It's easy to holler GREED! It's easy to say "they're being selfish and pety but what would you do if your boss announce that he is going to take back every benefit and incentive he offered you to work for him? What if your boss decided that after he made questionable and highly risky business decisions that loss money that your pay would be cut to make up the difference? What would you do? Probably exactly what the NBA players are doing. Drawing a line in the sand and saying "NO MORE".
Take the same business model that is the proposed model of the CBA and apply it to your job and work situation and you would be just as upset as the players. I concede that the the priority of business is to turn a profit but not at the expense of the employees that make it possible. No fan has ever purchased a ticket to a NBA game with the hope of seeing Dan Gilbert in his press box. In a business that money is made by the product that the players put out 82+ games each season, billions of dollars are generated. From jerseys to shoes, the NBA is almost a " right to print money" organization. Be it cable of satellite tv NBA game packages or attending a live game, the NBA has made money. Maybe not as much as they would like but it has been steady.
Since the last work stoppage, players has come and gone. We have seen outstanding games like game 7 of the 2000 Western Conference Finals and the entire 2009 Finals. Through all of that we, the fans, are told that we can't have games anymore because one side wants the other to give up everything they have worked for and earned.
No one held a gun to any owners head and made him sign a player to a contract. Whether or not a players was over paid is no real fault of the player but you shouldn't be able to take it away because of failed expectations either. When a person makes a decision, they have to live with the consequences, good or bad. Each contract is a risk. Any player could get hurt at any time and be lost for the season but still teams take he chance. In any business, there is risk and sometimes failures happen.
In the economy that we have been in for the last few years it is expected for less people to spend money at NBA games and NBA apparel. That always has been a part of life in business in the world we live in. So when the players went to the table and offered to come down to 54% that should have shown the owners that the players recognized hat there should be some concessions made from there side. Instead of being appreciative, the owners "saw blood" and wanted more. The owners latest proposal basically takes away money and power from the players. What the players are asking for is no different then you or I having out sick and vacation days taken away. No more 401k and medical insurance. None of us would stand for it either so why should the players? We may not ever be able to understand having the amounts of money being fought over but the economics are the same. The zeros don't change in the big picture. No employer should be able to tell an employee that to give 100% for less money. To drive the business but not have a share in the reward. Most NBA players have experienced this: in college but that's for another time. You don't have to agree with me but you know I'm right.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Saturday, October 29, 2011
A True Fall Classic
St. Louis drew the Philadelphia Phillies. The team many picked to win it all at the beginning of the season and had the best regular season record. The Cards stayed hot and won the Division Series in 5 games. Manager Tony La Russa kept his team believing in themselves as the prepared to play their division rival Milwaukee Brewers. La Russa said, "Anything can happen if we can continue to play hard and play together, anything." Let's be honest, know one really thought the Cardinals would get past the Brewers but then David Freese went nuclear.
Virtually unknown, this St. Louis native was quietly living the existence and a hometown hero no one had heard of. Most people thought his play in game 4, with 4 RBIs and a HR, was an aberration. After the NLCS, we all know, he was just getting started. Freese battered the Brewers pitching staff hitting .545 with 3 HRs and 9 RBIs in 6 games. Unknown no more, the Cards 3rd baseman was named NLCS MVP. After an improbable finish to make the playoffs, The Cardinals had beaten the best in the NL and were in the World Series for the 3rd time in 7 years.
The first 7 game World Series since 2002 and was just as good. Truly a Fall Classic for the ages. And just like in 2002, game 6 will go down as one of the greatest games in World Series history. It is true that heroes are made in October. Congrats to the 2011 World Series Champion St. Louis Cardinals. What a great run, what a great season!!D!
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Competitive Balance vs Parody....
With this 100+ day NBA lockout, many of us are forced to think about great seasons past. Magic's rookie year, the ShowTime Lakers, Isiah from '88-'90, Jordan and the Bulls in the '90s, the Spurs from '99 on. I could go and on but you get my point. Coming off, probably the best NBA season in a few years, this lockout has been a slap in the face to fans. Not pointing in one direction or the other, but the fans have been and after thought. We all recall our favorite seasons and teams. I remember exactly where I was when the Bulls won championships. I remember being at 6th grade camp when the Pistons beat the Lakers in 1989. I remember that terrible day in '93 when Jordan retired for the first time. We all remember that day in March 1995 when Jordan came back! Now, as I gather all this info regarding this lockout, I start to break things down.
