Trying to understand the un-understandable
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Trying to understand the un-understandable
The NBA is in jeopardy.
How do I know this? Because, unlike the majority of sports fans, I've been paying way too much attention to the current labor unrest. On Monday in New York, the whole "collective bargaining" situation blew up. The NBA Player's Association has dissolved, claiming unfair labor practices by the NBA and its owners. NBA commissioner David Stern responded to this announcement by saying the union's decision to dissolve was a "magic trick" that certainly wouldn't work in the courts. Stern and his owners said the union has long threatened something like this, which would make the move to dissolve nothing more than an attempt to gain leverage, not a legitimate claim that the courts will uphold. (Here's yesterday's post, if you're not yet caught up: Union rejects offer.)
Stern also dropped some hyperbole after hearing about the union's actions. "We're about to go into the nuclear winter of the NBA," he said.
Nuclear winter. Huh.
Usually when the topic of the NBA lockout comes up at a dinner party (yeah, I said "dinner party") there are three reactions. 1.) The NBA is locked out? 2.) Yeah, I heard that, but who really cares? 3.) Will they figure it out anytime soon? (vaguely interested). And then there's the fourth response, less common, but disturbing nonetheless: The way the NBA is going, it won't even exist in a decade.
This last one is more of a prediction than a generic response. While I don't agree with the sentiment, it's helpful in highlighting what might be the league's biggest mistake in all of this: overestimating the public's loyalty and desire for the NBA. It must be difficult for successful businessman, mostly billionaires, to believe one of their products is failing and diminishing in importance. And it must be even more difficult for elite athletes, millionaires, to pull off their Beats headphones, roll down the windows on their Range Rovers, and look around with eyes open, accepting that they might not have as crucial a place in the sports' landscape as they once thought.
The truth regarding all of this "collective bargaining" and "labor dispute"? I don't think many fans really care about this particular scene of he-said, he-said. I don't talk about politics because I figure if brilliant people have been arguing about these things for centuries without resolution, it's unlikely I'm going to produce concrete answers; I'm going to produce only additional slippery opinions. I think when fans look at yesterday's happenings -- the union saying the owners are unfair, the owners saying the union is unfair -- many view it through the same lense as they view politics: nobody is fundamentally right, both sides are simply using rhetoric and propoganda in an attempt to shift public opinion to their side.
Whose side am I on? The side of basketball and the side of living in reality. It's difficult to spend the evening watching the remarkable story of Gabby Giffords' recovery (nice job 20/20!), watching her struggle to find a single word representing her emotions, and then sit down the next morning and attempt to explain how strong, successful, healthy, blessed men -- I'm speaking of players and owners alike -- can so easily crush the wonderful livelihood offered to them. Why should all of us worry about the mid-level exception and whether a tax team can use it every other year or every year? The answer. I don't think we do. The two sides are so close to one another, if each would just lean forward a few inches, they'd meet in the middle.
But, nah, why expect that? Not when one side (the owners) wants to crush the other ... and not when the other (the players) has become so entitled it's willing to throw the nuclear switch to prove its manhood, its steadfastness. (If this sounds a little too intense for the situation, perhaps it's because I turned 30 today and I'm contemplating my own mortality.) In talking with everyone around the situation, it's clear what happened here. 1.) The owners wanted a blowout victory. They wanted to win on every single issue. They wanted to crush the players. They're still full-court pressing, up 50, with a few minutes left. 2.) The players were willing to concede on a number of issues. That is, until it became clear the owners weren't going to take their collective foot off the gas. Being the competitive, prideful professional athletes that they are, they rallied. They turned their back on common sense (cause, let's be honest, even if they sit out a season, the deal they just rejected will very likely be the best deal they see in this whole "charade") in favor of standing tall and locking arms and explaining to everyone that they're doing it for each other, that they're doing it for the "future generations."
So guess what owners and players? Not many people are on either of your side -- truthfully. They're on the side of seeing basketball again. They're on the side of the thousands of arena employees whose income has taken a hit through no fault of their own. They're on the side of understanding the world's current economic climate. They're on the side of the game and they're on the side of reality. But it's clear after watching this mess for four months, that we -- the fans of basketball and the ones peripherally associated -- might be the only ones standing on this side.
And we don't have a single voice in the matter.
--Kate
Each week, Kate will check in from the road and answer fan questions about the Sixers. Click here to ask Kate a question or e-mail her at kfagan@phillynews.com.
