NBA Lockout and Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion

[CharliePrince]

god bless twitter, twitter is truth and that's why it's so entertaining at times, these nba players are now showing the true rifts in their ranks

the most recent being Glen Davis, aka Big Baby of the Celtics, "take the 51% man and let's play!"

this amidst reports that if a deal isn't done in a week/week and a half, the owners are taking everything off the table and just drawing the line at 46/47% and cancelling the season outright

the owners believe that a lost season will be recouped in the next 10 years but will not budge from 46/47%, it'll be a take it or leave it deal

the players? I still go back to November 15..

watch total anarchy once that direct deposit isn't there anymore

truth

Outside the Lines special report
most worrysome is the fact that there is traction and a growing movement from the OWNERS of just cancelling the season outright

paraphrasing - "and if that happens, they go for the kill and drop it to 43% of BRI because it won't affect the owners whereas the players cannot even fathom missing out on 1-2 seasons' worth of paychecks.. at that point, they'll have to take whatever the deal is because there's no other choice" - Chris Broussard

[Vni]

Quote: Originally Posted by CharliePrince

the most recent being Glen Davis, aka Big Baby of the Celtics, "take the 51% man and let's play!"

Nice. Come on Glen tell em!

[da ThRONe]

Quote: Originally Posted by ScoobySnax

A good read on decertification via ESPN.com:

This can't be the players have "ZERO" leverage. None!


I'm really disappointed that the owners moved off the most important aspect of these negotiations IMO. This luxury tax system will do more to hurt parity then help. It's going to cause a much bigger gap between the large rev and med/small rev teams. We could easily see teams spending 3 or 4 times as much as some teams. This league needs a system with a definitive cap on salaries.

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by da ThRONe

I like how people can make the same points but the person you don't agree with is the one trolling. But might is right though. Especially when it's clear as day since this thread opened that the majority here are anti-player and choose to express it and almost every post.

The thing is, that's not true. It's quite frankly, blatantly obvious it's not true, and yet you don't seem to get it.

[23]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

The thing is, that's not true. It's quite frankly, blatantly obvious it's not true, and yet you don't seem to get it.

Its almost too obvious

[The 24th Letter]

Agreed on the tax aspect.

Really puts the small market teams in no better position. Shows once again that this really has nothing to do with improvement to the game IMO

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by da ThRONe

This can't be the players have "ZERO" leverage. None! I'm really disappointed that the owners moved off the most important aspect of these negotiations IMO. This luxury tax system will do more to hurt parity then help. It's going to cause a much bigger gap between the large rev and med/small rev teams. We could easily see teams spending 3 or 4 times as much as some teams. This league needs a system with a definitive cap on salaries.

LOL. You are completely full of it. You've been in this thread for weeks talking about this imaginary leverage. I've asked you several times to specify the leverage and youve ducked the question every time. I would respect it if you would have once said "Decertification" but you didnt because you know thats not true leverage.

Decert blows up the season. We've known that since June. That why Hunter hasnt done it. Its not leverage if you blow up the season because players do the same amount of damage to themselves (maybe more) as the owners. This "leverage" may move the owners 1 percentage point or it may cause the owners to call their bluff. Decert didnt work for the NFLPA and its not likely to work here. So the players can decertify and then they lose a year and are looking at getting 43% next year.

[da ThRONe]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

The thing is, that's not true, it's quite frankly, blatantly obvious it's not true, and yet you don't seem to get it.

Which part isn't true? The fact that people have been anti-players? The fact that a person is only considered trolling when they are in the minority with their opinion?

Once again the owners are more responsible for this lockout. They are losing just like the players are so for the greater good they could easily meet the players @52% and still come away from these negotiations a big winner. So I don't see how it's unreasonable to hold the owners just as responsible if not more than the players. There's a saying that nobody is suppose to come away happy after negotiations. Not here the owners will be the clear cut winners even coming up 1.5 - 2% points to end all of this.