Debate: Who's fault, the owners or players?

Clippers TopBuzz Forum/Message Board » Clippers News & General Discussions
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Search This Topic:
 
clippersblue
Clipper Starter
Posts: 329
votes: 5

The blame goes on the greedy players. Yes, I said it. I am 100% on the side of the owners. There would be no NBA if it wasn't for businessman who risked there capitol over 50 years to create a league, a place where players can show case their talent. The players are already making tons of money, way more than the players in the 80's, early 90's, 70s, whatever. They make astronomical amounts of money, and if they get injured, the owners are the ones that take the losses and are finished for 5 years, and the players still get payed. Bill Simmons said it best that people are not coming to games at much to sit in the cheap seats when they can watch at home on there nice big screen T.V.s

But more importantly, in order to make a fair league, or to have a league with more than 10 teams, you need a lower salary cap, and that means monitoring the salary of your players. The owners are taking the risk if the business fails, and the players share way too much of the profit for very limited risk or no risk at all. I had to take a 6% pay cut, but i don't make nearly as much as the players, big deal. They can take at least 10% pay cut when times are hard, heck they could take a 30% pay cut and still make more money than I'll make in 8 lifetimes! Poor millionaire players have too sacrifice too during a depression, and when profits are down, just like everybody else, you get a pay cut or laid off. So instead of getting five BMW's now they can only get 4 while the owners in small markets may generate a loss after investing 250 million dollars or more. I'm not saying I'm not for unions, but this union has overestimated it's contribution to the business. Without the NBA, there would be no lucrative contracts. Without the NBA, these players wouldn't be stars. There's no professional ping pong league that generates this kind of money. It's like the long shore men who think they deserve $450 dollars an hour for moving a crate. Absolutely ridiculous!

clippersblue
Clipper Starter
Posts: 329
votes: 5

Oh, and for Blake's analogy from the BS report, that it like somebody coming to your house, and then taking all your furniture, and then saying you can have your couch back and your bed. Wrong, it's like somebody coming to your house and telling you you can only buy twenty sports cars this year instead of twenty two.

I'm a teacher, and when I lose 6%, it effects my family worse than it will effect any of those players. Oh, hey Blake, tell that to the guy who lost his job. We can take a pay cut during hard times, so can you!

I don't even have a good car!

toohipcliptoslip
CTB MVP X1
Posts: 4710
votes: 31

For those who remember this commercial

Is Certs a breath mint or a candy mint? They're two mints in one

This is a case where the inmates are running the asylum

ClipYourWings
Clipper Starter
Posts: 467

ca.gif
votes: 5

Wow.

I don't even know where to begin.

Greenmonk94
Clipper All-Star
Posts: 1060
votes: 2

I think its the owners faults... really.. the cap was 57 43 split... the players are willing to go down to 53 47 split.. then went down for the players.. then they went 42.5 47.5 split.. still tryin to do more for the owners and they want not to reason but for a 50 50 split... seems to me like the owners are not trying to reason but only give an ultimatum.. not kool man not kool...

Ricky
Clipper Starter
Posts: 712
votes: 7

The players think 53-47 split is enough. And that might be enough to cover the loses for the 22 teams that lost money last season.

However, is just covering the loses enough? Don't the owners have a right to try to make a profit?

tense2
CTB MVP X2
Posts: 8821
votes: 20

Pick your poison.

clipper*joe
CTB MVP Champion
Posts: 15883
Location: los angeles
calif.gif
votes: 125

Make a profit for ineptitude? If other teams are profitable under that formula, maybe it's time for those teams to invest more and make better decisions. You can't make profit unless risk is involved...Unless your name is Donald T. Sterling.

Very Happy

Ricky
Clipper Starter
Posts: 712
votes: 7

Problem is that making a profit has less to do with ineptitude of decision makers and was all about location. Big markets made profit, small markets didn't. There needs to be a correction to the CBA to help out the small market teams. A revenue sharing plan helps, but doesn't completely solve the problem.

clippersfan85
Clipper Starter
Posts: 859

calif.gif
votes: 2

I would say that the player should take a cut like almost all other workers have in the US during the recession.I still think players should get the bigger cut so i would be in favor of a 51-49 split that could be increased over the duration of the new CBA to 53-47 based on league profitability. This accomplishes giving a concession from the players but also gives an option to get back to the 53% level players say is their lowest offer. Seriously both parties need to figure out how much money they lose without a season, swallow their pride, and negotiate.