Very well written commentary that I think fits into the wider societal dynamic though I won't go into it here. I think that both the owners and players don't realize just how close they are to the edge of a slippery slope. If the players think they're going to average $5 million + anywhere else they're crazy. If the owners think they are going to see the appreciation of equity in any other (legal) business they're equally insane. I side slightly with the players because at least they seem willing to compromise. The hardliner 10 owners out there seem to want an foolproof system for profitability and competitiveness.
And happy birthday. Take it from me that "40" is more of a mortality questioning milestone than "30".— doctorhim- "...The hardliner 10 owners out there seem to want an foolproof system for profitability and competitiveness..." Uhm, you realize the NBA, like other leagues, is simply a cartel. In other words, the whole point of a league is to create a foolproof system for profits. Some teams want to win no matter the cost (e.g. NY, LA) but other teams (insert random small market) know they can't win or don't necessarily care if they don't win as long as they turn "enough profit" at the end of the day. There is nothing worse to an owner who knows his team has no shot at a title and also doesn't make "enough profit" - at that point, what's the point of being an owner. The fight between small and big market teams is essentially this - how much money should the big markets have to guarantee the small markets in order to keep the small markets interested enough to stay in the league. The players are simply casualties until the owners figure out what the owners' slice of the pie will be. The players by definition will get the rest. The hardliners want more than 50% of the pie in exchange for lying down and being doormats to the big market teams winning titles, getting the PR glory, and making money from larger media markets. Look at MLB, teams like the Pirates have no incentive to try and compete for a WS b/c the owners are content to make nice profits cashing the revenue sharing checks of the big boys and pocketing the difference.
— DennyP - The best thing that can happen to basketball is for this lock out to drag on for 2 or 3 years. At that time at least 6 franchises get contracted and the bottom tier of 100 players who don't belong in the league in the first place are out of jobs. Welcome back to pre-expansion basketball when the product was actually worth watching.— Iron Giant
- Happy birthday, Kate! What's especially annoying for the Sixers is that their young guys are missing out on precious formative opportunities to work with that one particularly knowledgable old guy named Doug Collins. I worry that by the time this all settles he might retire. Very disappointing for the few fans who've faithfully followed the Sixers as they've slowly tried to dig themselves out of the post-AI/Eddie Jordan era.— Leegles
- Good write Kate. I for one will show my own resolve. Whenever their product is back on the floor, they can take their overly priced concessions, parking and ticket prices and shove it up their...hey now. My only financial contribution will be in the form of also overly priced monthly cable payments. I'll be at home, watching CSN....maybe. Thanks Guys.
Happy Birthday.— sixers8308 - It was hard to read the entire article. Only because I don't care about the NBA. Love to see some of those guys on the football field though.— krum
- They couldn't do real jobs. — bgreenage
- They couldn't do real jobs. — bgreenage
- I hate to say it but I'm with the owners. The fact is the players have very little leverage and are on the ropes; therefore now is the time to make drastic changes to the system. Don't get me wrong, owners and GMs are certainly to blame b/c they sign guys to bad contracts and need to be saved from themselves. The bottom line however as a fan, most teams have no shot to compete. Therefore, purely out of my own self-interest as a fan, I want whatever system will make my experience better. That means giving teams like the Sixers a chance to get better rather than treading in mediocrity ever year. In the end, the only hope we have is if the owners mop the floor with the players and get their way with some type of hard cap/punitive luxury tax threshold/revenue sharing system. Whether it's the NFL, MLB or NHL model doesn't matter to me as long as something is done. The league should also contract by 2-4 teams but one thing at a time.— DennyP
- And now to comment on the most important thing in Philly B'Ball to happen this season, "HAPPY BIRTHDAY KATE" you are the freshess thing to happen in Philly B'Ball since they signed the Doctor! And don't fret, you are still just a spring chicken! :) Just sayin'...— DJ
- Kate,
You did it, congratulations! Great commentary. Do you think the players and owners will learn anything from your comments? Not a chance.— prudential2 - As far as I'm concerned, the worst part of this debacle is Kate not having a league to cover. Now I have no reason to even glance at the sports page.— So_many_haters
- They are all nothing but a bunch of Greedheads -
shut the league down for good and
let the owners and players go out and find real jobs.
