MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: 79Warrior on April 29, 2014, 01:50:03 PM
-
Silver not F-ing around.
-
Nice to hear him praise Doc as the perfect leader in this situation. Wade also sent out a tweet showing his support for the decision.
The really was no other alternative in this situation. There have been rumors for years regarding Sterling's wacky ways and it was time for it to end.
Kind of weird punishment for Sterling. Get fined $2.5 million, being forced to sell your team (which you paid $16 million for) and get probably $1 billion back in sale?
-
Clippers to Seattle?
-
Not forced to sell. Silver does not have that authority.
Banned for life. That means no attending games, practice or making business decisions about the team.
Not sure what this means ... might be like tossing a baseball manager from a game. All that means is he goes from managing the team from the dugout to managing the team from the tunnel.
Of course he will continue to "run the team," just in a more discreet form.
-
How can the NBA ban an owner from attending games? I mean, if he said, FU, I'm sitting here, who is going to enforce that rule?
The police can't do it, he's not breaking any criminal laws. Building security? I'd imagine they work for Sterling.
Special NBA SWAT team?
-
Not forced to sell. Silver does not have that authority.
But the owners do. They need a 3/4 vote that he violated their constitution's requirement to conduct business in a reasonable and ethical manner.
-
How can the NBA ban an owner from attending games? I mean, if he said, FU, I'm sitting here, who is going to enforce that rule?
The police can't do it, he's not breaking any criminal laws. Building security? I'd imagine they work for Sterling.
Special NBA SWAT team?
The NBA has authority to determine who can and cannot attend its games. I am sure it is handled in the contracts with the individual franchises and the owners of the arenas.
-
Not forced to sell. Silver does not have that authority.
Banned for life. That means no attending games, practice or making business decisions about the team.
Not sure what this means ... might be like tossing a baseball manager from a game. All that means is he goes from managing the team from the dugout to managing the team from the tunnel.
Of course he will continue to "run the team," just in a more discreet form.
Great overview by Lester Munson:
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10852199/challenge-donald-sterling (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10852199/challenge-donald-sterling)
Specifically regarding team ownership:
Q: Is it possible for Silver and the NBA to terminate Sterling's franchise ownership?
A: Yes. Under the terms of Paragraph 13 of the constitution, the owners can terminate another owner's franchise with a vote of three-fourths of the NBA Board of Governors, which is composed of all 30 owners. The power to terminate is limited to things like gambling and fraud in the application for ownership, but it also includes a provision for termination when an owner "fails to fulfill" a "contractual obligation" in "such a way as to affect the [NBA] or its members adversely." Silver and the owners could assert that Sterling's statements violated the constitution's requirements to conduct business on a "reasonable" and "ethical" level.
Any owner or Silver can initiate the termination procedure with a written charge describing the violation. Sterling would have five days to respond to the charge with a written answer. The commissioner would then schedule a special meeting of the NBA Board of Governors within 10 days. Both sides would have a chance to present their evidence, and then the board would vote. If three-fourths of the board members vote to terminate, then Sterling would face termination of his ownership. It would require a vote of two-thirds of the board to reduce the termination to a fine. Terminating a franchise would obviously be a drastic remedy, but the potential of the termination procedure gives Silver and the other owners vast leverage in any discussion with Sterling about an involuntary sale of his team.
-
But the owners do. They need a 3/4 vote that he violated their constitution's requirement to conduct business in a reasonable and ethical manner.
Correct, that will take weeks to organize. But Silver cannot make this happen.
And the team is not worth $1 billion. Forbes placed its value at $575 million (Forbes said the Bucks were worth $400 million and they sold for $550 million).
I'll bet that Magic Johnson does not get them team. Apparently at least five groups have expressed interest in buying the team.
-
That is a major, major message. Silver not messing around. Off topic but the title of the thread made me start singing Maxwells Silver Hammer.
-
Interesting. The guy just turned 80, 3 days ago.
-
Great overview by Lester Munson:
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10852199/challenge-donald-sterling (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10852199/challenge-donald-sterling)
Specifically regarding team ownership:
Q: Is it possible for Silver and the NBA to terminate Sterling's franchise ownership?
A: Yes. Under the terms of Paragraph 13 of the constitution, the owners can terminate another owner's franchise with a vote of three-fourths of the NBA Board of Governors, which is composed of all 30 owners. The power to terminate is limited to things like gambling and fraud in the application for ownership, but it also includes a provision for termination when an owner "fails to fulfill" a "contractual obligation" in "such a way as to affect the [NBA] or its members adversely." Silver and the owners could assert that Sterling's statements violated the constitution's requirements to conduct business on a "reasonable" and "ethical" level.
Any owner or Silver can initiate the termination procedure with a written charge describing the violation. Sterling would have five days to respond to the charge with a written answer. The commissioner would then schedule a special meeting of the NBA Board of Governors within 10 days. Both sides would have a chance to present their evidence, and then the board would vote. If three-fourths of the board members vote to terminate, then Sterling would face termination of his ownership. It would require a vote of two-thirds of the board to reduce the termination to a fine. Terminating a franchise would obviously be a drastic remedy, but the potential of the termination procedure gives Silver and the other owners vast leverage in any discussion with Sterling about an involuntary sale of his team.
To me "yes' mean Silver can act alone. Above says he cannot act alone, he needs 75% of the owners to vote with him.
So, can Silver force him to sell? No. But 75% of the owners can force him to sell. Big difference
No league would give its commissioner that kind of power.
-
If Silver was in charge at the time would he have had such a large punishment for Tim Hardaway and his comments on hating gay people? Equality, right? http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2766213
-
To me "yes' mean Silver can act alone. Above says he cannot act alone, he needs 75% of the owners to vote with him.
So, can Silver force him to sell? No. But 75% of the owners can force him to sell. Big difference
No league would give its commissioner that kind of power.
I bet he had a conversation with each and every owner and fully understands where they stand on this issue. He's a smart guy.
-
To me "yes' mean Silver can act alone. Above says he cannot act alone, he needs 75% of the owners to vote with him.
So, can Silver force him to sell? No. But 75% of the owners can force him to sell. Big difference
No league would give its commissioner that kind of power.
During the press conference Silver said he was confident he had the votes.
-
Great overview by Lester Munson:
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10852199/challenge-donald-sterling (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10852199/challenge-donald-sterling)
Specifically regarding team ownership:
Q: Is it possible for Silver and the NBA to terminate Sterling's franchise ownership?
A: Yes. Under the terms of Paragraph 13 of the constitution, the owners can terminate another owner's franchise with a vote of three-fourths of the NBA Board of Governors, which is composed of all 30 owners. The power to terminate is limited to things like gambling and fraud in the application for ownership, but it also includes a provision for termination when an owner "fails to fulfill" a "contractual obligation" in "such a way as to affect the [NBA] or its members adversely." Silver and the owners could assert that Sterling's statements violated the constitution's requirements to conduct business on a "reasonable" and "ethical" level.
Any owner or Silver can initiate the termination procedure with a written charge describing the violation. Sterling would have five days to respond to the charge with a written answer. The commissioner would then schedule a special meeting of the NBA Board of Governors within 10 days. Both sides would have a chance to present their evidence, and then the board would vote. If three-fourths of the board members vote to terminate, then Sterling would face termination of his ownership. It would require a vote of two-thirds of the board to reduce the termination to a fine. Terminating a franchise would obviously be a drastic remedy, but the potential of the termination procedure gives Silver and the other owners vast leverage in any discussion with Sterling about an involuntary sale of his team.
In reading this again, the NBA cannot force him to sell. They can eliminate the Clippers from the league, going from 30 to 29 teams.
Of course that makes his franchise worth zero. So yes he would sell to avoid this. At least you hope he would. He's 80 years old and no stranger to courts. Would he fight?
-
Correct, that will take weeks to organize. But Silver cannot make this happen.
And the team is not worth $1 billion. Forbes placed its value at $575 million (Forbes said the Bucks were worth $400 million and they sold for $550 million).
I'll bet that Magic Johnson does not get them team. Apparently at least five groups have expressed interest in buying the team.
Bill Simmons tweeted today that number couldn't be further off. He estimated $1.5 billion.
-
During the press conference Silver said he was confident he had the votes.
Yep. And given the near-universal support by the public, indvidual players, union officials, and at least one owner (Cuban), I'd say it's a foregone conclusion. The owners are smart enough to realize the NBA would take a huge hit if they don't vote it through.
-
Sounds like this franchise can be had for a bargain basement price
-
Bill Simmons tweeted today that number couldn't be further off. He estimated $1.5 billion.
The Bucks just agreed to be sold for $550k. With the impending TV contract, I can see $1.5B being closer to the actual price.
-
Nice to hear him praise Doc as the perfect leader in this situation. Wade also sent out a tweet showing his support for the decision.
The really was no other alternative in this situation. There have been rumors for years regarding Sterling's wacky ways and it was time for it to end.
Kind of weird punishment for Sterling. Get fined $2.5 million, being forced to sell your team (which you paid $16 million for) and get probably $1 billion back in sale?
Doc has been getting a lot of love here in L.A. the last few days. Much respect and love, which is great to see.
-
Correct, that will take weeks to organize. But Silver cannot make this happen.
And the team is not worth $1 billion. Forbes placed its value at $575 million (Forbes said the Bucks were worth $400 million and they sold for $550 million).
I'll bet that Magic Johnson does not get them team. Apparently at least five groups have expressed interest in buying the team.
I'm guessing Silver will initiate the termination procedure. Once he does, the process moves pretty quickly:
"Any owner or Silver can initiate the termination procedure with a written charge describing the violation. Sterling would have five days to respond to the charge with a written answer. The commissioner would then schedule a special meeting of the NBA Board of Governors within 10 days. Both sides would have a chance to present their evidence, and then the board would vote. If three-fourths of the board members vote to terminate, then Sterling would face termination of his ownership."
-
The Bucks just agreed to be sold for $550k. With the impending TV contract, I can see $1.5B being closer to the actual price.
Not to mention the young nucleus and additional revenue from playoff games that the bucks couldn't offer. Plus, LA >>> Milwaukee as a destination to attract free agents.
-
But the owners do. They need a 3/4 vote that he violated their constitution's requirement to conduct business in a reasonable and ethical manner.
Yes they do, question is whether the would vote for it. As one veteran in the industry said to us last night, lots of owners out there have girlfriends, mistresses, etc and they don't know what they've said, what has been recorded, etc, so they might not be too keen on that slipper slope. Mark Cuban made that argument yesterday as well.
-
Bill Simmons tweeted today that number couldn't be further off. He estimated $1.5 billion.
Is Simmons going to buy the team? Reporters, like fans are always good at spending other people's money and telling others what they should pay for something.
Are the Clippers worth 300% the price Kohl sold the Bucks for last week? Same league, same TV contract, same players same salary cap. And both the Bucks and Clippers have sucked forever until the Clippers drafted Blake Griffin?
Can the difference between Milwaukee and LA really be $1 billion? Or is it Blake Griffin? If so, why is he not getting $100 or $200 million a year if he matters that much?
-
If Silver was in charge at the time would he have had such a large punishment for Tim Hardaway and his comments on hating gay people? Equality, right? http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2766213
Did Hardaway have a longstanding history of making derogatory statements? Did he have to make legal settlements to satisfy discrimination claims in his past? Was he in a position of power, thereby letting him use his draconian views in hiring, promoting, etc. Was Hardaway in charge of an entire franchise and therefore subject to NBA bylaws?
Hardaway made ignorant comments and shouldn't get a free pass. But please.
I'm guessing you actually are too smart to equate these two extremely dissimilar situations. You were just fishing for reaction, and congratulations ... you got mine.
Clearly, the NBA for too long turned a blind eye to Sterling's racism. This obviously was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
-
Does anyone think there may be a bunch of people protesting outside of Staples arena tonight?
-
The Bucks just agreed to be sold for $550k. With the impending TV contract, I can see $1.5B being closer to the actual price.
Their TV contract is an entirely different issue which may work against them. Just ask the Dodgers out here in LaLa land. No way they can start their own RSN, they are with Fox now and Fox knows this as well. So they either stick with Fox, or they try to join the Lakers network or new Dodgers network (that everyone but the owner has refused to carry to the public). Problem there is Time Warner owns those networks and they are going through the Comcast merger right now and they can't even get MSOs to take the Dodgers, so their willingness to take on more debt to grab the Clippers would be an interesting, and risky move.
-
If Silver was in charge at the time would he have had such a large punishment for Tim Hardaway and his comments on hating gay people? Equality, right? http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2766213
That was brought up here today on sports radio...what is Silver going to do the first time a player makes racist statements, etc. Plenty of interesting reactions to that question on the radio, including some mental gymnastics that are always fun to watch people go through.
-
Is Simmons going to buy the team? Reporters, like fans are always good at spending other people's money and telling others what they should pay for something.
Are the Clippers worth 300% the price Kohl sold the Bucks for last week? Same league, same TV contract, same players same salary cap. And both the Bucks and Clippers have sucked forever until the Clippers drafted Blake Griffin?
Can the difference between Milwaukee and LA really be $1 billion? Or is it Blake Griffin? If so, why is he not getting $100 or $200 million a year if he matters that much?
Probably because the NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement limits what players can be paid. See James, LeBron. I think it clears a billion easily.
-
That was brought up here today on sports radio...what is Silver going to do the first time a player makes racist statements, etc. Plenty of interesting reactions to that question on the radio, including some mental gymnastics that are always fun to watch people go through.
As I said a few comments earlier, it's not close to the same thing. Not even in the same universe.
-
Probably because the NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement limits what players can be paid. See James, LeBron. I think it clears a billion easily.