Studies need to be done on the wider effect on the economy not having an NBA season has. Alot of people have jobs that are tied to the league who don't have the liberty of having 5 instead of 7 Bentleys, Ferraris, or Rolls.

Clippers_FTW
CTB MVP X1
Posts: 4543

us.gif
votes: 11

I like the 50 percent but with that floater thing they were talking about... so between 50-52 1/2 percent or 53 percent.

SamMays
CTB MVP X1
Posts: 4022
votes: 53

I wouldn't call the players greedy, but I do think they're being foolish...

They've drawn a line in the sand saying they will only give back and give up so much. They are being inspired to stick to it by union bosses who have to find a way to win to justify their salaries and positions. If the union leaders said lets take 51% and a punitive cap, the rest of the players would fall in line quickly...

But, I think, the union leaders are misreading the determination of the owners and have a false sense of their importance and a false sense of their ability to win this...

There was a great line in "North Dallas 40," delivered by John Matusak... "We're not the team. They're the team (meaning owners and coaches). We're just the equipment."

I think that is more true of football, but to a strong extent its also true in basketball. Most fans are loyal to the team, not the player. Lebron didn't take most of the Cleveland fans with him to Miami. When a favorite player leaves most fans root for his replacement. Careers are short. Franchises carry on...

If there were replacement players brought in, the league would take a big hit for a few years... The old generation of stars would be gone, like Kobe and Duncan, etc... but fans would come back to their teams for the next generation of stars.

Players think they are the ones the fans come to see and that's true, but not to the degree they think... The players come and go, some good, some not so good, but I remain a Clipper fan... Whether that means watching Blake Griffin, or Tom Garrick. New stars replace old and the game goes on, because it's the franchises that have the fans. The players just borrow them for a short while.

In a very real way, the players are just the equipment.

FightOnRon
CTB MVP X1
 Avatar
Posts: 4729
Location: The Darkside
us.gif
votes: 37
It's our fault,,,for this and all professional sports. We keep going along with the price increases,,for decades,,and hence the allowed the owners and players to get greedy realizing what a cash cow pro sports are. My first ticket to a CLipper game was 25 bucks,,at the Sports Arena,,lower level about 20 rows back center court. When the price went to 30 did I stop going,,no. When they moved to Staples did I stop,,no. DO I pay 100 bucks a ticket now,,,well no but I would if it were a great seat. So it's our fault. I....

Please log in to view the entire post.

SamMays
CTB MVP X1
Posts: 4022
votes: 53

I think you were sitting right next to me... I had those tix for six years. I sold them only when I moved out of LA. I suffered through some miserable seasons. I remember going to a game and the place was so empty, you could actually hear the clock ticking down...

I literally couldn't give my tickets away when I couldn't make it.

clipper*joe
CTB MVP Champion
 Avatar
Posts: 15883
Location: los angeles
calif.gif
votes: 125

"Everything changed last year, though. The Heat’s value went up 17 percent, according to Forbes Magazine, because of LeBron James. In a recession, amid a system so broken that the sport is now locked out, no other team in the NBA had that kind of spike. And union chief Billy Hunter revealed the other day that Arison, for obvious reasons, is more eager than most owners to end the work stoppage. Arison has more to lose, and more to gain, than anyone in this rich man’s game."

Like I've been saying, one player alone can make these greedy self-indulged owners money hand over fist. Now how much is a 17% increase in revenues for a team? What fraction of that is LeBron making?

According to Newton’s third law of motion, however, every action is accompanied by an equal and opposite reaction. And, in the case of the NBA lockout, the equal and opposite reaction is named Dan Gilbert. Gilbert bought the Cleveland Cavaliers in 2005 for $375 million. According to Forbes, the small-market Cavaliers became the fifth most valuable franchise in the league with James, worth nearly $500 million. And now you know why Gilbert wrote that hateful, angry letter about James in crazy computerized crayon. The Cavs dropped in value more than any franchise in the league last year, 26 percent, losing as much as $250 million in value, according to some experts.

