I'll tell you this. Kobe and LeBron are both more popular than Tom Brady. And when asked who is the most popular sports star of all time its usually Michael Jordan, not Jerry West.
Basically the owners demanded 46% and the players made a strong statement that they were having none of that. Good Stuff. Love how all the big names showed up. Lebron and Melo are 6'8 120 kg dudes with tatts all over them - it would be a pretty intimidating to have to sit across them and make demands. Apparently Sarver and Gilbert the most vocal and hardest negotiators were a bit humbled by their presence. Love how Wade stood up to Stern as well, that would have been awesome to see. What figure will the owners come up with next? They better not offer 48%. Guys almost walked out.
Even a graduated luxury tax does not really balance out the ability of teams to compete. If anything, it further limits the number of teams that can be have's, and be able to pay those amounts. Until there is a true revenue-sharing plan, a la the NFL, the small markets will always be at a disadvantage. Having said that, the NBA makes the most money and publicity for the casual fan when they have the same few "great" teams that have to battle. A truly balanced playing field would likely not improve the the games visibility in comparison the NFL.
Because players are the reason why NBA fans even look in the general direction of the NBA. However NBA owners are the ones that finance this whole deal. 50/50 would be fair, but each side overvalues themselves.
Pretty much. The NFL is not in competition with the NBA. It just isn't. NBA games are played on weekdays and NFL games are played on weekends. They really aren't in competition with each other since it is very seasonal. NFL season ends, then NBA season, then MLB season and the cycle continues. You can enjoy all three. Also that NFL fans tend to be NBA fans. People aren't going to switch to Hockey and never look back. I know I'm not, I don't find Hockey all that exciting personally and if the NBA isn't on then I'll just watch something else probably more College Basketball.
I don't understand much of the logic of the support for the players. The owners definitely have to be accountable as well and have made their fair share of bad decisions so they also need to compromise without a doubt. But the players seem to live in some sort of dream world where you get guaranteed contracts without any financial responsibility or accountability. They have it like no other sports league in the world and it just is a flawed system that doesn't add up. Imagine you hired someone, either to work in your business or hired them to do a service for you . Imagine that they were a good worker and had good performance so you decided to hire them for long term and pay them to stick around and commit to a contract of a monthly payment. Say they decided to half ass it, lose motivation, stop performing their duties probably ,and then you can't fire them or stop giving them money because its all guaranteed, so itsj ust a matter of hope that they take their job seriously and there is no accountability. So say you have an early 20s center who just averaged 15 points and 7 rebounds in a dying position. He is young, already performing above average, so you lock him up. He decides I got a long term contract and those donuts are looking pretty good, so screw it, that is all I am committed to. He just does what he likes and all you can do is watch while you pay him 10 million dollars a year( eddy curry) and he is not accountable for anything. Same goes with Rashard lewis, someone who is in their 20s, just came off an all star year, averaged over 23, unique body type for a perimiter playing, he plateus and never plays like that again, you are stuck with a product you thought you were getting and he can't be help accountable because its all guaranteed. Shame with Erika Dampier, Jerome James, Stomile Swift...I mean you the examples are throughout the league and yes the owners are at fault for giving it, but the players aren't held accountable for any bit, there is no checks and balances on their side to make them act as professionals and align agendas. If TJ ford, allen iverson, francis, marbury, jamal tinsley decides he wants to be a starter otherwise he is going to be a cancer to this team..guess what, you have to pay them to go away, you can't take away their payment for not buying in to the teams agenda and the hand that feeds them and treating it like a job. It is almost absurd what they get away with and it just not how the real world works with the lack of accountability. So for that and for more spread out competition, I would like to see the owners take this one.
It is not so much as supporting the players, but rather picking the lesser of 2 poisons. Both sides do raise legitimate points and it is undeniable that the NBA's current playing field needs to landscaping work done. Teams that have wealthy owners unafraid to pay the luxury tax or those in marketable areas definitely have an immediate initial advantage; more money means higher payroll potential and more marketing means a more desirable free agency spot. It is also true that players in general just make a crap ton of money and in some cases, much more than their skills would otherwise merit. Fans generally lean towards players however for a few important reasons: - Owners have a crap ton more money than players and fans who are generally much poorer naturally align with the "poorer" party - Owners want a system that essentially guaranteed profit, something that turns us fans away because in business there is no such thing as guaranteed profit and we feel they are spoiled rich bastards - Owners trying to bail themselves out of bad decisions by claiming it as expenses leaves a nasty taste in fans' mouths - While players are significantly overpaid, who can blame them for taking the contract offered? We would all do the same thing. - Owners are the ones overcharging fans for everything, from tickets to concession stand food - We watch the NBA for the players and teams, not Mark Cuban, Jerry Buss, or Les Alexander. Who gives a crap about those rich billionaires? At the same time however, it is also easy to sympathize with some of the owners' issues as well. Owners in small markets or with smaller pockets are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They don't have the coffers to truly compete with bigger market or payroll teams and at the same time are compelled to overpay to try to get top talent, because if they do not, someone else will. They also suffer unavailable disadvantages as well from poor marketing locations; smaller fan base, smaller talent pool to entice, and less outside the team sponsor opportunities. A new CBA is needed, but both sides need to get over financial obstacles quick before fans just completely give up on them.
