- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: You Are the NBA Commissioner: How Would You Handle Sterling?
Posted on 4/27/14 at 5:55 pm to Overbrook
Posted on 4/27/14 at 5:55 pm to Overbrook
quote:
don't know what he can do. He ought to suspend himself for a year.
I don't understand the whole thing anyway. What's his wife doing dating other dudes in the first place?
The NBA is still a business, they can most definitely take action
And he still has a wife that hes going thru a divorce with. The girlfriend who hes talking to in the tape is a lot younger and is half black and half mexican, but they arent like exclusive boyfriend/girlfriend. Hes just using her for sex i assume and shes using his money
1
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:15 pm to crimsonsaint
quote:
My guess is that Sterling gets $5MM fine (largest in sports history, i believe) and banned from day-to-day operations for entire 2015 season
Fwiw, I think this is a very likely outcome.
Now here's my question. When someone is suspended from day to day operations, and it isn't a coach or a player, what exactly does that mean? Does he not get profits from revenue sharing, tv deals, and tickets? Is he not allowed to interact with coaches? Is he not allowed to go to games?
I hear guys like Barkley saying "suspend him", and I think it is a clear punishment at this point for Silver (if he wants, he can leave it to the owners, who will vote to suspend him), but what actually happens when an owner is suspended for non-financial reasons?
Does anyone know what happened in Cincinnati 20 years ago?
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:16 pm to Keys Open Doors
Good question. I have no idea.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:24 pm to dukke v
Ban him for a year from day to day operations because of a leaked private conversation? Like everyone on this board hasn't said something before that could be leaked and cause a rift.
Country is so pussified. If people don't like it, don't go to the games and he will feel it In his wallet.
Country is so pussified. If people don't like it, don't go to the games and he will feel it In his wallet.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:25 pm to ASTL
quote:
Country is so pussified.
Not pussification to take someone to task for something like this.
And it's not as simple as "just don't go to the games," don't be silly.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:27 pm to TbirdSpur2010
This is almost as good as the freedom of speech defense
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:29 pm to TbirdSpur2010
Being offended is the collateral damage of free speech.
Asking momma and daddy to punish someone we disagree with is very baby reaction.
Asking momma and daddy to punish someone we disagree with is very baby reaction.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:32 pm to fightingtiger2335
quote:
Being offended is the collateral damage of free speech.
Freedom of speech is not mean one is impervious to negative repercussions if such speech is offensive.
quote:
Asking momma and daddy to punish someone we disagree with is very baby reaction.
Apologizing for this man's actions to be excused behind the ridiculous free speech veil is asinine.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:33 pm to fightingtiger2335
The NBA has a brand to protect. Being associated with Donald Sterling is far more damaging to its brand than Mark Cuban making a comment about how refs should work at a Dairy Queen or Allen Iverson wearing a skull cap to a press conference.
The biggest surprise in all of this is a) the NBA never disciplined Sterling due to his actions in multiple lawsuits and in sworn testimony from a decade ago and b) that players who are now suddenly so outraged about this signed on to play for Sterling in the first place.
I'll make an exception for players in their rookie contracts like Reggie Bullock and scrubs who couldn't get any deals to play elsewhere (maybe Ryan Hollins), but not for the Griffins, Pauls, Redicks, etc and especially not for Doc Rivers.
ETA: If the NFL does nothing more than shake their heads at Zygi Wilf and Jim Irsay, that is also unbelievably spineless.
The biggest surprise in all of this is a) the NBA never disciplined Sterling due to his actions in multiple lawsuits and in sworn testimony from a decade ago and b) that players who are now suddenly so outraged about this signed on to play for Sterling in the first place.
I'll make an exception for players in their rookie contracts like Reggie Bullock and scrubs who couldn't get any deals to play elsewhere (maybe Ryan Hollins), but not for the Griffins, Pauls, Redicks, etc and especially not for Doc Rivers.
ETA: If the NFL does nothing more than shake their heads at Zygi Wilf and Jim Irsay, that is also unbelievably spineless.
This post was edited on 4/27/14 at 6:35 pm
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:34 pm to Keys Open Doors
quote:
The biggest surprise in all of this is a) the NBA never disciplined Sterling due to his actions in multiple lawsuits and in sworn testimony from a decade ago and b) that players who are now suddenly so outraged about this signed on to play for Sterling in the first place.
both of these things are what i don't get, especially the 2nd. i mean wtf, players
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:34 pm to TbirdSpur2010
It was a private conversation. It's not like he got caught in a deal similar to his real estate where he stripped tickets from minorities.
