Basketball lockout

[NeutralGuy]

What do you think of the NBA lockout?

I for one don't understand how all these rich people fighting for more money for themselves. If the players cared about anybody but themselves they would be fighting for lower ticket prices. Its absurd a game a costs 400-800 for a family of four.

Also there is approximately 8-17 teams in the NBA that lose money. Let me repeat that, LOSE MONEY. and these ballplayers who don't even "work" for a living think they should make more? Sorry but companies are not in the business of losing money.

[Kutra]

Both sides are greedy. Players not willing to take a pay cut when a lot of people were forced to because of the economy is funny. The owners asking for the players to take less than 50% is funny especially when a lot of the owners bitching are from bad teams/contract they created. The thought of creating parity is funny. (if you want parity shorten the season and make the playoffs single elimination). The whole thing is one funny joke and I, as a fan, have to "suffer" because of these idiots.

[NeutralGuy]

Both sides are greedy. Players not willing to take a pay cut when a lot of people were forced to because of the economy is funny. The owners asking for the players to take less than 50% is funny especially when a lot of the owners bitching are from bad teams/contract they created. The thought of creating parity is funny. (if you want parity shorten the season and make the playoffs single elimination). The whole thing is one funny joke and I, as a fan, have to "suffer" because of these idiots.

Heres the thing... they will always be "bad teams". A league would be no fun if everybody was 50% w/l. Just because your team is not winning does not mean you should lose $. The players never lose money, win or lose. Why should only the owners be on the hook? Somebody please explain the logic behind that.

[Kutra]

Heres the thing... they will always be "bad teams". A league would be no fun if everybody was 50% w/l. Just because your team is not winning does not mean you should lose $. The players never lose money, win or lose. Why should only the owners be on the hook? Somebody please explain the logic behind that.

Did you even read my post? I think they're both idiots. I don't believe they can achieve parity, but if they molded themselves more after the NFL they would get more of the effect they want. Shocking but the owner actually own the product they are putting out... if the team is bad and people don't want to pay to having anything to do with the product that's on the owners. The players will seek out the best possible money but they themselves can't give themselves bloated contracts. I think 50/50 on the BRI is more than fair. I also recognize that not all situations are the same, some owners have teams just in unappealing cities, some shovel out horrible contracts, etc. If you want to talk to people far more knowledgeable and opinionated on the topic I love the realgm forums http://forums.realgm.com/boards/view...2810fcdae7666e

[Skippy88]

I think the scary part for me is they are no where close to getting a deal done and it sounds like no one is budging from their positions. If they don't get their asses in gear the season is going to be toast and nobody wins.

[YoungRider]

I think it's an over rated sport full of over paid guys with moderate talent in a sport no one would really miss if it went away. Going to it would just be something to do on a Saturday.

[NeutralGuy]

Did you even read my post? I think they're both idiots. I don't believe they can achieve parity, but if they molded themselves more after the NFL they would get more of the effect they want. Shocking but the owner actually own the product they are putting out... if the team is bad and people don't want to pay to having anything to do with the product that's on the owners. The players will seek out the best possible money but they themselves can't give themselves bloated contracts. I think 50/50 on the BRI is more than fair. I also recognize that not all situations are the same, some owners have teams just in unappealing cities, some shovel out horrible contracts, etc. If you want to talk to people far more knowledgeable and opinionated on the topic I love the realgm forums http://forums.realgm.com/boards/view...2810fcdae7666e

I dont think you understand how an union operates. The owners don't set the wages, wages are negotiated. Only in a perfect world would owners set the pay.

---------- Post added 2011-11-11 at 10:51 AM ----------

I think the scary part for me is they are no where close to getting a deal done and it sounds like no one is budging from their positions. If they don't get their asses in gear the season is going to be toast and nobody wins.

Me and youngrider here do. I can care less about the season. My interest is from a business perspective.

[Fuzzzie]

It's a good thing this is the NBA. I don't think the NHL or MLB could survive another lockout.

[Masqerader]

i dont think then nba will survive this one.. i dont get why players need any part of the damn revenue.. you get paid to play basketball, endorsement deals.. i mean most bench players make like 6 million a season..

[Fuzzzie]

i dont think then nba will survive this one.. i dont get why players need any part of the damn revenue.. you get paid to play basketball, endorsement deals.. i mean most bench players make like 6 million a season..

Which is sad. Hockey players avg around 1.5-1.8 million. Most young players are only in the 500-800k range. Not that it's anything to sneeze at mind you. Still, when you consider the abuse they take, it's not much.

