Page 5 of 23 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 334
  1. #61

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?



    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    A private conversation that was made public. I am open to criticism about the way it was revealed...but once it made it's way into the public arena, all bets were off.

    For example, if your employer said privately that he hated you for no logical reason, and that he didn't want you attending company sponsor events, and said derogatory statements about your heritage. Now those comments were made public. Would you be opposed to your employer being ousted?
    I presumed that was a rhetorical question.... and you would probably roll your eyes... no, I wouldn't advocate my employer's dismissal. I can simply find another employer as I am not required to continue my employment with such employer. An exception can be given here is when that employer made remarks in public domain.

    I will go off on a tangent here... We live in a society of political correctness, and it is for a good reason as we are so conscious of our images. Punishments like this do not enable progress. Rather, it simply teaches us to mask our true nature better and pray that you "don't get caught" when you have a slip up. I simply think we can tackle this issue by having conversation/dialogue and applying our collective economic power.




  2. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    B'more
    Posts
    88

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    Donald Sterling is worth $2 billion...taking away his livelihood? Lmao. He's bought that team for $12 million and is liable to get $800+ million via any sale.

    The guy has a long a storied history of being a racist and a bigot...this wasn't in any way an isolated case.

    I don't buy the second chance BS because of his documented history...he has had many, many chances, and if I hear one more idiot on the radio or on twitter bring up the first amendment I'm going to lose it.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Fill me in on what he has done in the past and what the NBA did about it.
    As I said, I'm not an NBA fan so that would be interesting to see.




  3. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    Donald Sterling is worth $2 billion...taking away his livelihood? Lmao. He's bought that team for $12 million and is liable to get $800+ million via any sale.

    The guy has a long a storied history of being a racist and a bigot...this wasn't in any way an isolated case.

    I don't buy the second chance BS because of his documented history...he has had many, many chances, and if I hear one more idiot on the radio or on twitter bring up the first amendment I'm going to lose it.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Freedom of Speech?




  4. #64
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Columbia Maryland
    Posts
    1,526

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Old Dog View Post
    I don't know what he could have possibly said that would warrant such a drastic measure of injustice.
    I've heard Barkley say so many racist things it's pathetic, yet he is still a very notable spokesman and recognized by the NBA....We're talking about a man's livelihood and just because we don't like the way he voices his opinions on race, politics or religion, is certainly not reason enough to take what he has worked for all his life....That's ridiculous, fine him ,ok but be reasonable. Vick ran a dog killing ring for sport and the NFL reinstated him because they thought taking his livelihood away permanently was too extreme.....This guy just said something people don't like and is frowned on in today's society. So did Dog the bounty hunter but he was reinstated also.
    i have a hard time reading comments like this and not thinking that you somehow identify with some portion of what he said. i could be dead wrong as i dont know you from a hole in the wall but it just comes off a little odd to me that anyone could be so sympathetic to someone with his kind of mentality.
    PUT RAY RICE & REX RYAN BACK ON THIS TEAM NOW!
    (Notice: if this is now the future and this signature has become outdated because Ray Rice has signed with any of the following cities, Buf, Mia, Ne, Nyj, CIN, CLE, "PIT", Hou, Ind, Jac, Ten, Den, Kc, Oak, Sd, let the record show that I was never in favor of his release) This message has been brought to you in part by the R.R.R.R. Preservation Assoc.




  5. #65

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Old Dog View Post
    Fill me in on what he has done in the past and what the NBA did about it.
    As I said, I'm not an NBA fan so that would be interesting to see.
    Come on man...

    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Donald+Sterling


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.




  6. #66
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    8,266

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Old Dog View Post
    Maybe, but we still haven't heard his side of the story and as someone pointed out, he didn't even use a racial slur....And if he had so many other violations , why didn't they punish him then instead of unloading on him now over something so questionable ?
    I'm not an NBA fan so I wouldn't know about his past, only the news of the situation at hand.
    And this looks very unfair and questionable to me as an unbiased observer.
    Now that is one good question. With his history, why hasn't the NBA acted earlier. The answer: Sterling and his racist behavior wasn't known by the national public. He wasn't a Jerry Jones or Mark Cuban type of owner, where even non sports fans know who he is. So the NBA could turn a blind eye. A quick google search will give you all you need to about his history. But here's a few links.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jun.../me-sterling26

    http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb...hke-clippers13

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4619819

    That's not to mention stories/rumors about him calling players and coaches niggers and inviting "friends" into the locker room to examine the black specimens (players).




