View Single Post
11-14-2012, 05:18 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,854
vCash: 500
I have an idea. Since the players are holding on to the delinked structure, I think the owners should play along. First, you tell them that in order to accept their delinked structure that they believe so strongly in, they want a minimum of 8 years CBA length.

Year 1: 1.8B + 1.75% raise = 1.91 B
Year 2: 1.91B +1.75% = 1.94B
Year 3. 1.94B + 1.75 = 1.97B

This is where the union says that that the league should reach a 50/50 split. Now have the union put up or shut up with their framework and projected numbers that they've stood behind for so long and claim to strongly believe in.

So those first three years are delinked. For every year that revenue growth doesn't equal 7.2% growth, the owners will recoup the difference in year 4 of the CBA where linkage comes back into play. By year 5, it goes straight to a 50/50 for the rest of the contract. So basically, year 4 is where the league potentially gets reimbursed for any shortcomings of the PA's projected numbers.


Year 1: Growth is 2.2% that means that the owners will add 5% to their already 50% in Year 4.

Year 2: Growth is 4.2% that means the owners will recoup another 3% in year 4.

Year 3: Growth is 6.2% that means the owners will recoup an additional % year 4.

Year 4: The collective difference would be 9% so in this year, the owners end up getting 59% while the players get 41%.

Year 5: League is all squared up from the PA's delinked structure and 50/50 is implemented for the remainder of the CBA contract.

Owners should challenge the players that if they want to change the status quo of linked salaries, they should burden the responsibility for their proposal because it's them that have faith in it, not the owners.

Just for kicks, I'd love to see their reaction to this. I don't think they'd go for it though, lol. Even if the players do agree to it, the owners stand to gain far more because that 7.2% is fixed and they must meet that condition. And the chances are that any repercussions of a lockout will be felt immediately after the lockout so if the owners agree to take the risk up front and give the players the potential rope to hang themselves with their delinked framework, then the owners will be recouping the difference at a point where revenues should be expected to be back up on the rise.

Ari91 is offline