View Single Post
09-13-2012, 11:42 PM
dun worry he's cool
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by forthewild View Post
taking a reduced HRR going forward means that future contracts will be for less, while current deals won't be affected at all, so when Granlund signs his next deal he will have a different cap to work with that is based on what ever split they agree on. what the players are banking on is continued revenue growth so while their slice of the pie is smaller, it ends up being bigger then it currently is due to revenue growth.

Also that money that would be going to escrow isn't going back to the players, since teams will be losing money it will go to help those teams reach black, i would be shocked if any player received the escrow money back if they went along with the league proposal.

to your "players are overpaid" its an opinion, it has been shown that with revenue sharing every team can be in the black, while i do share the opinion that player share has to come down, its not a concrete fact. the owners have tried to paint this picture of woe, but what they aren't saying is that those huge markets that are responsible for the biggest revenues and are driving the cap up are the reason why poor teams are struggling, even if the HRR split is smaller those teams will continue to struggle because there is no solution in asking players to give a kick back.

Last CBA seems to have been written by a dumbass who didn't at all account for what would happen if the league revenues went up, so the cap just exploded and smaller markets suffered, a smaller share for players isn't an answer its a band aid, one relocation to Canada, continuing revenue increases and we'll be in the same spot. this is why the owners are not being taken seriously by the players, the limited owners who are allowed to negotiate seem to think that players giving money back is enough, its not we will have the same issue in x years when the new CBA runs out.
No, no, no, and no.

You clearly don't understand how escrow works. You clearly don't understand how revenue sharing works. You clearly don't understand what the word "proven" means. In fact, there's not a single meaningful factual statement in your entire post.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote