I see you been drinking the Kool-aid... They get paid to play a kids game... A game that was invented because it was too cold to go outside and play.. So please don't give me the specialized skill set crap. Specialized skill set is teaching 20 to 30 kids at one time and not being paid enough for it... A skill set is working two or more jobs to feed your family and keeping a roof over your head.. NO WAY IN HELL SHOULD ANY MAN BE PAID 5 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR for a freaking kids game... No matter what the sport is... But never the fact... They are still EMPLOYEES.. Not the EMPLOYER.. They work for what ever team they play for... If you think i'm lying.. then let's see how much they will get paid this week.. They get a check from the OWNERS.. So what ever logic you come up with and how ever you want to view it.. They work for someone... so they play by that owners rules..
A kids game that people like you and I pay extremely high prices to see, even for things as simple as a hit dog? A kids game that can get our city to fund a stadium with tax payer dollars? Does your company contribute more to the economy than this kids game? You are correct. Now, if you would pay $100 to take a date to watch folks do those things then you would have a point. But since you wouldn't.... Why not, if folks pay more than that to watch it? Maybe you don't realize how much $$ is made from professional basketball. And like other employees that drive large entertainment dollars, they have a different set of rules because you and I won't pay $$ to watch most employees do their job. If they are just employees then simply replace them. End of problem. Actually, they play by a set of negotiated rules that both parties agree to. Hence our problem....they don't agree. They won't get a check this week, just like Les Alexander won't get my $$ for whatever game was supposed to be played this weekend.
Ice i have seen you debate with everyone on this thread about your views for your agreement with the players.. cool i get it you side with the players.. But the simple fact is these guys are employees that work for the owners and as for the owners.. These teams are like a hobby and most have their money invested in other companies that they own.
.....I have no idea what this is about, but I can't stand college basketball. I wouldn't pay a dime to watch those guys play, and they're still much better than me. What makes these spoiled brats so special? You pay when you go see movies, and actors are just as much spoiled brats, if not more so, as not everyone's gossiping about the private lives of b-ball players ( Kris Humphries lol). They have a rare skill set, and yes it's a rare one. If I wanted to, I could be a teacher if I put the work into it. Can't say that about a basketball player. People are willing to go see them, and pay huge money for them. I would like to clarify. Would you be okay if the NBA somehow was capable of getting in replacement players in a lockout? From my perspective, that idea is completely ethically disgusting, and I would quit being a Rockets fan immediately if Les ever did that.
The owners are set to have a meeting tomorrow to gather info to see what to do next regarding the lockout. Let's see what their gameplan is.
If I was an owner, I'd offer them 52% BRI but with basically the same system and see if they bite. We need this lockout to end badly. I can't go another month without the NBA.
A sport league is not a free market in itself. If they want to work in a free market, they are free to work for the fast food industry. Nobody is stopping them from leaving the league. You keep saying that their rights are being limited. They actually have the most fundamental right of any non-slave working person: quit their job. If the league was a free market, it could not exist. It's not even like the movie industry where anyone with enough money can start a studio and hire the movie stars. You can't just start a team even if you have money. If players are rare commodities, teams are rare commodities too. And a league is even MORE rare. By your logic, if the players deserve big money because of their "special skill set" then the league deserves even more money because of its special existence. So stop the free market rhetoric. It is NOT a free market.
Professors get paid pretty well. Unfortunately if you teach early education well that doesn't require the skill to warrant a high salary and therefore they don't get paid as much. Its simple supply and demand. If they want to they can get a phd and paid more. However they much must have an aptitude to do that, and many of those people don't have it. NBA players are the elite of the elite. And the superstars are a level above them. Look at any companies income sheet. You will see a line item for COGS. NBA players are the goods so they should get a good chunk of the change. If you are the top .001% at your profession. Whether it be law,engineering, medicine etc you get paid serious jack. How much do you think a top trader makes? Or a top surgeon? Or a top researcher?
Sports Leagues are illegal monopolies that exist due to the Collective Bargaining Agreement. There have been court decisions that have established this criteria. Do you know why intel needs amd around or why ATT got broken up? You can look through US history and US legislation over the past 100 years to see why your argument doesn't have a sound basis.
Do you or I get to dictate how the businesses WE work for conduct their finances? Hell no! Why would you allow a group a people who have no vested interest beyond their 5 year career to dictate policy? We all love rootiing for our favorite players, but lets be honest - we root for our TEAM! A team that was built decades ago and will hopefully be around for decades to come... OWNERS invested the money when the league was a crapshoot at catching on - why should some 20 year old kid get to say how the league is run? They are EMPLOYEES - if they dont like the pay or the job - go work someplace else! The NBA needs to take a page from the NFL - hardcap and lose the 100% guaranteed contracts! Want a level playing field? Screw this luxury tax BS... markets like NY will always outspend smaller markets... Want these guys to quit hanging out in clubs all night, screwin around and giving less than 100% - be able to cut 'em! NFL has issues, but when you consider how many more players - not nearly as much as the NBA and it works - ask Pac Man Jones! LOL
Thats crap! YOU can go start a league tomorrow if you want to - nobody is stopping you... ABA started, USFL, Arena football, players can go play in European league, CFL for football....
