Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Dude - the league financials over the past 20 years or whatever don't matter. Like they literally don't fucking matter at all. 

Do you understand how CBAs work?

CBA doesn't change the starting place of league revenues/ profits.  The money has to exist first.

 

Or maybe the shirts are some weird support of paying back the NBA?

Edited by Iceman
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Murfdogg21 said:

Then pay them what they are owed after the owners are made whole for keeping the league running at a loss forever. 
 

Did they add WNBA to the NBA2k games as an excuse to divert some of the profits to women? I can’t imagine more than 5 people bought those games to play WNBA mode. 

If you can customize the players’ ratings I guarantee you kids are playing as them. If you’ve got sons watch them play fortnight online with their friends. Half the time are playing as female skins or even animal female skins. 

Posted

Ultimately it doesn’t matter to us and it shouldn’t. Whether napheesa collier gets the money or the owner of the Dream doesn’t impact my day.  But the players argument is very entitled and tone deaf.   You’re the product that has been losing money eh for 25 years but you think you’ve been getting the short end this whole time?  Add in the fee a ct that some of the players and fans loathe the reason why they’re even in this situation makes it pretty easy to root against them 

Posted
58 minutes ago, Iceman said:

The money has to exist first.

The money does exist. They aren't negotiating based on what the W pulled in revenue-wise in 2009. 

I don't know what the numbers are or are going to be but they are exponentially increasing and the players deserve to negotiate a good deal for themselves. 

The whole "the league loses money" thing is fucking retarded, anyway. Businesses lose money and gain revenue and valuation all the time. They wouldn't be selling expansion franchise for 9 figures if it was a shitty business to get into. 

The fact that there are pages upon pages of WNBA discussion here when a few years ago it was maybe a handful of posts every once in awhile should signal to everyone that it is a business quickly growing in the right direction. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

That's an incredibly shitty, and not true, analogy.

A more accurate analogy would be a C-list actor on a low budget TV show asking for a raise after the show he's on gets syndicated and the revenues go up 400% overnight.

WNBA players get anywhere between 9% and 20% of league revenue (depending on source).  NBA players get 50% (as do MLB, NFL players get 48%).  It is my understanding that WNBA players are asking for the similar % of revenue as these other leagues.  Obviously their salaries will be much lower - but they wound be earning the same % as their NBA counterparts.

 

1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I think the difference in total revenue, and more accurately the revenue/expense ratio, is what drives the lower comp%.  One would think that expenses will be more static so as revenue increases, a larger share should be available for salary. 
 

unless things like travel and arena rental are somehow subsidized or offered at a discounted rate, which will go away as revenue can cover it. 

 

1 hour ago, boilerhorn said:

The NFL has existed for over 100 years.  The NBA has been around for 75 years.    As recently as the early-to-mid 1980s, some NFL players had offseason jobs to supplement their pay.  Today, the average NFL player makes $3.2mm.  In 1985 it was $160k.  Players claimed it was 28% of revenue; owners claimed it was 44%.  Regardless, they NFL was making a profit.

Right now, the WNBA is 27 years old and (allegedly) loses $40mm on $200mm in revenue (2023).  Revenue is clearly rising, as it was $102mm in 2019.  In 2019, they were paid around 17% of league revenue and now around 10%.  When costs are 120% of revenue, it is difficult to justify giving everyone a raise, but (as already noted before) we really do not know how the WNBA manages its P&L.

NBA's CBA has players at 49%-51% of BRI (Basketball Related Income).  WNBA should strive for that.  The real problem is how is "income" calculated?  Is it gross?  Is it net?  If net, they get nothing.  The WNBAPA will need a really capable negotiator and financier on their side for the next few rounds of CBA negotiations.  And clarity in how they report and manage P&L.

 

Pato’s response in the middle quote was the answer. Businesses have to recover overhead and operating expenses. The more profitable a league is, the higher the % will go to the players. WNBA has been losing money at their current salary range and they want more???

Posted
1 hour ago, Iceman said:

CBA doesn't change the starting place of league revenues/ profits.  The money has to exist first.

 

Or maybe the shirts are some weird support of paying back the NBA?

I want these women to get paid. The league is on the precipice of being financially solvent for the first time in its three decade history. The players need to remember that in order to get substantially more money in their contracts they have to e to generate more revenue. The old heads on their way out of the league will grumble that they never got what they deserved, but honestly I do not care. This league is so close to better paydays, but they still have to see an uptick in revenue far past the break even point before they get paid.

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

All the men’s sports leagues went through these same growing pains. 

Well for sure they did. Elgin Baylor spent weekends serving his country while playing. Guys made very little and worked in the off-season in regular jobs in football and basketball especially.
 

Something that I live by in life is that I hope I do something to make the lives of people and generations I will not be alive to see, better. Some of these players need to adjust their thinking to something similar. They may not reap a financial windfall, but they are laying the groundwork for future generations of players and perhaps revenue growth will help them in their later years with a better pension and healthcare. The instant gratification mindset never leads to long-term stability.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, ztejas said:

The money does exist. They aren't negotiating based on what the W pulled in revenue-wise in 2009. 

I don't know what the numbers are or are going to be but they are exponentially increasing and the players deserve to negotiate a good deal for themselves. 

The whole "the league loses money" thing is fucking retarded, anyway. Businesses lose money and gain revenue and valuation all the time. They wouldn't be selling expansion franchise for 9 figures if it was a shitty business to get into. 

The fact that there are pages upon pages of WNBA discussion here when a few years ago it was maybe a handful of posts every once in awhile should signal to everyone that it is a business quickly growing in the right direction. 

Those investments are little to no risk when the NBA will back the W and their losses no matter what. 
 

Don’t think anyone would complain about the WNBA eating what it kills and if they can finish the season in the black for the first time in their history the players deserve to share in that to some degree. 
 

They would have far leas backlash if they focused on what they have earned and grown the last five years instead of the line that they are “owed” anything. It’s simply tone deaf. They make more than the median US salary for about 4 months of work. Those with endorsements make far more. 
 

Their entire PR apparatus needs to be fired and restarted from scratch. 

Posted
1 minute ago, ChickenSandwich said:

They would have far leas backlash if they focused on what they have earned and grown the last five years instead of the line that they are “owed” anything. It’s simply tone deaf. They make more than the median US salary for about 4 months of work. Those with endorsements make far more. 
 

Their entire PR apparatus needs to be fired and restarted from scratch. 

I mean yeah dude you're preaching to the choir. 

Posted
2 hours ago, Underdog said:

I may be in the minority here but I don’t want to see women dunking on the regular. 

The lack of the dunk or the presence thereof is not a factor for me.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Iceman said:

The lack of the dunk or the presence thereof is not a factor for me.

 

It would be nice to see from time to time I suppose.  I neither expect nor want them to be as athletic as men generally

Posted
4 hours ago, Iceman said:

The lack of the dunk or the presence thereof is not a factor for me.

 

Its the lack of athleticism that is so jarring to me. When you are used to seeing NBA caliber athletes racing up and down the court with 3X the ball handling capabilities (for the most part) and the game played above the rim, its impossible for me to pay attention to the slow plodding drafthorses in the WNBA.  I turned on the all star game for about 5 minutes in the 3rd qtr last night and the only shots that were made were layups (and they missed a few of those). Every mid-range and three was bricked. Granted its an allstar game, and even the mens version sucks due to effort, but the WNBA is basically still a layup drill. I don't know if its still the case, but a few weeks ago I checked stats and like 15 of the top 50 scorers in the WNBA had a FG% under 40%. In the NBA last regular season, there were zero players in the top 50 shooting under 40%. The problem is far too many of them play a version of basketball that is unappealing.  

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, d2o said:

 

 

 

I am so glad she chimed in with that. Perhaps off the top the NBA can recoup some of their investment. Let’s give them back 60 million which is five years worth of financial support. Now split the money from there. 
 

The NBA wouldn’t do that because it’s a pittance compared to what they haul in, but thinking all of a sudden these players will just get to take in 200 million when only one player is getting them attention right now is silly. Bueckers will be her own cash cow for the league soon enough, but not yet. The team owners can basically let them hold out and strike if they want. They are not in any kind of position to be making demands yet. Not that these women understand they need to have long-term thinking. I expect them to make ridiculous demands, go on strike and then come back to an owner-friendly deal due to their lack of planning this stuff out for the long-haul.

