What's new

Stephen A. Smith on 50-50 BRI and Derek Fisher

"Contrary to what union hardliners might want us to think, a 50-50 BRI split is in the best interest of the players. Something, simply, is better than nothing at all. If you are going to walk away from a league-average salary of $5 million, projected to escalate to $7 million, with $2 BILLION on the table — guaranteed minimally over at least the next seven years — during a ravaged economy and escalating unemployment, you damn well better have options in your back pocket. If Fisher has noticed the players don’t have any options, kudos to him. The union officials who talk about drawing a hard line in the sand by demanding nothing less than a 52-48 split can bloviate all they want over how they’ve given enough already, dropping from 57 percent to 52 percent on BRI, modifying luxury-tax issues and mid-level exceptions, etc. But to walk around with their chests protruding like they’re going to do something about it now, acting as if their biceps bulge bigger than those of the owners, is laughable. Correction, it’s sad! Sad because playing overseas is not an option for a rank-and-file consisting of at least 400 players. Sad because players formulating their own league was never an option. Sad because, at the end of the day, the evident lack of the players’ preparation for these negotiations in comparison to the owners’ has become clear, revealing how executive director Billy Hunter and the union’s recent arrival at these negotiations must have been predicted by owners years earlier. … So now that a 50-50 split is on the table, that D-Day has arrived, it’s time to throw Fisher to the wolves? Puh-leeze! ”Derek Fisher needs to do the right deal,” one player closely connected to Hunter told me. “He needs to understand that some of these guys talking all this junk about being hardcore are the same guys who’ll be calling for his head the second the season is canceled, after they’ve finally realized the owners ain’t budging. “Who the hell doesn’t want a 52-48 split at this point?” the player said. “Hell, we wanted more than that. Billy’s right to demand it, too. He’s right to be frustrated. He’s right to feel like we’re getting abused. But at the end of the day, you don’t sit around and lose $2 billion, cost hundreds of players to lose our jobs and thousands more employed by the NBA to lose theirs, over two damn points on BRI because you are ticked off. You don’t do it. That’s just stupid.” Stephen A. Smith

This makes really good sense!! I think Derek Fisher should be reading this every single day. The truth is that the players can't win, and they should have settled at 50-50. You do not win if the whole season is cancelled and the owners are not going to give you a better deal in the end. I think it just stupid to not take 50-50... your going to lose more money by a missed season than what you stand to gain. The owners have way more leverage. Smith is also right about how the players starting their own league was never an option... I kind of question Amare's intelligence if he was serious. Was he bluffing?! Anyone disagree with Smith?!
Here is the Link to the Entire Blog
https://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2011/11/03/labor-talks-circling-the-wagons/?ls=iref:nbahpt1
 
I've seen Stephen A on ESPN lately and he has considerably less annoying. I think after ESPN stopped putting him on air as much he stopped be so over dramatic all the time.
 
I think the players ego's are keeping them from seeing reality on this. Sure the owners aren't being fair and squeezing them a bit however many things have changed since the last CBA was agreed upon and the players got more than they gave on the last 2 and now the leverage has swung the other way.
They need to realize or ask themselves is their pride worth this 2% which even if they somehow get this 2% they cannot make up or get back the difference if this season is lost (they will lose more money not playing this year then giving up the 2%).
 
I've never been a fan of SAS's commentary or analysis. I do agree with this though.

I've thought the previous BRI was way too good for the players, but the 50-50 split is too good towards the owners. From an outsiders opinion, this was bound to happen with even the sane/smart owners unable to make money in the viable smaller markets.

I'm not pro-owner or pro-player, but the owners hold all the aces. The union has tried, and their best shot at getting to 52.5 was last week.

It's time the owners get their pound of flesh. If there was anytime for the high majority of the league to make money, it's now.......even in a horrid economy.

Enjoy it you rich #&%$@#&. Now go save the jobs of all that work for your club, and the businesses around the arenas who depend on the many home games.

Let's be honest, I could care less what the account balance of the owners and players are, it's the employees who depend on millionaires and billionaires settling out their ego driven BS that I really feel for.
 
I've never been a fan of SAS's commentary or analysis. I do agree with this though.

I've thought the previous BRI was way too good for the players, but the 50-50 split is too good towards the owners. From an outsiders opinion, this was bound to happen with even the sane/smart owners unable to make money in the viable smaller markets.

I'm not pro-owner or pro-player, but the owners hold all the aces. The union has tried, and their best shot at getting to 52.5 was last week.

It's time the owners get their pound of flesh. If there was anytime for the high majority of the league to make money, it's now.......even in a horrid economy.

Enjoy it you rich #&%$@#&. Now go save the jobs of all that work for your club, and the businesses around the arenas who depend on the many home games.

Let's be honest, I could care less what the account balance of the owners and players are, it's the employees who depend on millionaires and billionaires settling out their ego driven BS that I really feel for.
Yep David West's comments hopefully doesn't reflect the majority of the players understanding of how the BRI money is split and used for the owners/teams.
 
I doubt David West really believes what he said. It was probably just a PR move (bad one) to trick some fans into still being on the players' side 100%.
 
Back
Top