Reply With Quote
I mean they did waive the dude so I'm not sure that the silence is all that damning.
Lol... ok..
I mean they did waive the dude so I'm not sure that the silence is all that damning.
can you name me some of these "world renowned" professionals that spend half of their day on ST?
You seem to think stating what one does for a living or what degrees soneone has equates to claiming to be "world renowned"
1. It was unnecessary and uncalled for
2. Do you dispute the science on climate change or virology, etc because then you and your idiocy makes more sense.
3. Town idiot? Do tell. Because I demand consistency and forthright behavior from my favorite sports team? Who btw, more closely align with my own political views? I pity you.
I guess, when it comes to holding fans in low esteem, I dont give Sa benefit of the doubt that its just because “its legal” reasons. They do this all the time and its wrong and sends a bs message to fans IMO.
The linkage to all the social justice stuff (thought this was obvious but obviously not) was not that they are hypocrites for speaking out but that its bs to speak about other teams/owners when it pops up but not your own team. Nothing about that suggests speaking up is wrong etc…the link was doing it when it happens to other teams (not just Spurs players/coaches, but all nba players)
There’s this ironic “back the blue” mentality when it comes to players/coaches which is exactly what drives a lot of the issues players/coaches speak up about. But that neither here nor there..just an aside
I don't know anyone who spends half their day on Spurstalk. I also didn't say anything about "world renowned" whatever the that even means. I just know there are a lot of people here who actually know their and you seem to have some doubt of that. There are lawyers in this very thread posting right now my dude. Its not that complicated that you have to try and make this a thing.
I have not once condemned Spurs for their actions (I know y’all all dont do twitter but have posted a lot there as y’all know). Im strictly speaking of the relationship with fans and how they come off with regards to thinking fans are never owed any explanation.
Gotcha. I think we just miscommunicated some then. I would like more info too, and I wish I knew what the was up because it all seems incredibly confusing. Hopefully we'll get more clarity on the subject soon.
Im of the mindset SA, especially because this entire enterprise relationship with fans is built on “spurs family, fans, respect etc), that SA needs to be a bit more transparent and less dismissive towards fans in this regards.
Sure, I understand that even in some cases a generic response does not change anything in reality…But at least its some basic effort lol. Sometimes that is enough.
Primo was his pick. It was his job to interview, investigate, and evaluate all aspects of this person. It's a pretty bad look to have "drafting a sexual predator that led to an embarrassing lawsuit" on your resume. I'd fire him just because of how awful the pick was.
If he had knowledge of Primo's conduct for a year and did nothing about it, that's much, much worse. The er needs to be blacklisted by the NBA entirely. If these allegations are true, this could be disastrous for the franchise. If they lose in court and the lawsuit is found to be accurate, the NBA may penalize them. Front office and HR staff would need to be replaced.
It's just mind boggling that a franchise that goes on and on about "character" and "culture" could draft a garbage human being like Josh Primo. And then cover up his misconduct by dumping the psychologist.
My issue with the Spurs is soley how they deal with the media typically. I agree that their reticence here is wise and appropriate being a legal proceeding. I guess for me it seems like they (generally speaking) don't like interacting with the media, and I find that out of step with the progressive values Pop espouses. The media is part of the 1st Amendment and treating them like lapdogs (at least the local ones) seems disengenuous.
I dont know how anyone can knock them for that. I hated the pick; but this is a player that would have been drafted by any team eventually and spurs definitely do more than any team with regards to due diligence and character. It was not a Spurs issue there; just bad luck and/or Wright going way rogue and not adhering to what SA has done well for so long to call his shot/make his mark.
"get bent"
i do not dispute the science on climate change or peer reviewed findings in virology. My brother happens to be a virologist (who spends no time on this forum, btw).
we should all demand this behavior, from our elected officials on to any professional organization. but i have no idea where you inferred my pointed remarks as one that questions your moral positions in life. i mean, imagine if i purported to demand courtesy and kindness to all and then told people to get bent or offered them my pity as if to suggest they were beneath me. that would surely make my behavior rather inconsistent. i'd rather just offer sarcasm and barbs. i mean, it's not as if ST is the dialectical equivalent to Habermas' "public sphere".
