What's new
By:

Lockout!!!

margodydek said:
Unless you're the guy (or girl) signing the checks, then, save anything illegal or immoral, you usually have to fall in line w/ their requests. No one's forcing these guys to play in the league.
Click to expand...

Actually, they are being forced to not play in the league. It's a lockout, not a strike. The owner can go wityout any CBA, if they so choose.
 
millers own over 95 businesses and employ alot of people . give hundred of thousands of dollars to charities every year. yes they do earn there money and if you know anything, larry miller is a self made millionaire. not by giving it away to under educated cry babies. try this go to your boss and demand 57 cents of every dollar made by there company and tell them your not working if you don't get it and write back and let me know how fast you got fired.
 
All this has me so incredibly pissed off.

I was on tweeter before, during and after the press conference and reading player tweets made me lose what little respect I had left for a lot of the players. 90% of them were not talking about anything to do with the lockout, the lawsuit or anything basketball related. They were just tweeting their nonsense like usual. They obviously had no clue what was going on nor cared. How do they not care or pay attention to all of this? It blows my mind that this players who have million and millions at stake couldnt care less about all this.
 
LjJazzman said:
All this has been so incredibly pissed off.

I was on tweeter before, during and after the press conference and reading player tweets made me lose what little respect I had left for a lot of the players. 90% of them were not talking about anything to do with the lockout, the lawsuit or anything basketball related. They were just tweeting their nonsense like usual. They obviously had no clue what was going on nor cared. How do they not care or pay attention to all of this? It blows my mind that this players who have million and millions at stake couldnt care less about all this.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. I'm pretty fed up with this whole situation. Every day I get less and less interested in basketball at all. It's just too frustrating. Hopefully I still have the desire to watch when all this is over.
 
Insane. How much better of a deal do they really think is reasonable at this point? What are the odds that the owners simply buckle up and fight tooth and nail to the bitter end? One benefit the NBA owners have over the NFL owners is a better utilization factor of their venues. It is easier to rent out the space of a 18k seat enclosed stadium, thereby recouping some revenue, than it would be a 50k+ seat open-air venue.

Here is another question: could this potentially herald the end of the NBA as we know it? What if the owners closed up shop for 4 or 5 years? Most of the leadership of the players association would have lost their careers at that point (Fisher, Brand, Kobe, KG, even LBJ and others would be done or close to the end of their careers at that point). Then there would be a glut of young up-and-coming players that have been playing overseas with some experience and rookie-level contracts. Then the owners rebuild the league.

Probably not very likely at all, but that kind of scenario could be possible. The players are nuts to think it is completely out of the question.
 
TheItinerantSon said:
nobody knows what to expect at this point: “It is impossible to predict what is going to happen,” said Gabe Feldman, a sports law expert and professor at Tulane.

but they do know that after giving the owners back 7% of BRI they still couldnt get a deal that didn't dramatically hinder Free agency and wasn't a slow road to the end of guaranteed contracts...it can't get worse in court."]


Also, do you guys realize that because the leagues proposal would have taken salary over-runs from the next years cap, that basicallly big-market teams that could afford the luxury tax would have been able to lower their competitors cap space?
Click to expand...
Sure it can. If they lose their anti-trust lawsuit their deal is going to get significantly worse. They lose that battle and they have 0 leverage. At that point why would the owners even offer the deal they just did, at that point? I don't know who will win the legal battle but a precedent seems to have been set when the NFLPA lost the 2nd battle in court. The 1st decision was overturned before the players even got to work out.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
They are free agents in the NBA world, but not to the profession of basketball. They can choose to play wherever they want to play basketball, China, Europe, South America, Japan, NBDL, Slam-Ball, bets on H-O-R-S-E.

Restrictions as to where they can play in the NBA have little to do with their options to live where they want and earn a living.

If they are to be truly "FREE" to work wherever they want in the NBA, then there can't be ANY restrictions on salary-cap, bird-rights, contract length, etc. All the stars would play in NY, LA, Chicago, Miami, etc. All the other teams would be garbage.
Click to expand...
None of the other teams would exist and then the league would not exist.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Insane. How much better of a deal do they really think is reasonable at this point? What are the odds that the owners simply buckle up and fight tooth and nail to the bitter end? One benefit the NBA owners have over the NFL owners is a better utilization factor of their venues. It is easier to rent out the space of a 18k seat enclosed stadium, thereby recouping some revenue, than it would be a 50k+ seat open-air venue.

Here is another question: could this potentially herald the end of the NBA as we know it? What if the owners closed up shop for 4 or 5 years?
Click to expand...

Excellent!
 
kim chadwick said:
players may wake up once the accountant calls and tells them they have to sell a car or two and the summer home has to go, the furs and the wife has her jewlery taken away. or maybe not because i am sure most of these players since the graduated from school will just become lawyers ,doctors,fireman or police officers to fill there money needs.
Click to expand...

....say, you may be on to something! They might be able to make some side money by signing up to be on "Repo Man!" Sonya would sure enjoy repossessing some of these high priced items that these clowns will surely be losing! But then again, she'd probably cut them some slack as "partners with tattoo's!"
 
