ESPN: Teams that are helped/hurt by the new salary cap proposal

[Giantone]

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin;809913]And I guess I am just not sure what Giantone's take on that is. Is he saying:
(1) "Sure pay based on profit because player generated revenues are just part of the equation that leads to profit." or

(2) "B/c the owners wouldn't have any profit w/out the player generated revenue, the players should be paid based on the revenue they generate".

QUOTE]

Not trying to be a smart ass but why can't it be both?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Giantone

I apologize if I did that to anyone ,it was not my intent.
Let me try it another way ......all of you are 1000% right ...just answer me this how much revenue do the teams generate if the players don't play...just a simple question ?

For all intents and purposes - 0. Nada. Zilch. We are all in 1000% agreement with you on this point. No players = no revenue. No one. Absolutely not a soul is disagreeing with you on this point.

Originally Posted by Giantone

Not trying to be a smart ass but why can't it be both?

<sigh> All right, one last time, but this is my last shot at it G1 - if you get it, great. If not, c'est le vie:

The Basic Equation: [Revenue Generated By Players] - [Owners' Expenses] = [Owners' Profit/Loss].

Although the players salaries are an expense, the size of that expense will be determined based on the percentage of some number under the new CBA. The question is - What number should be used to define the Players' Percentage?

(1) Should the Players' Percentage be determined based on the Revenue Generated By Players before owners deduct their Non-Player Expenses? OR

(2) Should the Players' Percentage be determined based on the Revenue Generated By Players after owners deduct their Non-Player Expenses?

Using theory (1) the final equation looks like this: [Revenue Generated By Players] - [Players' Salaries (Percentage of Revenue)] - [Owners' Non-Player Expenses] = [Owner's Profit/Loss].

Using theory (2) the final equation looks like this: [Revenue Generated By Players] - [Owners' Non-Player Expenses] = [Owners' Preliminary Profit/Loss] - [Players' Salaries (Percentage of Preliminary Profit/Loss)] = [Owner's Final Profit/Loss].


and .... Ruhskins, I am sorry for once again boring the crap out of you.

[Giantone]

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin;810054]For all intents and purposes - 0. Nada. Zilch. We are all in 1000% agreement with you on this point. No players = no revenue. No one. Absolutely not a soul is disagreeing with you on this point.

QUOTE]

....and if people go back and see where I joined in on this they will see that's all I was saying. 0 players =0 revenue= 0 profit ...at no point did I say it should be before this or after this .There are to many mitigating factors that we(the fans) are not aware of to say weather it should be one way or the other. All I said was when the analogy of a lemonade stand cane up was ..."think of the players as leomade" .