So when the collective bargaining agreement expires the players and the owners will be so far apart we could see a season or two wiped out? Not just 25 games like two years ago.
If Lebron is worth a billion and he is getting $20 million,, he will be looking for a 50x raise ... and so will everyone else.
-
Not forced to sell. Silver does not have that authority.
Banned for life. That means no attending games, practice or making business decisions about the team.
Not sure what this means ... might be like tossing a baseball manager from a game. All that means is he goes from managing the team from the dugout to managing the team from the tunnel.
Of course he will continue to "run the team," just in a more discreet form.
Ban includes Sterling can't attend any NBA games, be present in any NBA facility, cannot make decisions for the team, not allowed to attend league meetings, cannot be present at Clippers HQ. He pretty much can't do anything at all team or league related.
-
Probably because the NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement limits what players can be paid. See James, LeBron. I think it clears a billion easily.
Correct on part one. On the billion, we'll see. They have to monetize that somehow, and television deal makers are in no mood to do those deals anymore because it is driving television consumer bills up too much. How do they pay for the $1B is the question. Interesting times.
End of the day, likely a win win for some, just like Frank McCourt with the Dodgers. Sterling is going to make a ton, sad as that is to say. The NBA will probably be able to exert enough pressure to get him out. The fans, they could be on the outs like the Dodgers fans are today.
In a related story. The LA Times here has been on the rampage the last few days about this, understandably so. Yet they are still accepting Sterling's advertising $$ (he's a big advertiser every week) so they're now being pulled into this.
-
Under the terms of Paragraph 13 of the constitution, the owners can terminate another owner's franchise with a vote of three-fourths of the NBA Board of Governors.
...
If three-fourths of the board members vote to terminate, then Sterling would face termination of his ownership.
Some ambiguous language here. Is the franchise liquidated, or would Sterling just lose the team?
The Bucks just agreed to be sold for $550k. With the impending TV contract, I can see $1.5B being closer to the actual price.
I knew the Bucks were bad, but $550 grand? Sign me up for a second mortgage!
-
Yahoo's Adrian Wojnarowski, one of the best sports reporters in the country and a guy who is extremely well-sourced, says a bidding war will push the price of the Clippers to more than $1 billion. He also quotes a source as saying Silver has all the votes he needs among owners to get rid of Sterling.
-
Yahoo's Adrian Wojnarowski, one of the best sports reporters in the country and a guy who is extremely well-sourced, says a bidding war will push the price of the Clippers to more than $1 billion. He also quotes a source as saying Silver has all the votes he needs among owners to get rid of Sterling.
I think that is right. Forbes' guesses on a franchise's worth means nothing. They don't set the price on the Clippers any more than they did on the Bucks.
These franchises are money trees. People will pay to get their hands on that tree.
-
Correct on part one. On the billion, we'll see. They have to monetize that somehow, and television deal makers are in no mood to do those deals anymore because it is driving television consumer bills up too much. How do they pay for the $1B is the question. Interesting times.
End of the day, likely a win win for some, just like Frank McCourt with the Dodgers. Sterling is going to make a ton, sad as that is to say. The NBA will probably be able to exert enough pressure to get him out. The fans, they could be on the outs like the Dodgers fans are today.
In a related story. The LA Times here has been on the rampage the last few days about this, understandably so. Yet they are still accepting Sterling's advertising $$ (he's a big advertiser every week) so they're now being pulled into this.
How are the Dodgers on the outs with the fans? They're leading MLB in attendance so far this season.
-
Correct on part one. On the billion, we'll see. They have to monetize that somehow, and television deal makers are in no mood to do those deals anymore because it is driving television consumer bills up too much. How do they pay for the $1B is the question. Interesting times.
End of the day, likely a win win for some, just like Frank McCourt with the Dodgers. Sterling is going to make a ton, sad as that is to say. The NBA will probably be able to exert enough pressure to get him out. The fans, they could be on the outs like the Dodgers fans are today.
In a related story. The LA Times here has been on the rampage the last few days about this, understandably so. Yet they are still accepting Sterling's advertising $$ (he's a big advertiser every week) so they're now being pulled into this.
True, but these guys are more in it for the power, glamour, attention, etc. etc. You know this. So it will not hurt his pocket but it will feel like a good kick in the a$$ to his ego.
-
So when the collective bargaining agreement expires the players and the owners will be so far apart we could see a season or two wiped out? Not just 25 games like two years ago.
If Lebron is worth a billion and he is getting $20 million,, he will be looking for a 50x raise ... and so will everyone else.
EDIT: Nevermind, not engaging
-
EDIT: Nevermind, not engaging
Read the statement(s) this was responding too ... and try not to go through life responding to the last sentence of a 50 post thread ... you just make yourself look bad or lazy.
-
As I said a few comments earlier, it's not close to the same thing. Not even in the same universe.
I would tend to agree they are not comparable, but certainly are in the same universe. Degrees to everything. Are we stamping out racism, or not? Interesting conversations about this today. One sports attorney felt that the league will have no choice but to clamp down on that behavior as well. Not lifetime banishments, but if stuff is on tape, tweeted, etc, racism of any kind, the league will have no choice but to come down hard and not just pretend it isn't there. As he said, it becomes a credibility argument and also one of following through on the promise that there is zero tolerance.
-
How are the Dodgers on the outs with the fans? They're leading MLB in attendance so far this season.
70% of Los Angeles can't watch their games currently on television. Last year and the previous 50 years, 100% of the market had at least the ability to, not anymore.
The poor that have no pay television subscription of any kind have 0% chance. In years past, if they had rabbit ears, they could watch some games over the air. That's gone as well.
Fans are not happy.
-
So when the collective bargaining agreement expires the players and the owners will be so far apart we could see a season or two wiped out? Not just 25 games like two years ago.
If Lebron is worth a billion and he is getting $20 million,, he will be looking for a 50x raise ... and so will everyone else.
Based on what? The NBA salaries are paid for by the television deals. The money is fixed to the deals. There is a pool of money, not an ocean of it.
-
Yahoo's Adrian Wojnarowski, one of the best sports reporters in the country and a guy who is extremely well-sourced, says a bidding war will push the price of the Clippers to more than $1 billion. He also quotes a source as saying Silver has all the votes he needs among owners to get rid of Sterling.
Well, if Magic and Gugenheim are involved, it could happen but doesn't mean it is smart unless you can find a sucker. They way overpaid for the Dodgers, but hoodwinked Time Warner to give them $8B over the next 30 years for the TV rights. Stupid money, but never underestimate the willingness of someone more stupid to bail them out. LOL.
All it takes is one entity to say it is worth a billion, and that's what it becomes.
-
Based on what? The NBA salaries are paid for by the television deals. The money is fixed to the deals. There is a pool of money, not an ocean of it.
Sigh, This was a restatement of the absurd in response to this absurd post.
The question was why did Kohl sell the Bucks last week for $550m if the Clippers are worth $1.5b? Is the difference between Milwaukee and LA really worth $1billion? Remember they are in the same league, same TV deal, same salary cap, same players? Also keep in mind the Clipper and the Bucks have spent many of the last several years as terrible teams. The difference between them is the Clippers drafted Blake Griffin. If he is a major reason that the Clippers are worth a billion more than the Bucks? If so, then he is horribly underpaid at $20 million/year. In response to that was this ...
Probably because the NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement limits what players can be paid. See James, LeBron. I think it clears a billion easily.
I took this to mean he thought LeBron was worth a billion. Then, being absurd, I said Lebron actually thinks he needs a 50x raise, then they are never going to agree on a collectively bargaining agreement.
-
I think it fair to call the Bucks selling price at $650 million since the buyers pledged an additional $100M for an arena, not hard to think the Clippers are worth quite a bit more at this point in time.
-
Sigh, This was a restatement of the absurd in response to this absurd post.
The question was why did Kohl sell the Bucks last week for $550m if the Clippers are worth $1.5b? Is the difference between Milwaukee and LA really worth $1billion? Remember they are in the same league, same TV deal, same salary cap, same players? Also keep in mind the Clipper and the Bucks have spent many of the last several years as terrible teams. The difference between them is the Clippers drafted Blake Griffin. If he is a major reason that the Clippers are worth a billion more than the Bucks? If so, then he is horribly underpaid at $20 million/year. In response to that was this ...
I took this to mean he thought LeBron was worth a billion. Then, being absurd, I said Lebron actually thinks he needs a 50x raise, then they are never going to agree on a collectively bargaining agreement.
Fair enough. Comes down to the markets
A house here might sell for $1M...if you took that EXACT same house and dropped it in Wauwatosa, it might sell for $350K. Insanity looms, no different on the valuations of other things.
-
Lester Munson was just on SportCenter and said the proceedings to remove Sterling would happen quickly and if the owners vote to terminate Sterling's ownership and he decides to sue, the case would be dismissed quickly because the owners vote is considered binding arbitration.
-
Milwaukee was undervalued.
The market for the Clippers will include Magic's group with the Guggenheim partners and anyone else with money out west. The Clippers value also includes the location. The TV market in LA for the Clips will be huge. Not sure about 1.5 Billion but I would not be surprised at $1 Billion. Not sure any owner has lost money on a franchise in the last 30 years.
-
Fair enough. Comes down to the markets
A house here might sell for $1M...if you took that EXACT same house and dropped it in Wauwatosa, it might sell for $350K. Insanity looms, no different on the valuations of other things.
Yes, but that's why I purposely said "same league, same TV contract [national] same salary cap, same players."
Wauwatosa does not have the economic opportunity as LA so yes their should be a wide difference in home prices. But the Clippers are the distance step-child of the Lakers in LA and everything else (i.e., same league) is the same. The difference should not be 3x.
Milwaukee was undervalued.
The market for the Clippers will include Magic's group with the Guggenheim partners and anyone else with money out west. The Clippers value also includes the location. The TV market in LA for the Clips will be huge. Not sure about 1.5 Billion but I would not be surprised at $1 Billion. Not sure any owner has lost money on a franchise in the last 30 years.
Yes the Clippers should be worth more than the Bucks $550m agreed to last week. But are the Clippers worth nearly 3x the bucks price? This sounds absurdly high.
Keep this in mine, the Jacksonville Jaguars sold for $770 million in 2012. Make the case to me that the Clippers in 2014 are worth 2x the Jaguars in 2012? Make the case they are worth more than any NFL franchise. That a second rate NBA franchise is worth 2x ANY NFL franchise is laughable.
-
Milwaukee was undervalued.
The market for the Clippers will include Magic's group with the Guggenheim partners and anyone else with money out west. The Clippers value also includes the location. The TV market in LA for the Clips will be huge. Not sure about 1.5 Billion but I would not be surprised at $1 Billion. Not sure any owner has lost money on a franchise in the last 30 years.
I read a story yesterday that as many as 5 groups are interested in the Clippers. If multiple groups are interested, I'll bet Magic/Guggenheim do NOT get it. Sterling will not sell to Magic Johnson because he is at the center of this mess (in Sterling's mind). Yes, the old man will spite Magic.
(again, this will be the case if multiple bidders show up)
-
How can the NBA ban an owner from attending games? I mean, if he said, FU, I'm sitting here, who is going to enforce that rule?
The police can't do it, he's not breaking any criminal laws. Building security? I'd imagine they work for Sterling.
Special NBA SWAT team?
He owns a team, a franchise. Not the NBA.
-
Local media contracts are where the numbers are really different. A sponsorship agreement for the viewing area of greater LA is worth a lot more than one for greater Milwaukee. These teams can shop their local TV spots for a lot of money, heck even radio spots will go for a fair chunk of change. Don't know about 3x the value, but remember the Jaguars are one of the poorest performing teams in the NFL, are in a small media market, and have to put tarps over seating areas of the stadium. A deal for an NBA team in a market many times the size is enticing to sponsors. I could see the Clippers going for north of a billion, but that's based upon their projected future value, current popularity, and current cost of these sponsorship deals.
-
If Silver was in charge at the time would he have had such a large punishment for Tim Hardaway and his comments on hating gay people? Equality, right? http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2766213
Keywords in your link are "Former Miami Heat guard."
-
That a second rate NBA franchise is worth 2x ANY NFL franchise is laughable.
Second rate? This isn't the Darius Odom/Quentin Richardson LA Clippers anymore. They're close to a top 5 team in the league, with a well known, respected and very popular superstar as their leader in Chris Paul and one of the most marketable and popular young stars in Blake Griffin, coached by one of the most respected and notable coaches in the league, in the second largest media market in the country. If they are second rate, then the Heat are second rate cause they used to suck before Wade and Shaq too. They are a sleeping giant, and a large reason they stayed sleeping until recently was because of incompetent and stingy ownership.
-
Second rate? This isn't the Darius Odom/Quentin Richardson LA Clippers anymore. They're close to a top 5 team in the league, with a well known, respected and very popular superstar as their leader in Chris Paul and one of the most marketable and popular young stars in Blake Griffin, coached by one of the most respected and notable coaches in the league, in the second largest media market in the country. If they are second rate, then the Heat are second rate cause they used to suck before Wade and Shaq too. They are a sleeping giant, and a large reason they stayed sleeping until recently was because of incompetent and stingy ownership.
Next owner will own the team for decades (presumably). Chris Paul, Blake Griffin and Doc Rivers will only be their a few more years (assuming the don't bolt next week after getting bounced from the playoffs). When they leave, will they go right back into the Crapper?
Using your logic, the Bulls are also a top 5 team because of the legacy of Jordan. OKC is a top 5 franchise because of Durant. That's three ... So the "storied" 76s, Celtics, Knicks and Lakers are probably not top 5 merely because this year's roster is poor.
