• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NBA Lockout: NBPA Rejects Deal, Announces It Will File For Decertification

StillBallin75 said:
Actually, his comment isn't that far from the truth. The average NBA career only lasts a few years. Athletes should make use of the education that they receive in college, because becoming a professional athlete these days is not a sure path to economic or financial stability.
Click to expand...
LOL. I agree his point was a good one. I was just poking fun as there are people that would find the suggestion unreasonable.
 
Mustachio said:
That's like saying that the only electric company in town isn't a monopoly because their customers receive running water from the water works.
Click to expand...

How is that comparable to what I said?
 
StillBallin75 said:
Wow. Just wow. Do you even realize how the power relationships in these negotiations works? It's the OWNERS that ALWAYS have more leverage than the players. It's the owners that can survive the cancellation of a season, while many players can't.
Click to expand...


Yes, because the millions they make wouldn't support anyone....Overpaid, overpriced, and spoiled children the whole damned lot of them.....


j-mac
 
You mean I wont be able to watch some over-paid idiots run up and down for 6 months? Oh no.....
 
j-mac said:
Yes, because the millions they make wouldn't support anyone....Overpaid, overpriced, and spoiled children the whole damned lot of them.....


j-mac
Click to expand...

And what precisely does that make the owners, who just sit on the sidelines or in the VIP boxes while the players actually put the product on the court, and their health and bodies at risk?

And my point wasn't that players literally can't survive a year without pay. But the owners can sure weather the storm a lot more than the players can.
 
Last edited:
StillBallin75 said:
And what precisely does that make the owners, who just sit on the sidelines or in the VIP boxes while the players actually put the product on the court, and their health and bodies at risk?
Click to expand...

The owners that charge what people will pay? You enjoy stupid questions?
 
StillBallin75 said:
And what precisely does that make the owners, who just sit on the sidelines or in the VIP boxes while the players actually put the product on the court, and their health and bodies at risk?
Click to expand...


Oh wait a minute, you mean the owners that sign the million dollar paychecks? You mean the owners that make it possible for these players to be players and not in jail, dead, or gym teachers? Those owners?


j-mac
 
Henrin said:
The owners that charge what people will pay? You enjoy stupid questions?
Click to expand...

I won't pay it which is why I'm perfectly good with no NBA.
 
1Perry said:
I won't pay it which is why I'm perfectly good with no NBA.
Click to expand...

I won't either and I'm also perfectly fine if the NBA stopped existing all together.
 
j-mac said:
Oh wait a minute, you mean the owners that sign the million dollar paychecks? You mean the owners that make it possible for these players to be players and not in jail, dead, or gym teachers? Those owners?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Or conversely, the players without whose labor it is impossible to put any sort of product on the court? If you've followed the entire process of these CBA negotiations like I have, it has consistently been the owners who have repeatedly been making unreasonable demands, not the players. It's the league and the ownership that are essentially being assholes. I don't begrudge them that - they are essentially being assholes because they can. But let's not pretend that it's the owners who are the victims and its only the players who are the whiny children.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Or conversely, the players without whose labor it is impossible to put any sort of product on the court?
Click to expand...

Which you realize are not as important as you put out. These players could easily be replaced tomorrow and you know it.

If you've followed the entire process of these CBA negotiations like I have, it has consistently been the owners who have repeatedly been making unreasonable demands, not the players. It's the league and the ownership that are essentially being assholes. I don't begrudge them that - they are essentially being assholes because they can. But let's not pretend that it's the owners who are the victims and its only the players who are the whiny children.
Click to expand...

You were probably bitching the first time an offer was put out that included less money for the players.
 
Henrin said:
How is that comparable to what I said?
Click to expand...

Seriously, I need to explain it to you? Because the NBA and other organizations like MLB offer different products to the same consumers, much like Electric and Water companies.
 
Henrin said:
Which you realize are not as important as you put out. These players could easily be replaced tomorrow and you know it.
Click to expand...

No. They can't. Not without seriously disrupting the quality of play, if you know anything about professional basketball. You're talking about the 400 best basketball players in the world. If what you said were the case, it would have already happened.

You were probably bitching the first time an offer was put out that included less money for the players.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was. Not because I'm against giving less money to the players and more to the owners. It's because the initial offer by the league was a complete joke and wasn't made in good faith. When your starting point is completely unreasonable, you can spin any subsequent concessions as honest, good-faith concessions and paint the other side as being unreasonable, when nothing can be further from the truth.
 
Last edited:
StillBallin75 said:
No. They can't. Not without seriously disrupting the quality of play, if you know anything about professional basketball. You're talking about the 400 best basketball players in the world. If what you said were the case, it would have already happened.
Click to expand...

