The NBA and the National Basketball Players Association have a meeting scheduled for Wednesday in New York -- one day before the leagues annual board of governors session -- as they inch closer to striking a new labor agreement, according to league sources.The meeting is the latest signal, sources told ESPN, that a new deal to avoid a work stoppage is looming in the near future.Sources say there is rising optimism on both sides of the bargaining table that the basic framework of a deal can be achieved as early as this month.The current collective bargaining agreement between the NBA and the NBAPA runs through June 2021, with both sides holding the right until Dec. 15 to express an intent to opt out in 2017.But NBA commissioner Adam Silver said last week that he expects the parties to come to terms on a new CBA before the opt-out deadline.Both sides have been very engaged and eager to get a deal done, Silver said.Speaking in China last week ahead of the 10th annual Global Games, Silver revealed that he spoke to Roberts during a recent league visit to Spain and said he would continue to pursue a fast resolution with the Players Association that avoids a lockout or any loss of games.Negotiations on the last CBA led to a five-month work stoppage that lasted until December 2011 and shortened the 2011-12 season by 16 games, marking only the second time in league history that a labor impasse led to a reduced schedule.With the league in a healthy state and money flowing into the game at unprecedented levels, there is strong motivation on all sides to avoid a work stoppage this time around.We dont want to strike and they dont want to strike, New York Knicks star Carmelo Anthony, who is on the unions executive committee, said earlier this week. So the best thing to do is really figure it out sooner rather than later.We want to try to get something done. I think the NBA and the owners are very receptive to that, and we are, too. I think [in the 2011 negotiation] we were so far away from each other. You can feel the difference, you can see the difference, you can see the reaction, you can see the contact were having, the information thats being sent on both sides. I think were closer to getting something done. Hopefully itll get done soon.ESPN.coms Chris Haynes, Brian Windhorst, Marc J. Spears and Marc Stein contributed to this report. Camiseta Griezmann Atletico 2019 .ca NFL Power Rankings, overtaking the Denver Broncos and remaining ahead of NFC competition San Francisco, Carolina and New Orleans. Camiseta Personalizadas Baratas . Miller reached right to deflect Mikhail Grabovskis attempt with just over 2 minutes remaining in regulation, and then made two more saves in the shootout Sunday to give the Sabres a 2-1 win over the Washington Capitals. http://www.atleticomadridtiendaonline.es/camiseta-atletico-de-madrid-thomas-partey.html . -- Devin Hester is done returning kicks in Chicago. Camiseta Diego Costa Atletico . -- Brandon Jennings made the most of his first game with the Detroit Pistons on Sunday night. Atletico De Madrid Tienda . LOUIS -- Heading into the final stretch of the season, the issues for the Chicago Bears banged-up defence only seem to be getting worse. In the early 2000s, the rules of the fantasy league between Green Bay Packers?front-office executives and scouts were straightforward: No money was involved. Coaches were not allowed to play, and you could not draft any Packers.Still, despite the seemingly harmless nature of the league, a team executive was a little bit concerned and thought he should call the NFL office. I knew [the NFL] had this mantra of gambling affects the integrity of the game, recalled Andrew Brandt, then a vice president for the Packers. Back then, I didnt know if fantasy was gambling. I didnt know how they would view it.The response I got was either We didnt have this conversation or Just do it and dont tell anyone that youre doing it.A decade later, Brandt, now a columnist for TheMMQB.com on Sports Illustrated, has a better understanding of the NFLs stance on fantasy sports and gambling. But, as discussions heat up about expanding legal sports betting in the U.S., he believes the league needs to be more proactive on the issue. Brandt, ESPN NFL Business Analyst, visited with Chalk about the leagues stance on sports betting as part of our series on the future of sports betting in the U.S.Q: How well do you think the NFLs gambling policy was understood back then, and how well is it understood now?A: People understand the general concept that gambling flies in the face of integrity in [the] sense that it has associations with fixing games. It has associations with casinos. It has an association with a negative element that goes against this mantra of competitive balance and integrity. But drilling down, I think its not that deep of [an] understanding, because there are some contradictions, and there are some questions as to how things apply.Q: How would you characterize the divide among NFL owners when it comes to the leagues opposition to expanding legal sports betting?A: I think the stance generally is more evolved. I say that because we havent had owners standing up on the table beating the drum against the possible relocation (of the Oakland Raiders) to Las Vegas. But even before we get to Vegas, I think theres a more evolved view. I cant name names, because I dont know which is which, but I do think there is an old guard that continues to hold up their hands in a stop sign to anything associated with gambling. But theres a newer version of ownership thats much more flexible when it comes to that.Q: What is the biggest concern from those who oppose sports betting?A: I think theres always the concern of competitive balance. It drives everything the league does. In my expertise, it drives the reason for restrictions on free agency. It drives the reason for a salary cap. It drives the reason for a draft in inverse order. And you can apply it to gambling. There is a concern that, if we allow [gambling] in, players, coaches, referees, executives will be subject to potential influence that could influence the outcome of these games. Every time Roger Goodell speaks about fantasy, the clear distinction is outcome of games versus outcomes of player performance. Thats the fear: that [gambling] could affect the competitive balance of the league. It could affect outcomes of games.Q: Why doess the NFL believe the current environment, where the majority of bets are placed in an illegal, unregulated market, better protects the integrity of the game than a legal market overseen by licensed officials?A: Its a fair question.dddddddddddd I think its the fear of the unknown. Its stepping into new territory, and again, I think the NFL isnt the most progressive sports league and not the one that you would see jumping into previously taboo areas. You have (NBA commissioner) Adam Silver writing an op-ed in the New York Times about exactly what you said in terms of bringing gambling out in the light. You have the NHL all-in, moving a team to Las Vegas. So before the NFL dips [its] toes in the water, I think they want to see it happen in other leagues. They dont move as nimbly as others.Q: Youve written about the need for the league to be proactive on sports gambling and possibly hiring a new executive position, a gambling czar. What would that positions responsibilities be, in your opinion?A: I do think that its a position that makes sense. It sort of follows the path of concussions and brain health. Because whats happened over the years is a positive trajectory toward concussions, a better understanding, better science, better rules, better governance and the hiring of a chief medical officer. I think that is a good path for the gambling issue. As they understand fantasy, as they understand the issues with Las Vegas, as they look into consequences for gambling, why not have the same strategy in hiring a chief gambling officer, what Ive called a gambling czar? So in this area that is incredibly changing and moving quickly, lot of legislation, lot of issues, lot of litigation and a potentially lucrative revenue source, which will get their attention as much as anything, why not hire this person?This person would have two primary responsibilities. One is regulation and enforcement, which is upholding the integrity of the game. First of all youd create the rules that prohibit players, coaches, referees, team personnel from placing bets in any way on any aspect of the game. The czar would be the clearinghouse that Ive talked about in terms of Can we do this? Why cant we do this? What are the limitations to play fantasy football? What are our limitations on aligning with a casino, whether sponsorship, advertising or marketing, etc.?Then I think there would also be the investigatory process that we hear so much about, with Roger Goodell and player conduct. There would be the same kind of policy, discipline, procedure and regulations in this area. Now, would Goodell want overarching authority? Thats another issue. But this czar would be the one deciding, notifying, investigating all these issues within this area.Q: The czar would have been the person you would have called regarding the Packers fantasy league? A: Absolutely. It would have been this person, and the answer would have been clear, concise. A general lawyer, who was the person that I called, is working on 50 different things, and gambling was probably not even on his radar. ' ' '