Fans Need to Support the Players

Doesn't matter it it's a mom and pop, Gov, fortune 500 or sports enterprise... The fact remains the same.. You have Employer and employee..

Now the NBA is a union which means like any other Union you have to negotiate when both sides don't agree... This is not a new concept, it's been around for a long time until Ronald Reagan busted them up.

Yes the players make a great deal of money and yes they hold a small chip... But I guarantee you the NBA will move forward with or without them.. This has been proven in the past with the NFL and NBA Referee's..

Now will the owners lose money? Yes they will.. But like any company with a product you learn how to re-market yourself...

For some reason people think that the owners and players are partners and their not.. Players are employee's and like any other company they can be replaced.

T_Man

 

This not true look at the post jordan ratings for proof. Why does no one watch the xfl or UFL?

 

I'll address a bit of this.

1. The NBA is fueled more by hype than real actual playing ability. Derrick Rose captured way more fans than Dwight Howard, who is undoubtedly the superior player. If a mass exodus of the top talent somehow happens, I don't think the NBA will suffer long term consequences. Sure, people might miss Kobe and Lebron and Wade, but in a couple of years new Durant clones will be dunking on the court and hitting fade away 3s. You may think you pay to see the players, but the truth is you pay to get entertained by watching basketball, and that's something the league can always provide you.

I think I know what I'm watching for 48 minutes, 82 days a year. (Derrick Rose is a better point guard than Dwight Howard!)

"If a mass exodus of the top talent somehow happens, I don't think the NBA will suffer long term consequences"

Oh, really? With all due respect, I ardently disagree. You can bet there would be long term consequences. I can't believe you're serious. Look, people tend to be loyal to their city's franchise, and identify with their team's players. They even identify, to a degree, with the guys their team goes up against. Of course they would miss them. You aren't talking about a big trade and the consequences. I think you exaggerate the hype and don't give nearly enough credit to the people who play ball.

2. Not every player can afford the lockout. Most of these NBA players are living paycheck to paycheck, they need their salaries to pay the interest on the houses and cars they bought. The owners OTH are millionaires who can afford to let their team sit if they don't have to pay salaries. It may be a poker game, but the owners have 4 aces and the players only have a spare.

I think most of the players will be OK. They'll be able to "feed their family." It'll hurt, but they can manage.

3. People will always watch what's available to them. If the only food you know is ****, would you think it tastes bad? If these players leave the country majority of the fans will forget who they are, esp. if the league counters by having multiple drafts every year to fill the roster space. Players are never in short supply, every year you have a new generation coming out every year, however there is only one NBA.

I couldn't disagree more. I pay a lot of money every year so I can watch the Rockets in Austin, and it lets me watch other NBA games, as well. Do you seriously think we can just replace the players and not notice? Really?

4. March Madness has proved that as long as the marketing is solid, you can make crappy b-ball seem more exciting than a league with better players. I watched some NCAA games, and those players were terrible, yet their ratings are on par or even higher than the NBA.

Now I really don't understand you. Sure, there are some clunkers, but March Madness is a success because you get to watch great basketball. Marketing? It's part of our way of life. It's all around us, but when they lace them up and get on the court, it's basketball.

 

I tend to agree with roslolian.