I think the players need to stand firm.....thoughts please????
I don't think so. They are some of the richest and most overpaid athletes in the country, possibly the entire planet. This situation reminds me of the players strike when the president of the Union was Patrick Ewing. Do you know what his salary was that year? It was $16 million. How could anyone making that insane amount of money think they're in a position to go on strike?
I think the focus of the contract negotiations should be looking for a fairer balance between league revenues, players salaries, and possibly lowering prices so people could actually afford to attend an NBA game without taking out a loan.
This is the world's smallest violin playing for the owners....I don't think 20,000 people would go see Jerry Colangelo or Jerry Reinsdorf do anything.....I don't think 1,000 would........nor could they sell a single $80 jersey....they owe every single dollar they make to their players, especially the ones making the most money.....and I just want something to put the wheels in motion to get Stern out.....its time.....
The problems are that teams are losing money and future revenues will be going down not up. Yes, the players are the product and no one will be their if it wasnt for them. However the owners put up THEIR money, the players are risking nothing.Wether the franchise makes money or not, the players get paid. The owners have to make profit. Where is their GUARANTEE
I don't mind the system how it is right now......the NBA seems to have the most fair salary system that I can think of.....NBA teams pay their players less than any other league....
the players make approximately 60% of the league revenue. Numerous owners actually lose money every year just by owning an nba franchise and they consider it a hobby which is why they don't always mind opperating in the red while players on the roster make more money then them off the team. With that said, I really don't think they should change anything. The owners are becoming more self aware of the economy and overspneding already. Guys are gonna be getting less and less regardless if the cba is altered. The rookie pay scale is fine. The veterans are getting paid well. But the overall money going out is going down on its own as owners become more financially responsible. Joe Johnson was offered lees then the max by the hawks before the season. The suns have not made a commitment to amare because they don't feel he is a max guy. No one was throwing big money at boozer this last summer when he could have opted out. Days of Rashard Lewis jacking 20 million a year are numbered. So I say keep it the way it is and leave on the owners to play it smart. Lots of good talent can be found for a decent price.
It should also be noted, that this happened before, and the message that came from that loud and clear is that a lockout is MUCH harder on the players then it is on the owners. Like I said owners are usually billionaires who treat owning a team like a hobby that they don't make money on anyways. Players are millionaires who can't last for ever while sitting out. You think Rashard Lewis wants to lose 20 mill to a lockout season?
And if there is a lockout, then screw all of them anyways. If anyone needs to hold fast, it's us fans. They have years in advance to begin negotiations on these deals and if they can't find a decent way to cut the money that we put into the nba's pockets, and they screw us over for it, then im gonna be pissed.
whats funny is alot of ya'll listen to stern when he said the teams have losyt 400million and go with that. seems that the president of the players did a lil research and found that stern greatly exagerrated. the players wont stand pat because the owners can afford a lock out much more then the players. and the players under contract cant go play overseas in the mean time. i think they should do alot like football and have some of these contracts no guranteed. every bargin agreement the owenrs think of something new to give them more money and the players less. eventually the players have to take a stand
i have not listened to stern on anything in terms of the nba owners losing money. There are numerous reports about 2/3rd's of owners operating in the red. You see teams going up for sale almost every year because the owners are losing money. The grizz went up for sale, the bobcats went up for sale now the warriors are going up for sale. You think these owners are doing that because they are making millions off the team?
also a reason they go into red is that the owners make a bunch of bad decisions. alot of peopel think its just because of the players getting the money but the fact is if they didnt make bad decisions they could still be making money and the players could still be getting there money
I hate that the players want more money but the owners don't have a peg leg to stand on. without the players is anyone going to watch?
that's why I say keep it the same. The owners should be smarter about how they spend their money. I pointed how many guys are getting less now adays. So the salaires are gonna go down regardless. Overall, I think the current system is fair. But let's not act like the players are getting screwed in any way here. IM not sure what details the owners are trying to change, I know they want less gauranteed years on contracts. To me one less year is not that big a deal on a contract.
