What's new

Lockout!!!

One source from the players side issued an 'ominous warning' to ESPN's Marc Stein about the latest proposal from the owners.
"Nothing was addressed," said the source. "It's same offer as it was before."
The source expects the offer to be rejected.
Marc Berman of the New York Post reports that Billy Hunter told him that there was very little difference in the new deal.


- That's it kids, its over. All this stupid talk of a deal was/is imminent was again full of ****.
 
2u55q1w.gif
 

...absolutely great video illustrating the unions position!

So basically, here's the bottom line: "The league is clearly banking on the premise that a majority of players, angry as some might be, would rather play than continue this labor battle and will ultimately relent if this offer is put up for a vote. Voting for the deal and playing out a 72-game season likely enables players to return to work with only one missed paycheck, while voting this deal down increases the likelihood the entire 2011-12 season will be canceled." ESPN
 
Doesn't look good after reading some of the reports -- apparently, the new CBA is nullifying the influence of the agents. So now who do the players listen to, themselves or their agents? Of course the agents ultimately only care about number one and don't care the effect it has on so many other people besides the players if the season is cancelled. I really can't feel bad for the players though; they are already making obscene amounts of money, and if 70 percent of the teams in the NBA lost money last year with an economy that continues to be teetering on the brink, I think it's irresponsible for the players to reject the proposal now.
 
While I have no inside information, I feel pretty good about the players accepting this offer. If they don't, I really don't know what they are thinking. If they don't accept it, I don't see how we are going to have a season. While I think that Stern's first "take it or we're offering 47%" threat was a bluff, I don't think he's bluffing now. There is too much pressure from small market owners to keep this offer on the table for long.

If the players lose this season because of 1-2% in BRI and some system issues, I really question the advice they are receiving from Fisher, Hunter, and their lawyers and agents. Losing the season equates to about $2 billion in lost salaries! 1-2% of BRI is well under $100 million for a season. That's 20 years before they see the return on their stance to hold out, ASSUMING that they get what they want after a year lost.

How is not accepting this deal even a consideration for them? Are the system issues that important?
 
While I have no inside information, I feel pretty good about the players accepting this offer. If they don't, I really don't know what they are thinking. If they don't accept it, I don't see how we are going to have a season. While I think that Stern's first "take it or we're offering 47%" threat was a bluff, I don't think he's bluffing now. There is too much pressure from small market owners to keep this offer on the table for long.

If the players lose this season because of 1-2% in BRI and some system issues, I really question the advice they are receiving from Fisher, Hunter, and their lawyers and agents. Losing the season equates to about $2 billion in lost salaries! 1-2% of BRI is well under $100 million for a season. That's 20 years before they see the return on their stance to hold out, ASSUMING that they get what they want after a year lost.

How is not accepting this deal even a consideration for them? Are the system issues that important?

My fear is that the owners are going to back out. They will use a dispute over a system issue as an excuse to pull their whole deal off the table, then lower their asking price on BRI to 47%.
 
Back
Top