What would an NBA lockout mean for college basketball?
- Thread starter thebigabd
- Start date
NickZepp
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2008
- Messages
- 13,397
- Reaction score
- 581
Depends on if it lasts all year or not. If it lasts till past football season it could do some good because college basketball will get more national tv time because there would be no NBA. But I'm not sure if it would really effect any of the early season either way. The NFL still goes on till February now. College Football till January.
WTSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2011
- Messages
- 11,801
- Reaction score
- 842
There is just about no way the lockout will last long enough to have any real effect on college basketball. When it comes down to it, like the NFL (probably), they'll reach an agreement at some point, probably before the season is suppose to start.
seniorsooner
New member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 5,168
- Reaction score
- 0
When it comes to the NBA I'm really not so sure that is true. The NBA labor situation is an entirely different animal than the NFL's is. Everything I have read indicates that the NBA owners are playing for keeps this time around. Their initial offer to the players included a 23% pay cut and ZERO guaranteed contracts.
WTSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2011
- Messages
- 11,801
- Reaction score
- 842
The specifics really don't matter. The NFL owners "requested" some pretty crazy stuff upfront too. In both the NFL and NBA, both the owners and players are better off if they have the season. Unlike the NFL, the NBA players can go overseas (and not come back), and the NBA owners know that.
seniorsooner
New member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 5,168
- Reaction score
- 0
We shall see. Hopefully you're right. You're certainly more hopeful than anyone I have seen that covers the NBA.
boksooner
New member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2008
- Messages
- 2,128
- Reaction score
- 0
I am worried about the NHL 6 (the 6 current and former NBA owners that also owned a hockey team during the NHL lockout). They took a hardline stance against their players and lost a season. It resulted in, arguably, the most favorable collective bargaining agreement for owners in all of sports. I realize that three of those 6 owners either have or are in the process of selling their teams, but their fellow owners may well listen to them.
The biggest difference between the NBA and NFL lockouts is that some NBA teams are actually losing money and would lose less if they shut down for a year. That is not the case for the NFL. Nearly every knowledgeable NBA writer believes that a 50 game regular season is a best case scenario.
Another more subtle issue is the struggle for power. After last summer's debacle of a free agency, many owners feel that players have too much power. Many owners had their considerable pride hurt by the actions of LeBron, Wade, etc. That did not like having to kowtow to the top free agents, especially when it seems that LeBron, Wade and Bosh had already decided to play together in Miami. It may seem petty, but I can see the owners taking a hardline stance to "show the players who's boss."
The biggest difference between the NBA and NFL lockouts is that some NBA teams are actually losing money and would lose less if they shut down for a year. That is not the case for the NFL. Nearly every knowledgeable NBA writer believes that a 50 game regular season is a best case scenario.
Another more subtle issue is the struggle for power. After last summer's debacle of a free agency, many owners feel that players have too much power. Many owners had their considerable pride hurt by the actions of LeBron, Wade, etc. That did not like having to kowtow to the top free agents, especially when it seems that LeBron, Wade and Bosh had already decided to play together in Miami. It may seem petty, but I can see the owners taking a hardline stance to "show the players who's boss."
Similar threads