Point is you cannot judge a franchise's long-term value by who happens to be on the team this season or who was on the team 15 years ago. That is transitory.
The question; is the next ownership group competent enough to keep turning over their roster every 3 to 4 years and produce winners? On this score, let's be blunt, teams run by former superstars (Jordan, Isaiah, Bird) usually suck. Superstars are no qualification to be an executive and they prove it over and over.
I do not expect Magic to get the team. But if he does, I suspect the Clippers will, in the long-term, continue as a second rate franchise. See the Bobcats.
-
Correct on part one. On the billion, we'll see. They have to monetize that somehow, and television deal makers are in no mood to do those deals anymore because it is driving television consumer bills up too much. How do they pay for the $1B is the question. Interesting times.
End of the day, likely a win win for some, just like Frank McCourt with the Dodgers. Sterling is going to make a ton, sad as that is to say. The NBA will probably be able to exert enough pressure to get him out. The fans, they could be on the outs like the Dodgers fans are today.
In a related story. The LA Times here has been on the rampage the last few days about this, understandably so. Yet they are still accepting Sterling's advertising $$ (he's a big advertiser every week) so they're now being pulled into this.
Packaging channels is an outdated business model that will be over soon. Sports programming is a top priority for cable companies as it's now the only programming that people still watch live, which increases the value for advertisers. Prices will continue to go up until one of the big cable companies switches to al la carte.
When that happens, the bubble will burst, and all this craziness associated with advertising money (conference realignment, franchise valuations, etc...), will take a sharp dive.
Here's an good article that talks about this in more detail; http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/73639340/baseball-football-basketball-american-sports-dependent-on-cable-television-money
-
I would tend to agree they are not comparable, but certainly are in the same universe. Degrees to everything. Are we stamping out racism, or not? Interesting conversations about this today. One sports attorney felt that the league will have no choice but to clamp down on that behavior as well. Not lifetime banishments, but if stuff is on tape, tweeted, etc, racism of any kind, the league will have no choice but to come down hard and not just pretend it isn't there. As he said, it becomes a credibility argument and also one of following through on the promise that there is zero tolerance.
I agree that this kind of language will and should be punished in the future. The NFL already does it. Maybe it will make these guys think before they tweet the first effen things that pop into their heads.
I still think bringing up Hardaway in context with Sterling was ridiculous. One guy said something stupid. The other has a decades-long history of racism, sexism and numerous other isms. Degrees to everything.
-
Yes they do, question is whether the would vote for it. As one veteran in the industry said to us last night, lots of owners out there have girlfriends, mistresses, etc and they don't know what they've said, what has been recorded, etc, so they might not be too keen on that slipper slope. Mark Cuban made that argument yesterday as well.
Cuban did make the slippery-slope argument yesterday. Today, he tweeted that he is 100% behind the commissioner and thinks the entire punishment is deserved. In other words, Sterling has zero chance.
-
I agree that this kind of language will and should be punished in the future. The NFL already does it. Maybe it will make these guys think before they tweet the first effen things that pop into their heads.
I still think bringing up Hardaway in context with Sterling was ridiculous. One guy said something stupid. The other has a decades-long history of racism, sexism and numerous other isms. Degrees to everything.
But until Saturday Hardaway and Sterling had one thing in common ... Neither was sanction, fined, reprimanded or punished for anything regarding hateful speech by the NBA.
They both had clean records until 3 days ago. So, I'm not buying the argument Sterling was a habitual offender. Show me his punishment before today?
-
Yes, but that's why I purposely said "same league, same TV contract [national] same salary cap, same players."
Wauwatosa does not have the economic opportunity as LA so yes their should be a wide difference in home prices. But the Clippers are the distance step-child of the Lakers in LA and everything else (i.e., same league) is the same. The difference should not be 3x.
Yes the Clippers should be worth more than the Bucks $550m agreed to last week. But are the Clippers worth nearly 3x the bucks price? This sounds absurdly high.
Keep this in mine, the Jacksonville Jaguars sold for $770 million in 2012. Make the case to me that the Clippers in 2014 are worth 2x the Jaguars in 2012? Make the case they are worth more than any NFL franchise. That a second rate NBA franchise is worth 2x ANY NFL franchise is laughable.
But you can't put those limiters on there. The value of something is based on what someone is willing to pay for it. If you have a bunch of big dicks out here that throw money around like it is no one's business, they are going to drive up that value. I realize it is the same league, same cap, etc, but just like the Cowboys were billions more than the Jags or Bills.
Maybe a lot of folks were reading Scoop when you were arguing how devalued football would become due to concussions and that is lifting the Clips value over a NFL team. ;)
-
But you can't put those limiters on there. The value of something is based on what someone is willing to pay for it. If you have a bunch of big dicks out here that throw money around like it is no one's business, they are going to drive up that value. I realize it is the same league, same cap, etc, but just like the Cowboys were billions more than the Jags or Bills.
Maybe a lot of folks were reading Scoop when you were arguing how devalued football would become due to concussions and that is lifting the Clips value over a NFL team. ;)
Again, I think the Clippers are worth more than the Bucks, a lot more. I'm question Bill Simmons claim of $1.5 billion (3x the Bucks). I'll take it you're not.
So the three highest sales of sports franchises will be ...
Dodgers at $2 billion
Clippers at $1.5 billion
Manchester United $1.47 billion
... Because everyone knows the clippers should be mentioned in the same breath as the Dodgers and Man U
-
"The question; is the next ownership group competent enough to keep turning over their roster every 3 to 4 years and produce winners? On this score, let's be blunt, teams run by former superstars (Jordan, Isaiah, Bird) usually suck. Superstars are no qualification to be an executive and they prove it over and over."
I agree with Jordan and Isaiah. Larry Bird has built a fine team with the Pacers and should not be on the list. Other former players have done well including Danny Ainge, Mitch Kupchak, Pat Riley, and even John Paxson. I think what you mean is playing experience does not equate to player evaluation or management. If so, I agree.
p.s. I would not let Isaiah run a lemonade stand
-
But until Saturday Hardaway and Sterling had one thing in common ... Neither was sanction, fined, reprimanded or punished for anything regarding hateful speech by the NBA.
They both had clean records until 3 days ago. So, I'm not buying the argument Sterling was a habitual offender. Show me his punishment before today?
Here is an article with good links to Sterling's past nonsense:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/04/28/why-the-world-finally-noticed-donald-sterlings-appalling-history/
-
Sterling is a huge douche, and deserves whatever he gets. But this is a huge example of the lawyers and Sterling walking away with bundles of cash. The bimbo will be sued, the NBA will be sued, the Players Assoc. will be suing, Doc will walk away from his contract with a suit, and Sterling's wife will walk away with half of everything, because California is the Pioneer of equal property rights.
All from a recording made in private.
As some would say "Respect the Due Process. And then the PC Police will start to sue for all others offended by other comments.
-
But the owners do. They need a 3/4 vote that he violated their constitution's requirement to conduct business in a reasonable and ethical manner.
The owners would be crazy to support this, but they will, because they do not want the headache of the protests/boycotts against them if they do not. Think of the turmoil and precedents this will set. The guy has conducted his NBA business in a reasonable and ethical manner. This whole thing is a cave to PC. It was a private conversation in which he said stupid things. Sterling is a senile douche who will walk away with bundles of cash, as his wife will--more than him. This is all about cash.
Barkley and Jamie Fox will need to shut their mouths (which they won't) because of the offensive comments they make and the law suits that follow.
-
Again, I think the Clippers are worth more than the Bucks, a lot more. I'm question Bill Simmons claim of $1.5 billion (3x the Bucks). I'll take it you're not.
So the three highest sales of sports franchises will be ...
Dodgers at $2 billion
Clippers at $1.5 billion
Manchester United $1.47 billion
... Because everyone knows the clippers should be mentioned in the same breath as the Dodgers and Man U
The Clippers are not worth close to $1 Billion. That is beyond absurd. A Billion, please. Maybe the Lakers, the Clippers will always be second banana in LA.
-
The owners would be crazy to support this, but they will, because they do not want the headache of the protests/boycotts against them if they do not. Think of the turmoil and precedents this will set. The guy has conducted his NBA business in a reasonable and ethical manner. This whole thing is a cave to PC. It was a private conversation in which he said stupid things. Sterling is a senile douche who will walk away with bundles of cash, as his wife will--more than him. This is all about cash.
Barkley and Jamie Fox will need to shut their mouths (which they won't) because of the offensive comments they make and the law suits that follow.
Reasonable and ethical? Really?
And your answer is for the black guys to shut up? That is truly priceless. Where do you really stand on the issue ::)
-
He owns a team, a franchise. Not the NBA.
I don't understand your point. The NBA doesn't own the building they want him to not visit during games. Perhaps if he's sitting court-side a ref may try to eject him, but again, what security team does physically remove him? Arena security doesn't work for the NBA, they work for who pays their salary. Admittedly, that could be some municipality.
-
Packaging channels is an outdated business model that will be over soon. Sports programming is a top priority for cable companies as it's now the only programming that people still watch live, which increases the value for advertisers. Prices will continue to go up until one of the big cable companies switches to al la carte.
When that happens, the bubble will burst, and all this craziness associated with advertising money (conference realignment, franchise valuations, etc...), will take a sharp dive.
Here's an good article that talks about this in more detail; http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/73639340/baseball-football-basketball-american-sports-dependent-on-cable-television-money
I enjoy Will Leitch as much as anyone, but he'll have to convince these types of people.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/08/08/21st-century-foxs-chase-carey-a-la-carte-is-a-fantasy/
http://www.thewrap.com/fox-coo-chase-carey-la-carte-cable-farce/
The other thing that Mr. Leitch is not factoring in the rights. Most of the major sports rights are tied up into the 2020's...some as far as 2027. You'll see some new announcements if I were a betting man in the next few months on some other sports extensions.
His timing for his view of the bubble I suspect is really short, the industry thinks it is 10 years out. "That will play out over the next 10-plus years, not the next three," Carey said. He’s also unfazed by rising sports costs. “It’s the most important content on television, period….It is the content that binds a community.”
If they can't get the dollars from other sources, it isn't happening any time soon. Mr. Leitch is free to offer a solution, many have tried.
-
But until Saturday Hardaway and Sterling had one thing in common ... Neither was sanction, fined, reprimanded or punished for anything regarding hateful speech by the NBA.
They both had clean records until 3 days ago. So, I'm not buying the argument Sterling was a habitual offender. Show me his punishment before today?
Just because Sterling wasn't punished doesn't mean he wasn't a serial racist. One of our fellow commenters just provided a few links referring to his past transgressions.
The NFL just adopted a policy saying they aren't going to tolerate this stuff from players, coaches, owners, anybody. The NBA will, too. Obviously, nobody can legislate how somebody thinks, but if a person is going to go public with his crapola, he knows he'll get nailed. And, in a case like Sterling, even if he doesn't know he's going public, he'd better think twice.
The only bad part about that for me is that I like to know who the racists are. Fortunately, many are so stupid and believe they are above everybody else, so they'll still come out of the woodwork to spew their hate.
-
The Clippers are not worth close to $1 Billion. That is beyond absurd. A Billion, please. Maybe the Lakers, the Clippers will always be second banana in LA.
All it takes is one person to say they are worth a billion. I don't disagree with you, but $2.4billion for the Doyers was preposterous, until someone paid $2.4billion. Then Time Warner bailed them out.
-
The NBA may not own the building but they can regulate who attends the games. He's a owner of a team and agreed to be governed by the NBA constitution, its rules, and its by-laws. Additionally the Clippers don't own the Staples Center and neither does he, the Anschutz group does. But back to the original point, the NBA can ban individuals from games including owners. It's a private organization he voluntarily joined and agreed to be bound by its rules.
As for the owners voting him out, that's tough to say. I doubt many of them are comfortable with the idea of being held accountable for everything they say in private. Although one would hope most NBA owners don't have the same antiquated and ignorant views on society that he does. It does set some interesting precedent regardless of the outcome.
-
Theoretically, if Sterling ignored the commissioner's decree and showed up to the games he would open himself up to further fines. Silver can fine up to $2.5M and this would be a separate action.
-
Here is an article with good links to Sterling's past nonsense:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/04/28/why-the-world-finally-noticed-donald-sterlings-appalling-history/
I'm still waiting for some media folks to go after David Stern a bit on this, but it may not happen. He's pretty chummy with most in the media at the highest levels, so it will be kid gloves. Silver was spinning a bit of the past today in his comments.
-
I'm still waiting for some media folks to go after David Stern a bit on this, but it may not happen. He's pretty chummy with most in the media at the highest levels, so it will be kid gloves. Silver was spinning a bit of the past today in his comments.
I've heard some take shots at the commish, including Wilbon and Kornheiser.
-
listening to the press conference there were more than a few questions asking about Stern and his attitude on the topic. I would expect someone to address Stern's lack of interest on this to be revealed. So many sworn statements provided by fact witnesses against Sterling (his building manager for example) and the NBA never looked into it until after a verdict? Sterling bought his way out of the federal housing claim and paid a record fine. Plenty of evidence against him. Same goes for Elgin Baylor's lawsuit. I just don't understand why, with Sterling, the NBA and Stern somehow needed to hold themselves up to the standard of proof required in a civil claim or arbitration to reprimand or fine Sterling for his behavior. I've never seen them do for any other fine against ownership or players. Very convenient to hide behind it today and the last 20 years.
-
I've heard some take shots at the commish, including Wilbon and Kornheiser.
Heard shots all day. Stearn looking very bad. Too late to matter, though.
