NBA Lockout and Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Stern addressed the fans with a "sorry" when he announced the cancellation. That apology means nothing to me. Neither does Bron or Nash's apology. They were talking that #stand united **** all day and then when Stern drops the hammer on them they want to apologize? GTFOH

Players cant have it both ways. Cant talk about "We are why people come to the arena so we deserve 53%" and then have an issue when the owners push you out and ask you to apologize on behalf of the players and the league.

Listen, I don’t knock the players for getting as much as they can. That’s not my issue. My issue is the way that they handled it and how they painted themselves in a corner that they can’t get out of. I’m more upset at the player largely due to stupidity.

BUT my other problem is that no one looks at the owners as being greedy for getting as much as they can. It’s just the players who have been given that label. To me, it’s either their both greedy or it’s just capitalism at work.

[WTF]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

In that case, I hope they take 100% of the BRI. You have your contracts, now play for those contracts. The Basketball Related Income will go to the arenas, employees, etc.

We (owners) provide you (players) with a venue to showcase your talent and earn these contracts and don't ask for anything other than effort. Here is your contract for millions of dollars, for playing a game. Be content with it. If you happen to get endorsements outside of your contracts, then great, good for you. We aren't going to take any portion of it for being the medium that was used to get the exposure for you... that endorsement is all yours, just as the BRI is all ours.

Decertify... everyone's contracts will be null & void... and those who want to earn a few million per year playing a game, then they're more than welcome to sign up. But it's contracts only, no split of the BRI.

I'd make a terrible owner

[Tsuki]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

To be fair the arena workers have plenty of events to work at from hockey games to concerts to gatherings....the nba is not the only source of work and income....



Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

Here's an understanding from an actual guest service worker at the United Center....

The company i work for At Your Service wont even allow us to question anything Bulls related the topic is taboo....meanwhile the Hawks are playing but how many working days is that for us workers? 5 in October.....8 in November......yeah and those other concerts and events there's only 3 working days for those events from now to December the workers in the stadiums are getting hurt too bro

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Here's an understanding from an actual guest service worker at the United Center....

The company i work for At Your Service wont even allow us to question anything Bulls related the topic is taboo....meanwhile the Hawks are playing but how many working days is that for us workers? 5 in October.....8 in November......yeah and those other concerts and events there's only 3 working days for those events from now to December the workers in the stadiums are getting hurt too bro

My brother used to work for At Your Service at the United Center. And yes, he's right. I used to be envious of him because he got to go to Bulls games for free. BUT he hardly worked Blackhawk games and the concerts were few at the UC.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

At the very least, we know they put 49% on the table.

Flat out, I don't want the players to succeed in keeping the power anyway. I hate what they have turned the game of basketball into, a glorified pickup game where players get to choose who they want to play with, rules be damned.

What rules are being "damned" by the players? If they play out their contract they should be able to go where the rules allow them.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

I think he's talking about collusion, which it is a rule but almost impossible to enforce and impossible to prove.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Listen, I don’t knock the players for getting as much as they can. That’s not my issue. My issue is the way that they handled it and how they painted themselves in a corner that they can’t get out of. I’m more upset at the player largely due to stupidity.

BUT my other problem is that no one looks at the owners as being greedy for getting as much as they can. It’s just the players who have been given that label. To me, it’s either their both greedy or it’s just capitalism at work.

Thank you. I really don't know how anybody can look at this situation and say "Poor owners these players are being unreasonable". The players are the only ones conceding anything from the previous CBA, yet they're the greedy ones that makes no sense to me. At any point just like some of you want the players to give more the owners could ask for less.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Listen, I don’t knock the players for getting as much as they can. That’s not my issue. My issue is the way that they handled it and how they painted themselves in a corner that they can’t get out of. I’m more upset at the player largely due to stupidity.

BUT my other problem is that no one looks at the owners as being greedy for getting as much as they can. It’s just the players who have been given that label. To me, it’s either their both greedy or it’s just capitalism at work.

Here is my issue with that: The players carry no risk. They have guaranteed contracts. As long as they show up for work each day they are guaranteed millions under the old cba and probably the new ones.

The owners carry some risk. If they overpay someone or a star player gets injured or a star player just decides to demand a trade...that can affect the number of people who come to see their games and the amount of revenue that owner brings in.

So I have no problem with the owners trying to devise a system that guarantees each team at least breaks even because they bear all the risk. Players dont bear any risk so for them to turn to the owners and say "I dont care if 16 teams lost money last year, we want our 53% and the system to remain the same as it always has"....thats a little greedy.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Don't know about anyone else but it's kind've hard to have sympathy for someone when one party has no risk whatsoever and will get paid regardless since their contract is guaranteed.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Thank you. I really don't know how anybody can look at this situation and say "Poor owners these players are being unreasonable". The players are the only ones conceding anything from the previous CBA, yet they're the greedy ones that makes no sense to me. At any point just like some of you want the players to give more the owners could ask for less.

