NBA Lockout thread

[salsadancer7]

An entire day of discussion and they did not touch the cap issue? Wonderful.

Go to 50/50 people. DO IT!


Sandra

That's what I said. When Broussard reported this after 16 HOURS of being locked in a room...I thought this is a great big song and dance for the federal mediator. IF it wasn't because they mediator FORCED them to comeback today, I would have called it a huge waste of time.

Like I said, they should have been locked up like this MONTHS ago. Especially when BOTH side new this was coming.

 

[SandraC]

That's what I said. When Broussard reported this after 16 HOURS of being locked in a room...I thought this is a great big song and dance for the federal mediator. IF it wasn't because they mediator FORCED them to comeback today, I would have called it a huge waste of time.

Like I said, they should have been locked up like this MONTHS ago. Especially when BOTH side new this was coming.

50/50. Go to 50/50 players...and you may not have to be locked up for very long.


Sandra

 

[salsadancer7]

50/50. Go to 50/50 players...and you may not have to be locked up for very long.


Sandra

Yep. After that, it would be a down hill ride.

 

[televisionarchives]

Comparing this to other strikes, this is hardly getting any media attention.

 

[salsadancer7]

Comparing this to other strikes, this is hardly getting any media attention.

The NBA is not the fan favorite like the NFL or the "national past time".

 

[CK SatGuy]

The NBA is not the fan favorite like the NFL or the "national past time".

The NBA used to be more popular when Michael Jordan was playing in the 90s. Since he retired, it's just gone downhill.

 

[SandraC]

Comparing this to other strikes, this is hardly getting any media attention.

In the NFL the two sides were fighting over profits. In the NBA they are trying to fix a business model that resulted in losses for a majority of the teams.


Sandra

 

[salsadancer7]

In the NFL the two sides were fighting over profits. In the NBA they are trying to fix a business model that resulted in losses for a majority of the teams.


Sandra

I will continue to agree to disagree on you statement. I will say it is all about the profits...IMHO.

 

[SandraC]

I will continue to agree to disagree on you statement. I will say it is all about the profits...IMHO.

You can discuss profits if you like. No problem.

The players and the league are discussing how to fix the business model that results in losses for too many teams.


Sandra

 

[salsadancer7]

You can discuss profits if you like. No problem.

The players and the league are discussing how to fix the business model that results in losses for too many teams.


Sandra

Come on Sandra....you know it's ALL about the revenue and who SHOULD get the bigger piece of the pie. That whole "fixing the business model" is spin for the owners to get sympathy from fans. YES, there is issue with how the NBA conducts business...it's called writing HUGE checks to players that do not deserve it...driving up the market for the rest of the league.

But I will stop to avoid that merry-go-round vortex and once again state, I agree to disagree.

 

[SandraC]

Come on Sandra....you know it's ALL about the revenue and who SHOULD get the bigger piece of the pie. That whole "fixing the business model" is spin for the owners to get sympathy from fans. YES, there is issue with how the NBA conducts business...it's called writing HUGE checks to players that do not deserve it...driving up the market for the rest of the league.

But I will stop to avoid that merry-go-round vortex and once again state, I agree to disagree.

Well, even the players have agreed that some teams are losing money, which is why they lowered their demand from the 57/43 split in favor of the players to a 53/47 split in the first place. You can call it 'spin' if you like, but the fact is that the business model does not work for a majority of the teams...and players recognize that.


Sandra

 

[televisionarchives]

When I see that 17 out of 30 teams lost money that would alarm me about the health of the NBA as a profitable business. Only 2 NFL teams lost money and one of them might not this year(Detroit).

When I see debates about the strike I usually see the people take the players side because the owners are "rich". That's why people who run a company or are self-employed might side with the owners. But one of the reasons owners become wealthy is because of what they did before they purchased a team. If I owned a NBA team and it wasn't profitable I would sell it. I'm only guessing that some owners keep it because they love basketball.

 

[salsadancer7]

When I see that 17 out of 30 teams lost money that would alarm me about the health of the NBA as a profitable business. Only 2 NFL teams lost money and one of them might not this year(Detroit).

When I see debates about the strike I usually see the people take the players side because the owners are "rich". That's why people who run a company or are self-employed might side with the owners. But one of the reasons owners become wealthy is because of what they did before they purchased a team. If I owned a NBA team and it wasn't profitable I would sell it. I'm only guessing that some owners keep it because they love basketball.

On the contrary, fans rarely take the side of the player because quite honestly, they cannot get over someone making $4 million a year in salary while they have a tough time making ends meet. The fans have no issues taking the side of the sometimes billionaire(but in most cases a millionaire 100 times over) because of course, they think owners take ALL the risk, when in reality, they do not. Do the owners take risk financially, absolutely, but then when is picking up the burden? Not the owners, it's the fans with $9-10 beers an $8-10 dollar hamb burgers. How many owners have payed for their own stadium? Not many if any at all. Who took the risk to build that stadium? The fans of that city, county and state with long term bobds and special taxes. I think the owners have to be held accountable for huge dumbass contract that they sign....something the media and fans do not. Now they WILL hold a playing accountable when they sign that contract..but never the owners. There is PLENTY of money to go around in the NBA...there is NO REASON that IF they want to be successful "business partners", they are gonna have to go 50-50....simple as that.

