What's new
By:

Lockout!!!

In this society we are raised to all feel entitled to get as much as we can. There is little to no regard about the current state of the country. Some people keep trying to put their players
situations into real life scenarios. "Well if my boss wanted me to take a pay cut so..." Please stop. These players aren't entitled to more. They aren't. There is zero regard for the people
who have put them where they are, the current state of the nation, or any sense of reality. It's just greed pure and simple.
 
Revolution 9 said:
In this society we are raised to all feel entitled to get as much as we can. There is little to no regard about the current state of the country. Some people keep trying to put their players
situations into real life scenarios. "Well if my boss wanted me to take a pay cut so..." Please stop. These players aren't entitled to more. They aren't. There is zero regard for the people
who have put them where they are, the current state of the nation, or any sense of reality. It's just greed pure and simple.
Click to expand...
Regular folks where I work took a pay cut a few years ago. All pay has been restored now, but I don't remember anyone quitting over it because the economy was in the tank and their options were no better anywhere else.
 
Revolution 9 said:
In this society we are raised to all feel entitled to get as much as we can. There is little to no regard about the current state of the country. Some people keep trying to put their players
situations into real life scenarios. "Well if my boss wanted me to take a pay cut so..." Please stop. These players aren't entitled to more. They aren't. There is zero regard for the people
who have put them where they are, the current state of the nation, or any sense of reality. It's just greed pure and simple.
Click to expand...
And the puzzling thing about the players' strategy, even if they are operating under a maximize-my-take approach as they likely are, is that most players will not make up the money that they are losing by not agreeing to 50-50 now (or earlier), assuming that the owners don't budge significantly above 50-50, which I am convinced that the owners will not.

Even more embarrassing for the players is that if they (sub)consciously wanted to have more than half of the take--arguably a greedy stance, given that their side assumes far less risk and additional costs--then they would've had a good chance to get it under the 49-to-51 offer (or they probably could've notched that up to better than a likely 50.2% or 50.4% outcome).
 
I absolutely get the players feeling a little taken advantage of in this negotiation. They see the likelihood of revenues increasing, revenue sharing that will further pad pockets, and the deal they're being presented isn't 'fair' in the true sense of the word. They will not share equitably in the (presumed) profits to come over the next 7 years.

But they didn't share in the losses. Personally, I think the real impediment to their accepting the deal is they were all insulated from the downturn in the economy. 2008 didn't really happen to them. Yeah, many saw depreciation of their homes, or investments that got crushed. But their jobs or paychecks were never directly affected. And weathering the storm on a house that dropped 25% of its value is infinitely easier to absorb if you've already got full or significant equity in it. You're just stuck not being able to sell it, not being unable to make the mortgage.

I don't think most players are really capable of seeing this. But what's happening to them has happened to most people already. The huge difference is their 'losses' still result in exorbitantly high paying jobs once they get past their pride.
 
I'm curious. How much of this money that the players want are they giving personally to Magic, Bird and MJ? Because that's the only reason they're in the position they're in to begin with. They were still ridin' these icons coattails during the last CBA or two and that ****'s slowly faded, and the product's more recently been about them and only them. And that product sucks. Hence, the losses for the owners. These dumbasses want money they didn't even earn and never will.
 
The players are on their ****ing own with their system demands.

I wonder if they're so clueless as to not understand the damage even allowing a LT to exist poses to the game. And that's saying nothing of the fact that they probably wouldn't care if they did know.
 
At least today we will know whether we are going to have a season or not, right? If the union rejects the owners' offer then it will get worse and I just don't see the players accepting 47% any time soon.
 
Apparently Stern has enough ownership support to tweak the system issues to try and get something done today. With the players willing to go to 50-50, I think we might get a deal unless the players are after some major system changes. It would salvage what little enthusiasm I have left for a season.
 
SalmonHobo said:
I'm curious. How much of this money that the players want are they giving personally to Magic, Bird and MJ? Because that's the only reason they're in the position they're in to begin with. They were still ridin' these icons coattails during the last CBA or two and that ****'s slowly faded, and the product's more recently been about them and only them. And that product sucks. Hence, the losses for the owners. These dumbasses want money they didn't even earn and never will.
Click to expand...

The NBA had it's most proffitable year this year. I would say his generation's stars are doing just fine on their own.
 
....today's NBA game is virtually unwatchable....and the only reason I watch some of it, is because.......I really can't think of any good reason. So I'm pulling for a year long lock out....so I won't be able to watch any of it anyway!
 
NBA teams averaged 17,323 fans per game last season, up slightly from 17,165 the previous season of 2009-2010. Both numbers are the lowest for the league since 2004-2005.

2008-9: NBA 17,520
2007-8: NBA 17,396
2006-7: NBA 17,767
2005-6: NBA 17,548

In 1997-1998, the average attendance was 17,135. 270M people lived in the U.S. at that point. Last year, about 310M people lived in this country. That's a 14.8% increase in population, roughly speaking, yet attendance numbers for the league have essentially not grown. Obviously, there are other factors but the point remains.
 
Revenue =/= attendance

The salary cap has gone up every year. Last year the NBA made more money than it ever has and spent the least on player salaries in at least 13 years.

