SupremeCommander wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Nalod wrote:Allenfan,

The game is not a public domain. ITs private enterprise so the priority is the supply and demand.

Why would it be any different?

I believe SupremeCommander was attempting humor with the "fans" post.

I quoted for humor. But my stance is that I think both sides are denying my consumption of a product that I love because both are greedy pricks living with their heads up their asses

As opposed to us fans, who are poor pricks living with our heads up our asses?

My stance is: Don't love the product. Enjoy the product when it's there. Love the game.
Go outside and show some punk how it's done - old school. Or something like that.

Just please don't convert to hockey.

jrodmc wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Nalod wrote:Allenfan,

The game is not a public domain. ITs private enterprise so the priority is the supply and demand.

Why would it be any different?

I believe SupremeCommander was attempting humor with the "fans" post.

I quoted for humor. But my stance is that I think both sides are denying my consumption of a product that I love because both are greedy pricks living with their heads up their asses

As opposed to us fans, who are poor pricks living with our heads up our asses?

My stance is: Don't love the product. Enjoy the product when it's there. Love the game.
Go outside and show some punk how it's done - old school. Or something like that.

Just please don't convert to hockey.

I think arguing the ins and outs of this 'dispute' is laughable... if these fans took their heads out of their asses and spent their time learning, say, physics instead, we would be able to teleport to Mars by now. It's 2011 and I don't have a hoverboard. I saw 'Back to the Future'. I was expecting big things

Good point with the 'love the game'. That's a better way to put it, and why I take off work for the first days of March Madness every year

Andrew wrote:

crzymdups wrote:brilliant post, nalod.

i do think the nba needs to share the TV money better though. lakers make $150 MILLION PER YEAR on their TV deal. they should be sharing the tv money better - the league needs to get 50% of that. because lakers games wouldn't happen without the other teams. NFL shares ALL the TV money. NBA does not. the league will never be competitive if NY, BOS, LA and Chicago and other big markets can use their own tv network money. it just won't. the league's demand for more competition is a sham. if they wanted it to truly be competitive, they'd fully share all TV revenue.

and really, the idea of competition or parity in the NBA is a pipe dream - it's always been about dynasties. you get one of the transcendent talents in the sport, you are going to be a top 5 team no matter what. it's always been that way. revenue sharing can't give all 30 teams a lebron james or dwight howard or what have you.

To be fair though, the NFL and NBA is not an apples to apples compairison. NBA teams have their own cable channels that they may have invested a fair amount of money in, while the NFL teams games are all nationally televised.

I agree NFL and NBA is not apples to apples at all. For one thing, the NBA is more star-driven and the individual players actually are much more important to the product. In the NFL, the teams seem like the stars - possibly because players have a shorter career.

Which is kind of want I meant - if the NBA owners want a system like the NFL, it's somewhat unrealistic. You're talking about 48-man rosters vs 15-man rosters for one thing. In the NFL, how many pro bowl players have 12-15 year careers? It has to be less than the NBA, especially outside the QB position. So, stars are more important to the face of the NBA than in the NFL.

As for TV - a lot of those teams that have developed their own TV network get LOTS of financial gain that they are able to squirrel away outside of BRI. Once you start talking TV, it turns into a really tricky situation. But if they want a league that is truly a level playing field financially, that's one thing they need to look at. And, as far as saying the league lost $300M last year, I'm guessing that doesn't include ANY of the tv money for individual teams, which as we know in the case of the Lakers is massive - they just signed a 20 yr $3 billion dollar TV deal with Time Warner. So, that's not even a case of the Lakers having their own network, they just signed up for $150 Million a year from one of the biggest media companies in the country.

It's just a pipe dream to say other teams can compete with the Lakers financially - the Lakers are getting more off their TV deal alone EACH YEAR than most other teams make in an entire season from everything combined. The Knicks, I'm sure, are the same way. Not to mention that the Lakers and Knicks are in cultural centers where they have a richer fanbase and can afford to charge $2000 or more for a courtside seat.

I think the calls for parity and "every team having a chance" are laughable. And a distraction from what the league really wants - a bigger share of the BRI. How can Stern walk into a meeting with the players with a straight face and act like there is ANY concession the players can make to level the playing field? Leveling the playing field is all about owners vs owners. Stern is right, the system is messed up - but it has nothing to do with what the players are getting. I think the players should maybe have shorter contracts and sure give back some BRI points, 57% seems high. knock it down to 51/52% and have shorter contracts and maybe stricter luxury tax for big spenders. But don't blame the players that the Lakers make probably triple or quadruple in a year what the Milwaukee Bucks make.

He's waiting for your "Value of Tape Review for Developing Defensive Prowess" thread.

Nalod wrote:

jrodmc wrote:I'm thinking Melo's decided to read your longer rants much more closely than he normally does.

He's waiting for your "Value of Tape Review for Developing Defensive Prowess" thread.

We all know the real lure of being with MDA is he won't have to play defense!

True, but the allure has faded with the hiring of Woodson, or did you forget about that amidst all this lockout bs?

Nalod wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Nalod wrote:

jrodmc wrote:I'm thinking Melo's decided to read your longer rants much more closely than he normally does.

He's waiting for your "Value of Tape Review for Developing Defensive Prowess" thread.

We all know the real lure of being with MDA is he won't have to play defense!

True, but the allure has faded with the hiring of Woodson, or did you forget about that amidst all this lockout bs?

Woodson gonna sit at the end of the bench with a towel on his head. Knicks will make it to second round of playoffs and all will hail MDA as making good progress.

Problem is voices inside Dolan's head. The voice says: "don't resign MDA until the end of the season!"

ANd he does not.

ANd MDA will bolt to the Bulls and Woodson will get the gig. ANd kick part of his money to uncle Isiah.

MDA will run away with the league when he unleashes the thunderbolt offense in the windy city. Joakim starting the break

Knicks by then will have been turned off by Woodson, but in private. After all, its the knicks!

Not that the knicks will be doing bad mind you, just not great.

Funny, Woodson doesn't look like Marbles...

And Bulls lose in second round anyway, and MDA starts feud with Rose, and the Jerry CrumbsDorf the owner decides MDA is overpriced non-talent and MDA then goes to the Clips, where Dolan has traded away Shump for a third round draft pick and two used Stratocasters (whatever) and the world goes berzerk watching thunderbolt part quattro and the Clips never make it out of the first round, and then MDA distances himself from Sterling by getting Blake to marry his exwife...and....

Meanwhile the Knicks are back to losing consistently in the conference finals...