[Bathory]

Give the players 2million each. All sports. Flat rate. If they don't like it, they can quit. I'm sure there will be plenty of SKILLED people lining up.

[Papapwn]

You guys obviously dont know what you are talking about. Most bench players do NOT make 6M or more a year. They make way less. Also the players make the game. The owners dont make or break the game and its entertainment value. Sure they provide the players with an arena and a league, but that really isnt what drives people into the game. Its the players that do and thus they deserve more than the owners.

Look at micheal jordan for an example, this fool fought for the players in the last lockout and now he turns on them just because now hes an owner and everything he stood for suddenly changed. Why? Because he wants more money and hes an owner now. Atleast stick to your principals.

Also its false that the teams are losing money. Its all talk. Would you run a business that is loosing money every year? These guys who own the teams are successful businessmen. They wont run an organization that is losing money for them every single year. Sure 1-2 years happens. Thats part of business.

Micheal Jordan himself said that if you are losing money as an owner than you shouldnt continue the team and stop. He contradicts himself here where apparently the bobcats are losing money and yet he goes on. (This isnt the exact quote but it was similar)

---------- Post added 2011-11-11 at 08:24 PM ----------

I think it's an over rated sport full of over paid guys with moderate talent in a sport no one would really miss if it went away. Going to it would just be something to do on a Saturday.

I think you are talking about american football =)

[Skippy88]

It's a good thing this is the NBA. I don't think the NHL or MLB could survive another lockout.

The Maple Leafs would. You could have 5 years old playing and the place would still sell out. lol

[Twiddly]

Tell me when the playoffs start! (How I feel about baseball, basketball, and soccer, but for soccer replace playoffs with world cup)

[Cheddabezze]

Give the players 2million each. All sports. Flat rate. If they don't like it, they can quit. I'm sure there will be plenty of SKILLED people lining up.

^^^As 'out-landish' this post may seem. ^^^

It seems it could work. Maybe.

[RollTide]

i dont think then nba will survive this one.. i dont get why players need any part of the damn revenue.. you get paid to play basketball, endorsement deals.. i mean most bench players make like 6 million a season..

Of course it will. The NBA is insanely popular. If the NHL could survive a lockout, the NBA has nothing to worry about. The very worst that could happen is maybe the MLB leapfrogs back to the number two sport in America again. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The NBA runs on a very broken system. If you look it up, it's really apparent. It needs fixed. Hopefully this stoppage will help to fix it.

[Tnep]

I think you are talking about american football =)

Maybe for you, but in America, REAL football is adored by many. Honestly, and I know a lot of people would disagree, but I think hockey and ACTUAL football (not soccer) are the only real sports. All the other sports just have players and a ball of some sort; football has almost constant action, plenty of contact, and is enjoyable for practically the whole 60 minutes.

OT: I could care less about the lockout. I really find basketball boring and tedious to watch. It's 10 guys, either attempting to throw a basketball through a hoop or defend against said person. Where's the action? I'd much rather see someone getting his teeth knocked out. You can replace football with rugby, as the hitting is just as fun to watch.

Also, these basketball and baseball players that are getting payed outrageous sums:they need to play some football and see how it feels getting hit; they could even play some hockey and get checked into the glass. The only people that deserve their pay, are football and hockey players. I just think these guys couldn't survive playing a real game for 60 minutes and that's why they decided to take it easy and play basketball/baseball.

[Radux]

One and only warning. Do NOT derail this into soccer/football crap. Not only is it not relevant towards this thread, but it's against the sports/fitness forum rules -- it just stirs shit up. Don't do it. Further occurrences will be infracted.

[Elbren]

You guys obviously dont know what you are talking about. Most bench players do NOT make 6M or more a year. They make way less. Also the players make the game. The owners dont make or break the game and its entertainment value. Sure they provide the players with an arena and a league, but that really isnt what drives people into the game. Its the players that do and thus they deserve more than the owners.

Look at micheal jordan for an example, this fool fought for the players in the last lockout and now he turns on them just because now hes an owner and everything he stood for suddenly changed. Why? Because he wants more money and hes an owner now. Atleast stick to your principals.

Also its false that the teams are losing money. Its all talk. Would you run a business that is loosing money every year? These guys who own the teams are successful businessmen. They wont run an organization that is losing money for them every single year. Sure 1-2 years happens. Thats part of business.