A few years back, Jaosn Kidd made a good point on why the nba should not be like the nfl and have non gauranteed deals, because he said in a sport where every player needs the ball, guys would just start being selfish. In the NFL, the majority of players never touch the ball and they just have a specific job to do that doesn't rely too much on teammates. Unless you are a reciever relying on a quarterback or a running back relying on linemen, it's hard to be selfish in the nfl. The nba is a different story and non gauranteed deals could result in me first play.
agree with rtbt... What they cant make a living with the league MINIMUM at a mil.....?
guys are already selfish in some instances. i dont agree with kidd because you dont need to score alot of points for a owner to know what youre worth. neither party is being screwed. the owners want to screw the players which is obvious by how they always come up with something new everytime which so happens put more money in there pokects. yeah they like basketball but they like making there selfs richer more. people say players are all about money but the players have played the game for years without being paid before getting to the nba. the owners are ALL about money. you might find a handful that are more about winning. you see the owners are always wanting a new deal
League revenues are going down and some owners are scrambling to sell their teams. GS is the latest one up for sale. Yes the players are the attraction but they already make a fortune in salaries and endorsements. In order to preserve and help the game that gave them so much, players should work on trying to find a fair balance between player salaries, ticket prices, and try as much as possible to make the teams more fiscally sound. Everyone benefits from that type of attitude.
I don't think anyone in their right mind can make a case that the players are in any way suffering financially.
like a article i read...the negotiations arent about the fans its about the players and owners. yeah the fans can say they pay there salaries which is true but you wont get a bunch of fans deciding not to go to the games so they dont have to have any fan input
to be honest no one is really suffering. the players are rich the owners are wealthy( which is better then rich).. just like any business you know the risks and if you cant handle it get out of it( sell youre team) in other business if you lose you either get out or deal with it. you dont cry and try to change the rules so you can make more money
as a business man the owners need ot make better decisions. lower food prices and ticket prices if you arent selling out. dont over spend for a guy that any average fan knows isnt worth it. no one forces the owners to pay this or that guy all that money and when they do and the player doesnt perform they wanna cry even though it was there decision to pay that player.
I really like the was rtbt is thinking right now...Couldn't agree more
Let me try this again. League revenues are going down and some owners are scrambling to possibly sell their teams in these tough economic times. GS is the latest one up for sale.
Yes the players are the attraction but they already make a fortune in salaries and endorsements. In order to preserve and help the game that gave them so much, players should work on trying to find a fair balance between player salaries, ticket prices, and try as much as possible to make the teams more fiscally sound. Everyone benefits from that type of attitude.
I don't think anyone in their right mind can make a case that the players are in any way suffering financially.
neither side has a right to complain. players or owners
I agree with almost everything you are saying quincey. After many years of seeing salaries sky rocket and even slightly above average players pulling close to 10 mill a year, it is up to the owners to stop themselves from being idiots and overpaying guys. And we are seeing it happen this very instant.
I say keep it the same as it is. Im not sure about little details, but the overall current system I think works fine. How many guys in the league can't be replaced honestly? Of course lebron and kobe are gonna get their money, but overall, if a guy wants crazy money, there are others out there that will sign for less. Let Detroit give ben gordon 10 mill a year while artest pulls half that and a guy like barnes puls a fraction of that and a guy like derrick willimas can come in and take care of business for scraps if barnes is too expensive for your taste.
business isnt fair or made to be fair in sports or life. thats how it is. its about who can get the most money or who can get the most of the pie. if the owners could they would get 90-percent of the revenue.
u know whats funny. stern says the owners are losing all this money but still refuses to open the books so the other side can see. sounds a tad fishy
The problem is that the great recession really bought the league down a lot and most of the owners are basically burning money by operating an NBA team. Quite a few owners are losing money in 8 digit figure.
It's a business afterall, so they have to readjust the salary cap and readjust the player portions of the money in order to have a sustainable business.
Anyway, I think the worst part is that there are so many dumb GMs overpaying for players with marginal value. They really should setup some kind of new system. We will see quite a few players being overpaid like crazy. There are only a few players worth the max contract like LBJ, Kobe, and maybe DWade. Certainly, Yao would also worth the max, not because of his play, more because he's basically a golden egg goose that generated tones of money from China.
Most players won't stand a chance to win this battle. Most players spent their money like crazy and more than 70% of them went broke after retirement. To have lockout would really be killing more than half the people in the league since they spent money as if they can print money out of thin air like the US gov't.
i've always said one of the worst mistakes owners make is over paying guys, and that was before the economy went down the gutter. Now, arenas are half filled all over the league. I watch games on league pass, and it looks like nbdl games how many empty seats there are. The nets had a night recently where if you showed up, they did your taxes for free. Teams are coming up with all kinds of ways to get fans to show up, just expecting 18,000 to show up no longer works. The players know this and know they might take a hit in the next cba, but ultimately it comes down to owners just being thriftier.
