2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part VI: The "What Comes Before Square One?" Edition
View Single Post
11-15-2012, 09:47 AM
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by
That is what many believes, but Brooks is quoting a source denying it, but, and without having followed this so closely, I under stand Daly is also reporting.
Think of it like this. With 50/50 the players will get X when everything is said and done.
To be paid in full, under the condition 82 games is played, you will need Y amount more money than X. To put any numbers on the table -- the PA needs to assume a Y. Brooks is referring to a source who says that the PA has not demanded a set amount for Y for next season.
If Brooks source is credible, its extremely obvious that the PA wants the following. Lets say that 50% of HRR gives the PA 1.5b and that all contracts amounts to 1.7b if a full season is played. The players would want 1.5b and 200m in make whole. If 50% of revenues is lost this season due to half the season being lost, the PA would want 0,75b and 100m in make whole. Its i) ridiculous to believe that the PA even would try to get 1.5b + 200m even if half of revenues was lost (I recon it could bankrupt half the league) and ii) Brooks is also citing a source saying that not to be true.
Still, there is a ton of reports and people who seem to believe that the players want to get paid in full because -- as I understand it -- Daly twisted something to almost sound like it. It just shows the media climate the PA is working on. Imagine if Fehr would step out of a meeting and say
hey the owners are offering us 25%
, and it turned out not the be true. He would be eaten alive...
never once did i mention the guaranteed money for a full season. i understand that they will accept the money being pro-rated and i wasn't disputing that at all
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by trueblue9441