing 47% of BRI and, more importantly, they were strict on system issues. They were insisting on no guaranteed contracts and a luxury tax that was so punitive it would have acted as a hard salary cap. Don't forget the owners have all of the leverage in these negotiations and the offer that was on the table was for 50% BRI with systems issues similar to today (teams couldn't go into the luxury tax more than 4 times in 5 years) and no sign and trades for teams in the luxury tax. The big market owners basically said to the small market owners, it will remain mostly the same but don't worry we'll have greater revenue sharing. The players were moaning that Fisher and friends dipped below 53% after they were "told not to do so." GUESS WHAT IDIOTS YOU HAVE NO NEGOTIATION LEVERAGE!!! A lost season will hurt the players and their inept financial responsibility a hell of a lot more than it will hurt the owners. I am absolutely flabbergasted how stupid the players are. The players seem to think that the 50/50 BRI split will always be on the table. The more games and revenue that are lost the more unattractive settling on a 50/50 split will become to the owners.
The players have been a disorganized mess, the superstars have been able to convince the vast majority of "role players" that their ability to move around as they wish is most important. The good news for the owners is that if the players could have behaved in a uniform fashion the division between the big market owners and so called "hardliners" could have led to the owners self imploding but alas it was the players who beat them to the punch.
I certainly hope that the season is lost, for the good of the league and the good of the sport, the NBA is in dire need to fix its already flawed system issues to make a more competitive league and better end product.
The players finally agreed on 50% of the BRI (basketball related income). Which is a pay cut from 57%. That 7% over the contract period of the new CBA is worth approximately $3 billion(if I'm not mistaken). The players were willing to give up 3 bil... They just didn't agree on some of the system issues that restricted player movement.
How did the owners give away too much? The owners were playing from the high ground since the beginning. The players never asked for more money from the BRI. From the beginning they(players) agreed to take less money. The owners claimed they lost 300 mil last year. The players gave the owners back their lost money twice over in the -7%. Not that I'm on the players side. BUT if you lose 300 mil and someone offers to give say 750-800 mil to cover your losses that's on you i.e. the owners. Also from Stern's account the leagues profits were up some 15% last year. The league "was" in a upswing the player offered to double the cost of the previous years loses plus the players conceded on some system issues like amnesty. Why aren't the owners happy?
Your'e right about the NHL comparison the the players are just going to get a worst deal after a missed year. The players should have just took the deal. I understand their arguments. It's not right how the owners are sticking it to them but in the end they will get even less money and more system restrictions. No wonder many owners wanted them to not take the deal. In the end They'll be the undisputed champs!
[/quote]
The NBA is a mess. It has been a mess for the past two decades. David Stern is absolutely to blame for the pompous glorification of individuals (see Allen Iverson), which makes it all too ironic that he is now leading the owners as they sock it to the players. The NBA is at an impasse led by turds in Miami. If they don't curb the player's power now it will get out of control. The players shouldn't be able to demand where they get traded to, trades should be made by best returning value. With the current trend here is who is going to win the NBA title: LA Lakers, Miami, New York, Chicago and Boston. Where will Chris Paul play? Where will Dwight Howard play? They are going to those markets. For fans of the rest of the league, you better be absolutely horrible for a few years, get a lucky bounce of the ping pong ball, have an absolutely stellar GM like Sam Presti and then you can assemble a competitive team that will be able to keep up with the big markets for a few years before your stud youth becomes free agents and moves to a bigger market. I don't think a team like a San Antonio could compete in the trajectory that the NBA is on, which is ridiculous. The Spurs are by far the best managed team in the NBA, they have deserved every title that they have won and they should be the poster child for every other team in the league as to how you compete.
I don't like American Football but for me the beauty of the NFL is its relative parity. If your a fan of a shitty team, you still have hope that within a few years your team will compete. The Arizona Cardinals are a prime example of this. They had been really bad for many years and then climbed their way to a Super Bowl. Now in the NFL if you are a well run organization you'll be competitive every year like Green Bay, Pittsburgh and New England. If you are horribly run like Detroit you'll suck for an unprecedented period but even they have started to turn the corner. That's where the NBA needs to be and to be fair they are in a much better position than the NFL to get there. Whereas in the NFL you need to build a team of 22 players in the NBA you only need 5 (bench options are always available).
Back to the question of how the owners have given up too much, they started a few weeks ago by proposing 47% of BRI and, more importantly, they were strict on system issues. They were insisting on no guaranteed contracts and a luxury tax that was so punitive it would have acted as a hard salary cap. Don't forget the owners have all of the leverage in these negotiations and the offer that was on the table was for 50% BRI with systems issues similar to today (teams couldn't go into the luxury tax more than 4 times in 5 years) and no sign and trades for teams in the luxury tax. The big market owners basically said to the small market owners, it will remain mostly the same but don't worry we'll have greater revenue sharing. The players were moaning that Fisher and friends dipped below 53% after they were "told not to do so." GUESS WHAT IDIOTS YOU HAVE NO NEGOTIATION LEVERAGE!!! A lost season will hurt the players and their inept financial responsibility a hell of a lot more than it will hurt the owners. I am absolutely flabbergasted how stupid the players are. The players seem to think that the 50/50 BRI split will always be on the table. The more games and revenue that are lost the more unattractive settling on a 50/50 split will become to the owners.
The players have been a disorganized mess, the superstars have been able to convince the vast majority of "role players" that their ability to move around as they wish is most important. The good news for the owners is that if the players could have behaved in a uniform fashion the division between the big market owners and so called "hardliners" could have led to the owners self imploding but alas it was the players who beat them to the punch.
I certainly hope that the season is lost, for the good of the league and the good of the sport, the NBA is in dire need to fix its already flawed system issues to make a more competitive league and better end product.