« Stern: Expect Bobcats sale in 60 days | Main | Brown: Jordan intent on buying Bobcats »

February 13, 2010

Revenue-sharing would boost Bobcats

 Whoever buys the Charlotte Bobcats from Bob Johnson should find this encouraging: NBA commissioner David Stern says he's "determined to change the revenue-sharing model,'' which can only be welcome news to small-market teams.

Players union chief Billy Hunter brought up revenue-sharing Friday as a way for the NBA to address financially-struggling teams' situations. The Bobcats are losing tens of millions annually. Big-market teams like the New York Knicks and Los Angeles Lakers sharing some of their marketing and local-media revenue could make a big difference for the Charlottes, Indianas and Milwaukees of the league.

Stern said he's committed to "come up with a model that says that every NBA team can compete'' regardless of market size. Stern's goal is "a very robust revenue sharing where teams will not be in a position to decline to compete because of money.''

Posted by Observer Sports on February 13, 2010 at 09:48 PM | Permalink

Comments

Sounds good to me. I have a serious problem with the way things are structured now.

Posted by: Token | Feb 13, 2010 10:20:25 PM

That is seriously good news!!!!! If not manipulated.. Sorry for being negative, just being realistic. Sorry I just don't like Stern(still smells fishy around here from when the hornets bailed.)

Posted by: fox has to go!! | Feb 13, 2010 11:00:26 PM

This would be a great thing for the NBA. If you look at the NFL, it has greatly helped the league. Let's be real. A team like the Colts or Saints could have never succeeded otherwise.

Posted by: PantherDave | Feb 14, 2010 12:03:36 AM

Look at the way the Bobcats have been marketed since being founded. You can not get access to the team without going to the game and some people that is not an option. The worst thing the NBA every did was sign that deal with ABC/ESPN. The coverage has been horrible. One or two individuals/teams are highlighted as oppose to taking a more league wide approach. Look at the way ESPN covers baseball as oppose to basketball. So losing money, quite frankly they should be.

Posted by: Moboythunder | Feb 14, 2010 3:09:40 PM

its a good thing from the outside looking in but imagine if you paid X amount of dollars for a big market team specifically BECAUSE of the extra revenue it creates and now you're going to be out of that revenue because of other markets. as much as people think baseball needs a salary cap and how flawed it is, i think thats how its sposed to be. let the yankees and red sox overpay old players every summer and let teams like minnesota and oakland field a cheap competitive young team that every 4 or 5 years makes a run at the world series. taking the business aspect out of the competition makes it rec league.

its rewarding bad ownership (like ours here in charlotte thus far) for not being better businessmen. If they make this happen, we're 5 years from the big market teams starting talk about cutting out the small market teams that would be holding back the league at that point. you don't want your franchise labeled as a well fare recipient and when they decide to trim fat you get trimmed. thats the next step if they go in that direction. for that i don't like it. for the more even playing field i do, but i'd rather leave it as is than create that window of us losing our team if the business doesn't increase shortly.

Posted by: charlottean | Feb 14, 2010 5:13:15 PM

I must agree somewhat with the charlottean. The overall drafting has left something to be desired. However, at least the ownership has remained proactive. They have never stop tryin to succeed. Now, they are standing on the edge of glory if they choose to seize it. A trade for Jared Jeffries would make them had to beat in the eastern conference, but who knows if they have the desire to make the move and shut the critics up.

Posted by: moboythunder | Feb 14, 2010 7:04:44 PM

jared jeffries isn't gonna be an answer and i think the drafting has been phenominal. if you compare the track record to other teams over the same span it hasn't been bad. okafor was the best available player, felton and may were great choices for the spots they were taken......may would be a perennial 20/10 guy in this league if it weren't for the health and weight issues. he looked great pre surgery his first 2 years. morrison same story.....basically a career derailing injury. jared dudley is a rotation guy for the suns and augustin and ajinca will be good for time. henderson is probably the worst pick in team history IMO not because he's a bad player but because they took him 13th and he's just not that polished. but derrick brown was a great pickup we've got great youth. between augustin, ajinca, brown, and henderson all of those guys could be long term starters in this league starting in 3 years.

Posted by: charlottean | Feb 14, 2010 7:38:13 PM

Well guys, the NFL can have a Super Bowl between Indianapolis and New Orleans, to a great degree because of how aggressively that league believes in revenue-sharing.

Posted by: Rick Bonnell | Feb 14, 2010 8:08:56 PM

Good stuff. Now, if they just drop the "Bob" in Bobcats, we are well on our way.

Posted by: HJ | Feb 14, 2010 8:25:09 PM

Good stuff. Now, if they just drop the "Bob" in Bobcats, we are well on our way.

Posted by: HJ | Feb 14, 2010 8:25:09 PM

Charlotte Cougars!

Posted by: MajorLeague | Feb 15, 2010 9:58:51 AM

I'm totally on board with more revenue sharing. Like Rick says, it's been a tremendous benefit to the NFL.

But does anyone think David Stern's claim that the league will lose $400 million this season is bogus? I know that some teams, including the Bobcats, are struggling and losing money. But I suspect those are the exception, not the rule.

Posted by: G'boro Cats Fan | Feb 15, 2010 12:00:28 PM

G'Boro Cat:
Do I think Stern is capable of a theatrical exaggeration? Sure. But there are plenty of NBA teams in the red. I have no doubt that league-wide, costs will exceed revenues this season in the hundreds of millions.
Now, that figures to be temporary, but still it's real.

Posted by: Rick Bonnell | Feb 15, 2010 12:46:50 PM

Rick the NFL also has a 16 game schedule that makes each franchise far more fragile and far more dependent on other teams. If the bobcats play the nets and nobody shows up because the nets are 4 and forever......thats 1 of 41 home games. if the panthers play the raiders and nobody shows up because the raiders haven't been competitive since rich gannon pulled off a miracle season, they lose a HUGE chunk of their possible revenue.

i may be wrong but i believe the nfl revenue shared is directly tied to the tv contracts and advertising dollars.....which that money should be shared equally assuming all teams are doing their part to protect the league as a whole regardless of actual performance. what shouldn't be shared is money directly tied to the success of a team in a better market place. that's just business. i like the system of the luxury tax being distributed to those under the tax threshold because then you can watch how owners (not collective bargaining agreements) hold teams back from being competitive.

Posted by: charlottean | Feb 15, 2010 5:45:47 PM

Maybe the Bobcats can get a cut of the revenue generated by selling 108,000 seats at Cowboy Stadium for the All-Star Game.

Posted by: All-Star | Feb 15, 2010 5:46:32 PM

charlottean,

I get what you're saying, but the chances of Lebron, Amare, or Wade coming to Indiana, or Milwaukee, or even Charlotte are slim to none. A better revenue sharing model evens things out a bit.

Besides, it's a good way to reward Utah, San Antonio, Portland, etc. for building solid, competitive franchises.

Posted by: cornchip | Feb 15, 2010 8:02:30 PM

the chances of the next lebron, amare, wade going anywhere are all evenly predicated on the draft lottery. wade was drafted by miami, amare by pheonix, and lebron by cleveland and all 3 teams own those guys larry bird rights. if we draft the next guy like them.....we'll be in the same boat......keeping him might be a problem but you take a guy like john wall who is FROM NC......like lebron is from ohio and your chances increase drastically.

the chances of stars going to smaller cities to play has little to do with the money. it has everything to do with where they want to live and spend their millions.

Posted by: charlottean | Feb 16, 2010 11:15:39 AM

Post a comment






Advertisements