-
The owners would be crazy to support this, but they will, because they do not want the headache of the protests/boycotts against them if they do not. Think of the turmoil and precedents this will set. The guy has conducted his NBA business in a reasonable and ethical manner. This whole thing is a cave to PC. It was a private conversation in which he said stupid things. Sterling is a senile douche who will walk away with bundles of cash, as his wife will--more than him. This is all about cash.
Barkley and Jamie Fox will need to shut their mouths (which they won't) because of the offensive comments they make and the law suits that follow.
Mods, how much can I donate to make this post a stickie post on the top of the board. Wow. Just wow.
-
Heard shots all day. Stearn looking very bad. Too late to matter, though.
Maybe because I live out here we are getting Sterling 24/7 because it's really been all about him, will Magic buy the team, and Doc is classy. Barely a whisper about Stern, though certainly plenty on Silver.
-
I'm still waiting for some media folks to go after David Stern a bit on this, but it may not happen. He's pretty chummy with most in the media at the highest levels, so it will be kid gloves. Silver was spinning a bit of the past today in his comments.
+1 was thinking the same thing, and CBB, you and I have bickered about the media in past posts, but I imagine we are in agreence, all the sanctimonious talk from commentators about all these years Sterling being so horrible. Hey media, where the F were you?
-
Mods, how much can I donate to make this post a stickie post on the top of the board. Wow. Just wow.
First time I've ever thanked anyone for quoting WW. Confirming the wisdom of ignore. What tin-eared drivel.
-
How can the NBA ban an owner from attending games? I mean, if he said, FU, I'm sitting here, who is going to enforce that rule?
The police can't do it, he's not breaking any criminal laws. Building security? I'd imagine they work for Sterling.
Special NBA SWAT team?
Then they would just fine him millions of dollars the next day.
-
All it takes is one person to say they are worth a billion. I don't disagree with you, but $2.4billion for the Doyers was preposterous, until someone paid $2.4billion. Then Time Warner bailed them out.
The Doyers and the Clippers are apples and oranges. The Clippers are a second rate franchise. This is the most they have ever been talked about in their history. the Lakers are LA. The Clips will not get the numbers being thrown around on the board. At the end of the day, they are Still the Clippers, the "other" basketball team.
-
I enjoy Will Leitch as much as anyone, but he'll have to convince these types of people.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/08/08/21st-century-foxs-chase-carey-a-la-carte-is-a-fantasy/
http://www.thewrap.com/fox-coo-chase-carey-la-carte-cable-farce/
The other thing that Mr. Leitch is not factoring in the rights. Most of the major sports rights are tied up into the 2020's...some as far as 2027. You'll see some new announcements if I were a betting man in the next few months on some other sports extensions.
His timing for his view of the bubble I suspect is really short, the industry thinks it is 10 years out. "That will play out over the next 10-plus years, not the next three," Carey said. He’s also unfazed by rising sports costs. “It’s the most important content on television, period….It is the content that binds a community.”
If they can't get the dollars from other sources, it isn't happening any time soon. Mr. Leitch is free to offer a solution, many have tried.
I get the feeling that since these execs say they will never allow something to happen - that you think it will never happen.
-
Just because Sterling wasn't punished doesn't mean he was a serial racist. One of our fellow commenters just provided a few links referring to his past transgressions.
The NFL just adopted a policy saying they aren't going to tolerate this stuff from players, coaches, owners, anybody. The NBA will, too. Obviously, nobody can legislate how somebody thinks, but if a person is going to go public with his crapola, he knows he'll get nailed. And, in a case like Sterling, even if he doesn't know he's going public, he'd better think twice.
The only bad part about that for me is that I like to know who the racists are. Fortunately, many are so stupid and believe they are above everybody else, so they'll still come out of the woodwork to spew their hate.
So now we are going to regulate private speech meant for one person. Do you have outrage for his mistress? Should you go to prison for invading his privacy (CA is a double consent state)? Or is she a hero for bringing this to light?
As Cuban said, if this is the standard, no owner will survive. It is just a matter of time before they get caught.
And where do we draw the line? Homophobia statements? Sexists? Religious? How about political affiliation? Do we ban owners that are against tax increases? How about class statements (poor v rich)?
Point is what controversial statement is one allowed to say and still keep their team?
To paraphrase Bill Mahar, you're still allowed to be an a**ho*e in this country. That is not a crime.
-
Heisenberg- The difference here is that the private statement (made public) brought to a general audience in crystal clear terms a history of racist conduct/attitudes. It is the combination of the two that buried this scumbag.
-
Heisenberg- The difference here is that the private statement (made public) brought to a general audience in crystal clear terms a history of racist conduct/attitudes. It is the combination of the two that buried this scumbag.
Just to be clear, if he launched about gays and women he would still own the team because he has no prior history of prejudice against these groups?
-
I'm guessing Silver will initiate the termination procedure. Once he does, the process moves pretty quickly:
"Any owner or Silver can initiate the termination procedure with a written charge describing the violation. Sterling would have five days to respond to the charge with a written answer. The commissioner would then schedule a special meeting of the NBA Board of Governors within 10 days. Both sides would have a chance to present their evidence, and then the board would vote. If three-fourths of the board members vote to terminate, then Sterling would face termination of his ownership."
Sterling will try and save face and agree to sell the team "in the best interests of everyone." He may be a racist and misogynist, but he is probably smart enough to know he's losing the team so he might as well try and retain control of the process.
He'll walk with his billion and be a punch line for the rest of his days.
-
The Clippers are a second rate franchise.
Not when The Eraser and Ernie D were lacing up the high tops they weren't...
-
Just to be clear, if he launched about gays and women he would still own the team because he has no prior history of prejudice against these groups?
Quite possibly. I did forget an important third factor--he is the owner of an NBA team--mostly AA employees in an industry comprised mostly of AAs and his comments and history are disparaging to that particular group, including specifically individuals in that group (for example, Magic Johnson) simply because they are AA.
-
And, by the way, you and Bill Maher are right. Being a jag is not a crime. He won't go to jail for what he did. But he still can, has and will suffer consequences.
It's a bit like free speech. It bugs the p!ss out of me when someone says something stupid, and gets criticized for it, and the first person is defended by idiots [not you in this example, Heisenberg] who say "you can't criticize him, he has a first amendment right to say that." Well, of course he does. And he has a First Amendment right to be criticized, humiliated and boycotted.
-
Just to be clear, if he launched about gays and women he would still own the team because he has no prior history of prejudice against these groups?
Quite possibly. I did forget an important third factor--he is the owner of an NBA team--mostly AA employees in an industry comprised mostly of AAs and his comments and history are disparaging to that particular group, including specifically individuals in that group (for example, Magic Johnson) simply because they are AA.
+1. Consider the accusations from Sam Cassell and Elton Brand that he brought women in the locker room to show off his nude athletes like thoroughbreds. Pretty degrading.
-
UCLA is returning a $3 million dollar gift from Sterling.
That more than covers the $2.5 million fine.
-
And, by the way, you and Bill Maher are right. Being a jag is not a crime. He won't go to jail for what he did. But he still can, has and will suffer consequences.
It's a bit like free speech. It bugs the p!ss out of me when someone says something stupid, and gets criticized for it, and the first person is defended by idiots [not you in this example, Heisenberg] who say "you can't criticize him, he has a first amendment right to say that." Well, of course he does. And he has a First Amendment right to be criticized, humiliated and boycotted.
When does Bill Maher go to jail? He's offensive ;)
-
UCLA is returning a $3 million dollar gift from Sterling.
That more than covers the $2.5 million fine.
Donation was for kidney research, which is unfortunate. He's radioactive right now, even dollars not for political purposes is coming back
-
And, by the way, you and Bill Maher are right. Being a jag is not a crime. He won't go to jail for what he did. But he still can, has and will suffer consequences.
It's a bit like free speech. It bugs the p!ss out of me when someone says something stupid, and gets criticized for it, and the first person is defended by idiots [not you in this example, Heisenberg] who say "you can't criticize him, he has a first amendment right to say that." Well, of course he does. And he has a First Amendment right to be criticized, humiliated and boycotted.
Just to be clear, the First Amendment protects speech from obstruction by the government. The First Amendment doesn't apply to private people or organizations. So, the NBA has absolutely no obligation to respect the speech of its employees or even owners under the First Amendment. The NBA can abridge peoples' right to speak all it wants. And it does so in many circumstances (criticizing refs, e.g.). Frankly, it's unremarkable that it is doing so here. Anyone defending Sterling on First Amendment grounds is thus misguided--it just has no application to the NBA whatsoever.
-
UCLA is returning a $3 million dollar gift from Sterling.
That more than covers the $2.5 million fine.
Showed him. Alford is probably thinking about that check every time he is waiting beside the A pole to board the SWA flight to UCLA's next game.
For Sterling, he can now go and buy Bert's Warehouse in Mequon with that check and have some cash left over to resurface the indoor basketball court
-
Just to be clear, the First Amendment protects speech from obstruction by the government. The First Amendment doesn't apply to private people or organizations. So, the NBA has absolutely no obligation to respect the speech of its employees or even owners under the First Amendment. The NBA can abridge peoples' right to speak all it wants. And it does so in many circumstances (criticizing refs, e.g.). Frankly, it's unremarkable that it is doing so here. Anyone defending Sterling on First Amendment grounds is thus misguided--it just has no application to the NBA whatsoever.
that was my point
-
Reasonable and ethical? Really?
And your answer is for the black guys to shut up? That is truly priceless. Where do you really stand on the issue ::)
Look at it another way: You have owned a business for 30 plus years and have built it up. Some bimbo baits you into saying some reprehensible stupid thing in private, and somebody tells you you must sell your business. Have you ever said something stupid in your own domicile that should justify somebody telling you to sell your home or business? Now I cannot say that he did violate or did not violate NBA by laws, because they are not all public. The fine and the ban are good things, but ordering you to sell your business? It appears that he has run his business responsibly or why has the NBA not reacted prior to this. As Bill Maher said: being an ahole is not yet a crime in this country.
The funny thing is: attorneys and Sterling will walk away with the money. And yes, if black guys say racist things, they should shut up. But they won't. It is a hypocritical double standard. I already said the guy is a stupid senile douche. That is where I really stand.
-
First time I've ever thanked anyone for quoting WW. Confirming the wisdom of ignore. What tin-eared drivel.
I was thinking the exact same thing. I love having willie on ignore. Thankfully, willie's "Greatest Hits" often show up in another poster's responses to his remarkably ignorant posts. And this one was particularly remarkable.
-
So now we are going to regulate private speech meant for one person. Do you have outrage for his mistress? Should you go to prison for invading his privacy (CA is a double consent state)? Or is she a hero for bringing this to light?
As Cuban said, if this is the standard, no owner will survive. It is just a matter of time before they get caught.
And where do we draw the line? Homophobia statements? Sexists? Religious? How about political affiliation? Do we ban owners that are against tax increases? How about class statements (poor v rich)?
Point is what controversial statement is one allowed to say and still keep their team?
To paraphrase Bill Mahar, you're still allowed to be an a**ho*e in this country. That is not a crime.
I have zero problems with a private enterprise (the NBA) using whatever methods it deems necessary (including private recordings that go public) to police its own member owners.
THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ISSUE! I work for a private company. If I am caught by that company saying something like Sterling did, I will be fired immediately. It will not matter that I have a constitutional right to say it. It will not matter that "it's not a crime to be an a-hole." All that matters is the private enterprise that employs me didn't like what I said.
When Sterling became an owner, he signed documents giving the NBA the power to do exactly what is being done to him now. From everything I've read, the NBA should have done something a lot sooner. It seems David Stern was the ultimate enabler.
Oh, and you are right about what Cuban said. However, you conveniently left out that Cuban later added that he was 100% behind Silver and the penalties.
-
I find it interesting that an owner who has a private conversation involving racist comments = essentially being kicked out of the league.
But players committing assault, rape, whatever other crimes = fines, possible jail time, but, more importantly, NOT kicked out of the league (with a few minor exceptions)
The difference, from what I see, is Sterling's situation was threatening the organization's profits.
-
2014 is the start of a new the era. The list of opinions that if held, lead to utter condemnation and ruin, now stands at two.
Surely, there will be more horrific opinions added as this new process claims more unspeakable opinions.
And the NSA can really help with this process, too. Gonna need to examine everyone's personal conversations.
-
I find it interesting that an owner who has a private conversation involving racist comments = essentially being kicked out of the league.
But players committing assault, rape, whatever other crimes = fines, possible jail time, but, more importantly, NOT kicked out of the league (with a few minor exceptions)
The difference, from what I see, is Sterling's situation was threatening the organization's profits.
Well, and players are protected by the CBA.
-
2014 is the start of a new the era. The list of opinions that if held, lead to utter condemnation and ruin, now stands at two.
Surely, there will be more horrific opinions added as this new process claims more unspeakable opinions.
And the NSA can really help with this process, too. Gonna need to examine everyone's personal conversations.
Yeah....poor Donald Sterling is ruined because he will be forced to sell his team for 100 times the value at which he paid for it. My heart goes out to him.
But really, the issue isn't what he said in the end. It really is more about what he has done over the course of his career to use his power to inflict real harm on a group of people because of their race. If his words were in a vacuum, I might agree with you. But they weren't...they never really are... They are reflective of his opinions that manifested itself in his business practices.
So I really don't give a sh*t about him. I really don't give a sh*t about precedence (because I don't think it will be much of one). I really don't give a sh*t about his "freedom of speech" (because he has a history of abusing other's civil rights).
-
I have zero problems with a private enterprise (the NBA) using whatever methods it deems necessary (including private recordings that go public) to police its own member owners.
THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ISSUE! I work for a private company. If I am caught by that company saying something like Sterling did, I will be fired immediately. It will not matter that I have a constitutional right to say it. It will not matter that "it's not a crime to be an a-hole." All that matters is the private enterprise that employs me didn't like what I said.
When Sterling became an owner, he signed documents giving the NBA the power to do exactly what is being done to him now. From everything I've read, the NBA should have done something a lot sooner. It seems David Stern was the ultimate enabler.
Oh, and you are right about what Cuban said. However, you conveniently left out that Cuban later added that he was 100% behind Silver and the penalties.
So if you go home tonight, have a few cocktails and your wife baits you into an argument (not physical fight) and you say some inappropriate things (as EVERYONE does in this situation) and the next morning she marches down to your bosses office with her iPhone and plays the recording, you will just quietly, and without protest, clean out your office and leave for good? And you will think this was a completely appropriate punishment?
Is this the world we now live in?
-
Sterling is now a toxic pariah, shunned by everyone who can't be associated with the scarlet R, which, as the citizenry can now see, leads to utter, swift condemnation. He can't own a team. Any business that he owns or associated with must divest. No one can risk being seen in public with him.
Sure, Sterling will have his $1b sale proceeds. But he might as well bury it in his back yard. He won't even be able to give it away, as charities would need to return the check. His punishment is, roughly, solitary confinement until he dies. (exaggeration, but with much truth.)
But really, the issue isn't what he said in the end. It really is more about what he has done over the course of his career to use his power to inflict real harm on a group of people because of their race.
I find that to be a dodge. All the other items that've come out in the past few days were mostly documented, and didn't draw this nuclear repercussion. "straw that broke the camel's back" .. maybe. But it's reasonable that 99.99% of the planet didn't know squat about his prior behavior, (and if they did, they did nothing about it) which means most are reacting to the private tape alone.
-
Yeah....poor Donald Sterling is ruined because he will be forced to sell his team for 100 times the value at which he paid for it. My heart goes out to him.
But really, the issue isn't what he said in the end. It really is more about what he has done over the course of his career to use his power to inflict real harm on a group of people because of their race. If his words were in a vacuum, I might agree with you. But they weren't...they never really are... They are reflective of his opinions that manifested itself in his business practices.
So I really don't give a sh*t about him. I really don't give a sh*t about precedence (because I don't think it will be much of one). I really don't give a sh*t about his "freedom of speech" (because he has a history of abusing other's civil rights).
Sultan--I agree with you on most of this except the part of precedence, but that can be left to wait and see. I also agree with the opinion that it is about his entire career-- but that ain't what Silver said! He said it was not about past incidents. I do not know enough about all of his opinions/beliefs. The NBA comes out of this looking like hypocrites also. Now Sterling can kick back and wait for what he considers a "fair offer". And guess what, if the offers become akin to a fire sale, he can turn them down, forcing the NBA to buy him out. Wonder if the players union will kick a third of a billion to help the NBA out?
-
So if you go home tonight, have a few cocktails and your wife baits you into an argument (not physical fight) and you say some inappropriate things (as EVERYONE does in this situation) and the next morning she marches down to your bosses office with her iPhone and plays the recording, you will just quietly, and without protest, clean out your office and leave for good? And you will think this was a completely appropriate punishment?
Is this the world we now live in?
I do not have a history where the inflammatory remarks to my wife are corroborated by hostile working conditions I've created or a lawsuit brought against me by the federal government. You're looking at this like it's a first-time offense when it is in fact the proverbial straw on the camel's back. I think you and I do share a concern here: according to California law, the only crime commited in this bizarre story was perpetrated by the girlfriend, not Sterling. I don't have a problem with the ownership booting him -- they have their own constitution (which in your example above, I don't fall under the jurisdiction of.) I have a problem with him getting booted now, using illegally obtained evidence from a vengeful girlfriend instead of the MOUNTAIN of evidence that could have sent him packing years ago.
-
So if you go home tonight, have a few cocktails and your wife baits you into an argument (not physical fight) and you say some inappropriate things (as EVERYONE does in this situation) and the next morning she marches down to your bosses office with her iPhone and plays the recording, you will just quietly, and without protest, clean out your office and leave for good? And you will think this was a completely appropriate punishment?
Is this the world we now live in?
It is getting close to that. The Feds are already pushing to monitor e-mails for "hate speech". One person's "hate speech" is another's opinion. Even Cuban knows that.
-
I do not have a history where the inflammatory remarks to my wife are corroborated by hostile working conditions I've created or a lawsuit brought against me by the federal government. You're looking at this like it's a first-time offense when it is in fact the proverbial straw on the camel's back. I think you and I do share a concern here: according to California law, the only crime commited in this bizarre story was perpetrated by the girlfriend, not Sterling. I don't have a problem with the ownership booting him -- they have their own constitution (which in your example above, I don't fall under the jurisdiction of.) I have a problem with him getting booted now, using illegally obtained evidence from a vengeful girlfriend instead of the MOUNTAIN of evidence that could have sent him packing years ago.
Yeah--and Silver said it is not about past incidents. Sterling gets booted for his opinions and Silver defends it with lies. Let the legal teams line up. This one will be very interesting.
-
Let the legal teams line up. This one will be very interesting.
On the other hand, can a legal team represent Silver without being dropped/forced to boycott by consumers/by other clients?
-
The Doyers and the Clippers are apples and oranges. The Clippers are a second rate franchise. This is the most they have ever been talked about in their history. the Lakers are LA. The Clips will not get the numbers being thrown around on the board. At the end of the day, they are Still the Clippers, the "other" basketball team.
I do not disagree with you, but it still takes just one guy to show how big his wiener is or compensate for how small it is to get crazy dollars.
Here are those already mentioned in the LA Times as having public interest
David Geffen
Magic Johnson + Guggenheim group
Floyd Mayweather
Oscar De La Hoya
Patrick Soon-Shiong
That's some crazy $$ with most of those guys.
-
Yeah--and Silver said it is not about past incidents. Sterling gets booted for his opinions and Silver defends it with lies. Let the legal teams line up. This one will be very interesting.
A few months into the job and you expect him to throw his predecessor under the bus? He was saving face for Stern -- I don't like it but I'm not terribly surprised.
Here are those already mentioned in the LA Times as having public interest
David Geffen
Magic Johnson + Guggenheim group
Floyd Mayweather
Oscar De La Hoya
Patrick Soon-Shiong
That's some crazy $$ with most of those guys.
I laughed when I saw his name pop up last night. Look up his rant about Manny Pacquiao. Can't imagine the league views Pretty Boy Floyd as an improvement over Sterling.
-
On the other hand, can a legal team represent Silver without being dropped/forced to boycott by consumers/by other clients?
Hey, we are talking about legal teams here. Don't you believe that there is one out there that will take the money? And then there will be the Bimbo's team, the NBA's team, Sterling's wifes, Doc's to get out of his contract, and the teams representing Magic and others in their offers. Hell, think what this will do for Califoria's economy--Lord knows they need it.
-
So if you go home tonight, have a few cocktails and your wife baits you into an argument (not physical fight) and you say some inappropriate things (as EVERYONE does in this situation) and the next morning she marches down to your bosses office with her iPhone and plays the recording, you will just quietly, and without protest, clean out your office and leave for good? And you will think this was a completely appropriate punishment?
Is this the world we now live in?
Although this is such a farfetched hypothetical that I probably should just ignore it, I won't.
Would I be pleased? No. Would I be pissed? Yes. Would my wife and I probably be headed for either divorce court or at least counseling? Sure. Would I think the punishment was appropriate? Probably not. Would I protest? Maybe.
Would I have recourse? Nope.
And I wouldn't even be able to sell my stake in the company for $1 billion.
That about covers it. Satisfied?
Now ... that doesn't change my opinion on the real, non-hypothetical Sterling case one iota. He's a serial racist who was caught being even more racist than usual. I don't feel sorry for him, I don't feel he has been unjustly vilified and I applaud Silver and his fellow owners for finally taking out the trash.
-
A few months into the job and you expect him to throw his predecessor under the bus? He was saving face for Stern -- I don't like it but I'm not terribly surprised.
I laughed when I saw his name pop up last night. Look up his rant about Manny Pacquiao. Can't imagine the league views Pretty Boy Floyd as an improvement over Sterling.
Agree, plus he loves to gamble.
Point was there are a lot of people swinging their junk right now to get in, question is how smart will they be in terms of price.
-
I find it interesting that an owner who has a private conversation involving racist comments = essentially being kicked out of the league.
But players committing assault, rape, whatever other crimes = fines, possible jail time, but, more importantly, NOT kicked out of the league (with a few minor exceptions)
The difference, from what I see, is Sterling's situation was threatening the organization's profits.
I find it interesting that folks keep wanting to come back to these kinds of comparisons.
First, there is little similarity. A player is not in a position of power the same way an owner is. A player who is a bigot -- or even a rapist -- can't make decisions that affect an entire organization.
Second, you say there have been "a few minor exceptions" regarding player punishment. Well, isn't Sterling an exception? In the history of the NBA, exactly one owner has received a lifetime ban. If that isn't an exception, I don't know what is.
Third, yes, of course Sterling's situation affects the organization's profits. Sterling signed up to be part of that organization. He certainly benefited from the profits he received being part of the organization. He agreed to the organization's rules. He seemingly broke one of the rules and now he has to deal with the punishment in accordance to the rules to which he agreed.
A private organization that has a major black presence does not want an owner who is clearly prejudiced against blacks. I don't see how this is even an issue. To me, the main issue is why the NBA didn't do something about Sterling sooner, because it sure sounds like he gave the league just cause. I agree with those who would like to see Stern have to answer to this -- maybe he'd be forced to return some of his bazillion-dollar severance.
-
I have zero problems with a private enterprise (the NBA) using whatever methods it deems necessary (including private recordings that go public) to police its own member owners.
THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ISSUE! I work for a private company. If I am caught by that company saying something like Sterling did, I will be fired immediately. It will not matter that I have a constitutional right to say it. It will not matter that "it's not a crime to be an a-hole." All that matters is the private enterprise that employs me didn't like what I said.
When Sterling became an owner, he signed documents giving the NBA the power to do exactly what is being done to him now. From everything I've read, the NBA should have done something a lot sooner. It seems David Stern was the ultimate enabler.
Oh, and you are right about what Cuban said. However, you conveniently left out that Cuban later added that he was 100% behind Silver and the penalties.
Mark has no choice, but he knows the slippery slope is problematic.
I think your first sentence creates an incredibly dangerous precedent. Things are said all the time in private that out of context could be construed different ways. Not the case in the Sterling example, but in other examples the amount of mischief this opens up is an issue. Say an owner in private said "Silver is an idiot" and that comes out. Maybe owner was talking about Silver being an idiot on a particular issue, but not as a whole, but that context isn't there. Say an owner makes a remark about a certain player, same type of situation, and all of a sudden people are screaming race, or whatever.
-
I do not have a history where the inflammatory remarks to my wife are corroborated by hostile working conditions I've created or a lawsuit brought against me by the federal government. You're looking at this like it's a first-time offense when it is in fact the proverbial straw on the camel's back. I think you and I do share a concern here: according to California law, the only crime commited in this bizarre story was perpetrated by the girlfriend, not Sterling. I don't have a problem with the ownership booting him -- they have their own constitution (which in your example above, I don't fall under the jurisdiction of.) I have a problem with him getting booted now, using illegally obtained evidence from a vengeful girlfriend instead of the MOUNTAIN of evidence that could have sent him packing years ago.
So his large real estate company was busted in racial discrimination. Elgin Baylor lost, repeat lost, his lawsuit for racial discrimination. Why does this count? All this combined with some second-hand hearsay comments?
Look I'm not defending the guy, I trying to understand what line was drawn to rise to the level of forcing him to sell (severely punished yes, but lifetime ban and forced sale?).
How about these owners? How many of them should get voted out at the same meeting with Sterling?
How about Herb Simon, the owner of the Pacers? He owns Simon Group, a large mall developer. In 2011 the EEOC charged that Latino janitors working for the company were subjected to daily verbal attacks because of their national origin. Simon is just as bad as Sterling. Why are we not asking Larry Bird why he accepts a paycheck from Simon?
How about Glen Taylor, the owner of the Timberwolves? He owns Taylor Corporation that employs 15,000 headquartered in Mankato MN. His company was sued for Sex Discrimination for passing over women for a promotion. They settled out of court. How can he be allowed to own an NBA team?
How about Cavaliers Owners Dan Gilbert? He owns Quicken Loans. Quicken lost a lawsuit for fraud and high pressure sales in that the pressured poor people (some minorities) into take out inappropriate mortgages and they lost their homes during the financial crisis. How can he keep his team? Isn't this worse than Sterling's words?
How about Mickey Arison the Miami Heat Owner? He owns Carnival Cruise lines and they had multiple incident of ships breaking leaving people without power, food, bagging their own sh!t and getting sick. They are bogged down in multi lawsuits over this. How can LeBron accept a paycheck form this guy? How can NBA owners allow him to own a team?
How about Brooklyn Nets owner Mikhail Prokhorov? The guy is a Russian Oligarch, running Norilsk Nickel and a few years ago 60 Minutes did a profile of him (before he was Nets owner) about the sleazy things he and his companies did. He is also a powder keg waiting to explode.
Mark Cuban was convicted of insider trading last year. He's a criminal, why not vote him out? Why is the NBA allowing criminals to run their teams (see Prokhorov too).
I could go on and on with virtually every owner in the NBA. If you want, they can all be made to look as bad as Sterling. You really want to open this Pandora’s box?