Yea we watch the NBA for those stars and to allow more balance of all the markets and better competition, therefore more fun for us, that is why we need to side with the owners. I don't blame the players for takign contracts, I do thikn they need to be held accountable in terms of guaranteed money, they need to have clausese to be professional. If htey start losing weight, not buying into the game plan, fighting with teammates/coaches, playing or being selfish, not practicing, they need to be held accountable just like any one of us would be in a job. The fact is, the only players worth their money are the superstars. They generate marketing and seats, the rest of them are pretty overpaid in terms of actual revenue generated. So I think you nailed in picking 2 poisons, because no sides are right, but I do see the players need to be grounded. I don't think they realize the marketing that goes in that allows the NBA to create its stardom and the infrastructure that is in that allows them to live the way that they do. I mean just compare it to Europe in terms of the facilities, travel, exposure, everything and you have to give the league and owners credit for making that happen. Plus without the hard market, the bigger cities always have a lcear cut advantage. I want to see a competitive game everynight. now bad decisions will be made, but fans have to suffer rebuilding for that many more yaers because of contracts and the current structure, I don't care about owners, I mean I want to see the fans and a better quality product.
I think the owners would readily agree to a 50/50 split . . . of actual INCOME (being total qualified revenues minus appropriately correlated expenses). The major problem in discussions on BRI has been determining what those appropriately correlated expenses should be. The biggest among these expenses has been interest expense, most notably on the financing of the purchase of franchises. The owners make a compelling point about such expenses directly impacting the league's ability to maximize revenues. However, the union makes an equally compelling argument that such expenses are in some cases irresponsibly large. My solution would be for both sides to determine each of the following: (A) a percentage of the franchise purchase price that a reasonably prudent investor would finance (say, 80%?); (B) an interest rate for the franchise purchase that a reasonably prudent (and highly creditworthy) investor would get on his loan (say, the Prime Rate [from time to time] plus 2%?); and (C) a reasonable determination for monthly payments of principal and interest on the debt (say, based on a hypothetical monthly payment if the loan was amortized over 20 years at the interest rate as of the date of acquisition of the franchise?). Using the above examples, the accountants who calculate BRI would run the numbers, as to each team's financing, to determine the annual interest expense to be deducted from BRI based on (a) an interest rate equal to the LESSER of Prime + 2% or the actual interest rate on (b) the LESSER of 80% or the actual percentage financed and (c) with monthly payments of principal and interest equal to the LARGER of the collectively bargained amount or the actual payments being made (hence, minimizing interest payments). This compromise would allow NBA owners to adequately finance their businesses for the benefit of the league as a whole, while at the same time avoiding abuses of that privilege by irresponsible owners at the expense of the players. I honestly believe that a compromise like that could convince the owners to move to a 50/50 split, if not even give the players a larger share of the pie (maybe even the 53% the players are offering). Just a thought.
BimaThug, It is much simpler to just consider BRI as EBITA. Keep Interest, Taxes and Amortization out of the equation completely. If you don't, then loopholes will exist and we will be back at the CBA arguing table in 5 years. s i m p l i f y
Even a cursory reading of the current CBA shows that calculations of BRI are anything but simple under the current system. The definition of "Basketball Related Income" is like 10-15 pages long, and that's after including several defined terms to shorten the language. It's not like any player (aside from Derek Fisher and some other union officers) even understands the intricacies of these calculations, anyway. Better to get to a FAIR split of income/revenue than to a simple one. But if the parties are seeking simplicity (and little to no exclusions from BRI), then perhaps I lean more in favor of the owners getting their (reportedly offered) 52/48 split. But, yeah, like everyone else, I'd love for the sides to just shut up and take a 50/50 split.
This is a league of players. When MJ left rating dropped. When LBJ made it to the finals rating spiked up. When Kobe made it to the finals ratings spiked.
And when the underdogs beat the superstars in the finals, the ratings blow through the roof. Thats why the NBA needs the superstars but it also needs storylines. (-as a side note - Thats why I believe the NBA should have a tournament of some sort during the season or preseason. Maybe a preseason bracket tournament with maybe some international teams as well and cut the regular season by 20 games.) The NBA has a strong mix of superstars right now, with older superstars, and up and coming stars also in the mix. You couldnt ask for a worse time to have an NBA lockout from a fan interest perspective.
I hate the way they can depreciate players contracts, and pay their spouse $10 million a year as a basketball expense.... The owners do not want a fair deal, they want to crush the union...gonna be a long strike. DD
Not really when Lebron made it to the finals for the first time and got swept by the spurs that was the lowest rated finals in NBA history ..
It appears to me both sides simply want as much revenue ($$$) as they can lay their hands on. On both sides of the equation, we are not talking about people that are having a hard time feeding their families or paying their bills. To me, this is a lot less about what is fair, and a lot more about who can gouge the other the most.