The owners want more competitive balance. They must have found this term right next to "the tuck rule" in the NFL. I can't remember when the league was balanced. First stat, and really the only one that matters, is since 1980, nine teams have won the NBA Finals. Go ahead and Google it, I did. Nine teams, Lakers, Celtics, 76ers, Pistons, Bulls, Rockets, Spurs, Heat and Mavs. That isn't competitive considering there are 30 teams. I will even throw in that if you count the losers of the NBA Finals, then the total is 16. So the list would include the Blazers, Suns, Knicks, Magic, Pacers, Nets, Cavs and Blazers. So, over the last 32 years, only half the league has made it to the Finals. Is that not parody? The Suns, Magic, Heat, Rockets, Blazer, Nets and Pacers have been less then 3 times during this time so that brings the list to 8 with the Rockets being the only team to win. The Rockets won in '94 and '95 and Houston isn't a major market either.
Let's look at markets. Obviously, LA, Texas and New York are the big 3 markets. You can include Boston, Florida and Illinois as well. Florida and Texas are combined in the market number (The reason for this is even though the populations are big, the sports teams are not that far spread out and often share TV time and/or have deals in place as to not have overlap. Its just how the markets are reported. Most of the numbers out of Illinois are the Chicago numbers). The problem with all of this is, population numbers don't matter. Most people want to see certain players regardless of what team they are on. The Lakers/Pistons Finals in 2004, has been the highest rated Finals since the 1998 Finals. Ratings for the Finals have been dropping since '98. Some feel it was the change from NBC to ABC but this is only partially right. Ratings started dropping due to the shortened '99 season. There was a small drop in '00 but that was the Lakers first of three championships and ratings went up in '01, but that was short lived. Let's face it though, no one wanted to watch the Pacers get blown out. The Spurs have won 4 championships but each year they won, the ratings were the lowest in the history of the NBA. No one outside of San Antonio wanted to watch the Spurs. Ratings didn't climb again until the 2009 season, which included the Lakers/Celtics. Well that figures. But the 2011 Finals ratings were best since that '04 Finals. The leagues became fun to watch again and fans were going crazy over all the good play. Now this damn lockout has erased all of that.
The fans don't want balance. Fans want to see their favorite players. People are tired of the Spurs, Celtics and Lakers and want to see the Thunder, Bulls, and Knicks. fans are also cheering for anyone who plays the Heat. If you really think about it, this lockout is really about the owners and the fact that the owners don't like each other nor do they want to share anything. Owners like Cuban and the OKC ownership are hated because they no how to conduct business in a way to make their teams competitive. Remember how people said that Memphis was stupid for giving up Gasol? Well 3 years later and the Grizzlies nearly made it to the Western Conference Finals. Portland, Warriors, Jazz, Nuggets are all small market teams. These teams don't have rosters full of over-the-hill players either. Just decent management. Looks like the competitive balance is fine to me.
My parting shot is aimed at the owners. No where in the world is there a business where the employees who bring in your money are supposed to give back money just because the "heads" of these businesses want to increase profits. You make business decisions and right or wrong you live with the fall out. You don't tell your employees "that salaries and contracts will be cut but we expect a higher level of work out of you or at least the same level". The NBA doesn't have to solicit for money. The NBA sells itself. Companies step all over themselves to get better visibility in the NBA. Stop complaining that your profits are down and be happy that in this economy, you have profits to speak of. Once you loose your fans, it will be hard as hell to get them back. Just ask MLB. Took them 4 years after the '94 strike to get fans to start to come back and 7 years before MLB was back to full strength.
Except the 4% increase in BRI and split the difference with the salary cap/luxury taxes. Make rookie contract 3 years and no more then $5 mil per year. I got you started. Now get in done and lets play some basketball!!
D!
The owners want more competitive balance. They must have found this term right next to "the tuck rule" in the NFL. I can't remember when the league was balanced. First stat, and really the only one that matters, is since 1980, nine teams have won the NBA Finals. Go ahead and Google it, I did. Nine teams, Lakers, Celtics, 76ers, Pistons, Bulls, Rockets, Spurs, Heat and Mavs. That isn't competitive considering there are 30 teams. I will even throw in that if you count the losers of the NBA Finals, then the total is 16. So the list would include the Blazers, Suns, Knicks, Magic, Pacers, Nets, Cavs and Blazers. So, over the last 32 years, only half the league has made it to the Finals. Is that not parody? The Suns, Magic, Heat, Rockets, Blazer, Nets and Pacers have been less then 3 times during this time so that brings the list to 8 with the Rockets being the only team to win. The Rockets won in '94 and '95 and Houston isn't a major market either.
