Blog Entry

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

Posted on: November 14, 2011 2:54 pm
Edited on: November 15, 2011 6:27 am
 
Posted by Royce Young



Read Ken Berger of CBSSports.com on the players' choice to file a disclaimer suit

It didn't take long for David Stern to respond to the players' dynamite announcement that they plan to file a disclaimer to disband the union and file an antitrust lawsuit against the league.

Stern was on SportsCenter just 45 minutes after Billy Hunter said that the "collective bargaining process has completely blown up."

"Billy Hunter has decided to put the season in jeopardy and deprive his union members of an enormous payday," Stern said.

Stern had promised over the weekend that if the players did not accept the current proposal from the league that the "reset" offer would immediately go into effect that included a 47-53 revenue split and a harder "flex" cap like what's used in the NHL. Basically, a deal the players would never accept.

Billy Hunter said that the disclaimer would be filed "in a few days," presumably to give the league time to come to its senses and offer a realistic deal to the players. But everyone should've known that David Stern would not be bullied.

"That's not happening," Stern said.

Stern said that at a bargaining session in Feb. of 2007, the players' attorney Jeffrey Kessler said this could happen. "That threat has been ongoing until now, despite the NBA's good faith bargaining," Stern said.

Stern listed all the positives he saw in the new offer like guaranteed contracts and higher average salaries, but then said, "But apparently it was not to liking of the players. We anticipated this."

The theme from Stern was passing the buck to the players. "We were very close, and the players decided to blow it up," he said. Stern called this tactic "irresponsible at this late date" and even called the disclaimer a "charade."

"It's not going to work," Stern said. "If they were going to do it, they should've done it a long time ago ... they seem hell-bent on self-destruction."

As for when the next round of games is canceled, Stern simply said, "The calendar takes care of that by itself." Which is true.

Stern passed pretty much all blame to Hunter and the lawyers for persuading the players against the current proposal saying that they got the players "all hopped up" on this stuff.

"We're about to go into the nuclear winter of the NBA," he said. "If I were one of the 450 players in the NBA, I would be wondering what Billy Hunter just did."

The NBA later released the following statement from Stern:
"At a bargaining session in February 2010, Jeffrey Kessler, counsel for the union, threatened that the players would abandon the collective bargaining process and start an antitrust lawsuit against our teams if they did not get a bargaining resolution that was acceptable to them.

“In anticipation of this day, the NBA filed an unfair labor practice charge before the National Labor Relations Board asserting that, by virtue of its continued threats, the union was not bargaining in good faith. We also began a litigation in federal court in anticipation of this same bargaining tactic.

“The NBA has negotiated in good faith throughout the collective bargaining process, but -- because our revised bargaining proposal was not to its liking – the union has decided to make good on Mr. Kessler’s threat.

“There will ultimately be a new collective bargaining agreement, but the 2011-12 season is now in jeopardy.”

Category: NBA
Comments

Since: Aug 29, 2006
Posted on: November 15, 2011 11:57 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

SCAB it, im sure the Harlem Globetrotters can ball as well as the outcoming senior class players, re-institute from scratch, lower ticket prices, have a season. Sign the players cheap, you would still get fans to come somehow methinks. So the top 20 stars in the league bail, you get young rising ones that will develop. To easy to rebuild a 20 man team with all the world talent out there. It is not limited to the US. Forget these players now, some will fold. Plenty of people in the world to recruit a new class of players....


tianyougo
Since: Nov 15, 2011
Posted on: November 15, 2011 11:57 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: Jun 25, 2009
Posted on: November 15, 2011 11:15 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

You can't have a league without players. For some reason you act as if these players are owned by the teams. If the NBA decides void the contracts, players are free to do as they please. The NBA is not the only choice, in fact it would be one of the last choices for players who just got their contracts voided.