  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    B'more
    Posts
    88

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Random Thoughts View Post
    I presumed that was a rhetorical question.... and you would probably roll your eyes... no, I wouldn't advocate my employer's dismissal. I can simply find another employer as I am not required to continue my employment with such employer. An exception can be given here is when that employer made remarks in public domain.

    I will go off on a tangent here... We live in a society of political correctness, and it is for a good reason as we are so conscious of our images. Punishments like this do not enable progress. Rather, it simply teaches us to mask our true nature better and pray that you "don't get caught" when you have a slip up. I simply think we can tackle this issue by having conversation/dialogue and applying our collective economic power.
    Well said, I totally agree.




  8. #68

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by AirFlacco View Post
    Freedom of Speech?
    Yes the first amendment.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.




  9. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,506

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    First Amendment has no bearing here
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    4,505

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    Donald Sterling is worth $2 billion...taking away his livelihood? Lmao. He's bought that team for $12 million and is liable to get $800+ million via any sale.

    The guy has a long a storied history of being a racist and a bigot...this wasn't in any way an isolated case.

    I don't buy the second chance BS because of his documented history...he has had many, many chances, and if I hear one more idiot on the radio or on twitter bring up the first amendment I'm going to lose it.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD



    First Amendment rights have to with our rights as citizens pertaining to government entities. The NBA is a private entity, and owning a team is not a right, but a privilege. He has too long a history of this type of behavior (lawsuits brought by Elgin Baylor, ex tenants of his rental properties) to let this slide. Stern only enabled to the point where he figured he wouldn't get into trouble this time; he should have been forced to sell a long time ago.




  11. #71

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    Yes I do.

    http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/me...nd-By-Laws.pdf

    The comments were made in private but are now public. There is no legal privilege about comments made between a man and his mistress (i.e. spousal privilege). Also he is not being prosecuted by the government for his comments. This is a private organization exercising its by-laws on a member.

    What actually do you think he should take the NBA to court over, being (possible, more than likely) forced to sell his team, lifetime ban from operating team, or the 2.5 mil fine? All of these punishments Sterling agreed to when he became an owner and signed the Constitution.

    Thank you for sharing.

    He is a seasoned attorney, he could involve a state or federal wiretapping laws to argue his case.

    He could pursue an antitrust litigation. As a seasoned attorney, he could force his hand to a federal court. Moreover, this litigation could take years, which wouldnt be beneficial to both parties...

    This is not as cut and dry as it may seem.




  12. #72

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Random Thoughts View Post
    I presumed that was a rhetorical question.... and you would probably roll your eyes... no, I wouldn't advocate my employer's dismissal. I can simply find another employer as I am not required to continue my employment with such employer. An exception can be given here is when that employer made remarks in public domain.

    I will go off on a tangent here... We live in a society of political correctness, and it is for a good reason as we are so conscious of our images. Punishments like this do not enable progress. Rather, it simply teaches us to mask our true nature better and pray that you "don't get caught" when you have a slip up. I simply think we can tackle this issue by having conversation/dialogue and applying our collective economic power.
    You quiting is fine and dandy for yourself, but why should I or anybody else be the one that has to lose my job...via quiting or whatever manor...because someone else is creating a hostile working environment?




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.




  13. #73

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    First Amendment has no bearing here
    I would say you'd be surprised at the idiots shouting from the rooftops about Sterlings first amendment rights, but I'm sure you've heard them on the radio.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.




  14. #74
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,506

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Random Thoughts View Post
    Thank you for sharing.

    He is a seasoned attorney, he could involve a state or federal wiretapping laws to argue his case.

    He could pursue an antitrust litigation. As a seasoned attorney, he could force his hand to a federal court. Moreover, this litigation could take years, which wouldnt be beneficial to both parties...

    This is not as cut and dry as it may seem.
    Huh?

    Neither of these issue will save him from what's already happened.

    And I don't know where you're getting the antitrust angle from. The facts of this issue have zero connection to an anti trust suit.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  15. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    8,266

    Re: Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Random Thoughts View Post
    Thank you for sharing.

    He is a seasoned attorney, he could involve a state or federal wiretapping laws to argue his case.

    He could pursue an antitrust litigation. As a seasoned attorney, he could force his hand to a federal court. Moreover, this litigation could take years, which wouldnt be beneficial to both parties...

    This is not as cut and dry as it may seem.
    Wiretapping? The recording was not made over the phone. It was made face to face. Sterling asked to be recorded in daily conversations because by his own admission he is forgetful, and would refer back to the recordings to remember what he said.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland