NBA Lockout Rumors: What Can Be Done To Ensure 2011-'12 NBA Season?
The possibility of not having an NFL season next year would be too much already. Losing the NBA season on top of that? The majority of the male population in the United States will have a lot of free time on their hands considering they might be free from August until May. That's nearly 10 months worth of having to resort to watching hockey, NASCAR and the early stages of the baseball season.
David Stern and Roger Goodell, please get this resolved as quickly as possible.
Not since the 1998-99 season has the NBA encountered the possibility of suffering a lockout. Even then, the league was able to resolve things in time to actually have an NBA season. The shortened year featured a number of rare occurrences with the New York Knicks becoming the second eighth seed in NBA history to defeat a number one seed and then become the first team to make an NBA finals with a seeding so low and the Los Angeles Clippers tying the NBA record for most consecutive losses to start a season at 17.
The San Antonio Spurs would win the NBA finals in a season where only 50 of the normal 82 regular season games were played. It didn't begin until February 5, 1999 and teams were forced to play back-to-back-to back nights in order to play enough games for that year to even be recognized as a season. It wasn't exactly the right way to kick off the post-Michael Jordan era as television ratings dropped and the NBA community became annoyed with the fact that monetary issues were keeping their favorite players from the hardwood.
The lockout then occurred as a result of disputes between the NBA organization and the National Basketball Players Association failure to reach an agreement on the Collective Bargaining Agreement prior to the start of the season. The idea of a CBA is an agreement met between the union and the organization, much like employees and employers except with a lot more money being involved because of the absurdity of some of the salaries a number of players are receiving. The agreement deals with revenue sharing and just how much money the players receive.
The problem between the NBA and the NBPA is the fact that Commissioner David Stern, among the team owners, wants to lower the salary cap as a means to actually make a profit. According to Stern, the NBA lost $300 million, but it is a report that is being disputed by the NBPA. I want to believe Stern, but I also saw Kanye West, Drake, Rihanna and Larry Kravitz perform at the past All-Star game, so it makes it extremely hard to believe that the NBA is in dire straits when it comes to making a profit.
Not to mention, LeBron James and Chris Bosh heading to Miami, as well as Carmelo Anthony and Amare Stoudemire heading to New York, have put television ratings to their highest in years. Either way, the NBA looks to cut players salaries by as much as 30 percent coming into the new season. The situation has become so serious that representatives are telling the players to save their money in case a lockout does occur.
Whether Rashard Lewis's $120 million will be alright is a concern that haunts my dreams every night.
If we know one thing, it's that money makes the world turn. As much as we want to believe that love and harmony does, it's actually money that turns the gears of the world. The NBA is no different as the owners and organization looks to save money at the expense of their employees, while the employees have no interest in giving up any of their money. A number of players have already stated that they would rather play in Europe instead of giving up a few millions to potentially save the league in the long run.
There are a few solutions to keeping this lockout at bay and it's mostly ideas that are to the dismay of the players and the fans. Aside from the idea of cutting the players salaries, the idea of contracting teams and shortening the season has been tossed around as well. Teams that aren't in big markets like Memphis or Sacramento could potentially suffer because of the NBA needing to save money.
The last thing a league wants to do is to contract, but if an agreement isn't reached by the time next season comes around there could be a few less teams. With teams like Miami, New York, and Boston living off of the concept of becoming the first teams to obtain three superstars and then surrounding them with average players, other teams with not as many funds won't be able to perform the same task to compete.
It would be a disappointment to see any sort of contraction and it would be to see the league lockout as well. Teams like the Celtics or Spurs could potentially lose some of the remaining years of quality play from their core, while a team like Miami would see their bench grow a year older. No matter what tier of the league the team is in, they will be affected in a negative light by the lockout. With no money to the players, there would be none going into the league to run.
Not until July 1st do we truly have to be concerned with the possibility of there being a lockout. Until then, we need to take advantage of the basketball we have on now because it could be gone come next October. The league could find a way to possibly split up the budget cuts between the owners and the players or just lower the percentage that the league is planning to take from the salary's of the players.
Otherwise else, the players will have to take over of their quarter salary if they want to play next season. For now, it appears that the players are not going to take this type of deal until the NBA can at least prove that they had lost $300 million next season. The players will be fine with their millions until an agreement is eventually reached, but it's the fans suffering the most from this.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?