College ball is extremely popular. I would argue that the NCAA tourney is both more popular and more exciting than the NBA playoff's.
 
1Perry said:
College ball is extremely popular. I would argue that the NCAA tourney is both more popular and more exciting than the NBA playoff's.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't disagree with that. I actually enjoy college ball to a great extent, the atmosphere is different and the style of play is different. However, at the end of the day they are two different products that cater to two very different (if sometimes overlapping) markets.

My point is, that if the NBA replaced all 400 of its professional players today with the 400 best college players, that the quality of play would drop off severely, and the you can be damned sure that ticket revenues would drop off as well. By quality of play, I mean things like defensive ability, offensive execution, individual skills such as shooting ability, speed and athleticism, etc. And basically the overall talent level would drop off It simply won't be the same product.
 
Last edited:
StillBallin75 said:
No. They can't. Not without seriously disrupting the quality of play, if you know anything about professional basketball. You're talking about the 400 best basketball players in the world. If what you said were the case, it would have already happened.
Click to expand...

That is big claim you are making there. Want to prove that? The NBA has failed to prove that in the past, so I'm looking forward to you somehow pulling it off.



Yes, I was. Not because I'm against giving less money to the players and more to the owners. It's because the initial offer by the league was a complete joke and wasn't made in good faith. When your starting point is completely unreasonable, you can spin any subsequent concessions as honest, good-faith concessions and paint the other side as being unreasonable, when nothing can be further from the truth.
Click to expand...

If you say so.
 
Henrin said:
No ****. Want to tell me anything I didn't already know?
Click to expand...

You were the one who suggested that the NBA was not a monopoly because other professional sports leagues cater to the same fans, not me :shrug:
 
StillBallin75 said:
Or conversely, the players without whose labor it is impossible to put any sort of product on the court? If you've followed the entire process of these CBA negotiations like I have, it has consistently been the owners who have repeatedly been making unreasonable demands, not the players. It's the league and the ownership that are essentially being assholes. I don't begrudge them that - they are essentially being assholes because they can. But let's not pretend that it's the owners who are the victims and its only the players who are the whiny children.
Click to expand...

The owners were very wealthy before any of these players were signed to anything, so if you think that ending the league means anything in the long run to any of them, you are mistaken. Who it does hurt are the fans that love the game. The children that look up to these over indulged children. The industries that make money off of the sport. These players, and the owners both make more off of the people that enjoy the sport, and you know the real sad thing? The average working stiff like myself at this point can't afford to take my son to a game. And that sucks! So end it all, get rid of them, and start over.


j-mac
 
StillBallin75 said:
I wouldn't disagree with that. I actually enjoy college ball to a great extent, the atmosphere is different and the style of play is different. However, at the end of the day they are two different products that cater to two very different (if sometimes overlapping) markets.

My point is, that if the NBA replaced all 400 of its professional players today with the 400 best college players, that the quality of play would drop off severely, and the you can be damned sure that ticket revenues would drop off as well. By quality of play, I mean things like defensive ability, offensive execution, individual skills such as shooting ability, speed and athleticism, etc. And basically the overall talent level would drop off It simply won't be the same product.
Click to expand...

Some, not severely and the players brought in would improve their game over time.
 
Henrin said:
That is big claim you are making there. Want to prove that? The NBA has failed to prove that in the past, so I'm looking forward to you somehow pulling it off.





If you say so.
Click to expand...

If you look at basketball talent level on a bell curve, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the talent of the second 400 best players in the world would be a severe dropoff from that of the first four hundred.
 
1Perry said:
Some, not severely and the players brought in would improve their game over time.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. The average basketball player peaks in his early to mid twenties, so while some development is certain to take place, for most of those college players it peaks very soon.

In any case, the the talent of those players won't come close to the talent level of the first four hundred. This phenomena is evident every year in the draft. You only have a small segment of the draftees - perhaps a fourth or a fifth out of the total sixty players drafted - who will actually go on to have a stable career in the NBA.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Yes and no. The average basketball player peaks in his early to mid twenties, so while some development is certain to take place, for most of those college players it peaks very soon.

In any case, the the talent of those players won't come close to the talent level of the first four hundred. This phenomena is evident every year in the draft. You only have a small segment of the draftees - perhaps a fourth or a fifth out of the total sixty players drafted - who will actually go on to have a stable career in the NBA.
Click to expand...

Most of these players will be among those in the NBA anyway. If there was a way to equalize the teams, I'd say the league would be far better at that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom