View Single Post
Old
11-14-2012, 09:18 PM
  #18
sjaustin77
Registered User
 
sjaustin77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan View Post
Im not sure i get your conclusions... For the most part i agree wigh your analysis for the most part but then you admit theres many teams losing money and say its the owners fault... Then you say it doesnt need to change.

I dont get it... If the owners screwed up before why dont they need to change now ?

If 1/3 of the teams are loskng money why dont they need go change?

I realize the players ardnt asking for a change...and with good reason. theyve done amazinhly well. but why again dont the owners who screwed jp by their own fault need a change now?

Must they really be forced to never fix their mistakes?
Only 6 (20%) lost money over the last CBA. Only 3 lost anything significant. Except for a couple of franchises at most it was through overspending, cap circumventing contracts, mismanagement, etc. It needed some give back by players and tweaking not a major overhaul all at once like the owners want.

I have never argued it doesn't need change but it is about other issues than just taking more from the players. I'm not even arguing the players shouldn't give back. My argument is the player's proposal at 50/50 with their make whole number should be plenty. The players deserve their current contracts honored in full at 57%. And the owners shouldn't get to change all the players contracting rights.

50/50 with the players make whole saves the owners $246M/yr. There is no need to hold out for the owners make whole version. The difference is minimal.
More revenue sharing is needed and the players want that.
Changing the upfront bonus contracts is needed. No more Philly-Nashville situations.
Length isn't a huge deal to me but 8 to 10 years should be fair. The owners don't need 5 years.
I think changing the cap floor is needed so that teams aren't forced to spend over their budgets. (Most still will but this mechanism should be there).
I think changing the 2nd contracts to have better cost control over young players is needed.

The owners need to take some responsibility for how and why we got here, for the players current contracts and for the future.
They should have a chance to make really good money on their investment if they run them with even half a brain.
They shouldn't be entitled to be guaranteed to make money no matter how they operate by taking it from players or rich owners.

sjaustin77 is offline