Michael Jordan Upsetting A Lot of Fans & Possibly Players
The New York Times broke a big story today about his Airness that’s upsetting a lot of fans, possibly players and also could possibly shut the season down.
MJ is leading a group of owners (10-15) to oppose any deal that gives players more than 50 percent of revenue. They would feel more comfortable with the BRI being 47 or lower. The majority of owners are supposedly ok with the 50.
What happened after this announcement was an uproar on Twitter and the blogosphere from people that think MJ is being a hypocrite because everything he is doing now, as an owner, goes against everything he said during the last lockout – as a player. That makes perfect sense to me. To me that’s like saying a human is a hypocrite because as a child they felt one way and then as an adult they felt the opposite. I know my opinion on politics, family, business, art, clothes, women, etc are all much different than they were 12 years ago when I was college kid that thought he knew everything when I fact I didn’t know a thing about running a business, raising a family or how anything in this world happens.
The following are some tweets from KGTrashTalk that I agree with and then an article from SBNATION that I don’t. Where do you stand on this?
If there’s no Michael Jordan, the player, these current players don’t make the kind of money they do today.
If you followed Michael’s career closely, he never complained about making less than $4 mil a year for his FIRST 12 SEASONS in the league
Michael is all about EARNING what you’re being paid, he HATES the fact that these kids make what they make before they prove themselves
Michael had 4 rings and 4 MVPs before he made over $4 mil a year and didn’t say a God damn word about it…
Now Mike has to sit up and watch these players/agents ask for money they really don’t even deserve…he’s seething inside
In 96, MJ didn’t come out and say “can I get paid what I deserve now?”..he just went out, at age 32, dropped 30/gm & won 72 games that year….oh yeah, and the MVP and Finals MVP.
don’t make the mistake of thinking it’s always the players demanding the money, it’s usually about the agents vs. owners
we’re at a point now where these agents have brainwashed these players into thinking they deserve a certain amount
I don’t think there’s one person on this Earth who could provide us with a valid argument that NBA players aren’t compensated enough
Michael Jordan: The NBA Lockout’s Biggest Pickle
by Tom Ziller • Nov 4, 2011 3:04 PM EDT
Michael Jordan is reportedly leading a charge from hardline owners seeking an NBA lockout deal offering players no more than 50 percent of revenue. (Players received 57 percent in the last deal, and have offered to move as far down as 52 percent.) This is quite a situation, given that Michael Jordan was once an NBA player.
In fact, as a player, he was represented by one of the fiercest player advocates in memory in David Falk. As such, MJ was at the forefront of several labor battles. He said things. They were quoted. They made the news, for Michael Jordan was an important man.
These are some of those news items from Michael Jordan, NBA Player.
knows the Abe Pollin exchange from the 1998-99 lockout, correct? In case you don’t, Mike Wise and Frank Isola describe it in their book Just Ballin’:
During an early October meeting in Manhattan, Jordan sparred with Wizards owner Abe Pollin in front of Stern, other owners and more than 100 players. After an impassioned Pollin, the league’s senior owner, talked of his struggle to keep his team, Jordan interrupted. “If you can’t make it work economically, you should sell the team.”
Jordan does not believe the current model allows him to make the Charlotte Bobcats work economically, even given the concessions by the players. Yet his own advice goes untaken.
Even before 1998, Jordan agitated against the greed of owners. As Phil Taylor wrote in Sports Illustrated in 1995, MJ and others pushed decertification because they (and Falk, natch) felt that the union had accepted too restrictive a deal. Decertifying the union would have cost games in the 1995-96 season. (This was the year after Jordan had come back midseason from his extended vacation in Birmingham.)
But then [Hawks forward Grant] Long received a video via overnight express from the decertification camp, which is led by various agents and stars Michael Jordan, Patrick Ewingand Reggie Miller. He put it in his VCR, and there were Jordan, Ewing, Miller and other players trying to convince him that decertifying the union was the only logical alternative. The dissidents argued that union executive director Simon Gourdine and union president Buck Williams had negotiated two bad deals. The first one, which was abandoned in the face of intense opposition, included a team luxury tax that, it was argued, would have put a drag on salaries. In the dissidents’ view the current proposal was only slightly better.
Long watched and listened as Jordan, Ewing and Miller told him that the best way to get a fair deal was to eliminate the union. Under antitrust rules, that would allow the players to seek an injunction against the owners’ two-month-old lockout. The teams would then be forced to open their doors to the players, and without the leverage of a lockout the league presumably would negotiate a deal more favorable to the players.
Jordan The Player railed against a luxury tax and a rookie scale. Jordan The Owner is pushing a deal that involves a punitive luxury tax and a 7 percent constriction of player salaries across the board.
But perhaps the best waffle in Jordan’s stack can be found in a quote published in August 1995 in the Chicago Tribune. MJ and the other decert club members lashed out at David Stern’s bad deal.
“All [Stern] has to do is evaluate the deal he has proposed to us from a player’s standpoint,” Jordan said. “He wouldn’t recommend that; he wouldn’t accept that deal from a business standpoint so why would he ask the players to do that?”
And on the subject of fighting for the younger players, the future of the league, MJ?
“I can see Clyde Drexler, I can see Charles Barkley, I can see David Robinson and I can see all these stars saying, `Great, it’s a good deal,’ ” he said. “Yeah, it’s a good deal for us–for the superstars. But for these young players who are going to move forward and make this league and make the game of basketball as popular as it is today, it’s not a good deal for them. That’s why we’re making this stand.”