How the owners lost all of that money where before they haven't is a mystery. If teams lost money it means means they had a poor product and have a MASSIVE disadvantage in ceiling of revenue (market). Revenue sharing fixes that disparity in income, BRI cuts and hard caps do not. That helps backwater and mismanaged franchises break even and big market teams make INSANE profits.
 
I thought inherent to owning a business was risk? But the establishmentarians in the middle of making that argument are trying to remove risk from the equation. It's puzzling. Either way, that money should probably come from the pockets of Dolan and Buss, not Lebron (whether you hate him or not, he's really worth more than the Cavs were).
 
NUMBERICA said:
Revenue =/= attendance

The salary cap has gone up every year. Last year the NBA made more money than it ever has and spent the least on player salaries in at least 13 years.

How the owners lost all of that money where before they haven't is a mystery. If teams lost money it means means they had a poor product and have a MASSIVE disadvantage in ceiling of revenue (market). Revenue sharing fixes that disparity in income, BRI cuts and hard caps do not. That helps backwater and mismanaged franchises break even and big market teams make INSANE profits.
Click to expand...

I realize revenue does not equal attendance. And again, how much money did the NBA make last year? People keep saying it made money? Based on what?
 
NUMBERICA said:
Revenue =/= attendance

The salary cap has gone up every year. Last year the NBA made more money than it ever has and spent the least on player salaries in at least 13 years.

How the owners lost all of that money where before they haven't is a mystery. If teams lost money it means means they had a poor product and have a MASSIVE disadvantage in ceiling of revenue (market). Revenue sharing fixes that disparity in income, BRI cuts and hard caps do not. That helps backwater and mismanaged franchises break even and big market teams make INSANE profits.
Click to expand...

Purely speculating, but I'd guess corporate sponsors declined significantly from 2009 on. Hard to imagine merchandise sales didn't take a hit, either. And there was undoubtedly a very disparate hit on attendance. Some small markets probably got killed if their populations were more affected by unemployment.
 
SalmonHobo said:
I realize revenue does not equal attendance. And again, how much money did the NBA make last year? People keep saying it made money? Based on what?
Click to expand...

I'm shooting from the hip a little. I'm concluding that based on three things
1. If the salary cap goes up, total revenue has gone up. Period. It has never gone down (at least not in the years where it would be relevant). Just based on that the odds that they'd do so last season are unlikely.
2. In one half of the NBA (mis)information campaign, it boasts of revenue being great in the last year (the other half being that the NBA is hemorrhaging money).
3. I've seen it written many times that last year was an especially good year and/or the most money netted by the league. Combining points one and two makes it easy to conclude that the NBA made the most money it ever has in the last year.

I know you were searching for links, but I don't have them at the moment. Maybe I'll find them or maybe I won't. I thought this was common knowledge.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I thought inherent to owning a business was risk? But the establishmentarians in the middle of making that argument are trying to remove risk from the equation. It's puzzling. Either way, that money should probably come from the pockets of Dolan and Buss, not Lebron (whether you hate him or not, he's really worth more than the Cavs were).
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. Yes, there is risk in owning a business, but as a business owner, you should not be stupid and take more risks than possible. As a smart owner, you should do everything you can to remove/reduce risk. If you aren't, then you will go bankrupt.

LeBron is not worth more than the Cavs are (well, I guess his personal worth might be higher). The Cavs have been around a long time before LeBron came along and they will exist a long time after he is gone. Players are a dime a dozen. LeBron is special, but he cannot carry a league. And, as good as LeBron is, as great as Michael was, there will always come another that is bigger, faster, stronger, better. There are a lot less Larry Miller's, Mike Dolan's, Mark Cuban's, etc to fund a whole franchise.

There is nothing wrong with the owners trying to screw the players. There is nothing wrong with the players trying to squeeze every dime they can. The problem is when the players are too stupid to realize that all their posturing is costing them money, not the other way around.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Revenue =/= attendance

The salary cap has gone up every year. Last year the NBA made more money than it ever has and spent the least on player salaries in at least 13 years.

How the owners lost all of that money where before they haven't is a mystery. If teams lost money it means means they had a poor product and have a MASSIVE disadvantage in ceiling of revenue (market). Revenue sharing fixes that disparity in income, BRI cuts and hard caps do not. That helps backwater and mismanaged franchises break even and big market teams make INSANE profits.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the comment on players salaries and have seen it in here before. They were guaranteed 57% of BRI. If BRI goes up it seems to me that players salaries would rise accordingly. If player contracts don't add up to 57% then as I understand it, they are paid the difference out of an escrow account. Is that not what happens?
 
carolinajazz said:
....today's NBA game is virtually unwatchable....and the only reason I watch some of it, is because.......I really can't think of any good reason. So I'm pulling for a year long lock out....so I won't be able to watch any of it anyway!
Click to expand...

....today's Jazzfanz is virtually unreadable......and the only reason I read some of it, is because......I really can't think of a good reason. So I'm pulling for someone to stab me in the eyes with a fork.......so I won't be able to read any of it anyway!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top