They will reach a middle ground outside of court. It is to much to risk for both sides to really battle this out for years in court. The owners need the players and the players need the owners. This will be resolved by January and you will get a 50 game season.
 
kim chadwick said:
larry miller is a self made millionaire. not by giving it away to under educated cry babies. try this go to your boss and demand 57 cents of every dollar made by there company and tell them your not working if you don't get it and write back and let me know how fast you got fired.
Click to expand...


...good point!
 
gregbroncs said:
Utah is a right to work state. Unions here have very little power. So not surprising that the people here are against the union. I'm an electrician and the electrical workers union here is a joke.
Click to expand...

Meaning what? The "union rules" can't force people to pay more than fair market value for electrical work? You have to actually compete with other electricians for business? Sounds like the real world. States with real union power like New York, customers pay much more for labor than necessary. You can't have one guy that does multiple jobs, you have to hire a bunch of guys with specific jobs (Bob runs the backhoe, Joe tells Bob where to dig, Dave supervises the dirt pile, Tony drives the dump truck, Sam tells Tony where to dump, Jim hands out water bottles and a 1 hour job takes 3 hours because of mandatory breaks). Forcing everyone to belong to a union by law to force prices up is no more ethical than business owners banding together to supress wages.
 
SuperBob said:
Meaning what? The "union rules" can't force people to pay more than fair market value for electrical work? You have to actually compete with other electricians for business? Sounds like the real world. States with real union power like New York, customers pay much more for labor than necessary. You can't have one guy that does multiple jobs, you have to hire a bunch of guys with specific jobs (Bob runs the backhoe, Joe tells Bob where to dig, Dave supervises the dirt pile, Tony drives the dump truck, Sam tells Tony where to dump, Jim hands out water bottles and a 1 hour job takes 3 hours because of mandatory breaks). Forcing everyone to belong to a union by law to force prices up is no more ethical than business owners banding together to supress wages.
Click to expand...

HMM...

I'm going to take a guess here, you are not from Utah?
 
carolinajazz said:
Speaking of tattoo's....here's the skinny:

Tattoos have a curious history

1850 - 1900 - Tattoos used to be the bastion of carnival freak shows, with people flocking to the circus to see the amazing tattooed Lady.

1900 - 1950 - Tattoos in the early 20th century indicated a Sailor or Marine. In these cases, they did not have any social stigma, except that tattoos were generally indicative of enlisted men. Few Navy or Marine officers dared to draw on their body.

1950 - 1960 - In the early 1950's, tattoos became popular with the criminal element, mostly outlaw bikers, social outcasts and the mentally ill. It was during this time tattoos took on a more ominous reputation.

1960 - 1990 - This was the age of "prison tats" where having a tattoo indicated to some people that you were a tough, ignorant, convicted felon.

1990-2008 - Today we see hordes of low-class young people drawing on themselves with free abandon, (almost 30% of people in the 1980's). These people do not understand that a tattoo may effectively prohibit them from pursuing a professional career, regardless of their other qualifications.

Today, a prejudice still exists within corporate America about tattoos, especially since there is a clear and direct correlation between income, education and the percentage of those populations who have tattoos. It's no surprise that tattoos are more popular among the poor and under educated.

Don't kid yourself about the importance of hiding or removing tattoos. If you look at middle management and above in any of the Fortune 50 companies, you will hard pressed to find any managers that have tattoos, hidden or otherwise.
Corporate Dress Codes and tattoos

A study by Careerbuilders shows the perils of tattoos for aspiring professionals, and confirms the conventional wisdom that tattoos are a sign of immaturity, bad judgment and bad taste:

Over 42 percent of managers said their opinion of someone would be lowered by that person's visible body art. Personally, I think that the actual figure is much higher.

Three out of four respondents believe that visible tattoos are unprofessional.

You don't have look hard to find hundreds of corporations which have banned employees with tattoos. San Bernardino County California, bars all employees from wearing denim, having visible tattoos, and any piercing in the nose, lip, or tongue that contains jewelry.

In sum, tattoos send a message to corporate America that you are ignorant, low-income, that you have have bad taste, and worst of all, that you may have a criminal record.

...oh, one more thing: Did you know that over 80% of the American prison population is tattooed, while only 15% of the general population has tattoo's?
Click to expand...


This makes sense, although there are cultural exceptions to the above. For example, the native people of New Zealand (Maori) and other indigenous cultures of the Pacific Islands might use tattoos to signify manhood or warrior status within their local clans.

Then there's that little guy from Fantasy Island who used to yell about the incoming air planes. I'm not sure what to make of him, but he seemed to be reasonably well regarded by his upscale boss.
 
NUMBERICA said:
HMM...

I'm going to take a guess here, you are not from Utah?
Click to expand...
Unions may also drive out business. I used to work for a company that organized tradeshows. We moved one of our biggest events out of New York due to the labor idiocy at the convention center. Companies basically can't even load a dolly with show brochures or office supplies. If you can't carry it in your arms, then it's considered "freight" and you have to pay (and WAIT and WAIT) for a union worker to come over with HIS dolly and roll it into the center for an exorbitant fee. And forget about changing a light bulb in your booth. That requires a certified electrician.

The labor unions (and complaints by our customers) made us decide to move another big event out of Chicago. Fortunately, a few years later the city took on the unions at the convention center and my company (well, former company) moved the shows back this year. Unions have a place, but they often become so big and corrupt that a major cleansing has to take place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top