We don't need them as much as they might think.— phillydude - Can we stop with the we love Kate posts. She's doing a pretty good job with these articles but all the love here is either A) Family members overdoing it with the support or B) Brainiacs who see a single hottie who likes sports and thinks "if i compliment her enough maybe she'll reach out to me". I've never seen a writer get so much love. Maybe she should go in and finish off the negotiations so we can finally get some hoops.— 76ers in 2076
- Happy Birthday, Kate! There is a lot of wisdom in what you wrote, not least of which were your contemplations on what is really important in life. On their deathbeds, no owner is going to say, "Gee, I wish we had squeezed more out of the players back in 2011," and no player is going to say, "I'm so glad we stuck to our principles so that future players could enjoy the mid-level exception." Rather, a lost season will much more likely take years off the owners' lives (uncertainty + conflict = high blood pressure) and cause players to rue the loss of a year off their primes. At least the lockout has produced some excellent writing on your part!— Statman
- Kate, congratulations on another great job in explaining this stupid situation. My son doesn't want to hear about or discuss BRI or MLE. He just wants to see the players play. Which side will blink first - and when?— bgdude18
- Happy birthday Kate.— Grazman
- SO WHAT, WHO CARES?
— DONDEN31 - Kate-
I don't know if you'll see this comment, but I think you hit the nail on the head in the first half of this post. I'm a sports fan. Many of my friends are sports fans. Most people I know are sports fans. With that being said, I can count on one hand the number of NBA fans I know. That might be apathy due to the state of the Sixers, but I feel it's more than that. I think the NBA grossly overestimates its fan base, and puts itself in a class with the NFL. If the NBA is taking its cues from the process the NFL went through in its recent labor disputes, it's going to face a harsh reality. Alienating your dwindling fan base in a millionaires vs. billionaires money dispute when our economy is in its worst recession since the Great Depression is an awful, tone-deaf decision. I don't know if this will kill the NBA, but the sad reality is, if the NBA dies, not as many people would care as the league assumes.— davevaliante - Happy birthday, Kate. Wishing you many, many more.
Just the other day, my 10-year-old daughter asked me when the Sixers start playing. I had to explain to her that they should've already started and why they aren't.
The way things look, I guess I'll get to save some money this season. She and I usually go to a game or two every year.— Zherog - I would also argue that if your aim is profit driven, then a sports franchise (particularly one in a smaller market) is a particularly poor investment.
Let's call the NBA for what it is. They have too many franchises in this climate, by at least 6. You aren't going to make money in Charlotte or Sacramento or Memphis or whenever on a consistent basis.
Ultimately, I think the model is 16 teams in North America and 16 teams overseas (8 in Europe & 8 in Asia). Or something like that.
Rather than trying to ratchet and few extra million out of labor, the business side (i.e. the owners) should be thinking about how to get to where they are the first truly global league.— doctorhim - I love that this lockout has popped the bubble of a decade of ESPN/NBA hype. We've had to endure basketball fans trying to convince everyone around them that the NBA was going to equal the NFL, despite the fact that in almost every measurable way they'd only gained a slight lead on the US NHL market, and still trail MLB by a wide gulf. Now they're faced with the reality that the vast majority of sports fans are either indifferent or excited about the lack of NBA games, and that all the hype was just an illusion.— Pelti
Comment removed.- You should give yourself more credit Kate, I think your coverage and points are brilliant.
- Great article that I think sums up how most everyday casual fans feel about all of this. Both arguing sides are much better off than the fan base that provide them with their riches, yet it seems like every professional league is being put on hold or threatened to be. We may enjoy watching the sports, but we don't need them-they need us. It's shame the fans don't decide to unite & 'De-occupy Pro Sports.'
Happy 30th Kate-I think the reason you have so many fans is because you write like someone we would talk sports to in a bar, not someone who works for the privileged athletes they cover.— squmata1 - Honestly the best post I have read on the lockout (and i've read way to many). Happy Birthday Kate!— sofa6
Happy Birthday Kate!- Note to self: 1. NBA players will be back on the court when their "weed-money" runs out, and 2. These strikes/meetings and negotiations give the players the opportunity to pretend they are businessmen by getting to dress up in collared shirts and suits. They still can't speak a sentence of proper English.— Sackbutt
- To be totally honest, I am not missing the NBA in the slightest.