-
Mark has no choice, but he knows the slippery slope is problematic.
I think your first sentence creates an incredibly dangerous precedent. Things are said all the time in private that out of context could be construed different ways. Not the case in the Sterling example, but in other examples the amount of mischief this opens up is an issue. Say an owner in private said "Silver is an idiot" and that comes out. Maybe owner was talking about Silver being an idiot on a particular issue, but not as a whole, but that context isn't there. Say an owner makes a remark about a certain player, same type of situation, and all of a sudden people are screaming race, or whatever.
Of course Cuban had a choice. He could have not tweeted anything. He didn't have to offer the slippery slope quote or the "I agree 100%" quote. But he couldn't help himself. He's an attention addict.
Re-reading my first sentence, I don't like it, either. But I dislike it for a somewhat different reason than you state. I say "using whatever methods it deems necessary," but I certainly don't condone torture, blackmail, bribery and other illegal methods.
Otherwise, I am content to see what becomes of this going forward. I agree that context is important. I don't think there was any doubt about the context of Sterling's message. We won't know how all of this plays out until there are more instances.
I think my record as a poster shows that I'm not a big hypothetical-situation guy. So far, no other owner HAS been caught this way. And Marquette DID beat Davidson. And Marquette DID beat Holy Cross. I don't see the value in asking, "What if Cuban says so-and-so tomorrow?" or "How would Buzz be regarded if we lost to Davidson?" Or "Would Crean still be a college coach if we lost to Holy Cross?"
Hypotheticals, to me, represent arguing for the sake of it, and I don't enjoy doing that.
-
The slippery slope is this: according to the laws of private associations an association must apply its own rules consistently. A decision cannot be arbitrary, capricious, or made in bad faith. The consistent application of Silver's ruling now may include the punishment of NBA owners for things said in private. However, because players are also members of that association, this rule will in the future also apply to them. In a sense, the NBA has now created legal precedent to follow.
There are other elements to the laws of private associations but from a precedence standpoint those are the most pertinent. Application of league by-laws now includes lifetime bans for things said in the confines of a private conversation. Granted, what he said was bigoted and moronic and the league had cause to get rid of him years ago, but it will be interesting to see if down the road this ruling gets applied in other contexts.
-
The slippery slope is this: according to the laws of private associations an association must apply its own rules consistently. A decision cannot be arbitrary, capricious, or made in bad faith. The consistent application of Silver's ruling now may include the punishment of NBA owners for things said in private. However, because players are also members of that association, this rule will in the future also apply to them. In a sense, the NBA has now created legal precedent to follow.
There are other elements to the laws of private associations but from a precedence standpoint those are the most pertinent. Application of league by-laws now includes lifetime bans for things said in the confines of a private conversation. Granted, what he said was bigoted and moronic and the league had cause to get rid of him years ago, but it will be interesting to see if down the road this ruling gets applied in other contexts.
Players are protected by entirely different documents -- those collectively bargained.
Players are not in positions of power. It's not good if a player is a bigot, but that player is not the one who hires and promotes personnel people, secretaries and other players. That player's viewpoint can expose him as a jerk, but it won't affect who gets hired as the P.A. announcer.
I believe the league would have great difficulty banning a player for life even if the player went on TV and said the exact same thing Sterling did. The union and courts would protect that player. Hell, the league couldn't even give an extreme penalty to Sprewell, who physically assaulted his coach.
As for owners, yes, there certainly might be a slippery slope here involving them. Only time will tell.
-
I agree I doubt a player would get a lifetime ban or even a significant one. Sprewell got banned for a year, and they wanted to terminate his contract but that got overturned. What I was simply referring to is the rule has now been set that you may be punished for things said and recorded in private. Players could now get punished for that action theoretically.
How much will depend on what protections the CBA gives them as well as what is in their uniform player contract. There are provisions that actions detrimental to the league are subject to sanctions. I could see fines or even brief suspensions, like what we saw with Riley Cooper and the NFL.
I wouldn't be surprised if, depending on the outcome of all this, the owners push back in the next CBA for more stringent rules to be applied to players. How much they get will depend on their bargaining positions when the CBA expires.
-
2014 is the start of a new the era. The list of opinions that if held, lead to utter condemnation and ruin, now stands at two.
Surely, there will be more horrific opinions added as this new process claims more unspeakable opinions.
And the NSA can really help with this process, too. Gonna need to examine everyone's personal conversations.
Don't need the NSA to get to such opinions...they are right on Scoop.
-
Wow. Heisenberg, I'm impressed w/ the research.
I expected something along those lines to come out. Let's face it, lots of billionaires are dirtbags who have made their money in a duplicitous way or been willing to cut corners. I was addressing your hypothetical about our lives. I'm sure there has been a case in CA between a divorcing couple with a similar plot -- a tape exposes a jerk for who he/she is. Difference is, the couple has a net worth south of $1M, so the illegally made tape gets thrown out by a judge rather than being broadcast by TMZ in the court of public opinion.
This is why I've said I'm conflicted about this whole thing. Anyone who thinks the NBA is doing this purely out of compassion for African-Americans is a fool. The owners you've listed breathe a sigh of relief; their sins glossed over by their willingness to toss out the darkest of the black hearts. People are claiming victory and touting lessons about respect for your fellow man. But sadly, the pragmatic lesson the owners learned is: always frisk your mistress for a wire.
-
Sterling is now a toxic pariah, shunned by everyone who can't be associated with the scarlet R, which, as the citizenry can now see, leads to utter, swift condemnation. He can't own a team. Any business that he owns or associated with must divest. No one can risk being seen in public with him.
Sure, Sterling will have his $1b sale proceeds. But he might as well bury it in his back yard. He won't even be able to give it away, as charities would need to return the check. His punishment is, roughly, solitary confinement until he dies. (exaggeration, but with much truth.)
Well....hold a benefit concert for him then.
Because I truly don't care.
-
Wow. Heisenberg, I'm impressed w/ the research.
I expected something along those lines to come out. Let's face it, lots of billionaires are dirtbags who have made their money in a duplicitous way or been willing to cut corners. I was addressing your hypothetical about our lives. I'm sure there has been a case in CA between a divorcing couple with a similar plot -- a tape exposes a jerk for who he/she is. Difference is, the couple has a net worth south of $1M, so the illegally made tape gets thrown out by a judge rather than being broadcast by TMZ in the court of public opinion.
This is why I've said I'm conflicted about this whole thing. Anyone who thinks the NBA is doing this purely out of compassion for African-Americans is a fool. The owners you've listed breathe a sigh of relief; their sins glossed over by their willingness to toss out the darkest of the black hearts. People are claiming victory and touting lessons about respect for your fellow man. But sadly, the pragmatic lesson the owners learned is: always frisk your mistress for a wire.
I posted this earlier: http://www.nj.com/ledger-dalessandro/index.ssf/2014/04/dalessandro_donald_sterlings_candid_moment_its_business_as_usual_and_nba_business_is_often_ugly.html
-
I posted this earlier: http://www.nj.com/ledger-dalessandro/index.ssf/2014/04/dalessandro_donald_sterlings_candid_moment_its_business_as_usual_and_nba_business_is_often_ugly.html
Apologies. Good find.
-
Wow. Heisenberg, I'm impressed w/ the research.
I expected something along those lines to come out. Let's face it, lots of billionaires are dirtbags who have made their money in a duplicitous way or been willing to cut corners. I was addressing your hypothetical about our lives. I'm sure there has been a case in CA between a divorcing couple with a similar plot -- a tape exposes a jerk for who he/she is. Difference is, the couple has a net worth south of $1M, so the illegally made tape gets thrown out by a judge rather than being broadcast by TMZ in the court of public opinion.
This is why I've said I'm conflicted about this whole thing. Anyone who thinks the NBA is doing this purely out of compassion for African-Americans is a fool. The owners you've listed breathe a sigh of relief; their sins glossed over by their willingness to toss out the darkest of the black hearts. People are claiming victory and touting lessons about respect for your fellow man. But sadly, the pragmatic lesson the owners learned is: always frisk your mistress for a wire.
Not dirtbags.
But when you run an organization of tens of thousands people under you they are going to do things that get the organization sued and make you look bad. So Herb Simon did not make racial slurs to his Latino janitors any more than Sterling personally directed no renting to blacks. Those come out of the organization. Look at the organizations you work for, should we judge you bu their lawsuit record? Should we judge our MU degrees by the sexual assault in 2011, Jeffrey Dahmer or Senator Joe McCarthy?
If you want to paint an person and his organization in a bad light, it's not hard to do when you're talking about a billionaire with organizations that employs tens of thousands.
-
Sounds like Silver's hammer was really the players. All 6 teams in playoffs yesterday gave word they were not going to play unless that lifetime ban was issued, he had no choice.
-
I do not disagree with you, but it still takes just one guy to show how big his wiener is or compensate for how small it is to get crazy dollars.
Here are those already mentioned in the LA Times as having public interest
David Geffen
Magic Johnson + Guggenheim group
Floyd Mayweather
Oscar De La Hoya
Patrick Soon-Shiong
That's some crazy $$ with most of those guys.
Add
Henry Samueli (Ducks owner)
Larry Ellenson (Oracle)
Chris Hanson (Seattle)
-
I do not disagree with you, but it still takes just one guy to show how big his wiener is or compensate for how small it is to get crazy dollars.
Here are those already mentioned in the LA Times as having public interest
David Geffen
Magic Johnson + Guggenheim group
Floyd Mayweather
Oscar De La Hoya
Patrick Soon-Shiong
That's some crazy $$ with most of those guys.
Steve Ballmer and Oprah
Also I thought I read that Magic was backing out of the Guggenheim group. If correct, I think he realizes that Sterling will never sell to him.
-
Here is the out ... he's going to transfer ownership to his wife ... and Doc will bless it!!
Clippers coach Doc Rivers shows support for Donald Sterling's wife Shelly
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/clippers-coach-doc-rivers-shows-support-for-donald-sterling-s-wife-shelly-092602210.html
While Clippers fans rejoiced in their team's first victory sans a banned Donald Sterling, perhaps the biggest Clippers fan of them all departed Staples Center in silence, dressed in black and flanked by several bodyguards.
"It's a tough one for Shelly [Sterling], really," Clippers coach Doc Rivers said following a 113-103 Game 5 victory over the Golden State Warriors on Tuesday. "She didn't do anything wrong either. You have compassion for her. I kept hearing about the girlfriend. I kept thinking, 'Shelly is the wife.' You know what I mean? I talked to her [Tuesday] and she has been through as much as anyone as well."
The NBA banned Donald Sterling from the league on Tuesday while also fining him $2.5 million and stating plans to force him to sell the Clippers. The suspension came in aftermath of an audiotape surfacing in which Sterling was heard telling a former girlfriend that she should not have pictures with black people shown publicly nor should she take them to Clippers games.
While the NBA is attempting to push Sterling out as owner, it's uncertain if his wife or any other family member could take over the franchise. National Basketball Players Association vice-president Roger Mason Jr., however, told Yahoo Sports that the players want completely new ownership and not a family member connected to Sterling. A source said that Shelly Sterling would like for her son-in-law, Eric Miller, the Clippers' director of basketball administration, to take over the franchise.
"We're looking for a change in ownership. A complete change," Mason said.
Rivers didn't think the Sterlings could keep the Clippers in the family in the midst of the ban.
"It doesn't sound like it, to be honest," said Rivers, about the possibility of Shelly Sterling owning the Clippers. "And I think she knows that. But she still wanted to be [at Game 5]. I don't know if it's right or wrong, but to me it was right."
Clippers guard Chris Paul, who is president of the NBPA, said: "Luckily that's not up to us."
The day after the Donald Sterling news broke on TMZ Sports, Shelly Sterling attended Game 4 of the Clippers' first-round series against the Warriors in Oakland. The weary Clippers lost 118-97. She was decked out in all black and sat courtside across from the Clippers' bench. She watched Game 5 hidden in a suite instead of her usual courtside seat at Staples Center.
"For us, it's tough," Paul said. "But I can't imagine how tough it is for that family. So we will continue let them get through that."
Rivers said he convinced Shelly Sterling to attend Game 5 and passed on a message from her to the players.
"She asked if she could come, which I thought was a very nice gesture," Rivers said. "And she just wanted the players to know, she told me to tell them that she loved them. I thought, 'Why not?'"
-
Wow. Heisenberg, I'm impressed w/ the research.
I expected something along those lines to come out. Let's face it, lots of billionaires are dirtbags who have made their money in a duplicitous way or been willing to cut corners. I was addressing your hypothetical about our lives. I'm sure there has been a case in CA between a divorcing couple with a similar plot -- a tape exposes a jerk for who he/she is. Difference is, the couple has a net worth south of $1M, so the illegally made tape gets thrown out by a judge rather than being broadcast by TMZ in the court of public opinion.
This is why I've said I'm conflicted about this whole thing. Anyone who thinks the NBA is doing this purely out of compassion for African-Americans is a fool. The owners you've listed breathe a sigh of relief; their sins glossed over by their willingness to toss out the darkest of the black hearts. People are claiming victory and touting lessons about respect for your fellow man. But sadly, the pragmatic lesson the owners learned is: always frisk your mistress for a wire.
I thought it was that when you give millions to your mistress - consider it the cost of doing business. Don't try to get it back.
-
Not dirtbags.
But when you run an organization of tens of thousands people under you they are going to do things that get the organization sued and make you look bad. So Herb Simon did not make racial slurs to his Latino janitors any more than Sterling personally directed no renting to blacks. Those come out of the organization. Look at the organizations you work for, should we judge you bu their lawsuit record? Should we judge our MU degrees by the sexual assault in 2011, Jeffrey Dahmer or Senator Joe McCarthy?
