Not if you own the league and have seen other costs go up, coaching, scouting etc...and can not be held in check by an antiquated BRI agreement. The Union has no leverage. DD
Bingo! I agree with this. But I want to add one thing here. Think about some of these owners. Dan Gilbert, Paul Allen... Their names have been tossed around as bad guys here and I think they deserve some attention as such- What incentive does a billionaire have to negotiate JUST to have another 15 win season? What incentive does a billionaire have to have another average season with bad contracts (on injury plagued stars) attached? These guys are more concerned about their egos than their losses in dollar figures. They are more concerned about how badly their feelings are still hurt after their franchise player left or got injured. The money is meaningless. They have yachts worth as much as these franchises. The lockout will not be fixed until owners like these two are overran by the other owners and by (I hate to say it) David Stern and his desire to make a deal for the preservation of the league. Right now these owners don't want to negotiate, and they are the ones in control. They want to look like they are negotiating so the public isn't upset at them. They want to see the players squirm just to feel better about themselves. And as we blame the players they sit quietly behind their castle walls snickering about how the players are taking the brunt of this. THEY are the reason this is a lockout. THEY are the filth more concerned about their pride than millions of peoples release from this economy and this society - not to mention all the people they are making unemployed.
DD you are right those cost have gone up and revenue sharing should pay for part of that cost as well as a reasonable player BRI drop. Every team that plays the lakers should get half of the TV revenue for that game. Lakers are not out there playing 5 on 5 with their 15 man roster. They are playing a whole other team who should get some kind of compensation for fielding a competitive NBA roster.
How many owners fall into the criteria you just mentioned? Quite a few. Funny thing is, the wealthiest owners who can afford to pay well over the lux tax for a good team are on the other side of the spectrum. So exactly which owner is dying to start the season? And you think the players have any leverage??? Seriously? You think missing a season for an owner has anywhere near the impact it has for a player? Do you have any idea the difference in value between owners and players? You do realize a player's window for revenue is FAR shorter than that of an owners? A missed season for the owners is nothing but a small hitch if in the end they break the union, fix the system, and profit more. I don't care if Dan Gilbert is a bad guy give me a ******* break. Your entire argument is predicated on emotion. There is just no arguing with you people.
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski A league source wired into bargaining session tells Y!: "There's a deal to be had if everyone shows a little flexibility."
The thing is with competitive balane the Lakers probably would not be 10 deep, some of those guys would be starting on other teams, and thus...a more competitive league is born. DD
3 hours and counting so far today... Fingers Crossed- http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/216216/NBA_Exploring_Plans_To_Extend_Season_Through_Late_April http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/216214/Hands_Could_Shake_On_New_Deal_By_End_Of_Friday http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2011/10/28/its-go-time-in-nba-talks/?ls=iref:nbahpt1
The NBA lives and dies with its superstars. Its ratings and popularity improves when one or two teams with a "larger-than-life" player dominates the league. Pure competitive balance is not what attracts the casual sports fan, and to think it will help the bottom line of the league given the history of the NBA is highly idealistic.
NFL vs MLB Take a look at the popularity of those games and see which one is winning in popularity. Stars will still make their money and drive the league, but teams that stockpile stars will not be able to do that..... You would not have a Miami with a hard cap, they could not afford it. It would force the stars to spread out and lead instead of puss out and team up. Better league overall, IMO. DD
DD. I'm not disagreeing that for the avid basketball fan who wants every team to be competitive and relavant, it makes the games more interesting. But the avid basketball will watch the NBA generally no matter what. Expansion of ratings and revenue though are driven by the casual sports fan and the not-really-into-sports fan more than the fair weather fan, unless that fair weather fan is a fan of the huge market like LA, Chicago, or NYC. If the owners are complaining about their profitability, they should not be worried about "competitive balance". Instead they should be fully behind revenue sharing. Also, a team hard cap only prevents superstars from joining if there are NO individual player salary caps.
THERE WILL BE NO NBA IF THEY DON'T FIX THIS.....there will be contraction, teams will start to die in smaller markets, the game will wane in popularity. This is not funny, the NFL works because small markets like Green Bay can compete.....baseball is dying because for the most part outside of a few outliers with young players, the best players are all concentrated on a few teams. The fans lose out - the NBA needs to share revenue, institute a cap, and get rid of guaranteed contracts.......and since number 3 is not going to happen they need to hold the line at the other two. DD
Players are stupid. They are going to lose, so why lose even worse by missing paychecks? In the end, the owners will get what they want. They might get even more if the players don't wake up.