Damn....sorry for the rant.....:rant:

 

[meStevo]

You don't build arenas for concerts and events, you build them for your team(s) and there are a lot of benefits to having an operating franchise in your city. Every time you rail against owners you make it sound like they prey on communities to get these things built and there is zero benefit to the area they are built in, which is simply not the case.

 

[SandraC]

there is NO REASON that IF they want to be successful "business partners", they are gonna have to go 50-50....simple as that.

So you agree that the business model doesn't work at the current 57/43 split in favor of the players.

Or at the 53/47 split the players are currently demanding. Got it. Thank you.


Sandra

 

[televisionarchives]

On the contrary, fans rarely take the side of the player because quite honestly, they cannot get over someone making $4 million a year in salary while they have a tough time making ends meet. The fans have no issues taking the side of the sometimes billionaire(but in most cases a millionaire 100 times over) because of course, they think owners take ALL the risk, when in reality, they do not. Do the owners take risk financially, absolutely, but then when is picking up the burden? Not the owners, it's the fans with $9-10 beers an $8-10 dollar hamb burgers. How many owners have payed for their own stadium? Not many if any at all. Who took the risk to build that stadium? The fans of that city, county and state with long term bobds and special taxes. I think the owners have to be held accountable for huge dumbass contract that they sign....something the media and fans do not. Now they WILL hold a playing accountable when they sign that contract..but never the owners. There is PLENTY of money to go around in the NBA...there is NO REASON that IF they want to be successful "business partners", they are gonna have to go 50-50....simple as that.

Damn....sorry for the rant.....:rant:

That I blame on the fans. If they stopped going and paying for the beer and food what would happen? I agree that the players are overpaid but look at movie star salaries compared to teachers. Life is not fair.

 

[salsadancer7]

You don't build arenas for concerts and events, you build them for your team(s) and there are a lot of benefits to having an operating franchise in your city. Every time you rail against owners you make it sound like they prey on communities to get these things built and there is zero benefit to the area they are built in, which is simply not the case.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth. At NO POINT did I ever state there is zero benefit. What I have stated..and always have stated, is that the owner does not take 'all the risk' as percieved. City, counties and states take MOST of the financial risk involved in building areas....regardless of the sport...but I will keep it on the NBA for now.

I think you are way too intelligent to think there aren't owners that do "prey" on mayors, city commisioners and governors. You are smart than that.

 

[salsadancer7]

That I blame on the fans. If they stopped going and paying for the beer and food what would happen? I agree that the players are overpaid but look at movie star salaries compared to teachers. Life is not fair.

This is one of the reasons I side with players most of the time(I did think the NBA players had an unfair 57-43 advantage in the basketball related revenue department and should be 50-50) because the NBA has only 450 "positions" all together. IF you are considered one the BEST in the ENTIRE world at your field...do you feel you should be compensated as much? Take the emotion out of the equation... If you are the top ANYTHING, you will always be compensated the same because of simple supply and demand. Same thing applies in sports.

I do not know what you do for a living, but if you were the very best at what you did, and the bar is set extraordinarily high by those that manage/supervisor your field of talent...is that YOUR fault? NOPE. Same applies in the NBA. They are the best at what they do AND the owners have set the bar.

 

[SandraC]

This is one of the reasons I side with players most of the time(I did think the NBA players had an unfair 57-43 advantage in the basketball related revenue department and should be 50-50) because the NBA has only 450 "positions" all together. IF you are considered one the BEST in the ENTIRE world at your field...do you feel you should be compensated as much? Take the emotion out of the equation... If you are the top ANYTHING, you will always be compensated the same because of simple supply and demand. Same thing applies in sports.

I do not know what you do for a living, but if you were the very best at what you did, and the bar is set extraordinarily high by those that manage/supervisor your field of talent...is that YOUR fault? NOPE. Same applies in the NBA. They are the best at what they do AND the owners have set the bar.

Doesn't address the great point televisionarchives made. NOBODY is forcing you or anybody else to spend a large amount on tickets, or $8 for a hamburger. That is a choice YOU (meaning all fans) make freely.


Sandra

 

[salsadancer7]

Doesn't address the great point televisionarchives made. NOBODY is forcing you or anybody else to spend a large amount on tickets, or $8 for a hamburger. That is a choice YOU (meaning all fans) make freely.


Sandra

And NOBODY is forcing the owners to pay Michael Redd and Gilbert Arenas more than Lebron, Wade, Dirk, Anthony and Paul....that was the choice the OWNERS made....aslo freely. And more than likely, because of those super intelligent contracts..the fans of THOSE teams where Gilbert and Michael Redd play, probably had to deal with a price hike as well as food and beverage.

But let's stop there. We agree to disagree.