Let's look at markets. Obviously, LA, Texas and New York are the big 3 markets. You can include Boston, Florida and Illinois as well. Florida and Texas are combined in the market number (The reason for this is even though the populations are big, the sports teams are not that far spread out and often share TV time and/or have deals in place as to not have overlap. Its just how the markets are reported. Most of the numbers out of Illinois are the Chicago numbers). The problem with all of this is, population numbers don't matter. Most people want to see certain players regardless of what team they are on. The Lakers/Pistons Finals in 2004, has been the highest rated Finals since the 1998 Finals. Ratings for the Finals have been dropping since '98. Some feel it was the change from NBC to ABC but this is only partially right. Ratings started dropping due to the shortened '99 season. There was a small drop in '00 but that was the Lakers first of three championships and ratings went up in '01, but that was short lived. Let's face it though, no one wanted to watch the Pacers get blown out. The Spurs have won 4 championships but each year they won, the ratings were the lowest in the history of the NBA. No one outside of San Antonio wanted to watch the Spurs. Ratings didn't climb again until the 2009 season, which included the Lakers/Celtics. Well that figures. But the 2011 Finals ratings were best since that '04 Finals. The leagues became fun to watch again and fans were going crazy over all the good play. Now this damn lockout has erased all of that.
The fans don't want balance. Fans want to see their favorite players. People are tired of the Spurs, Celtics and Lakers and want to see the Thunder, Bulls, and Knicks. fans are also cheering for anyone who plays the Heat. If you really think about it, this lockout is really about the owners and the fact that the owners don't like each other nor do they want to share anything. Owners like Cuban and the OKC ownership are hated because they no how to conduct business in a way to make their teams competitive. Remember how people said that Memphis was stupid for giving up Gasol? Well 3 years later and the Grizzlies nearly made it to the Western Conference Finals. Portland, Warriors, Jazz, Nuggets are all small market teams. These teams don't have rosters full of over-the-hill players either. Just decent management. Looks like the competitive balance is fine to me.
My parting shot is aimed at the owners. No where in the world is there a business where the employees who bring in your money are supposed to give back money just because the "heads" of these businesses want to increase profits. You make business decisions and right or wrong you live with the fall out. You don't tell your employees "that salaries and contracts will be cut but we expect a higher level of work out of you or at least the same level". The NBA doesn't have to solicit for money. The NBA sells itself. Companies step all over themselves to get better visibility in the NBA. Stop complaining that your profits are down and be happy that in this economy, you have profits to speak of. Once you loose your fans, it will be hard as hell to get them back. Just ask MLB. Took them 4 years after the '94 strike to get fans to start to come back and 7 years before MLB was back to full strength.
Except the 4% increase in BRI and split the difference with the salary cap/luxury taxes. Make rookie contract 3 years and no more then $5 mil per year. I got you started. Now get in done and lets play some basketball!!
D!
The Phoenix Report
So much is going on in the sports world that I really didn't know what to blog about. So now, I will post a few blogs about some of the happenings in the sports world.
My Raiders have made a huge splash by trading for Carson Palmer. This trade doesn't happen if Jason Campbell doesn't break his collarbone. It is a risk but no bigger risk then any other team would take if in the same position. The Raiders are 4-2 and a half game out of 1st in the division. To put this in perspective, the Packers would have tried to get Palmer is Rodgers went down. This talk of numbers between Palmer and Campbell is ridiculous. If Palmer is 100% healthy, then Palmer can become the best QB in Oakland since Gannon. For 8 years, palmer has been, at the least, a top 10 QB in the NFL. Actually, only Brady, P Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers come to mind at being better then Palmer. So that puts Palmer at number 6. I'm sure some people can say there are others but who? Eli Manning? Is it the ring? Maybe but what has Eli Manning really done with the exception of that Super Bowl year? Bottomline, no one knows what will happen with the Raiders the rest of the season. In Palmer's Pro Bowl seasons, he had a good running game so he didn't have to "be the offense" in Cincy. With the Raiders, Palmer has McFadden, the leading rusher in the NFL right now. The Raiders have the #2 rushing offense in the NFL. Palmer is being asked to manage the Raider offense. He has to learn an offense that he is already familiar with and has a coach he has known and worked with going back to his days at USC. The Raiders are #19 in passing. Are you really saying that Palmer can't get the Raiders passing attack into the top 10 by seasons end? With no O-line in Cincy last year, Palmer had the Bengals at #13 in the NFL. He will have protection in the pocket and has receivers who can actually catch the ball and stretch the field. If anything, the Raiders will continue to do what they have been doing and they just got better at the QB position. First the division then the Super Bowl. See you in INDY! YEAH, I SAID IT!
