I think I'm overpaid and I don't even belong to a union. My benefits are pretty freaking good, too. So, I guess it really depends.
Lockout!!!
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
I think I'm overpaid and I don't even belong to a union. My benefits are pretty freaking good, too. So, I guess it really depends.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
That's what Stern is offering. Starting Dec. 15th. That's a HUGE sweetener.
trigg3r
Well-Known Member
That would be sweet. This thing better get done.
So what the hell you do in Reno other than post here? In other words, tell me your story.
/elbowontablechinonhandlookingatyoukindafreaky
One source from the players side issued an 'ominous warning' to ESPN's Marc Stein about the latest proposal from the owners.
"Nothing was addressed," said the source. "It's same offer as it was before."
The source expects the offer to be rejected.
Marc Berman of the New York Post reports that Billy Hunter told him that there was very little difference in the new deal.
- That's it kids, its over. All this stupid talk of a deal was/is imminent was again full of ****.
"Nothing was addressed," said the source. "It's same offer as it was before."
The source expects the offer to be rejected.
Marc Berman of the New York Post reports that Billy Hunter told him that there was very little difference in the new deal.
- That's it kids, its over. All this stupid talk of a deal was/is imminent was again full of ****.
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
...absolutely great video illustrating the unions position!
So basically, here's the bottom line: "The league is clearly banking on the premise that a majority of players, angry as some might be, would rather play than continue this labor battle and will ultimately relent if this offer is put up for a vote. Voting for the deal and playing out a 72-game season likely enables players to return to work with only one missed paycheck, while voting this deal down increases the likelihood the entire 2011-12 season will be canceled." ESPN
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Not at all. I simply found Kicky's tizzies hilarious. Dude needs to chill on the estrogen.
Yes, you are.
Doesn't look good after reading some of the reports -- apparently, the new CBA is nullifying the influence of the agents. So now who do the players listen to, themselves or their agents? Of course the agents ultimately only care about number one and don't care the effect it has on so many other people besides the players if the season is cancelled. I really can't feel bad for the players though; they are already making obscene amounts of money, and if 70 percent of the teams in the NBA lost money last year with an economy that continues to be teetering on the brink, I think it's irresponsible for the players to reject the proposal now.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.
AlaskanAssassin
Well-Known Member
While I have no inside information, I feel pretty good about the players accepting this offer. If they don't, I really don't know what they are thinking. If they don't accept it, I don't see how we are going to have a season. While I think that Stern's first "take it or we're offering 47%" threat was a bluff, I don't think he's bluffing now. There is too much pressure from small market owners to keep this offer on the table for long.
If the players lose this season because of 1-2% in BRI and some system issues, I really question the advice they are receiving from Fisher, Hunter, and their lawyers and agents. Losing the season equates to about $2 billion in lost salaries! 1-2% of BRI is well under $100 million for a season. That's 20 years before they see the return on their stance to hold out, ASSUMING that they get what they want after a year lost.
How is not accepting this deal even a consideration for them? Are the system issues that important?
If the players lose this season because of 1-2% in BRI and some system issues, I really question the advice they are receiving from Fisher, Hunter, and their lawyers and agents. Losing the season equates to about $2 billion in lost salaries! 1-2% of BRI is well under $100 million for a season. That's 20 years before they see the return on their stance to hold out, ASSUMING that they get what they want after a year lost.
How is not accepting this deal even a consideration for them? Are the system issues that important?
My fear is that the owners are going to back out. They will use a dispute over a system issue as an excuse to pull their whole deal off the table, then lower their asking price on BRI to 47%.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
I could definitely see this happening.
AlaskanAssassin
Well-Known Member
You're right. I think they will absolutely back off of what they have offered. I don't think it's an "excuse" to do so though. I think they really have submitted their best offer at this point.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
The owners pulling a bait and switch is a PR Disaster they would never recover from. They'll hold to the agreement. Question is whether the players agree to it as is or attempt a last ditch effort to make changes before ratifying it. I refuse to believe common sense won't finally prevail.
BENTLEY
Well-Known Member
I don't care about the revenue split. I want a system that limits the player's power to create their own dream teams. Hard cap, non-guaranteed contracts, franchise tag, etc. I'm a hardliner so part of me kinda wants the players to get their panties in a bunch and push to play the decertification card. I'm perfectly happy having more time to focus on NCAA ball. BUT rather than the players go thru with decertifying I want them to eventually be humbled and realize they can't win and that even the hardliner's offer is a better than nothing.