The NBA lockout is now over 90 days old and seemingly has no end to it. With the scheduled season tip-off looming in the distance, the players are still spread out across the world playing in various international and local leagues.

During the recent NFL lockout, ESPN and sports networks would update us almost every day on how talks were going, and whether or not an end was near; this is not the case with the NBA lockout.

My theory on this is it’s because there just is no telling whether or not the NBA and its players will ever come to an agreement. You see, the NBA is just so screwed up compared to the NFL. The NFL was fighting for things like rookie salary caps, HGH testing, how high the salary cap should be, how much money should go to the players, and other items on the agenda that would better their business model.

The NBA’s previous business model is so messed up that their new collective bargaining agreement is going to involve a whole new plan, assuming they come to the appropriate agreement.

The main problem that the NBA is trying to fix is the fact that only so many teams are making a profit each year in the league. For instance, after last season ended, it was reported that only eight teams in the league recorded a profit for the season.

How can this be? This means that 22 out of 30 teams in the league either broke even or lost money for running a professional basketball team in the NBA. If less than 25 percent of the teams are making money, there has got to be something wrong with the business model in place.

Locally, we know the Kings did not make money last year and have likely recorded losses the last couple of years at least. The Kings had such a low payroll on its roster that they had to trade for Marquis Daniels, a player that was out for the rest of the season due to injury. They traded for Daniels just for his expensive contract so they’d get over the minimum salary cap to avoid being taxed by the league.

ESPN’s columnist Bill Simmons said it best. In the system now, small-market teams have to do almost everything right in the front office (draft, sign free agents, re-sign players, etc.) in order to have a chance to compete with big-market teams.

The Sacramento Kings, along with other small-market teams, just cannot compete with these big-market teams because of the money situation. The big-market teams are the ones recording profits, therefore they have more money to spend on the players. This whole problem can be solved by one solution, but it is being shot down by greed.

The NBA needs to reach an agreement to share the revenue of the owners amongst the various teams. Although I understand the eight owners that are recording profits won’t want to, but those eight owners also need to realize that they need the other 22 teams to have a NBA.

Besides, can you imagine an NBA in which it wasn’t the same teams in the playoffs every year? It would be great seeing these small-market teams challenging for a championship. Just look at how excited every has gotten with the Oklahoma City Thunder’s success over the last five years.

The NBA and its players need to end this lockout and make sure they get the business model correct this time, as it is losing ground on the NFL in fandom.  

There are many things that makes BIl Simmons a successful columnist, and quite possibly one of the most popular in the sports community, but the one thing that keeps him popular is his ability to write pieces that his readers can relate to.

Simmons entered the world of sports journalism while attending the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass. While majoring in Political Science, Simmons joined the school newspaper, The Crusader, and had a column called “The Rambling” before becoming the paper’s sports editor.

Upon graduating from Holy Cross, Simmons attended the print journalism graduate program at Boston University where he received his master’s degree. It was while in Massachusetts that Simmons drew the eye of his current employer, ESPN, the leader in sports news.

Simmons started a website, BostonSportsGuy.com, which grew in popularity until ESPN offered him a job to write three guest columns for ESPN’s Page 2 section in 2001. After seeing the amount of readers Simmons brought to ESPN, the company gave Simmons the lead columnist position which he still holds today.

Simmons has been able to expand his popularity because of his wide variety of topics covered, along with the easiness of the reading material.

Although Simmons is quite vocal about his Boston-team fanhood, he does not shy away from discussing other topics that surround the wide world of sports. He also to picks topics that are prominent in the sports world in a timely matter.

For example, as people in our Sacramento region fought to keep our beloved Sacramento Kings from moving to Anaheim (well, some of us), much of the country and its sportswriters simply reported on the situation as opposed to discussing what was wrong with the situation. Not Simmons.

Simmons decided to take the Sacramento Kings’ disastrous situation as an opportunity to point out problems with the NBA. In his article titled “Kings checkmated by money, luck” published on April 26, Simmons attacks the potential issues of small-market teams in the NBA head on, writing:

But with a momentum-killing lockout lurking and the Maloofs scrapping to keep their franchise afloat, it's hard not to wonder whether those two events are connected. Is there a chasm between big and small NBA markets that only a prolonged labor stoppage can prevent? Is Sacramento's failure a glimpse of a bigger picture -- that, in the Multitasker Generation, middle-class fans would rather stay home and do four things at once than spend their hard-earned money for mediocre seats and uninspired basketball? (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/110425&sportCat=nba).
Simmons goes on to discuss the problems small-market NBA teams have and why they mostly fail to be successful. He lists the problems, making it very easy to read, and then compares them to the Kings situation and how the same problems are present in the Kings demise.

