What's new

Owners are replaceable

For ****s and giggles let's say google decides to play the patron

google products
Youtube
Chromecast
Google TV
Android

So let's say the world's leading advertiser offers the players union the same ten year TV deal the owners got.

Their stipulations might be:

-a list of players that must agree
-30 teams in specific markets
-independent management
-a single league wide corporation(the league owns all the teams)
-and since google is taking the risk ownership share in the league/profit sharing

Remember Google isn't the only possible patron FOX was not even given the opportunity to place a bid on the new TV rights. A few more possible patrons off the top of my head: apple, Verizon, Amazon

Fox possibly has the viewership to make the same kind of money that ABC/ESPN/TNT currently does, if they feel the replacement league will bring the ratings. I don't see that as likely, though.
 
Perhaps heyhey likes to forget we exist.

Lotsa Mormons in Las Vegas. On opening night I went out in my Favors jersey to grab something at smiths. I was stopped three times by perfect strangers in a 5 minute run. Its awesome to see Jazz support in Vegas.
 
-30 teams in specific markets

You are assuming that they would try to clone the NBA. Even that would be far more difficult than you're making it out to be, but that's not what they would do. If the stars committed to this, then I think it's safe to say they'd try a free market system, since that's the main complaint among the stars. Less than 15 teams with maybe 5 super teams that would really be the only competitive teams. Nobody is watching that. Even the people in the cities with a super team aren't watching that for very long. You are correct in that it is feasible to try and start such a thing, but as far as being successful, not feasible.
 
But team names, logos, gear, etc would have to be abandoned cause the nba owns that kind of stuff right?

People will not like that and stop following thier "new team" cause it's not thier old team.

People are creatures of habit and sentiment. Alot of people are resistant to change

You root for the Utah Jazz The sonics became the OKC Thunder Vancouver moved to memphis. New Orleans dropped the Hornets and became the Pellies. Charlotte dropped the Bobcats and went back to the Hornets. The Nets moved to Brooklyn. **** loads of teams have redesigned their gear including the Jazz. Did you drop the team when they dropped the Note?

Fans seem to be pretty flexible


Perhaps heyhey likes to forget we exist.

Look it's not going to happen because like I said the owners are not that stupid but I'm sure both of you would be stoked to have a pro team in your town.
 
You root for the Utah Jazz The sonics became the OKC Thunder Vancouver moved to memphis. New Orleans dropped the Hornets and became the Pellies. Charlotte dropped the Bobcats and went back to the Hornets. The Nets moved to Brooklyn. **** loads of teams have redesigned their gear including the Jazz. Did you drop the team when they dropped the Note?

Fans seem to be pretty flexible

Touche'
 
OK, but that's why I think players' unity is key. If 100% of the players are all united then the owners have a problem. Money is not an issue, the players can always find "investors" who will bank roll their new league.


But if the 10-20 or so star players are gonna side with the owners, then yeah of course the players won't have as much bargaining power.
There will NEVER be player unity. The labor strife is driven by the few players who want to do away with the max contracts so they can get paid $50M. But you do that and the NBA middle-class, consisting of the vast majority of players gets squeezed. Teams have a mega-star, guys on rookie contracts and the rest at vet-minimum wages. The players caved last time because the rank-and-file players recognized their best interests were not being represented. And they'll cave again. If the league proceeds without LBJ, Carmelo, etc. it will survive. New stars rise up, and old ones retire. I'd be fine with LBJ and his 10 closest friends going off and forming their own team to play exhibitions around the country in 2nd-rate arenas.
 
I would like to say that I believe the players are getting some money back this time, but it won't be because the owners are afraid of them starting their own league.
 
I would like to say that I believe the players are getting some money back this time, but it won't be because the owners are afraid of them starting their own league.

I agree. BRI will be going up, with out much of an increase in expenses. The players will have an expectation to get a modestly larger slice of the pie.

Con't confuse pre-negotiation rhetoric for expectations.
 
I would like to say that I believe the players are getting some money back this time, but it won't be because the owners are afraid of them starting their own league.

What other reason do the owners have to pay them other than they are afraid they may play elsewhere?

The reason NBA players get paid what they do is precisely for this reason. The owners aren't paying the players millions out of the kindness of their hearts.
 
Yep, let's put it to a vote of the player's association. DOWN WITH THE NBA!

....yeah, this time, though, lets hope the owners lock'em out for a WHOLE YEAR! The game is virtually unwatchable right now as it is, with the exception of a few teams. Nobody goes to the games anymore, unless they come disguised as "empty seats!" The big money comes from t.v. revenue and players without NBA money end up in the poorhouse faster than their heads would spin! Heck, players WITH NBA money end up in the poorhouse or broke a couple of years after they leave the league anyway!
 