If you want to paint an person and his organization in a bad light, it's not hard to do when you're talking about a billionaire with organizations that employs tens of thousands.
People already do. They roll their eyes when I tell them I work for a government contractor. They call me a snob when I say I went to MU. And they ask why I support misogyny and child molestation when I tell them I'm a Catholic. And then I say and do things that make them eat their words. It's the beauty of individualism.
Sterling's the same way. Fine, don't judge him based on his company's discrimination. Judge him for his refusal to rent to them because he claims they stink and attract vermin. Judge him for his desire to run the team like a plantation. When the words come out of his mouth, it's hard to put a 20,000 person buffer in front of him.
-
Not dirtbags.
But when you run an organization of tens of thousands people under you they are going to do things that get the organization sued and make you look bad. So Herb Simon did not make racial slurs to his Latino janitors any more than Sterling personally directed no renting to blacks. Those come out of the organization. Look at the organizations you work for, should we judge you bu their lawsuit record? Should we judge our MU degrees by the sexual assault in 2011, Jeffrey Dahmer or Senator Joe McCarthy?
If you want to paint an person and his organization in a bad light, it's not hard to do when you're talking about a billionaire with organizations that employs tens of thousands.
Uh....you sure about that? The past lawsuits have some direct quotes attributed to him that sound like he actively kept blacks and Latinos out of his buildings.
You have a tendency to post stuff as truth (eg, Diamond Stone's family paid for the tickets MU gave him) without actually checking it out to see if it is actually true.
-
One thing to remember with all of this slippery slope talk.
The league was not after Donald Sterling. His mistress was after him. This is the peripheral damage of screwing (in every sense of the word) the wrong woman.
It was only because of her actions that the NBA had to take steps. It certainly was no mystery (as many posters have stated) how he treated minorities before the tape came out.
-
Uh....you sure about that? The past lawsuits have some direct quotes attributed to him that sound like he actively kept blacks and Latinos out of his buildings.
You have a tendency to post stuff as truth (eg, Diamond Stone's family paid for the tickets MU gave him) without actually checking it out to see if it is actually true.
http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-8-11c.cfm
Simon Property Group To Pay $125,000 To Settle EEOC National Origin Discrimination Lawsuit
Supervisor Harassed Latino Janitors, Federal Agency Charged
LAS VEGAS — The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced the $125,000 settlement of a national origin harassment lawsuit it had filed against Simon Property Group, Inc., which identifies itself as the largest real estate company in the United States. The EEOC had charged that Latino janitors working for the company were subjected to daily verbal attacks because of their national origin. Simon Property Group owns and/or manages various shopping malls throughout the country, including the Forum Shops at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas, the site where the EEOC said the abuse occurred.
According to the EEOC’s suit, a housekeeping shift leader, who was white, had harassed a class of Latino janitors on a daily basis beginning in 2005, subjecting them to verbal abuse, including slurs. Over a dozen Latino janitors submitted a written petition that same year complaining about the shift leader, but they perceived that nothing was done to stop the harassment. The EEOC alleged that the harassment continued for another year, until the supervisor was finally terminated for other reasons.
The EEOC originally filed suit against the company in U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada (EEOC v. Simon Property Group, Inc., Case No. 2:09-cv-01178), alleging that the conduct violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The parties entered into a two-year consent decree providing monetary relief for at least five harassment victims along with injunctive relief designed to prevent and appropriately deal with future instances of harassment. The consent decree also requires that Simon Property retain a consultant to monitor and track complaints in Nevada; provide anti-harassment and anti-discrimination training for staff; and report compliance efforts to the EEOC.
“We commend Simon Property for reinforcing measures to prevent future instances of harassment and discrimination,” said Anna Y. Park, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Los Angeles District Office, which has jurisdiction over southern Nevada. “National origin discrimination issues are on the rise and we are committed to vigorously enforcing federal laws to ensure workplaces free of harassment and discrimination.”
Adriana Lopez, acting director for the EEOC’s Las Vegas Local Office, added, “We encourage workers to report harassment as they did here in this case. We equally encourage employers to take proactive steps to stop harassment and to take swift action when it does occur.”
According to its website, Indianapolis-based Simon Property Group is an S&P 500 company with ownership or property interest in 392 properties throughout North America, Europe and Asia, generating annual retail sales in excess of $60 billion in the United States.
The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov.
-
One thing to remember with all of this slippery slope talk.
The league was not after Donald Sterling. His mistress was after him. This is the peripheral damage of screwing (in every sense of the word) the wrong woman.
It was only because of her actions that the NBA had to take steps. It certainly was no mystery (as many posters have stated) how he treated minorities before the tape came out.
Lots of people want to take down other people, especially high profile folks. Business deals gone bad, disgruntled employee, mistress, etc. You get to some of these levels in society and you have ticked off a person or two along the way.
-
How are the Dodgers on the outs with the fans? They're leading MLB in attendance so far this season.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-mayor-dodger-deals-20140429,0,14756.story#axzz30O6gelMR
-
Uh....you sure about that? The past lawsuits have some direct quotes attributed to him that sound like he actively kept blacks and Latinos out of his buildings.
Being argumentative ....
Donald Sterling is not a racist, the LA Chapter of the NAACP gave him a life-time achievement award in 2009 and he is such a saint, they were scheduled to give him another one next month.
Two life-time achievement awards in one life-time! How can this guy be a racist?
-
Now that we have the "Sterling Standard," Why is Jay-Z allowed to be an agent? Why doesn't he get banned for life?
(http://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/rockets_nets_basketball_91323501.jpg?w=720&h=480&crop=1)
Jay-Z’s bling from ‘whites are devils’ group
The New York Post
April 6, 2014
http://nypost.com/2014/04/06/jay-zs-medallion-bears-logo-of-five-percent-radical-group/
Black people are the fathers and mothers of civilization, white men are the devil, the Christian god is nothing more than a ghost and only a small percentage of people understand the world.
These are just some of the beliefs behind the bling — the gaudy Five Percent Nation medallions worn by Jay Z and Carmelo Anthony.
Last week, all eyes at the Barclays Center weren’t on Jay Z’s better half, Beyoncé — but on the coaster-size golden pendant swinging from the rapper’s neck as the couple sat courtside. Asked once if the group’s symbol — an eight-pointed star with the number 7 in the middle — held any meaning for him, the rapper shrugged, “A little bit.”
So what exactly do Five Percenters believe?
“The rationale is that the black man is God and created the universe, and is physically stronger and intellectually stronger and more righteous naturally,” says Michael Muhammad Knight, an author of two books on the radical group.
“Whiteness is weak and wicked and inferior — basically just an errant child who needs to be corrected.”
The group was founded in 1964 in Harlem by Clarence Smith, who later changed his name to Allah, a former student of Malcolm X who disagreed with the Nation of Islam over the nature of God.
Smith rejected the notion of a supernatural deity and instead believed that all black men had God in them and that black women were “earths” who took on a complementary yet subordinate role to their gods.
The idea is empowering, Knight says.
“Anytime someone is saying you have to accept your conditions of oppression and slavery and pray to an unseen god — that kind of god is just being used to keep people down and to keep people from looking to themselves as a solution to their problems,” he notes. “If there is a problem, no one will fix it for you, except yourself.”
Five Percenters don’t consider themselves Muslim, but their name comes from the Nation of Islam’s belief that 5 percent of humanity are “poor righteous teachers” who exist to enlighten the masses about the truth of existence.
Members will sometimes refer to themselves as “scientists” to drive home the search for truth. And they face a tall task, because under their belief system, 10 percent of the world’s population controls the other 85 percent by spreading the belief in a “mystery God.”
To show followers the way, members must learn the Supreme Mathematics and Supreme Alphabet — powerful tools to decipher the meaning of the universe. In both, each letter and number represents a concept: for example, 1 is knowledge, 2 is wisdom, while A is Allah and B is be, or born. The number 7 on Jay Z’s pendant stands for God.
Caucasians, meanwhile, don’t enjoy an exalted status in the narrative of the Five Percenters.
“The first lesson I learned from the Five Percent was simple: F–k white people. Seriously. White people are devils,” Knight, 36, who is white and converted to Islam as a teenager, once wrote.
He insisted the movement has been welcoming and that he views the controversial sentiment as a statement about power rather than biology.
“For me, it is about who is marked as privileged in the power relations of this society,” he says.
Some followers take exception to those who transform their flag into a fashion accessory.
“Jay Z is not an active member — no one has vouched for him,” Saladin Allah, a representative of the group’s upstate region, told The Post. “It was always understood that you don’t wear the regalia if you don’t totally subscribe to the life.”
-
Now that we have the "Sterling Standard," Why is Jay-Z allowed to be an agent? Why doesn't he get banned for life?
He's an artist and he can't be racist, it is impossible
-
He's an artist and he can't be racist, it is impossible
I demand that all blacks sign papers saying that racism no longer exists before we allow them to be a part of the NBA - or American life, in general.
What could drive a man to refer to people who owned, tortured and abused blacks as "white devils"? I don't know where this thinking could have come from.
-
I demand that all blacks sign papers saying that racism no longer exists before we allow them to be a part of the NBA - or American life, in general.
What could drive a man to refer to people who owned, tortured and abused blacks as "white devils"? I don't know where this thinking could have come from.
Interesting logic....so if members of my family were tortured, killed by a certain ethnic group, I would be just if I decided to write songs, speak on the talk show circuits, etc, etc condemning in general terms an entire group of people. And in doing so, it would be universally accepted as "ok".
Incidentally, I'm glad to see a man of such high integrity has become an agent for players in leagues that have names like Braves, Redskins, Indians, etc. You know, White Devils and all. Must be conflicting for him, but my guess is the team's money is probably still green so he's able to make an exception.
-
Interesting logic....so if members of my family were tortured, killed by a certain ethnic group, I would be just if I decided to write songs, speak on the talk show circuits, etc, etc condemning in general terms an entire group of people. And in doing so, it would be universally accepted as "ok".
Incidentally, I'm glad to see a man of such high integrity has become an agent for players in leagues that have names like Braves, Redskins, Indians, etc. You know, White Devils and all. Must be conflicting for him, but my guess is the team's money is probably still green so he's able to make an exception.
Interesting. I wonder if you were introducing a Native American friend to someone and that someone asked what nationality your friend was - would you reply "Oh, he's a redskin".
If you replied that way, I could see your support for the name, otherwise.... Since Snyder owns the team, why doesn't he change the team's name to a word with Jewish connotations comparable to Redskins?
By the way, I have no problem with Warriors, Indians, etc. Those are not derogatory terms.
-
Uh-oh, here we go again. Chicos, can you just refer him to arguments you've made in another thread to save space?
-
Interesting. I wonder if you were introducing a Native American friend to someone and that someone asked what nationality your friend was - would you reply "Oh, he's a redskin".
If you replied that way, I could see your support for the name, otherwise.... Since Snyder owns the team, why doesn't he change the team's name to a word with Jewish connotations comparable to Redskins?
By the way, I have no problem with Warriors, Indians, etc. Those are not derogatory terms.
I take it that in my example, if my family was killed by members of a specific ethnic group, I would be just in blaming said ethnic group with a broad brush.
In your interesting example, the answer is obvious....."my friend is American", that's his nationality.
-
I demand that all blacks sign papers saying that racism no longer exists before we allow them to be a part of the NBA - or American life, in general.
What could drive a man to refer to people who owned, tortured and abused blacks as "white devils"? I don't know where this thinking could have come from.
Hey Brandx--Bigotry comes in all colors. Jay Z, Jamie Fox, Barkley make disparaging remarks about whites frequently. They get a pass. Sharpton and Jackson, two crooked shake down artists have frequently done the same, but they get away with it. The list goes on and on. Sterling, a white bigot who employs many minorities, gets crucified, because he is a white owner. The EEOC aggressively pursues alleged white discrimination all the time--not so much discrimination by blacks. There is a huge double standard in this country, known by many, and the shame of it all is that the knee jerk reactions for stupid comments are almost always registered against whites. And much of the "moral outrage" is concocted.
-
So his large real estate company was busted in racial discrimination. Elgin Baylor lost, repeat lost, his lawsuit for racial discrimination. Why does this count? All this combined with some second-hand hearsay comments?
Look I'm not defending the guy, I trying to understand what line was drawn to rise to the level of forcing him to sell (severely punished yes, but lifetime ban and forced sale?).
How about these owners? How many of them should get voted out at the same meeting with Sterling?
How about Herb Simon, the owner of the Pacers? He owns Simon Group, a large mall developer. In 2011 the EEOC charged that Latino janitors working for the company were subjected to daily verbal attacks because of their national origin. Simon is just as bad as Sterling. Why are we not asking Larry Bird why he accepts a paycheck from Simon?
How about Glen Taylor, the owner of the Timberwolves? He owns Taylor Corporation that employs 15,000 headquartered in Mankato MN. His company was sued for Sex Discrimination for passing over women for a promotion. They settled out of court. How can he be allowed to own an NBA team?
How about Cavaliers Owners Dan Gilbert? He owns Quicken Loans. Quicken lost a lawsuit for fraud and high pressure sales in that the pressured poor people (some minorities) into take out inappropriate mortgages and they lost their homes during the financial crisis. How can he keep his team? Isn't this worse than Sterling's words?
How about Mickey Arison the Miami Heat Owner? He owns Carnival Cruise lines and they had multiple incident of ships breaking leaving people without power, food, bagging their own sh!t and getting sick. They are bogged down in multi lawsuits over this. How can LeBron accept a paycheck form this guy? How can NBA owners allow him to own a team?