If the players want a free market, then maybe they would be happier with a promotion and relegation system. One advantage for players would be with multiple leagues there would be a number of higher paying jobs as a professional basketball player far beyond 450 now in the NBA. Of course the players also have to deal with the reality that relegated teams see drops in revenues which in turn lower salary expenditures as well as the reality that teams may actually go out of business if they can't compete. This means that, for owners, it may not prove a boon to the valuation of their teams. Currently, foreign owners of European teams are trying to push the American model on Europe. Funny how Yurp system is much more free market while the North American model is socialist/monopolist in nature. The American capitalists want their socialist sports league (complete with public subsidies) while the socialist Europeans want to keep their much more free market solution.
So... The owners and NBA lawyers are meeting today to discuss the "next step." Anyone have a clue if they will suggest a new proposal, or discuss their next step in the litigation process to win their battle in court. Lets not forget that IF the players win in court, whether its a losing battle or not, they will for sure bankrupt the NBA and its owners. I personally think the owners will try to settle. There is alot of risk involved with doing battle in court. So, what do you guys think the next step will be for the owners?
bankrupt the owners? ermm, the teams but not the owners, take for example paul allen. He'd bankrupt the blazers, now the players don't get to sue paul allen the microsoft co-founder worth 13.2b, they get to sue the now bankrupted portland trailblazers whose secured creditors (ie banks) get first dip on what would be a pretty small pie. People like Jerry Buss and Les Alexander would lose most of their net worth as its tied up in their teams and that would put in a lot of hurt, the players though, would end up with next to nothing.
A sports league is not a free market only because the players agree to have those restrictions placed upon them. In other words, you have to get them to agree to play by rules everyone else would deem unfair. So if you want your multi-billion dollar empire to succeed then you have to get them to agree to the paramaters. Just as nobody is stopping them from leaving the league, no one is stopping the owners from finding replacement players, right? As far as my comparison, the only thing you can really look at is the entertainment industry. Tom Cruise can walk in a studio and say "I'm not doing X and Z". Beyonce can walk in a record company and say "I'm not doing X and Z". The only proper comparable is a skilled entertainer that you and I will pay big $$ to watch. And in any example like that the entertainer is handsomly paid and doesn't simply do what the boss says, like most employees. I would assume it's the same for the top 1% of any field, but have no way to make that comparison.....just assuming.
But here's where that line of sinking falls apart: There is a pool of revenue generated by that freaking kids game.....why should the players, the far and a way biggest factor that anyone pays in to watch, be restricted in their cut and not the owners? Why is it right to cap a player when all that means is the owners stuff their pockets with the remainder? Owners absolutely should turn a profit....but I see a lot of folks carping that players get paid to much to play a game and have no apparent issue with each owner taking home ten times more in revenue.
I think the players should get paid, I just want them to have to earn it... I would love to remove guaranteed contracts, watch how much better the players play when their livelyhood is on the line. DD
Agreed, I have no problem seeing a guy get paid 20 million after he just left it on the court and took his team to another level. Same goes with the different levels of one million-10 or whatever. It is almost more about the principle of earning it rather than just the money. When you have guys like Rashard and Gilbert saying don't blame us, basically they are openly admitting we don't deserve this money. This system, from the agents, marketing so on is what allowed this to happen. If they made a mistake, I don't care the owners are stuck with the mistake, the worst end is that the fans are stuck with those contracts and rebulding for all years. If they need guaranteed contracts, make them shorter. If they want better contracts, put less guarantees, and more bonuses. Make the bonuses team related(team wins), you will see the locker room come together and say we need to win and develop chemistry, bc then we all win and they will boot out those bad locker room guys or people depending rolls when ev eryone gets a cool million or more to win. I remember when memphis set a rookie contract incentive to xavier henry, the writers and and eveyone else put them on full blast for being cheap. Then when they over pay, the owners should be held accountable, when they don't pay bc people aren't worth it, then the owners are cheap. The agents have a lot of ways to influence media nad players but its sad to see the road it has gone down. Damn you NBA, why am I so attached to you?!
I meant bankrupt the teams, not necessarily the owners in all cases. I know that the owner of the Nets(forget how to spell his name, sorry) has the liquid assets to cover a major loss. However, I assume about half of the owners would really feel the pinch if they had to bankrupt their franchises. If the teams are considered private franchises, its in the best interest of the owner to do everything he can to not go under because more than likely, depending on the contract they have with the NBA, they could very well have personal liability or joint and several liability with their franchise. Im not sure how small that pie is that you mention coming from the banks before the banks can sieze personal assets. Of course, I dont know the details of an NBA franchise contract, but I assume the owners have pretty decent coverage like you mention. However I still think that they will try one more time to settle if they think there is a real possibility of losing in court. If there is say a 15% chance, then its worth it to try and settle IMO. -As for the players, they are missing paychecks yes, but what is their debt. Id guess about 50% of the players are carrying a debt less than 1 million dollars. With maybe 2% of players carrying a debt over that, and those players probably have major endorsements and the ability to play overseas. Some might have to file bankrupcy but not at the price of 50 million dollars that the government can sieze from my personal assets. Which is a pretty conservative dollar amount that each owner would have to give up if they have a personal or joint and several guarantee. The players do have the ability to wipe their hands clean from the NBA if the NBA implodes, and I have yet to hear about a scenario where the NBA sues the players for 2 Billion dollars in damages.