Wasn't this what I was saying yesterday in the other thread? This article was posted today so don't go thinking I got my ideas off a writer...easy concept. Cavs without LeBron according to sources, lost as much as 250 million in value! How much is LeBron making????? What? 14 million?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/10/23/2 ... z1bZJM6Tv5

That is the reason why I side with the players. The impact of a franchise is so huge in terms of profit if you get the right player on your team.

Players fill the seats, not the team name or owner!

youngkano
Clipper Starter
Posts: 458
votes: 4

I kinda see both sides to it. I think a 50-50 split should be fair, i mean owners make money because of the players, at the same time if the league keeps losing money then the players wont make that money. Notice how the players who go to big market teams like LA and NY tend to make more money off endorsements and so forth. See what's messed up is the players who are in their rookie contracts and players who are 2nd or 3rd tier players that aren't making much money. While these lockouts go and players are standing firm, they are the ones not making money. The superstars are doing a tour and playing in these games where they can make 500,000 to a 1 million dollars, during the lockout, leaving the lesser tier players not getting anything. They don't get paid or even asked to play for these big event that could make them money like the superstars. You have the 2 different groups of players, the ones making money even in lockout because they are stars and those that don't make any money and waiting.

Owners alike have to understand that they are the reason for these huge contracts that they are trying to get rid of, you can't blame the players for that. If someone offered me that much money to play ball i'd say "where do i sign?"

For me it's like 52/48 and i side a lil more with the players. Eventually i think things will get figured out, I'm thinking first nba game will be Christmas Day.

FightOnRon
CTB MVP X1
Posts: 4729
Location: The Darkside
us.gif
votes: 37

For a while my ST were in the last row of 200 section, on the aisle. The year after the playoff run the entrie section was packed. That year sucked again. the following year virtually no one was int he seciton my me and my wife. Many games we literally were in the back row with no one at all sitting in front of us. And you're right, the year after that no one would even take them.

SamMays
CTB MVP X1
Posts: 4022
votes: 53

Superstars are worth every penny they get and are, frankly, underpaid. They are the ones who bring in fans with star power.. Blake Griffin, Lebron, Kobe, Nash in his prime, etc... Players like that are bigger than the game, but that is one player to a team if you are lucky... Miami has two... Fan in Toronto found it well easy to pass on seeing Chris Bosh... As Joe noted, a player like Lebron can make a franchise tick.

Then there is the next level. Great teams that don't have the hype machine of one marquee player going for them... The fans come out to see an excellent team... Boston, San Antonio, Dallas... Sure those teams have stars, or even superstars in the case of Dirk N... but Boston fans aren't going to see KG or Ray Allen. They go to see the Celtics. If the Celtics are good, they show up regardless of who is playing...

But that's only a third of the league who have either transformational players, or excellent teams. What of the rest? Those are the teams that are behind this lockout... The Lakers, Dallas, Miami don't want this strike. They are fine with the status quo... But what of Milwaukee, Detroit and fifteen other teams... They're the owners who are hawks, who need to get the NBA house in order.

So, do fan really come to see players? I think most of the time, they come to see teams and like certain players on those teams... There are only a handful of guys who rise above the game and draw fans because of the excitement they bring... Kobe, Griffin, Lebron, Wade, Nash (no longer), Durant, Rose... I would argue that there aren't but another two or three such players in the league... Carmelo? Amare? Excellent players, but if their teams don't win, they don't draw.

We are lucky to have one such player in Griffin...

I could argue that the rest of the players are overpaid. It's like going to see Fatal Attaction where Michael Douglas gets 12-million, Glenn Close gets 8-million and Anne Archer gets five million. Anne Archer is a damn fine actress, but nobody leaves their house to see her in that movie... Or Basic Instinct... Michael Douglas gets 15-million, or whatever... By association does George Dzundra get 5-million because he's the second lead. Dzundra is terrific, but nobody cares if he's playing in it or not...