How about Brooklyn Nets owner Mikhail Prokhorov? The guy is a Russian Oligarch, running Norilsk Nickel and a few years ago 60 Minutes did a profile of him (before he was Nets owner) about the sleazy things he and his companies did. He is also a powder keg waiting to explode.
Mark Cuban was convicted of insider trading last year. He's a criminal, why not vote him out? Why is the NBA allowing criminals to run their teams (see Prokhorov too).
I could go on and on with virtually every owner in the NBA. If you want, they can all be made to look as bad as Sterling. You really want to open this Pandora’s box?
Hmmmm.....Pandora's box has already been opened. NBA has lots of splaining to do. Likely these tidbits will enhance the walk away money that sleazy Sterling is given. And I do not believe that Sterling broke any laws here--but his Bimbo sugar baby did.
-
I was thinking the exact same thing. I love having willie on ignore. Thankfully, willie's "Greatest Hits" often show up in another poster's responses to his remarkably ignorant posts. And this one was particularly remarkable.
Hey 82--read some of the other tin eared drivel from many others who see this for what it is. Your moral outrage is duly noted. Oh, I am sure your MU degree which is valued by you over all others will help you to figure all this out.
-
Pretty interesting take from Bomani Jones. http://deadspin.com/in-10-minutes-espns-bomani-jones-lays-waste-to-the-ste-1569195989
-
I do not disagree with you, but it still takes just one guy to show how big his wiener is or compensate for how small it is to get crazy dollars.
Here are those already mentioned in the LA Times as having public interest
David Geffen
Magic Johnson + Guggenheim group
Floyd Mayweather
Oscar De La Hoya
Patrick Soon-Shiong
That's some crazy $$ with most of those guys.
Anyone remember the early days of the Cubs sale in 2007/2008? It was supposed to be a bidding war between Mark Cuban, Oprah, Michael Jordan and others.
In the end their were only two credible bidders, John Canning and Tom Ricketts.
Right now it's all BS talk. No bid book exists. When the team is actually for sale, and bankers have to be hired, let's see who actually shows up.
-----
It's hard to run a team. It's a full time job. If a freak show lead by Floyd Meaweather buys the team, you think a credible basketball guy (think Phil Jackson) wants to work for an unstable guy like him? Ditto Oprah. She will spend 5 minutes a month on team matters as she attends to her dying TV network.
The buyer will be a credible businessman/group that will make it their job to run the team, not attention seeking billionaires.
-
Hey Brandx--Bigotry comes in all colors. Jay Z, Jamie Fox, Barkley make disparaging remarks about whites frequently. They get a pass. Sharpton and Jackson, two crooked shake down artists have frequently done the same, but they get away with it. The list goes on and on. Sterling, a white bigot who employs many minorities, gets crucified, because he is a white owner. The EEOC aggressively pursues alleged white discrimination all the time--not so much discrimination by blacks. There is a huge double standard in this country, known by many, and the shame of it all is that the knee jerk reactions for stupid comments are almost always registered against whites. And much of the "moral outrage" is concocted.
There really is nothing more annoying than white people complaining about being the subjects of racism.
Honestly, you can point to JayZ and his ilk all you want, but what Donald Sterling has done throughout his professional career dwarfs anything that JayZ said on any of his albums....or what Sterling said over the weekend. When you can point to JayZ or Foxx systematically discriminating against a group of people, and not just with their words but with their actions, *then* you have made a point.
But look at Riley Cooper. Went through hell, was contrite, got a contract extension, and all is well.
Look, if this was simply Sterling having an off-day I wouldn't be so quick to judge. But what he has done throughout his career as a property owner is disgusting. And people here are worried about precedent and his rights?
Really. The heart goes out to the billionaire? Screw him.
-
There really is nothing more annoying than white people complaining about being the subjects of racism.
Honestly, you can point to JayZ and his ilk all you want, but what Donald Sterling has done throughout his professional career dwarfs anything that JayZ said on any of his albums....or what Sterling said over the weekend. When you can point to JayZ or Foxx systematically discriminating against a group of people, and not just with their words but with their actions, *then* you have made a point.
But look at Riley Cooper. Went through hell, was contrite, got a contract extension, and all is well.
Look, if this was simply Sterling having an off-day I wouldn't be so quick to judge. But what he has done throughout his career as a property owner is disgusting. And people here are worried about precedent and his rights?
Really. The heart goes out to the billionaire? Screw him.
Agree 100% - the NBA finally found a foothold to do what they have wanted to do for 15 years - get rid of Sterling. Those who are looking at this incident in isolation are missing that point.
-
There really is nothing more annoying than white people complaining about being the subjects of racism.
Honestly, you can point to JayZ and his ilk all you want, but what Donald Sterling has done throughout his professional career dwarfs anything that JayZ said on any of his albums....or what Sterling said over the weekend. When you can point to JayZ or Foxx systematically discriminating against a group of people, and not just with their words but with their actions, *then* you have made a point.
But look at Riley Cooper. Went through hell, was contrite, got a contract extension, and all is well.
Look, if this was simply Sterling having an off-day I wouldn't be so quick to judge. But what he has done throughout his career as a property owner is disgusting. And people here are worried about precedent and his rights?
Really. The heart goes out to the billionaire? Screw him.
To me, this is akin to finally throwing Al Capone in jail for tax evasion.
Before anybody says I'm accusing Sterling of killing people, as Capone did, I'm not. What I'm saying is that he's been a serial racist and the NBA finally found a way to get rid of him.
All the reverse discrimination, freedom of speech and privacy issues being bandied about are just noise.
-
I take it that in my example, if my family was killed by members of a specific ethnic group, I would be just in blaming said ethnic group with a broad brush.
In your interesting example, the answer is obvious....."my friend is American", that's his nationality.
Yeah, he's an American...an American Redskin.
-
There really is nothing more annoying than white people complaining about being the subjects of racism.
Honestly, you can point to JayZ and his ilk all you want, but what Donald Sterling has done throughout his professional career dwarfs anything that JayZ said on any of his albums....or what Sterling said over the weekend. When you can point to JayZ or Foxx systematically discriminating against a group of people, and not just with their words but with their actions, *then* you have made a point.
But look at Riley Cooper. Went through hell, was contrite, got a contract extension, and all is well.
Look, if this was simply Sterling having an off-day I wouldn't be so quick to judge. But what he has done throughout his career as a property owner is disgusting. And people here are worried about precedent and his rights?
Really. The heart goes out to the billionaire? Screw him.
Spoken like a true student of what the USA is all about. Of course we all know that bigotry and racism is only committed by white people. And you conveniently left out two big time race baiters, Jackson and Sharpton who of course are not also.
-
This site could turn a thread entitled " Hitler was a bad dude" into a pissing match.
-
Spoken like a true student of what the USA is all about. Of course we all know that bigotry and racism is only committed by white people. And you conveniently left out two big time race baiters, Jackson and Sharpton who of course are not also.
You know I had a rant responding to this but I just decided its not worth it.
-
The Doyers and the Clippers are apples and oranges. The Clippers are a second rate franchise. This is the most they have ever been talked about in their history. the Lakers are LA. The Clips will not get the numbers being thrown around on the board. At the end of the day, they are Still the Clippers, the "other" basketball team.
Like I said, all it takes is one guy to do it.
Steve Balmer, $2 billion for the Clippers today.
-
Like I said, all it takes is one guy to do it.
Steve Balmer, $2 billion for the Clippers today.
Chico's you are correct, sir. Some people have an awful lot of money and are looking for a way to spend it.
If the Clippers are worth $2B, what are the Lakers worth? Wow.
-
Chico's you are correct, sir. Some people have an awful lot of money and are looking for a way to spend it.
If the Clippers are worth $2B, what are the Lakers worth? Wow.
The Clippers aren't worth $2B, except that someone said they were. Silly stuff. Now they're going to try and monetize it with their new television deal that runs out and they will expect to get around $4 or $5 per subscriber from television distributors. I think they would be wise to see what's going on with the Dodgers right now. You can't just keep spending billions of dollars in funny money and expect everyone, including non sports fans, to pay for the fact they over spent.
Oh well....not surprising.
-
This site could turn a thread entitled " Hitler was a bad dude" into a pissing match.
Well, he did build the Autobahn
-
Since Snyder owns the team, why doesn't he change the team's name to a word with Jewish connotations comparable to Redskins?
The Foreskins?
-
The Foreskins?
See! If I was more clever, I wouldn't have to wait for your response ;D
-
Well, he did build the Autobahn
And the trains ran on time.
-
And the trains ran on time.
Actually, that one's on Il Duce
-
Actually, that one's on Il Duce
Well, yes, the saying refers to Mussolini, but it is actually crapola. He really didn't get the crappy Italian rail system to run on time. The krauts, on the other hand, have punctual rail times before, during, and after the mustachioed one. It's simply in their DNA.
-
Well, yes, the saying refers to Mussolini, but it is actually crapola. He really didn't get the crappy Italian rail system to run on time. The krauts, on the other hand, have punctual rail times before, during, and after the mustachioed one. It's simply in their DNA.
Notice how carefully I worded that, Sir. I am used to the Japanese train system which is punctual to the second. My son lives in Italy and my experiences with Italian trains is far from bad but it is certainly a more leisurely excursion than in other, more anal societies.
-
Notice how carefully I worded that, Sir. I am used to the Japanese train system which is punctual to the second. My son lives in Italy and my experiences with Italian trains is far from bad but it is certainly a more leisurely excursion than in other, more anal societies.
I can share my Italian train experience. For my honeymoon my wife and I went to Italy after having a second wedding reception in Poland for her relatives who could not make it to the States. We went to Naples so I can visit the ancestral homestead and so we could visit Pompeii & Capri. The guidebook said the train should take 1 hour and it took 3+ hours because we found out later there's a speed train and a local train and we caught a local train. On the way back to Rome we would not make the same mistake. But we didn't have a choice as there was a huge train wreck in Rome the night before, so we were forced to take another local, followed by bus ride from a station a few stops prior to Rome which we decided to skip and just take a taxi straight to the airport instead. That lead to huge traffic jam that our driver somehow found away around. Planes, Trains & Automobiles.
-
So you won't be going back to Italy for your next honeymoon? ;)
I can share my Italian train experience. For my honeymoon my wife and I went to Italy after having a second wedding reception in Poland for her relatives who could not make it to the States. We went to Naples so I can visit the ancestral homestead and so we could visit Pompeii & Capri. The guidebook said the train should take 1 hour and it took 3+ hours because we found out later there's a speed train and a local train and we caught a local train. On the way back to Rome we would not make the same mistake. But we didn't have a choice as there was a huge train wreck in Rome the night before, so we were forced to take another local, followed by bus ride from a station a few stops prior to Rome which we decided to skip and just take a taxi straight to the airport instead. That lead to huge traffic jam that our driver somehow found away around. Planes, Trains & Automobiles.
-
more anal societies.
Please continue
-
visit Pompeii & Capri.
I have never been to Pompeii but have always been fascinated. Is it worth the side trip?
-
I have never been to Pompeii but have always been fascinated. Is it worth the side trip?
the movie with Keifer Sutherland sucked (NOT the Floyd one)
-
So you won't be going back to Italy for your next honeymoon? ;)
I'll go back to Italy in a heartbeat.
-
Cuban was right. Lasry and Edens stole the Bucks from Herbie.
-
Cuban was right. Lasry and Edens stole the Bucks from Herbie.
Disagree with that. Just because the Clippers sold at an overvalued level, doesn't mean the Bucks were undervalued. Given all the moving pieces involving the Bucks, I'd say they were overvalued as well.
Monitizing a $2bil valuation for the Clippers is going to be a major effort and one I don't think they'll be able to pull off. I realize live content is king right now, but I think there is a bubble burst here in the next 10 years. The confluence of changing technology, consumer pushback on the cost of content delivery, consumers being priced out of the live entertainment market, general disdain with wealthy individuals, and a soft economy seems to spell a looming disaster to me.
-
With a new venue to play in, a huge return on invest looms ahead. Without the new facility, a huge capital gain looms ahead when sold. Only a finite number of franchises out there and a 'hole lotta folks with deep pockets lookin' for toys.
-
the movie with Keifer Sutherland sucked (NOT the Floyd one)
brb watching "Echoes"
-
Cuban was right. Lasry and Edens stole the Bucks from Herbie.
Here is what Bill Simmons said about the Bucks when they were purchased:
"As I predicted on Friday, hedge-fund billionaires Marc Lasry and Wes Edens agreed to purchase the Milwaukee Bucks for $550 million on Wednesday. Forbes recently pegged the Bucks at $405 million, so the magazine was off by 36 percent. Thirty-six percent! That probably goes for every evaluation on that list.
Meanwhile, Milwaukee made history Wednesday by breaking the NBA purchase-price record while also serving as our new floor for “here’s the lowest number anyone is getting for a 2014 NBA franchise.” What did Lasry and Edens agree to purchase? A small-market team, no franchise star, no state-of-the-art arena, a 25-year legacy of losing (save for 2001), apathetic and tortured fans, … I mean, they basically landed the Greek Freak, a top-three lottery pick, some revenue-sharing money and a chance to tell people they own an NBA team while secretly hoping they don’t ask “Which one?”
http://grantland.com/features/the-worlds-most-exclusive-club/
-
Notice how carefully I worded that, Sir. I am used to the Japanese train system which is punctual to the second. My son lives in Italy and my experiences with Italian trains is far from bad but it is certainly a more leisurely excursion than in other, more anal societies.
I do now see what you did there.