Lets make it simple. These are the undisputed facts:

- 16 NBA teams lost money last year. Whats disputed is the amount (Players say 150-180 mil, Owners say 300).

- Both sides agree that the long term survival of the league is in jeopardy if the players remained at 57%. (That makes the 57 to 53 drop by the players not a real concession. They realistically knew they would never keep the 57% just like the owners knew they would never get a hard cap. So if dropping the hard cap isnt a concession...than the 4% drop isnt either).

No one on this board has even written the words "Poor owners." What most are saying is that after reading all of the articles about the lockout, they think that the owners are being more reasonable and agree with what they are bringing to the table.

- I love the amnesty clause idea because it works well for the owners and the players (Owners get to remove bad contracts from their cap and players get to double dip contracts).

- I love the higher luxury cap (I'm a laker fan but I think its ridiculous that we get to spend almost 60 mil more than small market teams)

- I think that a fair deal would be a 51% BRI for the players (The players refuse to go down from 53%)

- I think sign and trades should be abolished.

These are all owners proposals. So thats why I'm with the owners. When you factor in that the players have no leverage now and there is a decent chance that the owners will get most or all of the things listed above...i blame the players.

I negotiate every day as a part of my job and a key to negotiating is knowing when you have leverage and when you dont. When you dont....you take the best deal available. The players missed that last night.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Here is my issue with that: The players carry no risk. They have guaranteed contracts. As long as they show up for work each day they are guaranteed millions under the old cba and probably the new ones.

The owners carry some risk. If they overpay someone or a star player gets injured or a star player just decides to demand a trade...that can affect the number of people who come to see their games and the amount of revenue that owner brings in.

So I have no problem with the owners trying to devise a system that guarantees each team at least breaks even because they bear all the risk. Players dont bear any risk so for them to turn to the owners and say "I dont care if 16 teams lost money last year, we want our 53% and the system to remain the same as it always has"....thats a little greedy.

Ok my problem with your comments is this is how business work. If you are the owner you assume the risk. If any owner signs a contract with anybody if that party show up and does that job the owner has to pay them. So how is this different?

Once again the players completely generate this revenue solely based on their talents. The owners are about as irrelevant in this equation than any other business. This isn't FedEx where you just replace one guy with the next and business resumes flawlessly.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

If any owner signs a contract with anybody if that party show up and does that job the owner has to pay them.

So what happens when that person I hired promises me to perform the job to his FULL capabilities but instead he doesn't and his performance is awful, should I still continue to pay him even though he's doing a ****** job?

This isn't FedEx where you just replace one guy with the next and business resumes flawlessly.<!-- / message -->

In the NBA, it most certainly is.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Ok my problem with your comments is this is how business work. If you are the owner you assume the risk. If any owner signs a contract with anybody if that party show up and does that job the owner has to pay them. So how is this different?

Once again the players completely generate this revenue solely based on their talents. The owners are about as irrelevant in this equation than any other business. This isn't FedEx where you just replace one guy with the next and business resumes flawlessly.

Thats not how business works. I work for a cable network and not everybody can do the job I do. I dont have a guaranteed contract so if I just show up today but I do my job poorly, my boss can fire me and he has no financial obligation left. If my network closes shop, I will not be able to file a claim for damages because I dont have a guaranteed deal. An NBA player on the other hand can do all those things.

The owners are FAR from irrelevant. Their money gives players a place to showcase their talents, gets them to and from each venue, provides them with facilities to perfect their talents and provides them with top of the line health care to keep them healthy.

[The 24th Letter]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

The current system is jacked. We all know that. I dont think anyone can disagree.

But I refuse to boo hoo like these BILLIONARES have it so rough out here b/c ONE of their ventures is losing money.....especially the ones who put themselves in even worse situations by making god awful decisions with their ball club.

they arent rich because they own basketball teams, they own basketball teams because they are rich....these dudes are making the Forbes top 400 lists. We can pretend like they are the "noble" ones in this ordeal all we want, but they are just as greedy.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

The current system is jacked. We all know that. I dont think anyone can disagree.

But I refuse to boo hoo like these BILLIONARES have it so rough out here b/c ONE of their ventures is losing money.....especially the ones who put themselves in even worse situations by making god awful decisions with their ball club.

they arent rich because they own basketball teams, they own basketball teams because they are rich....these dudes are making the Forbes top 400 lists. We can pretend like they are the "noble" ones in this ordeal all we want, but they are just as greedy.

Nobody is talking about making owners more rich....I just want it so that teams like the Bucks and Pacers can break even. So we dont have to worry about teams moving to other cities in order to generate income. A 46% BRI for the players makes every owner rich. A 50-51% BRI makes it so every team can at least break even.