Part of what you said is true, you can't have a league with PLAYERS... but where you're wrong is you can have a league without THESE players.  Today's NBA players didn't fall from the sky miraculously from a place nobody can ever recruit from again, don't kid yourself. They came from colleges in the U.S, highschools, overseas, etc.   There are THOUSANDS of talented kids out there ready to play ball and be paid nicely to do it, some you and I have heard of but there are many, many more that never get a chance because there are less then 400 positions available in the NBA.  And before you tell me the NBA can't replace ALL of today's players all at once and still be a good league, don't worry about that because it would never need to happen.  If the league wins in court and voids all current contracts, 75 percent of today's NBA players would be on their knees applying for jobs with the new NBA..... no doubt about it.

The players could join international teams, whose popularity would skyrocket would all the best talent in the world coming to ther league

You know nothing about basketball overseas, but since most of my family is from overseas I've followed and know quite a bit about basketball over there.  Leagues overseas could NEVER support too many NBA players on a permanent basis.  Basketball fans overseas would NEVER pay what it takes to support NBA superstars playing over there.  If owners over there raises ticket prices by the equivalent of 20 or 30 dollars they'll be shutting down their respective leagues a year later.  People overseas aren't stupid like we are here in Nort America, the novelty of NBA superstars would quickly fade and fans would not only stop going to games but protest and stop watching altogether.   And oh yeah, what a simple transition you're suggesting.  NBA players and their families move their wives, children and parents from LA or Orlando or anywhere else to Serbia or Croatia.... yeah, that's almost easy to do. 

Other groups could form leagues. And since everyone is a free agent, they could sign with whoever they want. A 15-20 team league would be much more entertaining. The talent on each team would be amazing. Salaries would still be hign for most of the players.

What other groups? Where are they? Who are they? Why haven't they already began the process of starting a new league so if and when the NBA successfully voids these contracts the new league would be ready to scoop up quality NBA players.   Or do you believe a new league can be planned overnight?  Are you kidding me?  Today's NBA players aren't willing to take a 15 or 20 percent pay cut for even one season, let alone risk their own money in a new league.    And where are you going to find wealthy people willing to risk their financial well being on a new basketball league when they know the players will become unionized just like before and slowly start asking for more and more every season????  If today's NBA can't succeed, who else is going to throw their money away???

And this 15 to 20 team league you're suggesting is pretty on paper, but the union would never have it.  A 20 team league would cost today's players 200 jobs, do you really think today's players are willing to sacrifice half or almost half the jobs that have been created?   Is that how you think players and unions operate?????????

 



Since: Nov 20, 2008
Posted on: November 15, 2011 9:46 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

urine idiot...the lakers aren't the norm....during times of economic hard times, when a losing team can't sell tickets, do the players go to management and say hey, "for the well being of the organization, we want to share in the losses, cut our pay in half this year"...you're brain dead



Since: Jun 25, 2009
Posted on: November 15, 2011 9:10 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

Trojannation, you are exactly right; however, all the NBA teams aren't functioning like the beloved Lakers.  That's the problem.  The only time some NBA teams have sellouts is when LA, Boston, Knicks, and Miami come to town.  Some teams even have triple pack game tickets when they have a horrible home schedule and basically give tickets away at the local Burger King or Taco Bell.  They don't do that when the top 5 teams in the league come to town.  Why?  Because they generate revenue.  The same ticket in the same seat for a Kings/Wolves game is double when its Kings/Lakers.  It's all about revenue.  I think the owners just want to keep it fair across the board.  The system is messed up the way it is.  Some owners CAN and are willing to pay the luxury tax and overpay for overpriced players.  If the system was different and there was a strict cap there's no way LA could have Kobe, Gasol, AND Odom, AND Bynum.  And there's no way the Heat could have Lebron AND D-Wade. 

The players should try to make as much money as they can however it has to be within market value.  The owners are trying to set that market value so it can be fair for ALL teams in the league.  Not just the top 5.



