Reply With Quote
You actually have to wonder if Sterling didn't have the goods on Stern, tbh...
Meanwhile the rest of the slave owners eeemmm I mean owners are silent
You actually have to wonder if Sterling didn't have the goods on Stern, tbh...
Diddy would replace Gatorade with Ciroc vodka on the Clippers bench.
everyone is missing the point. this has nothing to do with punishing a guy for his views, also nothing to do with an NBA vendetta vs. Sterling.
This has ALL TO DO WITH $$$$$$$$$$$$$
the new NBA commish is on his hands and knees pleading the sponsors to return to the Clippers. He's basically asking to suck their s for the sponsoring money. He is also "pleading" the owners to do something about Sterling, which means, he doesn't have the votes nor the support of the owners. He is publicly pleading and sucking the media and sponsors for money.
that's it and that's all. Money $$$ dollar bills. It's all about money.
this move by NBA has NOTHING to do with dealing with racism or dealing with Sterling. It's basically asking and pleading for the sponsors to come back and stop jumping ship on the NBA.
At first, I too, thought forcing Sterling to sell the Clippers would be too overboard. The lifetime ban and $2.5 million fine seemed more than enough for racist comments said in private.
But then I thought, no decent player, coach, or GM will ever want to work for Sterling again. Not to mention the loss of sponsor revenue. The Clippers will transform back into the perennial loser and the joke team of the NBA. The only way to solve this would be for Sterling to sell the team and give up ownership. Forcing an owner to sell is bad but leaving Sterling as an owner would only cripple the Clippers. This is really a lose-lose situation.
as I said inthe other thread. This is equivalent to Stern fining the Spurs last season. 100% motivated by money and profit and keeping sponsors happy. NBA is puppet to the sponsors and big corporations. nothing more, nothing less.
You have a point--yet, we posters here @ ST are the same puppets.
most definitely. Even Obama and Congress are mainly puppets to these same corporations. Me and dear Dr. Paul have been saying this for years.
Same here. But then I have coalesced so much after my mid-20's...I'm sadly a sheep.
How so? According to the NBA's cons ution, there are only three ways an owner can be forced out:
- Inability to pay the bills, franchise becomes insolvent
- Betting on basketball
- Conduct so consistently toxic and harmful to the league that it leads to major public outcry
Is it really a bad thing to force out owners that meet one of those criteria?
Both still made money for their respective leagues. That's the only difference. The NBA does not care (nor should they) what an owner says on a private telephone conversation. But when that conversation causes a hemorrhage of money from the league, Silver pretty much has to make a bold move to keep the situation from spiraling further out of control. Anything else should be viewed as lip service. Players, coaches, and execs have gotten away with far worse as you said.
Bold prediction: No black coaches will be fired this offseason
So he's been banned for what, 5 years? What about the afterlife?
It doesn't matter if it was a private conversation except legally. What matters is that his racial prejudice is known by everyone now, and to continue to associate with him is not only a bad business decision, but could completely undermine the NBA around the world. If your racial biases were known in your place of work, because your own voice was recorded saying stupid and the media got their hands on it (and gave a ), you'd be fired as well and would have a hard time finding work anywhere. Donald Sterling has no business anywhere near the NBA.. he's a piece of who deserves what he got, but it's not a legal move... it's a business move. The 2.5m fine could be a problem, he could just say " off". You cannot kick someone out and fine them at the same time, not as a private organization.
It was the right thing to do, the only thing in fact. If he sues and wins, that doesn't change anything. The NBA made it's feelings known on the matter, their stance is more powerful than a black arm band or a reversed warmup jersey. I never understood the Heat's gesture... their organization didn't do anything wrong, why cover their names?
I don't think it's just about the sponsors, as sponsors don't care if anything is actually done. They just want it to look like something was done while people are mad, until things get brushed under the rug once the media forgets about it. If all they were worried about was sponsorship they would have been fine suspending him for the playoffs and possibly next season. This is all about trying to replace Sterling with an owner who will spend lots of money to get the league fat TV contracts in the future having another marquee team in Los Angeles. All this coming down against racism just gives them a perfect excuse for finally removing the cheap bas under the PR slogan of "NBA Cares."
Forcing an owner to sell due to criminal behavior is acceptable. But this is over something an 80 year old man said in private.
It harms the image of the league. As an owner he no doubt signed a contract stipulating moral and ethical PR issues and "The League"'s power to make a move in their own best interest.
It's not just about something he said in private, it's about over 32 years of constant humiliation to the league and one of its franchises and a commissioner willing to put his foot down....
This. Everyone misses the point that this is a lifetime achievement award for an owner who has acted in bad faith from the beginning and now the NBA has an airtight way to sack him and put an ownership group in place to make it a compe ive franchise.
In today's technological age, nothing is said "in private" anymore unless nobody hears it.
Once something is circling the internet, its public domain imo, regardless of whether it was originally used in a private setting. If I mention to a co-worker how much of a pain in the ass a client is being in my own office, that's fine. If I mention it in my office while the client is on the other end of the phone, I'd expect the client to be rightfully pissed off about it.
Which is exactly why some people need to learn to just shut the up.
and one more that fits in this supposed time of equality or movement to "more" equal terms.
What if you mentioned it in the privacy of your office and your coworker recorded it and handed it to your client?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