Since my dad is a St. Louis Cardinals fan, I wanted to speak on the World Series. The 107th World Series is between the Texas Rangers (2nd straight trip) and the St. Louis Cardinals (3rd WS in the last 8 years; 2006 Champions). The Cards won Game 1 and look to go up 2-0 tonight. These teams are very evenly matched. Both have power in the middle of the lineups and good contact hitting at the top and bottom. The pitching staffs are on the same level. These teams strengths and weaknesses are mirror images of each other. This series can go down as one of the best in many years. If game 1 was any indication of how the rest of the series will go, then its all good for baseball fans. I'm encouraged by this especially since the NBA can't get right! The Rangers and Cards can keep my mind off the NBA BS for another week or so. I pick the Cardinals in 6!!
My Raiders have made a huge splash by trading for Carson Palmer. This trade doesn't happen if Jason Campbell doesn't break his collarbone. It is a risk but no bigger risk then any other team would take if in the same position. The Raiders are 4-2 and a half game out of 1st in the division. To put this in perspective, the Packers would have tried to get Palmer is Rodgers went down. This talk of numbers between Palmer and Campbell is ridiculous. If Palmer is 100% healthy, then Palmer can become the best QB in Oakland since Gannon. For 8 years, palmer has been, at the least, a top 10 QB in the NFL. Actually, only Brady, P Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers come to mind at being better then Palmer. So that puts Palmer at number 6. I'm sure some people can say there are others but who? Eli Manning? Is it the ring? Maybe but what has Eli Manning really done with the exception of that Super Bowl year? Bottomline, no one knows what will happen with the Raiders the rest of the season. In Palmer's Pro Bowl seasons, he had a good running game so he didn't have to "be the offense" in Cincy. With the Raiders, Palmer has McFadden, the leading rusher in the NFL right now. The Raiders have the #2 rushing offense in the NFL. Palmer is being asked to manage the Raider offense. He has to learn an offense that he is already familiar with and has a coach he has known and worked with going back to his days at USC. The Raiders are #19 in passing. Are you really saying that Palmer can't get the Raiders passing attack into the top 10 by seasons end? With no O-line in Cincy last year, Palmer had the Bengals at #13 in the NFL. He will have protection in the pocket and has receivers who can actually catch the ball and stretch the field. If anything, the Raiders will continue to do what they have been doing and they just got better at the QB position. First the division then the Super Bowl. See you in INDY! YEAH, I SAID IT!
Since my dad is a St. Louis Cardinals fan, I wanted to speak on the World Series. The 107th World Series is between the Texas Rangers (2nd straight trip) and the St. Louis Cardinals (3rd WS in the last 8 years; 2006 Champions). The Cards won Game 1 and look to go up 2-0 tonight. These teams are very evenly matched. Both have power in the middle of the lineups and good contact hitting at the top and bottom. The pitching staffs are on the same level. These teams strengths and weaknesses are mirror images of each other. This series can go down as one of the best in many years. If game 1 was any indication of how the rest of the series will go, then its all good for baseball fans. I'm encouraged by this especially since the NBA can't get right! The Rangers and Cards can keep my mind off the NBA BS for another week or so. I pick the Cardinals in 6!!
Thursday, September 29, 2011
The Phoenix Report: MLB 2011
With the regular season now over, what a way to end it? Four games to decide two wild card spots. Yankees @ Rays, Red Sox @ Orioles, Cardinals @ Astros and Phillies @ Braves. Where to go and what to watch. Thank God for Pic-N-Pic and live streaming online. Just think, a week ago, there was a chance of a 3-way tie for the Wild Card spot in the AL. The Angels decided they didn't want to be in the playoffs. The story I think no one is talking about is how the Yankees holding the Red Sox playoff hopes in their hands. Like some sort of bad, ironic joke. I know Boston fans had to be sick about that but all the Sox had to do is win. Yeah, I know, easier said then done. Especially after the September we have all just seen.
