Re: Down on the Plantation...
posted at 11/10/2011 1:49 PM EST
In Response to Re: Down on the Plantation...
[QUOTE]Not sure of your point, Yaz, but maybe you are saying that players are not "slaves on a plantation" because they make so much money? No, they are not on a plantation. But, some of the rules that some folks advocate would make them captive to their team forever. If that's the case, then they will have no leverage to get paid those millions of dollars that buy the homes you picture. Now, why should they get these huge contracts anyway, right? Because they are the reason there's a product. Its their talents that the fans come to see and to cheer for. So, the owners can't make mega millions without them so they deserve part of the money. Normal workers don't individually create such high value. If fans, television, advertising, etc all pay huge amounts of money because of the players - then the players deserve part of the profits for what they created. If they, as workers are not valuable enough to drive ticket sales and tee shirt sales and television contracts (ie. they are easily replaceable) , then they don't deserve the money. Players deserve the right to negotiate with other teams in a reasonably open market after they've fulfilled their requirements of an initial contact. I don't know if its 4 years or 6 years but after some time, they deserve free agency and without so many restrictions that they have no rights. To do otherwise would make them "captive workers" and they WON'T have the right to share int he megamillions of revenue and profits that they generate for owners. I want workers everywhere to share in more profits but especially where the workers ARE THE PRODUCT!!!
Posted by Celtsfan4life[/QUOTE]
I agree 100% .... the workers are the product. I have no problem with free agency - it has hellped both the recent Celtics and Red Sox. The days that Curt Flood (also baseball, but you probably know) that started to get the strangle hold on players broken has been invaluable to the pro games we enjoy.
It has also driven the cost of everything up.
The team owners are JUST as guilty here as anyone, because they have been willing to pay the higher and higher rates for FA stars and super stars. I don't cry over the pain the owners have casude themselves ... they are cutting their own throats - not fatally, yet.
But the agreement between the owners and players in the NBA is roughly over 1% to 2% of the total gross of basketball income.
It is silly to lose the fans, cost peripheral businesses and employees their businesses and jobs, over this power play.
I realize soft salary caps and hard salary caps are involved and surely other things I have no idea what might be ...
But to go to the point that they are calling the owners slave owners is just trying to cause incindiery feelings, not resolve things. If they aren't trying to resolve things, then bump them all. Play in Italy. Or Latvia ....
I'm not happy with either side.
I walked away from baseball for a couple of seasons after the '87 work stoppage ... the wife and I had a blast watching the kids play - Little League ... even, and especially the LL World Series ... Tom's River won and we enjoyed it for the fun of it.
I've volunteered several years and helped start booster clubs for everything from soccer to robotics ... meaning, there's plenty of other stuff to support, I guess. (No one -or not many - really need(s) to start booster clubs for football and basketball ...) And for the pleasure of watching kids grow and develop ...
But these pros, these "poor little rich men," start to wear on me when they cry foul ... they have had almost 60% of the basketball income for the last several years (57%). I can understand not wanting to give up that percentage, but you know what, I'm earning nearly 40% less now than 5 years ago. A lot of us as earning less ...
The team owners, btw, pay for the costs so the show goes on. There should be some compensation for them.
I'll boil it down to this ...
Several times before, other leagues have started up. Some have failed - even most - but some have succeeded. If there is really a desire to be free of the control of owners, start the players league.
The ABA, the AFL, the USFL, even the three on three street leagues (I don't recall the name of it or them), the countless boxing and wrestling associations ... all break offs, mutinies, new chances ... bucking the establishment.
But the need to say the owners are running a plantation? I don't think so.
I've been a Celtic fan since 1963. I am glad for the players these days not having to have off season jobs, like in the old days. I am glad they have a union to stand up for them. But I'm also glad we had the owners who put up the initial cost and the operating costs so that the game can be played at all.
The chicken or the egg, which one came first? That is not really the question. The question is, can one do without the other? The answer is, not for long.