What's new
By:

Lockout!!!

TheItinerantSon said:
the nfl players got their asses handed to them... that doesnt mean everyone else should take paycuts at the whim of their employers.
Click to expand...
You still don't get it, TIS (or maybe you get a rise from people responding). There is no reason that the NBA athletes should get a higher BRI than the NFL. If anything, they should get less, given that the NBA player's average league lifespan is shorter and their average salary (and median salary, I believe) is significantly higher than the NFL, even if the BRI drops all the way down to 50-50. Furthermore, the owners (foolishly, IMHO), have proposed options to keep salaries high (e.g., by reducing total headcount per team), but that still wasn't good enough for the NBA punks.

Revenue has not gone down - NBA revenue was higher in 2011 than at any point in league history*, and player profits were ~57% of that (just like every other year in the CBA. If expenses are up its because owners are blatantly monkeying with the numbers either through accounting tricks or by having the teams do business with their outside companies at a loss.
Click to expand...
Or maybe, just maybe, that other expenses are up, which is a fundamental component that you ignored. Whether it was by choice or by chance, profits are negative, even after accounting for non-cash expenses or discretionary expenses.

Or you can ask the owners of the Hornets or probably even the Jazz how tricky is to operate an NBA team profitably--much less at a good return.

Bottom line: the players have to ask themselves if it worth sacrificing part or all of this season's income that they will never get back (1% of 10-year BRI per 4+ months of the season) in exchange for attempting to bump up the BRI for a percentage point or two. The owners will DEFINITELY not give them 53%, will most likely not give them 52%, and only possibly will give them 51%. The players would be much better off taking 50-50.
 
....I've got to get this computer to do spell checking when I'm posting! Someone help me out here! I keep mispelling these words and your going to think I'm an imbecile!!
 
carolinajazz said:
....I've got to get this computer to do spell checking when I'm posting! Someone help me out here! I keep mispelling these words and your going to think I'm an imbecile!!
Click to expand...
I have absolutely no doubt that the majority of players who you keep characterizing as idiots are smarter than you. And make no mistake, I agree with you that there are a boatload of mental midgets in this league.
 
Meeting just let out after 16 hours. Another meeting scheduled for 10AM. Mediator has asked that both sides refrain from commenting, and they are complying.
 
Jeditiger said:
Meeting just let out after 16 hours. Another meeting scheduled for 10AM. Mediator has asked that both sides refrain from commenting, and they are complying.
Click to expand...

I hope this is good news
 
jazzmeister said:
That's funny, because Adrian Wojnarowski is reporting that his league source says "little progress was made".

https://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-wojnarowski_nba_labor_talks_101811

I'm sorry, but if you meet for sixteen hours and you can only amount to "little progress" there are serious problems that likely won't be overcome this season. I'm fully expecting zero games this year.
Click to expand...

One of these guys is full of it then. Broussard's comment about progress made is found on the video connected to this link.

https://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7118714/nba-labor-negotiations-last-16-hours-more-talks-planned
 
Interesting. I'd lean toward the notion that progress was made. Otherwise, why show the urgency to meet again this morning? If no or little progress was made after 16 hours, the concept of meeting the next day at 10am seems moot to me.
 
Yeah, it seems likely that Wojnarowski's source is trying to comply with the gag order by saying that little happened. He should have said "no comment," but there are people who simply can't bring themselves to do that. No way do you convince a large group of people to meet unproductively for 16 hours and then talk them into schedule more punishment for the next morning.
 
SalmonHobo said:
Interesting. I'd lean toward the notion that progress was made. Otherwise, why show the urgency to meet again this morning? If no or little progress was made after 16 hours, the concept of meeting the next day at 10am seems moot to me.
Click to expand...


gotta say I agree with this - seems to me that if they felt the meeting went nowhere, they wouldn't be so quick to get back at it

doesn't mean they're close to an agreement though either
 
carolinajazz said:
....I've got to get this computer to do spell checking when I'm posting! Someone help me out here! I keep mispelling these words and your going to think I'm an imbecile!!
Click to expand...

... you're an imbecile - and spell check will not help you out with that

perhaps a really good grammar checking program could help, but I have my doubts
 
moevillini said:
... you're an imbecile - and spell check will not help you out with that

perhaps a really good grammar checking program could help, but I have my doubts
Click to expand...

Repeating kindergarten (somewhere like the south-side of Chicago) is my suggestion.
 
SalmonHobo said:
Interesting. I'd lean toward the notion that progress was made. Otherwise, why show the urgency to meet again this morning? If no or little progress was made after 16 hours, the concept of meeting the next day at 10am seems moot to me.
Click to expand...

My thoughts as well. Why gag order if 'little progress is made?' Why meet again so soon? Yep, agree.
 
Oh, and I'm sure this is obvious, but there's potentially little difference between;

- "Progress was made"
- "Little progress was made"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top