Did the Yankees "pack it in" and give the Rays a chance to catch the Red Sox? Its debatable but you can make an argument either way. The stat that stands out first is that the Rays, coming into last nights game, had won 8 out of 17 games against the Yankees. With last nights win, the Rays and Yankees are tied at 9 for wins head to head on the season. Bottom line, regardless of it all, the Rays had to score runs and they did with timely hitting and good pitching. The Rays earned their way into the playoffs and can actually do some damage. Rangers could be in for a fight.
Meltdown, choke, implode. Any of these three words describe both the Atlanta Braves and the Boston Red Sox. Both with big leads at the beginning of September and both home for the winter. Lack of heart comes to mind. Both of these teams have a history of folding at the wrong time on multiple occasions. The Red Sox and their 86 year championship drought has been well documented. The Braves, with all those division championships in the '90s and only one championship to show for it. In a small way, are we really surprised. The question isn't how these teams melted down, but how will they recover?
A much more quiet story is the St. Louis Cardinals. The Cards have always been in the hunt over the years and have a 2006 championship to show for it. They won the NL Central Division 7 times since 2000 and were also in the 2004 World Series. The 2011 team, put their heads down and went to work. Picking away at a 10.5 deficit on Aug. 25 by winning 23 of their last 31 games. It wasn't sexy but it was effective. They took care of the games when they needed to. The Cardinals worried about themselves and took care of business. Wild Card or not, the Phillies will have their hands full when the Cardinals come to town. Remember, the Cardinals took 6 games out of the 9 played this year. After this run, would you really bet against the Cardinals?
I have to give props to the Baltimore Orioles. With nothing to play for, this team strapped up and went to work. The Os showed their fans a good show and didn't just lay down for the Red Sox. Integrity comes to mind when it comes to this Orioles team. As a fan of baseball, I appreciate a team 20+ games below .500 showing up to play. It wasn't just this game either. The Orioles and Red Sox played 7 times in September, with the Orioles winning five. Thank you Baltimore! You may not have had much to celebrate but you should your professionalism and the love of the game.
D!
Did the Yankees "pack it in" and give the Rays a chance to catch the Red Sox? Its debatable but you can make an argument either way. The stat that stands out first is that the Rays, coming into last nights game, had won 8 out of 17 games against the Yankees. With last nights win, the Rays and Yankees are tied at 9 for wins head to head on the season. Bottom line, regardless of it all, the Rays had to score runs and they did with timely hitting and good pitching. The Rays earned their way into the playoffs and can actually do some damage. Rangers could be in for a fight.
Meltdown, choke, implode. Any of these three words describe both the Atlanta Braves and the Boston Red Sox. Both with big leads at the beginning of September and both home for the winter. Lack of heart comes to mind. Both of these teams have a history of folding at the wrong time on multiple occasions. The Red Sox and their 86 year championship drought has been well documented. The Braves, with all those division championships in the '90s and only one championship to show for it. In a small way, are we really surprised. The question isn't how these teams melted down, but how will they recover?
D!
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
The Phoenix Report: NFL Flukes
Let's be honest, there have been and are teams that play "above their heads", dating back to at least last season. I'm going to start with the Kansas City Chiefs because they are the biggest fluke of all.
The Chiefs won the AFC West by default. Basically, someone had to win and the Chargers can't finish during a playoff push and the Raiders can't stop the run. Just look at the stats for the Chiefs over the last 19 games (16 regular season, 1 playoff in 2010 and 2 games in 2011). The Chiefs problems were somewhat hidden by their running games and now that Charles is out for the season, where do they turn? Don't say Matt Cassel because he threw 7 INTs last year in 15 games and has 4 already this year after just 2. Then there's the defense or lack there of. The Chief defense has given up 80+ points in 2 games. This is the defending AFC West champs here. The front seven cause ZERO pressure on opposing QBs and the DBs consistently get burnt. Yeah, no repeat for this team. I hope they enjoyed their gift playoff last year because the Chiefs are done. Yeah, I Said It!
The Buffalo Bills are not as bad as we thought but they aren't as good as some say they are. The Bills have looked good the first 2 weeks but starting the season playing the Chiefs and my Raiders doesn't mean that they are contenders for the playoffs. The real Bills will show up on Sunday when they host the Patriots. They won't score more then 10 points and will lose by at least 20. I do applaud the Bills for "looking" like they no longer want to be fodder for the AFC East but its not about how your team looks. Its about what your team produces, on the field. The Bills do have good RBs but are middle of the pack in passing (18th overall). Fred Jackson is playing very well but wait until they play the Pats, Steelers, Ravens and other defenses that are run stoppers. Yeah, I Said It!
D!
The Chiefs won the AFC West by default. Basically, someone had to win and the Chargers can't finish during a playoff push and the Raiders can't stop the run. Just look at the stats for the Chiefs over the last 19 games (16 regular season, 1 playoff in 2010 and 2 games in 2011). The Chiefs problems were somewhat hidden by their running games and now that Charles is out for the season, where do they turn? Don't say Matt Cassel because he threw 7 INTs last year in 15 games and has 4 already this year after just 2. Then there's the defense or lack there of. The Chief defense has given up 80+ points in 2 games. This is the defending AFC West champs here. The front seven cause ZERO pressure on opposing QBs and the DBs consistently get burnt. Yeah, no repeat for this team. I hope they enjoyed their gift playoff last year because the Chiefs are done. Yeah, I Said It!
D!
Friday, September 16, 2011
The Phoenix Report: NBA Lockout
I have tried to keep an open mind but no matter how you look at things, I can't begin to see things from the owners position. If you listen/read the comments and statements from the owners and David Stern, you can tell that they are being less then truthful. Stern is using words like "vast majority" and "virtual unanimity" tells me and everyone else that there is no unified agreement within the owners as a collective. How can you, in good faith, bargain with the players if you are not all on the same page? The answer is you can't. I understand, business wise, when you are going through a collective bargaining, both sides ask for more then they can get. Its where you start and then leave room to negotiate up or down. I'm good with that but the owners want to get back the money that they "lost" during the previous CBA. WTF?! How can you look the NBA players in the face and ask/demand that they give you back money you "lost" because of poor business decisions you made? Sounds like the federal bank bailout all over again. No one is rewarded for making mistakes. I have never been and no one I know ever has. What makes the owners any different? Not a damn thing! Let's break it down:
The Salary Cap:
As is, there is a "soft cap". There is a set dollar amount for all teams but there is a "luxury tax" added when teams spend beyond the cap. A good idea but it is not a high enough amount to make any of the "big market teams" to not go over the cap. That leaves teams like the Bobcats, Bucks and Kings in a position where they can't offer players the amount of money they are seeking to play for a team. The easy fix is to raise the penalty amount. If you go over the cap by $1 million, then you should have to pay $5 million in luxury taxes. Sounds steep? Good. Then those "big market teams" won't act as if there is no salary cap. It would also lower player paydays as well. If a player wants to play for a particular team, then he would have to take a pay cut to do so. If you are laughing at players taking less money think about how many players are being over paid like Rashard Lewis, who would make $22.1 million this season. That is $3 million short of what Kobe Bryant is making. SMDH!! Lewis hasn't been a factor in since '09 and not worthy of this money. He has been in the league since 1998 and only 2 all-star selections. That isn't a $20 million player! I don't blame Lewis at all. Some owner/GM decided he was worth it and now they want to complain about paying him and players like him because they aren't producing on the court. That is no ones fault but the owners. They shouldn't be bailed out for bad business decisions. Greedy bastards.
Split of Basketball Related Income or BMI:
Under the previous CBA, the players got 57% of the BMI and rightly so. Basically, the owners made endorsement and TV deals using the players as equity/collateral to get companies to pay through the nose. So why would the players get the bigger share? Its the players that put people in the stands. I have been to quite a few NBA games in 4 cities and never have I seen a fan wearing a jersey or T-shirt with an owners name on it. Nike, Reebok, Converse or Adidas don't have a shoe marketing an owner. Kids on the playground don't call out Jerry Buss or Jerry Reinsdorf name as they go to the hole or take a 3-point shot. So once again, the owners are acting as if the NBA would be nothing if not for them. LOL!! What's worse is that the players offered to lower their percentage to 54%. That amounts to $500 million over the duration of the new CBA. The owners want to bigger share, for no other reason then to recoup "losses" from the last CBA. Get the hell outta here with that. If I was a player, I wouldn't give in on that either.
