CBA Judgment Day Thread

[Chris]

And boom, there goes my confidence, and most likely the season.  Whether the players like it or not, they just turned down the best offer they will ever see from the owners.  The real staring contest has begun, and it is going to turn from a negotiation to the owners simply waiting for the players to crack.  See ya in 2012.

[BASS_THUMPER]

fellas

no season?

jus take up..

http://www.youtube.com/v/oYGqXAN8R-4?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0

[Roy H.]

Stern/Silver said biggest system sticking points were contract length, length of CBA, use of exceptions by taxpaying teams ...

... and also, tax levels and the frequency of the tax.

http://twitter.com/#!/kbergcbs

That, plus they couldn't agree on the revenue split? Um, yeah, sounds like they were super close.

[hpantazo]

Is this really a surprise to anyone?

I dunno. the fact that the talks were lasting so long today and the news that they agreed on a mid-level made me a little optimistic. this blows

yea, I was optimistic that the players would realize that they are not going to get anything better from the owners and just end this today, but I guess not

[Roy H.]

Whether the players like it or not, they just turned down the best offer they will ever see from the owners. 

That's my take, as well.

[The Walker Wiggle]

And boom, there goes my confidence, and most likely the season. Whether the players like it or not, they just turned down the best offer they will ever see from the owners.  The real staring contest has begun, and it is going to turn from a negotiation to the owners simply waiting for the players to crack. See ya in 2012.

Decertification? With the reputation's of both Hunter and Stern suffering.

Also worth noting for those taking sides, via David Aldridge:

League also says it was union that first floated 50-50 concept.

[nickagneta]

And boom, there goes my confidence, and most likely the season.  Whether the players like it or not, they just turned down the best offer they will ever see from the owners.  The real staring contest has begun, and it is going to turn from a negotiation to the owners simply waiting for the players to crack.  See ya in 2012.

I wouldn't be so sure. If the agents can get the players to de-certify and this goes nuclear, Stern could be in trouble and then we might be back to square one and settling somewhere around the numbers we have seen recently.

If the union doesn't de-certify, then its a staring match that both sides lose at, in the long run because fan confidence will be lost, money from a lost year of salaries will never be recouped, and the owners will eventually have to give all that television money back and deal with empty buildings and smaller future revenues as the fans will take a while to return.

More than likely this means the owners will get what they want, but its probably a Pyrrhic victory.

[JSD]

Oh man... I am bumming pretty hard right now.

[hpantazo]

what kind of drawback do the players have for de-certifying?

[Roy H.]

Another GM: "I think the best case scenario now is 50 games, but I can see the whole season gone."  http://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA

Sweet!

[Roy H.]

I don't see decertification as a magic bullet. The only thing it's going to do is throw things into the court system, cost millions in attorneys fees, and take months and months to resolve.

[Chris]

Also worth noting for those taking sides, via David Aldridge:

League also says it was union that first floated 50-50 concept.

Well, if you believer Stern (and I know a lot of your don't), the split was not really the issue.  He claims that if they had worked out the other issues, they would have come up with a solution to the split.  

And I actually think that makes sense.  I think it has been made pretty clear over the last couple days that it makes little financial sense for both sides to hold to that last 2% difference.  However, the system is a different story, and would be worth missing games over.  

The owners want a harder cap, and the players don't, and that is what it appears really killed this.

[Chris]

what kind of drawback do the players have for de-certifying?

Well, the owners are claiming that decertifying would nullify all current contracts...and I believe that they are still waiting on a ruling from a judge on that, not sure though.

As for the problem, I think Fisher summed it up:

Fisher: "This is not just about dollars and cents for players. It's about a system for our guys to operate under."

Players don't want the cap to be any harder than it is now.

[hpantazo]

what kind of drawback do the players have for de-certifying?

Well, the owners are claiming that decertifying would nullify all current contracts...and I believe that they are still waiting on a ruling from a judge on that, not sure though.

As for the problem, I think Fisher summed it up:

Fisher: "This is not just about dollars and cents for players. It's about a system for our guys to operate under."

Players don't want the cap to be any harder than it is now.

wow, if that's the case, de-certifying would be a big sacrifice for the players

[Chris]

what kind of drawback do the players have for de-certifying?

Well, the owners are claiming that decertifying would nullify all current contracts...and I believe that they are still waiting on a ruling from a judge on that, not sure though.

As for the problem, I think Fisher summed it up:

Fisher: "This is not just about dollars and cents for players. It's about a system for our guys to operate under."

Players don't want the cap to be any harder than it is now.

wow, if that's the case, de-certifying would be a big sacrifice for the players

Right, and if there is even a remote chance that could happen, they will not even consider decertification.

Right now though, I think it is a waiting game to see what happens with the lawsuits that the two sides filed a couple months ago.