Everyone overreacting about this is being dramatic.
Like I said, how many of y'all have said shite privately, that if leaked, would cause the same reaction?
He didn't get on a pulpit and act like Louis Farrakhan.
Everyone overreacting about this is being dramatic.
Like I said, how many of y'all have said shite privately, that if leaked, would cause the same reaction?
He didn't get on a pulpit and act like Louis Farrakhan.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:37 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Freedom of speech is not mean one is impervious to negative repercussions if such speech is offensive.
But we never let the free market decide. There are groups out there who will never listen to a show,, get an email saying send emails to this shows sponsors because of xyz. Sponsors will pull ads because people whonever watched or listened to a show because a special inter3st group leader sent out this person is the target this week.
Is that free market decision? Should someone who has never listened to one second of a show have tye power to pressure shows off the air? Its why tue few times a company stands by there guy it always blows over.
The we have the freedom to attack back after your speech is a lazy argument.
You should always defend people speaking. Not beimg ablr to have an opinion because scared of special interest groups is just as bad as govt saykng cant say anything because it effects your life just as much.
But if we are offemded please punish mean man
This post was edited on 4/27/14 at 6:40 pm
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
It means one of two things. Either they are all fricking morons who don't do 3 seconds of research about where they are going, other than ask around for which cities have the best nightclubs and weather, or that they don't care unless it is heavily publicized, thus making them look bad as a result.
I think either or both can be reasonable explanations. I'd say guys like Redick, Blake, Baron Davis, and Doc Rivers just don't care as long as they get their checks. For others, I don't know.
I think either or both can be reasonable explanations. I'd say guys like Redick, Blake, Baron Davis, and Doc Rivers just don't care as long as they get their checks. For others, I don't know.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:38 pm to ASTL
quote:
Everyone overreacting about this is being dramatic.
I haven't overreacted at all.
quote:
how many of y'all have said shite privately, that if leaked, would cause the same reaction?
I know for a fact I have never said anything along those lines, and furthermore, none of us are in a position of power in a globally visible organization.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
both of these things are what i don't get, especially the 2nd. i mean wtf, players
And if they would have boycotted tonight's game your reaction would have been a positive or negative one?
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:40 pm to ASTL
quote:
Like I said, how many of y'all have said shite privately, that if leaked, would cause the same reaction?
Are you admitting you've said racist things like Donald Sterling has?
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:41 pm to Keys Open Doors
quote:
Either they are all fricking morons who don't do 3 seconds of research about where they are going, other than ask around for which cities have the best nightclubs and weather, or that they don't care unless it is heavily publicized, thus making them look bad as a result.
i'd imagine it's the latter. they don't care if they're getting checks, but they know when they have to act offended and how a lack of social awareness can affect their brand (no more "republicans and democrats buy my shoes" guys anymore)
it seems literally impossible to me that they couldn't know about his racial issues in the past
as for why the NBA cares now? the clips are good and this was dropped during the playoffs. if neither were a variable, then nobody gives 1/10 of the fricks that are being given right now.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:42 pm to jacks40
That's how I interpreted it, Jacks.
I like that someone is down-voting all of the posts that such the least bit of racial awareness.
I like that someone is down-voting all of the posts that such the least bit of racial awareness.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:43 pm to BayouBandit24
quote:
This only applies to the government or a government actor who is trying to abridge your right.
There's absolutely no freedom of speech in the private sector. The NBA can absolutely tell him what he can or cannot say if he wants to be a member.
I'd venture significantly less than 50% of America truly grasps the extent to which Freedom of Speech does (and more specifically doesn't) cover.
Posted on 4/27/14 at 6:44 pm to Keys Open Doors
quote:
Either they are all fricking morons who don't do 3 seconds of research about where they are going, other than ask around for which cities have the best nightclubs and weather, or that they don't care unless it is heavily publicized, thus making them look bad as a result.
Here's the deal--faulting players for their handling of this is stupid. There are a myriad of more relevant issues affecting whom they sign with (again, it's not always their decision where they land) other than the druthers of the owner.
That does not mean that they are outside their rights in expressing their displeasure if/when the owner makes an arse of himself in the manner that he did.
Page 10 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News