Re: Owners now the problem?

["Jim Meninno" <jim_meninno@hotmail.com>]

I read this article and, admittedly, didn't understand the escrow system 
entirely.  It seems to me to be just a way to have a hard cap without 
calling it a hard cap, so that the players can save face.  In effect, 
the owners sign contracts at will and, if salaries exceed X%, the 
players must give back the difference.  Meaning that salaries can not 
exceed X%.  A hard cap.  My problem with it is that, given the knowledge 
that they can sign any contract and still keep salaries fixed, the 
owners will get completely out of control.  Players demands will be even 
more irrational, because their actual salary will depend not on the 
dollars of the contract, but how it relates to everyone else's contract.  
Yet another proposal that sounds to me like it would make the shrinking 
middle class problem even worse (they seem to be coming from both sides 
now). 

The question I have is, what is so horrible about a hard cap?  Why don't 
the two sides just sit down, negotiate a fixed percentage of revenues to 
go to salaries and pay it.  Not a "cap" per se, but a negotiated fair 
ammount for salaries.  The owners would be restricted from signing 
contracts above that ammount, but if salaries worked out to be LESS for 
a given year, the extra money could be given out in a sort of profit 
sharing bonus scheme.  If revenues were lower than expected, the players 
would keep what they got, but next year's cap would reflect the adjusted 
revenues.  This seems much more in keeping with how most businesses are 
run, except the players would have greater influence in setting the 
limits because of their collective bargaining power.  

Any comments or can anyone enlighten me further on the escrow system 
being proposed.  The way I have explained it sounds lousy for both 
sides.  Have I missed something?

Jim
>From: damekmo@teleport.com
>Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 09:24:41 -0900
>To: celtics@igtc.com
>Subject: Owners now the problem?
>
>From:
>
>>http://cbs.sportsline.com/u/page/covers/basketball/nov98/owners111498.htm
>
>I wont post the entire article, just what's below. But...if the 
information
>in the article is correct, I think it could be argued that at this 
point
>the owners aren't negotiating in good faith.
>
>>>But Danny Schayes, a member of the players' negotiating committee,
>>>disclosed this week what torpedoed that "framework" of an agreement 
the
>>>two sides claimed to have reached two weeks ago. And Schayes' account
>>>makes the owners look both ridiculous and hypocritical. One league 
source
>>>confirmed the substance of Schayes' account.
>
>Paul M.
>
>
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com