Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

**jonboy79** · 05-22-2014, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

You're asking me to prove a negative. Impossible.

it was more rhetorical, but ok...

I suppose to answer my own question...

Using the Pete Rose example. He bet on baseball, and was booted from the game entirely. That has not turned into the slippery slope where any time an athlete or coach has bet on any sporting events they have been booted from their sport. It has remained only an issue with gambling on your own sport.

I'm simply bombarded throughout my daily life with slippery slopes being the modus operandi so i assume that it transfers to every situation until proven otherwise.

**HoustonRaven** · 05-22-2014, 01:05 PM

Well, change usually happens gradually so yes, there's tons of examples one can point to.

I just don't think that in this case Cubans words will start down any slope.

**jonboy79** · 05-22-2014, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Well, change usually happens gradually so yes, there's tons of examples one can point to.

I just don't think that in this case Cubans words will start down any slope.

Ok, well maybe next year it's a comment half way in between the two... Maybe someone off-hand mentions they aren't comfortable walking down a particular street, in a black neighborhood... maybe that is enough at that point... Maybe Biscotti says he isn't comfortable in Edmonson Village, or Cherry Hill...

**lowrider** · 05-23-2014, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

100% exactly my point. Anyone with half a brain that hears the entirety of the quote can identify and understand Cuban's POV. BUT, that is NOT the world we live in... it should give the owners reason to pause before this vote.

Cuban made a comment that he had to apologize for. He went on to explain it away by being honest about preconceived bias in our society. The difference between he and Sterling is that Cuban was honest and sterling tried to lie about his racism. He says he's not a racist. Really?

I could connect Cuban's comment around preconceived bias to Sterling. He grew up in an entirely different world where blacks were not allowed to drink from the same water fountains, not permitted to use the same bathrooms, didn't go to the same schools. Were treated differently. I believe that his comments and behavior came from that part of his life. With an obvious onset of dementia, it's not hard to see why this happened. Doesn't excuse his actions, but sheds some light on the notion of preconceived bias.

More to your point, I don't know if the Cuban situation will cause the owners pause when considering Sterling's fate, but it should. It is a perfect example of how words can be used innocently and/or taken out of context, and then used against you.

**jonboy79** · 05-23-2014, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by lowrider

Cuban made a comment that he had to apologize for. He went on to explain it away by being honest about preconceived bias in our society. The difference between he and Sterling is that Cuban was honest and sterling tried to lie about his racism. He says he's not a racist. Really?

I could connect Cuban's comment around preconceived bias to Sterling. He grew up in an entirely different world where blacks were not allowed to drink from the same water fountains, not permitted to use the same bathrooms, didn't go to the same schools. Were treated differently. I believe that his comments and behavior came from that part of his life. With an obvious onset of dementia, it's not hard to see why this happened. Doesn't excuse his actions, but sheds some light on the notion of preconceived bias.

More to your point, I don't know if the Cuban situation will cause the owners pause when considering Sterling's fate, but it should. It is a perfect example of how words can be used innocently and/or taken out of context, and then used against you.

That was my point, thanks for understanding it.

Cuban said honest words, that in reality, are positive from a race relations POV, IF THEY ARE HEARD IN THEIR ENTIRETY.

BUT, yesterday it was almost a mini-scandal, because as could be expected, they were taken out of context and spun relentlessly by our PATHETIC media.

**TonyD79** · 05-23-2014, 11:15 AM

And the latest. Sterling has agreed to sell.

So much for his court fight.

**HoustonRaven** · 05-23-2014, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by TonyD79

And the latest. Sterling has agreed to sell.

So much for his court fight.

Not surprised.

By all accounts, he's an excellent attorney. He knew he had little recourse, given the limitations of agreeing to arbitration.

**lowrider** · 05-23-2014, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Not surprised.

By all accounts, he's an excellent attorney. He knew he had little recourse, given the limitations of agreeing to arbitration.

Not really surprised either. The odds were stacked against him. He would have spent millions for what? He paid $12 mil for the Clippers and will make at least $400 mil on his investment. He, and his family wins.

**jonboy79** · 05-24-2014, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by lowrider

Not really surprised either. The odds were stacked against him. He would have spent millions for what? He paid $12 mil for the Clippers and will make at least $400 mil on his investment. He, and his family wins.

he doesn't "win" if it's worth a BILLION and he's forced to sell for half that. It doesn't matter what he paid for it, it matters what it's worth and what he sells it for.

He probably acquiesced more so because he had reason to believe he would get a fair price. He was probably stalling while trying to figure out the outcome in that manner.

**lowrider** · 05-24-2014, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

he doesn't "win" if it's worth a BILLION and he's forced to sell for half that. It doesn't matter what he paid for it, it matters what it's worth and what he sells it for.

He probably acquiesced more so because he had reason to believe he would get a fair price. He was probably stalling while trying to figure out the outcome in that manner.

The way I understand it he'll get fair market value. Forbes has it at ~ $575 mil. Either way his return on his initial investment is going to be huge. So as long as he gets fair market value, whatever that ends up being, he wins IMO.

**jonboy79** · 05-24-2014, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by lowrider

The way I understand it he'll get fair market value. Forbes has it at ~ $575 mil. Either way his return on his initial investment is going to be huge. So as long as he gets fair market value, whatever that ends up being, he wins IMO.

And I heard based on recent sales(Bucks) that he should be in line for more in the $800 million range... That's quite a difference.
The Bucks, if I'm not mistaken, were sold for around what you quote... in a terrible market with an unsuccessful team.

Yeah, $550m... after Forbes valued them at $405m and Cuban thought it was a bargain price...

http://espn.go.com/dallas/nba/story/...s-sale-bargain

If you apply a bit of math, the $405m value selling for $550 is akin to the $575m value selling for $780m.

**lowrider** · 05-24-2014, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

And I heard based on recent sales(Bucks) that he should be in line for more in the $800 million range... That's quite a difference.
The Bucks, if I'm not mistaken, were sold for around what you quote... in a terrible market with an unsuccessful team.

Yeah, $550m... after Forbes valued them at $405m and Cuban thought it was a bargain price...

http://espn.go.com/dallas/nba/story/...s-sale-bargain

If you apply a bit of math, the $405m value selling for $550 is akin to the $575m value selling for $780m.

If I were Cuban I would be saying the same things. If there are multiple interested groups there could be some sort a bidding war that could drive the price higher. In that scenario I could see the price going north of $750 mil.