Edited by UpperWestside
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, d2o said:

 

 

 

Is she going to pretend that WNBA salaries haven't increased since 1997? A quick google search shows that the average salary has increased from $28K in the first year to $125K in 2025, so I'm not sure what her point is with that comment. Another interesting data point is that google tells me the NBA first turned a profit in 1971. In 1970 the average NBA salary (35K) was 4X the average salary for the US worker. In 2025 the average WNBA salary is $125K which is about 2X the average US salary. BUT the men were playing 82 games a season and the women are only playing half of that. those extra 40+ games translates into more revenue. Its likely they are gonna have to up the workload. I don't know if that is a sticking point for them or not. Do the networks want 2X the inventory? 

Everyone knows the women are going to get a raise with the next CBA agreement, the only question is how much. The shirts are simply a ploy to get attention and try and win the public favor on their side. Because we all know a raise is coming, and nobody has any clue about the league financials( how much is lost, if any, AND who is actually losing the money) its near impossible to know if the players are too far out over their skis in negotiations. As far as I can tell neither side has leaked specific data points, only that they aren't close. I'm in it for the trainwreck at this point, so I can only hope they choose to strike, just for the lulz. But eventually all the leverage is with the owners(it always is), so a deal will get done before the players starve to death. 

Edited by Blotto
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

That’s the big thing- how does work stoppage hurt the owners?

meanwhile, how many of these women will be hurting financially pretty quickly if they aren’t getting paid by their team?

These women all have overseas options. Many of those teams pay better than the WNBA and include benefits such as housing and travel allowances.  
 

Always cracks me up when fans side with the billionaire owners over those ‘selfish’ players. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

These women all have overseas options. Many of those teams pay better than the WNBA and include benefits such as housing and travel allowances.  
 

Always cracks me up when fans side with the billionaire owners over those ‘selfish’ players. 

They should take them if they’re getting hosed over here.  

Posted
23 hours ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

What do you think they’re owed?  
 

because right now they’re a collection of actors that have lost money in every single movie r the hey make for the last 25 years.  

This, they are "owed" a damn thing.  

They don't want to be paid based upon the revenue they generate as is the case with the NBA, NFL, MLB etc.... but paid what they think they are worth which they can ask for and the WNBA owners most likely will tell them to pound sand.

So, how badly do they want to get paid what they are "owed"?  Willing to strike when the play-offs come around or is it too big a risk ESPN will simply slide in replays of the 2023 World Axe Throwing Championships and Dodgeball.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
37 minutes ago, PGFrog said:

This, they are "owed" a damn thing.  

They don't want to be paid based upon the revenue they generate as is the case with the NBA, NFL, MLB etc.... but paid what they think they are worth which they can ask for and the WNBA owners most likely will tell them to pound sand.

So, how badly do they want to get paid what they are "owed"?  Willing to strike when the play-offs come around or is it too big a risk ESPN will simply slide in replays of the 2023 World Axe Throwing Championships and Dodgeball.  

This wouldn’t be a topic if Caitlin Clark were t around tbh.  
 

and look I’ve taken a hard stance against the players and I stand by it.  On the flip side, life is more expensive so they deserve a raise of some sort.   But from the owners vantage point it’s like “I’ve been paying you for shitty results.”  
 

also league has lost more money with Caitlin.  Apparently chartering flights for 200 people over 40 games adds up.  Who knew?

Posted
1 hour ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

This wouldn’t be a topic if Caitlin Clark were t around tbh.  
 

and look I’ve taken a hard stance against the players and I stand by it.  On the flip side, life is more expensive so they deserve a raise of some sort.   But from the owners vantage point it’s like “I’ve been paying you for shitty results.”  
 

also league has lost more money with Caitlin.  Apparently chartering flights for 200 people over 40 games adds up.  Who knew?

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
11 hours ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

These women all have overseas options. Many of those teams pay better than the WNBA and include benefits such as housing and travel allowances.  
 

Always cracks me up when fans side with the billionaire owners over those ‘selfish’ players. 