That's why I hate Stern.....the players, the fans....he doesn't even try to make compromises with anyone....which leads me to believe that he is probably doing the same thing here....he did the same thing by refusing a private investigation into the referees....I understand he answers to the owners first but still.....he makes them look bad by doing that....
Why do you hate Stern? he NBA is a very succesul business that he has helped expand world wide and the players are some of the richest athletes and most recognizable world wide. He helps do a great job with marketing of the individual athlete allowing for them to further make money in endoresment revenue. Of course his first job is to represent the owners and do what is in their best interest.
As for refusing private investigation, I have no idea where you come up with that. The CIA did a thourough investigation after the Donaghy situation that the NBA was more then cooperative in. When there are millions in gambling on the line as well the issues of potential business malpractice that involves billionaire owners, you better believe Stern had zero say over whether or not there was gonna be a complete and formal investigation done by the government.
i came up with that because the owner said he asked stern on espn and stern refuses. its one thing to agree with the cia because its a private matter and he's not in negotiations with the cia. its quite another to do it with someone you are n negotions with. listen to jim rome or some of the other talk shows a lil more. they have guest on all the time who are in deep with this situation. thats where i get it from. i thought it was common knowledge but thats on me for assuming
rome asked stern what? What does Jim Rome have to do with the cia doing an investigation on the nba's reffing scandal? Stern works for the owners, all of them, and you don't think the owners who have millions on the line would want an investigation done if the refs were corrupt? Stern never ever denied any investigation to those that matter who are the legal authorities.
huh?..he didnt ask stern. it was the players rep who said they asked stern to see the books to confirm the lost of 400 million and stern refused. stern cant refuse the cia and what ever results they find doesnt have to be shared with the players rep. not sure why you brought that up because that has nothing to do with this. you really think the players rep or anyone else has the power to get stern to open the books if he doesnt want to? he cant say no to the c.ia my point was answering to you saying you dont know where i came up with that.
example- my boy ask to see my books. i say no. the c.i.a ask me and i say yeah. if someone comes along and say im honest just because i opened my books to the c.i.a is wrong since i had no choice in the matter so even if i wanted to hide something i couldnt. but i sure as hell can say no to my boy or his rep if i have something to hide
billy hunter thats his name.. couldnt remember
but stern has said hes gonna open the books yet still hasnt when asked. all that sounds very fishy to me. like the owners are redoing somethings with the books before handing them over
quincey, what are you talking about? I was talking to midwestbbscout about the refferee investigation, and you jumped in talking about how stern was talking to rome about 400 million in losses and then ask me what im talking about?
Did you just assume I was calling you out quincey when I was responding to midwestbbscout?
,idwest post actually didnt come up on my end so i rightfully assumed you were talking to me. my bad
and now that i see his post midwestbbscout i dont agree with hating stern. i actually like him and think hes done a very good job. i dont agree with him unwilling to open his books to hunter so far or the fact that he lied about the nba losing 400million. also found out that the teams losing the money are the lower teams while some of the higher teams are making money. isnt that pretty muhc how its always been in sports?..bad teams lose money while good teams make money
yeah, i have no comment on whether or not stern is lying about losses or not in the nba. I do think the declining number of fans and 4 teams going up for sale in the last 2 years is kind of a sign that teams are obviously struggling. But to what degree I have no idea and it's quite possible stern could be twisting numbers aorund when he says 400 million. But I don't see any reason to hate stern. He has done a lot for this sport and most the players seem to have no problem with him or how he runs things.
In the end, I think any threat of a possible lockout is all just posturing from both sides to get what they want, but in the end things will get done in a timely matter.
Brian Scalabrine and Brian Cardinal are prime examples of how well the players are doing in these very tough economic times.
You may not believe this, but Brian "No Talent" Cardinal's salary with Minnesota at the start of the season was $6.3 million. He's earned approximately $30 million in his ten year career.
Brian Scalabrine's salary with Boston this year is $3.4 million.
which shows how well the owners are doing if they are willing to pay those players that money...so yeah youre right nuff said