Micheal Jordan himself said that if you are losing money as an owner than you shouldnt continue the team and stop. He contradicts himself here where apparently the bobcats are losing money and yet he goes on. (This isnt the exact quote but it was similar)

While every bench player may not make $6 Mil. a year, the average NBA player made $5.84 Mil. in the 2009-2010 season despite the fact that the NBA is only the 3rd biggest sport in the US (and they're quickly losing that spot to MLS). In comparison, the average MLB player made $3 Mil. in the 2010 season; almost half as much as NBA players despite MLB clearly being the more successful/profitable sport. People can debate how 'popular' basketball is until they're blue in the face; the fact is it doesn't even come anywhere close to making the type of money that MLB or the NFL does. The players make way too much, the season is too long, the playoffs are too long and something like 1/3 of the teams in the league are in the red. That's not good business.

Also, the players don't 'make the game'. The sport is always bigger than the player. The NBA kept going after Bird and Magic retired. It kept going after Michael Jordan 'retired'. It kept going after Jordan came back and retired again. It kept going after any number of legendary players left the game and it'll keep going now as long as the players wise up. Fans will always find players to attach themselves to. The MLBPA found that out in '95 when baseball started spring training with replacement players.

As for Michael Jordan, I'm sure his stance change has something to do with the fact that he owns a team that is hemorrhaging money. There's no easy, quick-fix way to change that; especially for so many teams. What is he (and other owners) supposed to do? Just close their doors, fire everyone and walk away? They definitely can't just sell the team. They basically have little/no value, they're clearly in the red and whoever takes it on would be stuck in a failing business model that they can't individually change. They're stuck with the salary cap and whatever the League and NBAPA allow them to do. This is one of the biggest problems Hockey had and one they continued to have well into their lockout; players just refused to believe it and it almost killed their sport. Yes, all of the owners have money (that's how they bought the teams in the first place) but they're not just going to keep throwing their own money back into the teams; they're money pits.

- won't use money from their other business ventures. Whats the point of using a successful, profitable business just to fund an unprofitable one? Especially when there's little/no hope of seeing a return on that investment under the current business model? That's without even getting into the fact that it's probably not even legal to just take money out of a company just to spend it on something else that the owner/CEO/etc. may personally own.

- they're not going to use use their own money. What in the world would be the point of that? You're going to just throw all of your families money into something that clearly shows no sign of being profitable? A lot of their 'wealth' I'd imagine is tied up in assets; not actual cash. So are you going to start selling off profitable businesses, or even worse, your own families home(s) and belongings just to try and keep a sports team afloat?


No offense, but you clearly sound like someone who has no concept of money or business.

[conscript]

While every bench player may not make $6 Mil. a year, the average NBA player made $5.84 Mil. in the 2009-2010 season despite the fact that the NBA is only the 3rd biggest sport in the US (and they're quickly losing that spot to MLS). In comparison, the average MLB player made $3 Mil. in the 2010 season; almost half as much as NBA players despite MLB clearly being the more successful/profitable sport. People can debate how 'popular' basketball is until they're blue in the face; the fact is it doesn't even come anywhere close to making the type of money that MLB or the NFL does. The players make way too much, the season is too long, the playoffs are too long and something like 1/3 of the teams in the league are in the red. That's not good business.

The MLS being the third biggest sport is crap btw. Attendance means about nothing when it comes to talking about most profitable league. MLS games simply seat more people. The TV ratings for the MLS are laughably bad and that is where all of the money is made nowadays.

The owners are so phenomenally stupid during this lockout. They are holding the players at the edge of cancelling the season for a percent or two even though a week ago they changed an exception in the CBA for alternate player costs that will end up costing them MORE than they will gain from the 2% difference. They could have left that clause the way it was, agreed to 52% and ended up with more money in their pockets in the end. I can't blame the owners for wanting more of the money, who wouldn't? I don't buy the line the a bunch of teams aren't profitable, especially when its their own damn fault for overpaying players, but they are business men so of course they are going to want to make money. The NBA has problems to work out for sure. They can't have owners like Cuban spending massively over the "cap" into the luxury tax area because he can. They can't have owners like Nolan in New York spending like crazy and driving up the contract values of mediocre talent because they have no concept of money and haven't worked a day in their life to earn what they inherited from daddy. They need to have some sort of enforceable balance.

But to be honest, it doesn't matter. A hard cap isn't going to bring parity into the NBA. The NBA has NEVER had parity. The Spurs, a small market team, dominated the early 2000s. The Lakers have had streaks of dominance that lasted years. Same for the Celtics, Pistons, etc.