Never fails and its always hilarious

Posted
20 hours ago, Murfdogg21 said:

Pato’s response in the middle quote was the answer. Businesses have to recover overhead and operating expenses. The more profitable a league is, the higher the % will go to the players. WNBA has been losing money at their current salary range and they want more???

 

2 hours ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

and look I’ve taken a hard stance against the players and I stand by it.  On the flip side, life is more expensive so they deserve a raise of some sort.   But from the owners vantage point it’s like “I’ve been paying you for shitty results.”

Profitability and revenue generation is not the players' responsibility.  The average WNBA player makes less than the average WNBA employee, which is completely out of whack. Of course they want a larger share of league revenue, if you don't understand why, you're a complete fucking dolt.

Given her salary history, the league commissioner likely makes 40x what Caitlin Clark is going to make. Does that seem fair to you?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, PGFrog said:

Willing to strike when the play-offs come around or is it too big a risk ESPN will simply slide in replays of the 2023 World Axe Throwing Championships and Dodgeball.  

Their playoffs take place as football starts on all levels. No one would notice the absence.

20 minutes ago, d2o said:

Never fails and its always hilarious

It's not siding with billionaires to say something isn't owed (or earned).

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

 

Profitability and revenue generation is not the players' responsibility.  The average WNBA player makes less than the average WNBA employee, which is completely out of whack. Of course they want a larger share of league revenue, if you don't understand why, you're a complete fucking dolt.

Given her salary history, the league commissioner likely makes 40x what Caitlin Clark is going to make. Does that seem fair to you?

I may be a dolt but at least I’m not a tech fan.   But ok brainiac,  you tell us how much the women should make. Keep in mind the owners are losing money at 9% and would likely shutdown at 50%.  At this point, they should go to law school or go bag groceries.   Also, this is a voluntary sport right?  No one is a prisoner. Like it, or if you want the big bucks, go to med school or play overseas. 
 

Pay Caitlin Clark whatever she wants. Everyone else is a ham sandwich 

 

*edit. Just looked it up.  Roger Goodell makes 64M, which I think is more than any player, including Pat Mahomes.  I'd guess Englebert is around 6 million or so?  I'd pay Caitlin more than that if I could.  She's the league

Edited by Im_smarter_then_you
Posted
12 hours ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

These women all have overseas options. Many of those teams pay better than the WNBA and include benefits such as housing and travel allowances.  
 

Always cracks me up when fans side with the billionaire owners over those ‘selfish’ players. 

This is categorically not true. Thanks to a combination of no salary caps, unsavory oligarch ownership, and in some places big-spending owners attached to very profitable men’s soccer clubs who have their women’s team as a vanity project— a top tier (like, maybe a dozen) of American players can land big salaries. The vast majority make nowhere near that much and it needs to be repeated: that is mostly thanks to no salary cap which means teammates are all really on the struggle bus. 
 

This debate about women’s sports overseas and especially Europe is so unanchored in reality. In every metric from fan attendance to participation at the youth league Europe lags far behind America in women’s sports. There is no mass audience for women’s basketball in Europe, viewership and attendance lags well below the W.   
 

The W is actually trying to put the league on a viable footing and have some equity in the revenue sharing (hence the CBA, a thing that does not exist in overseas leagues and the non-stars make basically nothing). The salaries for Americans in Turkey at the top clubs are sort of like if Hal Steinbrenner and Jerry Jones decided to start women’s teams as a vanity project and pay whatever they felt like. Sure, you’d get some big money for 5-10 players but it’s not a way to grow the sport or make it a sustainable way of life for even most pro-level players. 
 

Watching these sportswriters and players talk about salaries and benefits in Ekaterinburg pre-2022 was especially crazy making.  They weren’t getting paid to play basketball. They were getting paid to serve as a cut-out in a complicated money laundering and international sanctions evading scheme for one of Putin’s favored oligarchs.  And yeah, that was a pretty sweet gig but is wholly irrelevant for the economics of a legitimate women’s basketball league. 
 

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/4456252/2023/04/27/wnba-salaries-overseas/

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
49 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

 

Profitability and revenue generation is not the players' responsibility.  The average WNBA player makes less than the average WNBA employee, which is completely out of whack. Of course they want a larger share of league revenue, if you don't understand why, you're a complete fucking dolt.

