View Single Post
01-03-2013, 11:27 PM
MoreOrr's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,650
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by JordanStaal#1Fan View Post
What's the point of "fixing" a system that isn't broke? What's the point of keeping teams like Phoenix and Columbus in the league? Why not expand revenue sharing?


Why must the players give something back when the owners have other option to fix their problems?

Better revenue sharing + getting rid of the teams would still REALLY lose money after revenue sharing is implimented (Phoenix and Columbus, most likely) first, then, if MANY teams still struggle, fix the system. I understand why the players are reluctant to accept what the owners propose, they are doing all the giving back. The owners make "concessions" while negociating, but they are just dropping some demands they had earlier in the process. They never GAVE anything to the PA, it is just take, take, take. What do the players get for giving back 7% of their share? Nothing. The revenues keep growing, but the owners still need the players to make concessions? Who's greedy, tell me...
Certainly wasn't broke for the players, that's for sure.

And could you be a bit more specific about what "better revenue sharing" could look like... Like you know, % $ values...??

Originally Posted by madhi19 View Post
Am fine with that but let not pretend the owners are the naive angels that get taken advantage off by the nasty PA rep. And off course you negotiate off the old CBA at least when you want to get a deal done fast.
No,... when the old CBA gives you a better deal than the proposals for the new one.

MoreOrr is offline