Guaranteed Contracts:
This is the only issue where I am on the owners side. The NFL doesn't have guaranteed contracts and rightly so. Players are paid to play and produce on the court, if you aren't doing that then you shouldn't get paid. A good example is Grant Hill. He got hurt, doing his job, and it took some years before he was effective for a team again. He had a guaranteed contract so he got paid even though he played 82 games over a 3 year span. I like Hill but as an owner, I would not have wanted to pay someone who wasn't doing what I was paying him to do. Get rid of the guarantees and add more buyout clauses, just like in the NFL. DONE!
Revenue Sharing:
This is only a issue because the players were able to get a clause that allows them to have to sign off on any revenue sharing. What the owners do with their share is their business but the owners can't agree among themselves how to share so that isn't on the players. Once again, the "big market teams" want to make the money they generate or receive and let the "small market teams" fend for themselves. Example: The Lakers don't want to give the Bobcats a piece of the Lakers TV deals. The owners feel that since they individually made deals for their teams then they should reap all the rewards but they want to players to bridge the gap in revenue sharing between the owners. C'mon man!
D!
The Salary Cap:
As is, there is a "soft cap". There is a set dollar amount for all teams but there is a "luxury tax" added when teams spend beyond the cap. A good idea but it is not a high enough amount to make any of the "big market teams" to not go over the cap. That leaves teams like the Bobcats, Bucks and Kings in a position where they can't offer players the amount of money they are seeking to play for a team. The easy fix is to raise the penalty amount. If you go over the cap by $1 million, then you should have to pay $5 million in luxury taxes. Sounds steep? Good. Then those "big market teams" won't act as if there is no salary cap. It would also lower player paydays as well. If a player wants to play for a particular team, then he would have to take a pay cut to do so. If you are laughing at players taking less money think about how many players are being over paid like Rashard Lewis, who would make $22.1 million this season. That is $3 million short of what Kobe Bryant is making. SMDH!! Lewis hasn't been a factor in since '09 and not worthy of this money. He has been in the league since 1998 and only 2 all-star selections. That isn't a $20 million player! I don't blame Lewis at all. Some owner/GM decided he was worth it and now they want to complain about paying him and players like him because they aren't producing on the court. That is no ones fault but the owners. They shouldn't be bailed out for bad business decisions. Greedy bastards.
Split of Basketball Related Income or BMI:
Under the previous CBA, the players got 57% of the BMI and rightly so. Basically, the owners made endorsement and TV deals using the players as equity/collateral to get companies to pay through the nose. So why would the players get the bigger share? Its the players that put people in the stands. I have been to quite a few NBA games in 4 cities and never have I seen a fan wearing a jersey or T-shirt with an owners name on it. Nike, Reebok, Converse or Adidas don't have a shoe marketing an owner. Kids on the playground don't call out Jerry Buss or Jerry Reinsdorf name as they go to the hole or take a 3-point shot. So once again, the owners are acting as if the NBA would be nothing if not for them. LOL!! What's worse is that the players offered to lower their percentage to 54%. That amounts to $500 million over the duration of the new CBA. The owners want to bigger share, for no other reason then to recoup "losses" from the last CBA. Get the hell outta here with that. If I was a player, I wouldn't give in on that either.
Guaranteed Contracts:
This is the only issue where I am on the owners side. The NFL doesn't have guaranteed contracts and rightly so. Players are paid to play and produce on the court, if you aren't doing that then you shouldn't get paid. A good example is Grant Hill. He got hurt, doing his job, and it took some years before he was effective for a team again. He had a guaranteed contract so he got paid even though he played 82 games over a 3 year span. I like Hill but as an owner, I would not have wanted to pay someone who wasn't doing what I was paying him to do. Get rid of the guarantees and add more buyout clauses, just like in the NFL. DONE!
Revenue Sharing:
This is only a issue because the players were able to get a clause that allows them to have to sign off on any revenue sharing. What the owners do with their share is their business but the owners can't agree among themselves how to share so that isn't on the players. Once again, the "big market teams" want to make the money they generate or receive and let the "small market teams" fend for themselves. Example: The Lakers don't want to give the Bobcats a piece of the Lakers TV deals. The owners feel that since they individually made deals for their teams then they should reap all the rewards but they want to players to bridge the gap in revenue sharing between the owners. C'mon man!
D!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)