Since: Nov 12, 2011
Posted on: November 15, 2011 9:00 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

You can't have a league without players. For some reason you act as if these players are owned by the teams. If the NBA decides void the contracts, players are free to do as they please. The NBA is not the only choice, in fact it would be one of the last choices for players who just got their contracts voided.

The players could join international teams, whose popularity would skyrocket would all the best talent in the world coming to ther league.
Other groups could form leagues. And since everyone is a free agent, they could sign with whoever they want. A 15-20 team league would be much more entertaining. The talent on each team would be amazing. Salaries would still be hign for most of the players.

Down with the NBA. The fans deserve a new league!!! 



Since: Jun 25, 2009
Posted on: November 15, 2011 8:58 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

I know we fans don't have ALL of the facts, only what the media makes us aware of.  I have a hard time believing this rejection of the owners offer and pending lawsuit is unanimous by all the players.  I mean really, the only players you see in the headlines, making statements, or on twitter are guys like Kobe, Lebron, D-Wade, etc.  Mostly the starting 5 of all of the NBA teams and guys who have either already made enough money in NBA salary or have lucrative endorsement deals.  I'm curious what the 11th guy on the bench of all the teams have to say about this.  We all know them; there the ones who make $500,000 to $1 million a year who leases a home in whatever city he can find work.  And although that much money seems more than enough for most working stiffs that salary is basically "pay check to pay check" for an NBA player.  I don't think this is all 100% as the players are lending us to think. 

But, here's why people, myself included, don't care anymore.  College Football is on Saturdays.  NFL dominates Thursday, Sunday, and Monday.  Parity of the NFL pretty much makes every game watchable.  Plus we're in the second half of the NFL season.  The only time anybody hardly misses the NBA is playoff time in May. 



Since: Nov 12, 2011
Posted on: November 15, 2011 8:50 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

Please. The Lakers are a multi-billion dollar company.  They just signed a tv contract that pays them almost 3 Billion dollars over the nexy 20 years. Thats 3 billion...not million.  My math isn't that good but that works out to roughly 150 million a year for LOCAL TV rights. That doesn't count the close to 80 million plus that that it gets from the NBA for its tv contract. Then you throw in another 10 million for arena naming rights. Another 5 million for merchandise

150+80+10+5+ 245 milion a year before a single game is played. They only pay 91 million a year in salaries.  This doesn't even count 
any of the game revenue from tickets, food, beer, parking, sponsers, etc..

The BS about 38 million operating revenue is bull. That is only tickets and concession sales. They make over 245 million a year before a game is played.  

If you want to feel sorry for some billionaire who says the'worker is screwing him"  go ahead. The players are locked out. They only make what a 
team is willing to pay them....that is called capitalism! Every human being should his gods best to get the best wage he can, whether that wage is 10 bucks an hour or 10 million a year.  Quit being a hater because you can't play pro ball. These guys derserve every penny they get!


  



Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: November 15, 2011 8:40 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

Sound familiar NFL fans? The difference is that nobody cares about the NBA anymore.



Since: Feb 15, 2008
Posted on: November 15, 2011 6:42 am
 

Stern responds to players' antitrust lawsuit

Who cares if they play. College Ball is a much better game.
Yeah, only if you think the WNBA is a better game as well.

I'm verys surprised the players have taken this action. I think the owners could easily prove the case they lost a lot of money over the last couple of years in court.
Isn't that kind of moot? The players came down so far on the BRI that it would've been way more than enough for the owners to recoupe their losses. I think a court would look at the case and ask the owners, " The players just shifted over $3 billion to you guys which not only makes up for your losses, but is way more than enough..........so what's the problem?"
  Everyone keeps bringing up the owners need to make money blah, blah, blah. What everyone seems to be blind to is the fact that the players are the only one's who made concessions from the previous CBA and those concessions result in the owners making a gigantic profit.........but it's still not good enough. I think a court would side with the players just based on that.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com