Given her salary history, the league commissioner likely makes 40x what Caitlin Clark is going to make. Does that seem fair to you?

Sounds like college sports to me.

The commissioner retired from Deloitte at 55 and I would suspect she doesn't need a significant salary which is why she was perfect for the job.

I would guess the disparity between Joey Football's compensation and the revenue sharing at Tech is a bigger multiple than the WNBA commissioner and Clark's salary.  Might be wrong, but I don't think the WNBA is paying their commissioner $3.2M. 

Posted

 

39 minutes ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

I may be a dolt but at least I’m not a tech fan.   But ok brainiac,  you tell us how much the women should make. Keep in mind the owners are losing money at 9% and would likely shutdown at 50%.  At this point, they should go to law school or go bag groceries.   Also, this is a voluntary sport right?  No one is a prisoner. Like it, or if you want the big bucks, go to med school or play overseas. 
 

Pay Caitlin Clark whatever she wants. Everyone else is a ham sandwich 

 

*edit. Just looked it up.  Roger Goodell makes 64M, which I think is more than any player, including Pat Mahomes.  I'd guess Englebert is around 6 million or so?  I'd pay Caitlin more than that if I could.  She's the league

Goodell's salary makes up 0.27% of NFL revenue. Adam Silver's salary makes up 0.08% of NBA revenue. If Englebert makes $6 million, that's 3% of WNBA revenue (reported, 2024) which makes her wildly overpaid relative to the revenue/profits the organization she leads generates (which, again, is her responsibility, not the players') and that's just one WNBA executive.

Revenue has been on the upswing since even before Caitlin Clark, and yet player salaries (as a percentage relative to revenue generation) have been going down, not up, which kind of blows up the argument that they will start getting paid a higher % as revenue increases, considering we haven't seen that happen yet.

My argument (and that of the players) is that the administrative side of the WNBA is largely overpaid compared to the players, who actually put the butts in seats.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
51 minutes ago, Herpa Derpa said:

Their playoffs take place as football starts on all levels. No one would notice the absence.

 

ESPN could simply stop running the games now and show old 30 for 30's and only a small segment would notice. 

Posted
Just now, PGFrog said:

The commissioner retired from Deloitte at 55 and I would suspect she doesn't need a significant salary which is why she was perfect for the job.

Yeah I'll believe she took a pay cut from that when pigs fly. There's a reason her salary isn't publicly disclosed.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah I'll believe she took a pay cut from that when pigs fly. There's a reason her salary isn't publicly disclosed.

As an alum from a school that never truly said what Gary Patterson truly was ever compensated i fully recognize sometimes there are things that aren't posted and maybe  this is a situation where she is getting paid significantly more than what the players are paid in the league.  Doubt you can go to Glass Door and check what the salary range for that position.

Wearing those fucking t-shirts was showed just how out of their depth the players are in this matter and they need to find their Marvin Miller or be willing to walk and take the hit for a period of time, but whatever they do don't point to what the NBA players are making because that isn't the argument and that only brings back more attention to the fact right now you are a niche' sport.  

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Herpa Derpa said:

Their playoffs take place as football starts on all levels. No one would notice the absence.

It's not siding with billionaires to say something isn't owed (or earned).

correct

The highly privileged trading in victim currency is exhausting.  You don't even work six months a year.

 

While revenues are up, so are expenses.   See adding $25 million to the budget to pay for private planes last season.

 

"The WNBA plans to commit $50 million over the next two years to provide full-time charter flight service for its teams during the season, commissioner Cathy Engelbert announced Tuesday"

 

WNBA to begin full-time charter flights, commissioner says - ESPN

Edited by ChickenSandwich
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

“Fair” and “percentage of “revenue” has no fucking place in the conversation around a league that’s not covering expenses. Coughing up 50 percent of 11 billion in a league that makes money is an entirely different mathematical proposition than coughing up 10 percent of 200 million in a league that loses money. If you don’t get that, I am sorry you are in the vast majority of people who cannot understand big numbers. 
 