One of my favorite pieces by Simmons was one that he wrote last May in which he compared the NBA Playoffs with quotes from HBO’s The Wire.

25. "Yeah, well, now, the thing about the old days? They the old days."To the Spurs, only the fourth No. 1 seed ever to get bounced in Round 1 ... although we can't totally call it an upset because, within a half of Game 1, everyone went from thinking, "Memphis could beat San Antonio" to "Wow, Memphis is going to beat San Antonio UNLESS they choke away a couple of wins because of free throw shooting and/or repeated brainfarting." (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/part1/110503&sportCat=nba)
Simmons’ ability to compare sports to pop culture has always fascinated me, as he does it with ease and keeps his readers coming back for more.

Simmons is currently still the lead columnist for ESPN, along with being the Editor in Chief of ESPN’s newly-founded website Grantland, which fittingly covers sports and pop culture. Simmons is also the creator of ESPN’s popular series of documentaries 30 for 30, which covers sports stories from ESPN’s time on air. 

The world of sports has long brought people joy, entertainment, pleasure, controversy and even scandal. For example, take the recent scandals of the Ohio State Buckeyes, Cam Newton and most recently the Miami Hurricanes.

But are these programs really to blame?

Instead of pointing fingers at the programs that repeatedly get caught and punished for scandals, the NCAA and media need to look at the college football industry and find a way to fix it.

The fact is this, the NCAA and the college football industry is broken as it stands now, and this has long been the case. If the industry wasn’t broken, there wouldn’t consistently be scandals being turned up.

Take ex-quarterback Terell Pryor and his fellow teammates for example. Pryor was recently ousted out of his position of starting quarterback for the Ohio State Buckeyes because he sold some memorabilia that was signed with his signature.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I used to be completely against these football players taking any other money except for their scholarship money. But this all changed recently when I got into an argument with a friend of mine.

My friend made a valid point when he asked me the following question: “What is the difference between Pryor selling an autograph and an art student selling a painting they made in class?”

I pondered the question for a couple of minutes and came up with what I thought was a valid argument back. “But Pryor and football players are already on scholarship,” I said confident in my response.

But he already had a response for that: “The college football industry is a $1 billion industry, probably more. How much do you think art students make their colleges?”

I was stumped. He had completely changed my opinion of the situation in under five minutes of conversation. He was right, these athletes make their universities a ridiculous amount of money to not get at least a little bit of allowance.

Now, I’m not saying that college football needs to turn into a minor-league NFL. All I am saying is that these kids need to be compensated more than they are now.

Think about it. College football is an industry that makes universities tons of money, yet the kids can’t even sell their autograph?

In the 2009 season, a year that Pryor led the Buckeyes to an 11-2 record including a Rose Bowl victory, Ohio State made $39,515,387.00 on ticket sales alone, according to USA Today. This doesn’t even include the money that the university made from jersey sales and other revenue sources like boosters.

Not only do these football players make the university money, but they also often fund the other athletic programs since they are not as marketable. This is just another reason why the universities need these players, and should give them a little bit of extra money.

In America, we pride ourselves in our capitalistic market. In most business models in industries in this country, if your business goes up in worth and the product quality increases, then your employees get a raise. This is not the case in the college football industry.

The coaches of the game continue to get paid more and more, receiving multi-million dollar contracts, all while the college student-athletes continue to only receive scholarships.

Again, I am not saying the players should earn salaries. But why not give them some of the jersey revenue, or ticket sale revenue? Not an outrageous amount, but maybe in the form of a small weekly allowance. Or if the player is able to sell an autograph for a little extra cash, allow it.

The NCAA has been broken for years now, and it is the reason why these scandals keep happening. If the NCAA would recognize how much money these athletes make for the industry, the would realize that it needs to be fixed in order to fix the industry and stop future scandals. I’m not saying there is one definite way to fix it, all I’m saying is that the NCAA needs to attempt to fix the college football industry.