I guess the bottom line is I agree with this sentiment ... but this case is legal and the Spurs can't release any details. Next time the Spurs are frustratingly silent on a topic they should talk about, I'll be with you in calling them out
Buford's statement was more than I thought they'd say but it doesn't say anything other than deny the timeline.
I guess the bottom line is I agree with this sentiment ... but this case is legal and the Spurs can't release any details. Next time the Spurs are frustratingly silent on a topic they should talk about, I'll be with you in calling them out
Buford's statement was more than I thought they'd say but it doesn't say anything other than deny the timeline.
i know you didn't say anything about "world renowned" because i did. it was my sarcastic response to another poster's rather astute, and also sardonic comment. when you decided to take that comment more seriously than it was ever meant to be taken as, you pointed out that there are plenty of doctors and lawyers and such (and then for some reason wondered what i do for a living-as if that has anything to do with it), i merely reminded you that i had initially stated "world renowned". and i've been on ST long enough to know that there are plenty of posters on this forum who post a lot of crap in regards to a great deal of topics such as the economy, viruses, vaccines, race relations, history, psychology, how to run a front office, and, in this case, public relations and tort law. there's enough bull and false information on this law to merit a sarcastic reference that labels such morons as "world renowned", with apologies to all the legit professionals who do offer their insight on this forum.
I'm glad it sounds like they're fighting it tbh. Never settle.
(though they're probably gonna end up settling)
Gotta agree with this. Pop is smart enough to be able to use his sense of humor to deflect bad questions, or simply be bemused by it all, understanding that it really doesn't matter that much. Is he really shocked that a 25 year old reporter isn't as wise as a 73 year old coach on the topic of basketball? Would he tell his grandkids that their questions are stupid? Being nicer is not going to change his ability to coach an NBA team. He has even joked in the past about his wife saying he should try to be nicer to interviewers. There's definitely a dichotomy in Pop's personality between wanting to be a progressive who respects all people and perspectives and being an ex-military type who has no issue rolling his eyes in people's faces and telling them they're idiots. And RC and Brian don't seem to enjoy dealing with the media at all, and always seem on the verge of running out of the room to avoid any kind of more meaningful interactions. Contrast that with someone like Steve Kerr, who is usually willing to give serious explanations about most decisions and controversies while also allowing for times to crack jokes and have fun with the media.
I only said get bent after your dig on professionals (world renowned, which no one claimed anything of the sort ever) in here and I had no doubt you were directing it squarely at me given I detailed my education like 2 days ago and your first dig was at climatologists in here. Plus as I re all you might have been the one asking me about it.
Your intention was clear and your dig came before I ever even responded to you. Nice try though. And while it might not be Habermas' public sphere, your desire to undermine any effort at informed dialigue by knocking the educational attainment of others here only makes you look like a fool.
Guys, well some of you. Instead of delighting yourself in the demise of SA Spurs have you read RC Buford statement ?
For all who believe in the good guys that's great news.
- Spurs "disagree with the accuracy, details and timeline" ... Well to make such a statement Buford has to feel on solid ground.
- Spurs don't pay Buzzbee : they will allow the legal process to play out. That's a proof of the Spurs culture : we don't kneel. We stand our ground.
- "We will continue to live by our values and culture" : Strong affirmation of Spurs way of being.
Of course this doesn't play well for the fake Spurs fans who wish the FO .
This short statement doesn't appear to come from a weak, hurt, damaged organization but from one who will fight according to its strong values.
We'll see. It's just the beginning.
i think this is the very point that should be repeated time and time again because it will be ignored time and time again. there is not much the spurs can say at this time and this is the only position they can take at this moment. but this silence will facilitate even more speculation and accusations, none of which are verified by such silence and speculation.I guess the bottom line is I agree with this sentiment ... but this case is legal and the Spurs can't release any details. Next time the Spurs are frustratingly silent on a topic they should talk about, I'll be with you in calling them out
Buford's statement was more than I thought they'd say but it doesn't say anything other than deny the timeline.
All time thread btw, this is going to be gold for years to come
so it all went wrong when you mistook sarcasm for sarkazein. i would think that a "dig" falls into the latter category. i would have to say that there is a certain situational irony here in your demand for informed dialogue when this really isn't even a dialogue.
I'm not disputing any of that, I'm just saying I hope the facts aren't as you describe, and he doesn't end up getting fired on those grounds, I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