And arguably, at the point the business people do deserve a higher share in the WNBA since as Fantana has pointed out— they are the ones who might be able to make the numbers eventually work. The argument right now is to funnel a greater percentage of money to the players and take it from, what, exactly— the marketers? Reinvestment into the league?  Go ahead and hire some bargain basement execs and see how this goes. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
53 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

 

Goodell's salary makes up 0.27% of NFL revenue. Adam Silver's salary makes up 0.08% of NBA revenue. If Englebert makes $6 million, that's 3% of WNBA revenue (reported, 2024) which makes her wildly overpaid relative to the revenue/profits the organization she leads generates (which, again, is her responsibility, not the players') and that's just one WNBA executive.

Revenue has been on the upswing since even before Caitlin Clark, and yet player salaries (as a percentage relative to revenue generation) have been going down, not up, which kind of blows up the argument that they will start getting paid a higher % as revenue increases, considering we haven't seen that happen yet.

My argument (and that of the players) is that the administrative side of the WNBA is largely overpaid compared to the players, who actually put the butts in seats.

The key thing you are missing is that the people on the “administrative side” have transferable skills and a market value that they can take down the road to a variety of other employers. That is true of basically all of them from league commissioner down to marketer, accountant, physical therapist,  secretary.  
 

Women point guards do not have transferable skills they can take elsewhere. 
 

So you either want this league to be run professionally, or you don’t. Or I guess you ask the secretary to take a pay cut so Kelsey Plum gets a raise? Do you want a Deloitte-quality CEO or just some person willing to give this a shot? 
 

A huge problem in sports media is allowing sports writers to write about things that are really economics or business.

Posted

Instead of player salary % of revenue, why not look at it from the perspective of % of profit, and see if nba or wnba players are better compensated.  Then you can also take a look at admin expenses. 
 

the goal needs to be increase in salaries paid by increased revenue/profit, rather than demanding it now from whole cloth and asking I guess owners and the nba to come out of pocket even more.  New media contract should help with that. 
 

I do wonder if the league does blow up in popularity from new talent over the next 5 years, if teams aren’t happy with the media deal and remaining time, if they’ll try to strong arm a new deal kind of like the players are trying to do now to them. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

 

Goodell's salary makes up 0.27% of NFL revenue. Adam Silver's salary makes up 0.08% of NBA revenue. If Englebert makes $6 million, that's 3% of WNBA revenue (reported, 2024) which makes her wildly overpaid relative to the revenue/profits the organization she leads generates (which, again, is her responsibility, not the players') and that's just one WNBA executive.

Revenue has been on the upswing since even before Caitlin Clark, and yet player salaries (as a percentage relative to revenue generation) have been going down, not up, which kind of blows up the argument that they will start getting paid a higher % as revenue increases, considering we haven't seen that happen yet.

My argument (and that of the players) is that the administrative side of the WNBA is largely overpaid compared to the players, who actually put the butts in seats.

Idk if it’s 6 million that was just a guess.  And before Caitlin there weren’t that many butts in the seat or eyeballs on the tele.  This is a charity

also you’re making my point when you’re pointing out revenue of other leagues.  The wnba is so far behind it doesn’t register

Edited by Im_smarter_then_you
Posted
14 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Instead of player salary % of revenue, why not look at it from the perspective of % of profit, and see if nba or wnba players are better compensated.  Then you can also take a look at admin expenses. 
 

the goal needs to be increase in salaries paid by increased revenue/profit, rather than demanding it now from whole cloth and asking I guess owners and the nba to come out of pocket even more.  New media contract should help with that. 
 

I do wonder if the league does blow up in popularity from new talent over the next 5 years, if teams aren’t happy with the media deal and remaining time, if they’ll try to strong arm a new deal kind of like the players are trying to do now to them. 

Players are trying to strong arm the league for a new deal.   The CBA is up at the end of this season.   I suspect the new deal will have an out for both sides at some point during the contracted period

Posted
1 minute ago, d2o said:

Players are trying to strong arm the league for a new deal.   The CBA is up at the end of this season.   I suspect the new deal will have an out for both sides at some point during the contracted period

Yeah I realized that big difference after I hit post. Normal negotiating window. 
 

guess I was trying to say the owners have their own “pay us what you owe us” sentiment with media rights. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...