Why would you have fewer teams? Many markets would not be abandoned especially the big ones.

Where do they play?
NBA would not go away. A 30-team new league would not crop up overnight. There won't be universal support for the new league and that kind of infrastructure can't come together in <1 year. The NBA owners sure as hell aren't going to go quietly into the night and share the arenas. You can bet there are non-compete clauses preventing ANY basketball team whether pro or minor-league from playing in an arena without consent of the NBA team(s) which have leased that arena. Of course SLC is unique because the team owns the ESA. So a new league is relegated to either playing in college arenas, cities without pro franchises (but with existing "NBA-ready" arenas) or abandoned arenas (e.g. the Forum, Key Arena, etc.).

So let's assume LBJ can convince 100 or so players to defect with him and form a new league. Ten teams in LA (likely playing in Anaheim), New York (maybe playing in New Jersey), Seattle, Nashville, Las Vegas, etc.

Now what? Revenue is not going to be anywhere near what teams in the NBA generate. Gate receipts, broadcast or streaming deal, sponsorships, merchandising, etc. will all be much, much smaller with the major players wanting more of it. So do these players go out and try to find the most idiotic billionaires on the planet to own the teams? Hey, we have an incredibly risky business model for you to invest in, and oh yeah, most of the profit goes to us. Or they sell shares? Again, investors want to see solid returns on their money...the riskier the investment, the greater the expected return.

The NBA would survive with maybe 4-5 small market teams going under. The new league would last 3-4 years tops. The stars might still make good money initially, but every other player would see they could make more in the NBA and BEG for reinstatement. And this won't be a situation like the ABA; there would be no merger.
 
Also, if the players did start their own league, I'm assuming they would want to implement a free market system, considering that's what seems to be the issue with the stars. I think this is way more complicated than people want to admit.

.....the "players" would have a hard time opening up a "bicycle" shop let alone their own league! Who's going to bank role them....."Snoop Dog" and "J-Z" and his entourage?
 
.....the "players" would have a hard time opening up a "bicycle" shop let alone their own league! Who's going to bank role them....."Snoop Dog" and "J-Z" and his entourage?

Maybe the owners of tattoo parlors and gun shops could bankroll the teams in each city.
Suggested team names:
Chicago Fire
Washington Bullets (that was a great one)
LA Rioters of Anaheim
New York Wannabees (playing in New Jersey)
Texas Riflemen
Seattle Superhairies
Kentucky PKM's (just kidding)
 
Where do they play?
NBA would not go away. A 30-team new league would not crop up overnight. There won't be universal support for the new league and that kind of infrastructure can't come together in <1 year. The NBA owners sure as hell aren't going to go quietly into the night and share the arenas. You can bet there are non-compete clauses preventing ANY basketball team whether pro or minor-league from playing in an arena without consent of the NBA team(s) which have leased that arena. Of course SLC is unique because the team owns the ESA. So a new league is relegated to either playing in college arenas, cities without pro franchises (but with existing "NBA-ready" arenas) or abandoned arenas (e.g. the Forum, Key Arena, etc.).

So let's assume LBJ can convince 100 or so players to defect with him and form a new league. Ten teams in LA (likely playing in Anaheim), New York (maybe playing in New Jersey), Seattle, Nashville, Las Vegas, etc.

Now what? Revenue is not going to be anywhere near what teams in the NBA generate. Gate receipts, broadcast or streaming deal, sponsorships, merchandising, etc. will all be much, much smaller with the major players wanting more of it. So do these players go out and try to find the most idiotic billionaires on the planet to own the teams? Hey, we have an incredibly risky business model for you to invest in, and oh yeah, most of the profit goes to us. Or they sell shares? Again, investors want to see solid returns on their money...the riskier the investment, the greater the expected return.

The NBA would survive with maybe 4-5 small market teams going under. The new league would last 3-4 years tops. The stars might still make good money initially, but every other player would see they could make more in the NBA and BEG for reinstatement. And this won't be a situation like the ABA; there would be no merger.

So why is the salary cap $60 million and not $30 million? Why don't the owners cut their pay in half? Since the players really have no choice anyway.
 
Maybe the owners of tattoo parlors and gun shops could bankroll the teams in each city.
Suggested team names:
Chicago Fire
Washington Bullets (that was a great one)
LA Rioters of Anaheim
New York Wannabees (playing in New Jersey)
Texas Riflemen
Seattle Superhairies
Kentucky PKM's (just kidding)

LOL! Great stuff!
 
Back
Top