And while I also think Kate does a good job...better than most on this site...I tend to agree with 76ers in 2076. That being said, "Happy Birthday, Kate!"— MrPhillie - Let me add to the list of Happy Birthday wishes Kate! 30 is just a beginning. Great article! It sums up the frustrations of those who still care about the NBA and the Sixers. It's hard to take sides in this but I don't think the owners would be taking a hard a line if the players like LeFraud and Carmelo didn't make such productions of shoving their egos in the faces of management.— dgman1020
- DennyP: hope you are taking your medicine for your schizophrenia. On the one hand, you succinctly identified the heart of the issue: big owners versus small owners, who wish to recoup everything they agreed to in the last CBA rather than work out a solid arrangement whereby true revenue sharing takes place. Then you announce that you support the owners because you mistakenly believe that big market owners really want a balanced system of parity. Not going to happen in my estimation. The NBA needs successful big market teams for advertising revenue, TV revenue, and revenue from the new technology. New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Dallas, Chicago, Miami, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio for starters. Most of the remaining teams will continue to be cannon fodder, but want revenue sharing that actually matters. I have said this before, and will say it again: there is a solution to real parity, to real quality basketball: reduce the size of the NBA to 20 teams, expand the rosters to 15 players (to get union support), as there are enough talented players to create an exciting, competitive league. Right now, the big market owners are letting the small market owners have their way, on the off-chance that the players would cave on the BRI, but if the Players, as is possible, win in the courts, those Big Market owners will sell out the small market owners. David Stern dramatically allowed the league to overexpand and now needs for the league to contract.— chuckw
- You're right,Chuck. New Orleans, Sacramento, Memphis, Indiana for starters can't afford a team. But, no city wants to give up their team. Greed sets in. The more teams,the more games for LA, NY etc to broadcast and beat. They simply should share or contract. The league owns NO. They need one more to start the contraction process. If the big market teams believe that sharing is more profitable than contraction,they'll share. Otherwise, their tact is too squeeze down the players' salaries and blame it on the small market teams.— philsix6
- Who cares? It's NBA basketball, a boring product, let them cancel the whole season. Who'd notice with the Flyers playing the way the are anyhow?— marley66
- I find the Owners/Players labor war far more entertaining than the NBA games.— matteo
- Comment removed.
- 76ers in 2076: Kate won over a lot of readers breaking down the horrific Eddie Jordan season. She's by far one of the more insightful writers in town, largely because I'm pretty sure she's the only one who played the sport at the college level. I doubt anyone thinks they'll win her over with a freakin' friendly comment -- it's more appreciation for her creation of an intelligent, comparatively respectful forum for Sixers talk, which sadly at this point is all there is.
— Leegles - "don't trust anyone over 30." exceptions can be made.— rzzzzz
- Kate, I guess, I see it differently. Last year, according to reports, twenty-two of the thirty teams lost an aggregate amount somewhere between $300-$450 million, which tells me something is seriously wrong. This current/last NBA model is unworkable, the owners have to change their paradigm, The last CAB just isn't in line with reality, it's like you said in your blog, the NBA isn't that popular, it can't support that salary structure.
As far as the "System Issues", the NBA wants be more competitive, and modify the rules in order to give the smaller markets a better chance to win championships, personally, I think that's great. I saw a twitter feed from Stern that stated over the last five years every NBA Champion was a taxpayer. So it makes sense to limit their ability to accrue more talent with the brute force of money.— L.A. Steve - L.A.Steve: too many teams, particularly in small markets, not enough quality players for 30 teams, too many raw one-year college players getting drafted, a limited number of superstars, most of whom, I would argue, even if offered similar sums to stay in small markets, waould prefer going to the larger markets for a variety of reasons. What small-market owners really want is revenue sharing from the wealthier big-market teams, so they can make a profit. To believe that there will ever be parity in a 30-team NBA is, in my opinion, a fantasy.— chuckw
John Mitchell is in his second year covering the 76ers for the Inquirer after joining the paper in November 2011. He covered the Washington Wizards for the Washington Times from 1998 to 2008. He's also worked at the Philadelphia Tribune, the Wilmington News Journal, Courier-Post, Trenton Times and Elmira Star-Gazette.Born and raised in West Philadelphia - not too far from Will Smith - he graduated from Overbrook High School the same year the 76ers won their last championship. He's a proud graduate of Howard University and the proud father of two sons, Jared and Jordan.
ABOUT MARC NARDUCCI
Marc Narducci has served in a variety of roles with the Inquirer since beginning in 1983. He has covered the 76ers as a backup and a beat writer. In addition, Narducci has covered everything from the Super Bowl to the World Series and a lot in between. Narducci also has a true passion for South Jersey scholastic sports, which he has covered for many years.
