View Single Post
Old
08-31-2009, 02:50 PM
  #74
Bluefan75
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by st5801 View Post
You're missing the larger point, which is not every team has an unlimited amount of money to put towards salaries.
The question is, though, why is that the players' problem? Owners of these teams you refer to choose to be in this business. They put out a product that gets judged nightly against other owners' product. The people put in place for that product have been valued at a certain amount by the owners.

From the players' perspective, they are nothing more than cattle. The minute they no longer are deemed of value(either by performance, or performance at a particular salary), they are cast aside. They are employees. However, they are among the few employees where their presence can have a direct relationship on revenues. Owners sign players to contracts worth $x amount of dollars because the player will bring in $y amount of revenue. And make no mistake, owners do not sign a deal for a cent they can't pay. They will cloud and couch things under different guises, however, these are successful businesspeople.

They need to generate revenues. Tickets, television rights, merchandise, you name it. Some cities can do this better than others. Forgetting the obvious question of why a franchise is in a city where this is so difficult, for a moment, the owners claim that all these cities need to have teams that are "viable" for the overall health of the league. But many people here will tell you(and I know what they are saying, and don't disagree) that the players have no say in where a franchise is located. They have no business getting involved in that.

Which leads back to the question then: if it is the owners who determine who has a franchise where, and not all of those franchises can compete for players, why is it the players' problem? Why are the owners unable to run their business in such a way that they need the employees to save them? The owners do not pay their players a share of their profits if they have a really good year.

I don't disagree with your statement. I disagree with the idea that it's the players' responsibility to fix that. By signing the CBA they did in 2005, however, the players said it was their responsibility, which is why they ind themselves in the mess they do now.

Bluefan75 is offline   Reply With Quote