All but the superstars in the NBA are interchangeable cogs in the wheel. Sure, we get attached to some of them. I happen to like Kaman. I appreciate his footwork and shooting ability, but I know he doesn't make the team go. He's a complimentary and replaceable player. If I were a Milwaukee fan, who would I go to see? If the team was good, I'd see them, but they don't have a marketable star. Jennings? Really?

BenjaSands
Clipper All-Star
Posts: 1296
votes: 3

Haha it is mind boggling to watch someone trying to argue for the players...

you know what?

F*** Em Both your arguing for either side while neither side gives a F*** about you, the fan

clipper*joe
CTB MVP Champion
Posts: 15883
Location: los angeles
calif.gif
votes: 125

I'll argue for Blake, EJ, DJ, and Kaman before I EVER argue for Donald T Sterling. Essentially, that is what you're doing...Mind boggling.

I can live without a season...My life would still function.

tense2
CTB MVP X2
Posts: 8821
votes: 20

Reason and perspective are a good thing...Here here.

SamMays
CTB MVP X1
Posts: 4022
votes: 53

Unfortunately, there are lots of people who work at the arenas and in supporting businesses whose lives don't function during this lockout.

ClipfanSince88
CTB MVP X1
Posts: 3349
votes: 21

I can still function too, but my day-to-day enjoyment level certainly goes down without pro-basketball since it is far and away my favorite sport.

Initially, I was strongly pro-owner. I think in a purely private enterprise, like the NBA is, business owners should be able to make a profit and take steps to protect their investments. I acknowledge that some teams are in financial trouble because of mismangement, but others are not. And I don't believe that the playing field among teams is level. Big market teams like the Knicks and Lakers, or teams with billionaire owners like the Mavericks, can more afford to sign players to bad contracts than other teams. But when they do that, they set the market. The smaller teams feel they have to follow suit in order to at least stay competitive on the court and keep people coming out to watch. I think that's why you saw the Bucks give big contracts to people like Maggette and Gooden last year. They felt like they had to do something to stay relevant in the East, so they way overpaid for a couple of marginal players. So, its a difficult balancing act that they small market teams have to pull off -- how to stay competitive on the court with the big market teams, while being financially responsible. A couple teams have figured out how to do it really well -- the Spurs and Jazz -- but a lot haven't. I don't want to throw OKC in the same category with the Spurs and Jazz yet because they haven't been doing it long enough and they've also had some tremendously good fortune in the draft recently. Anyway, for these reasons, I can see why a lot of owners what the system changed.

All that said, they owners have definitely lost some of my sympathy with their negotiating tactics - especially recently. I feel like the owers are responsible for stringing this situation out and having the negotiations go in fits and starts. I believe the owners (or most of them) know what their bottom line is on most issues, particularly the BRI split, and could communicate that to the players. I feel like the reason the owners are "negotiating" is more for PR purposes than out of any real interest in reaching a compromise. I'd rather have the owners say, ok players, this is what you're going to have to agree to or we're cancelling the season, than to keep being duped in to thinking there's a chance things can be worked out without the players completely caving.

tense2
CTB MVP X2
Posts: 8821
votes: 20

Unfortunately, it's usually that way....the 99% get hurt the most.

clipper*joe
CTB MVP Champion
 Avatar
Posts: 15883
Location: los angeles
calif.gif
votes: 125

Then let the guys who locked out the players sort it out. I mean, they are the ones who actually lease these venues. That falls on the owners. The owners had enough time to sort this out and if you read a lot of articles, the owners were planning and expecting a season lockout.

Go To the Top of the ThreadGo Home

or Comment Using FB

Post new topic   Reply to topic


← DTS would fire David "The Commish" Stern?

→ Chat with EP

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

register
You are an anonymous user- Register now!


Follow our Los Angeles Clippers RSS Feed, plus the Clippers Rumors RSS Feed, the LA Clippers News RSS feed, and the Clippers Forum RSS feed to get the newest updated Clippers News and Trade Rumors plus Clippers Game update in your RSS/XML reader!