That might be true, but if it is necessary to keep the whole league viable then it is necessary. I think the players are delusional. Once they figure out that even a system which cuts into profits this drastically is still better than nothing, (start lowering their expectations) they might see how good they really have it. This is more about not accepting reality on the player's part.
Here's how I imagine the owners discussion went during the meeting before this: Let's demand 50-50 BRI, or threaten to end all negotiations. *They won't go for it. That's obvious, but they are not meeting our demands. Stern agreed, because it makes the owners look like they are not desperate to end this lockout. I believe the owners are more desperate than the players. It's not a bad strategy. Let's see if it works.
I'd be inclined to agree with you if the negotiations were actually that far apart. That doesn't even seem to be what they're arguing about anymore. This whole thing looks to be a lot stupider than that.
The Player view is is this: You want shorter contracts with less guarantees we get a bigger BRI (53%) share. OR Only minor changes of the system and we go as low as 52.5% - 50% of the BRI The Owner view: Major system changes and a Bri range on a sliding scale from 51% - 49 based on revenue incentives
@MrMichaelLee Michael Lee Great point by @daldridgetnt. NFL met for 16 straight days; NBA can't go more than 3. Too much emotion, not enough urgency from both sides
lol so true. Kraft's wife is in the hospital dieing and he is trying to get a deal done for the nfl. David Stern on the other hand has the flu and has to go home and lay down.
Right now the owners are more desperate, because they prefer not missing any games. With players like Stephen Curry caving two weeks prior to the season starting, it's only a matter of games before the players start to get desperate. The owners want to make a deal when the players are desperate.
Why did I just become a rookie all of a sudden? Seems like all my rep points, all 107 of them, just vanished.
Well, if you remember, this negotiation has been talked about for years - it was that serious and many people were saying that it would cost the nba a full season. I guess people were thinking cooler heads would prevail, but in reality it is going down just as it has been predicted to go down. I think the owners want A WHOLE LOT. But much of it, isn't just financial but the free agents, restricting movement. It is a lot to take. But most of it, I agree with the owners about. I am sick of super teams.
https://twitter.com/#!/daldridgetnt/status/127202318792925184 https://twitter.com/#!/daldridgetnt/status/127203583975366657 https://twitter.com/#!/alanhahn/status/127205192935538688 https://twitter.com/#!/alanhahn/status/127205567415599104 https://twitter.com/#!/sam_amick/status/127203193208840192
If the owners aren't willing to negotiate and have a "take it or leave it" attitude, they should just come out and say it and lock out the entire season. Then talk again next year. Jeez. And losing this season will set the NBA back a decade at least. It's on the owners right now. The players went down 5%. And as a fact, although the players started with 57% of the BRI, it's not really 57%. The owners already gotten some on top, so technically they are 50-50 right now. So if the plaeyrs go down to 52.5% as they stated, their actual part of the BRI is around 46-47%.
You're right. The big owners are willing to get a deal done if it means not missing any games, but the owners of less financially viable teams are willing to give up an entire season if that's what it takes. They can keep the big owners quiet by saying things like without us (turning a profit) your teams wouldn't make so much. I agree with the owners on a luxury tax rate that essentially serves as a hard cap. It would prevent all of these "super" team owners from taking the majority of the cake.
I'm sure Prokohorov would be willing to get this season started, so can't he just hire some Russian mafia guys and persuade those bastards in Gilbert or Sterling or Sarver? And I'm only half-joking.
This. I don't care about the money how much money they make. If after going through all the trouble and the result is the same old system, just a different split, then I'd be VERY pissed.
I've heard this said often, and I think you are mistaken. When they did the 57-43 split it was a true 57% of revenues. One of the proposals on the table by the owners WAS a 50-50 split with some taken off the top, but they are now offering a true 49-51 band it seems.
I'm just relaying what my man Max Kellerman says on his ESPN radio show. Hopefully someone can chime in on this.
If I were the union, I would make peace with the agents and then create a smoke screen by making treads of a real decertification, it seems is the only leverage they could have going for them right now. I feel scorn for the owners who would prefer a lock out, but in this lie their advantage, they can afford to not give a damn of this because this league isn't about them once games are being played.
acshen is right Kellerman is unbearable I just get my NBA updates whatever these days from stephen a's show. Stern, Billy hunter and Fisher come on his shows
These are the gentlemen responsible for the mess https://twitter.com/#!/AlexKennedyNBA/status/127229327740907520 Blazers, Spurs, Celtics, Suns and Cavs owners
A more severe luxury tax would not prevent major market teams or owners with large pockets from getting the players they want (i.e. Lakers/Mavs/Miami). It would only further prevent small market teams from getting the players or even keeping the ones they have (i.e. Blazers if they all had been healthy, OKC in a few years). It will only widen the gap between the two groups of franchises.
