Would the NFL Ban an Owner for Life?

[Raveninwoodlawn]

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

[HoustonRaven]

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.

[Dade]

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.

[HoustonRaven]

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

From my wife and from Deadspin, yes

[Random Thoughts]

I am of an opinion that professional sports should become more like a private corporation because those professional sports are equally accountable to the public (taxpayers fund stadiums, arenas, et cetera.). With that said, it should have a team board of "trustees" that governs the conduct of the team owner(s). The Association (NBA, NFL, etc.) wouldn't risk losing its tax benefits or monopoly rights in this instance, in my opinion.

Ultimately, it is up to individual team (at its current format). I doubt the owners would endorse something like that, what owner would.

[HoustonRaven]

I am of an opinion that professional sports should become more like a private corporation because those professional sports are equally accountable to the public (taxpayers fund stadiums, arenas, et cetera.). With that said, it should have a team board of "trustees" that governs the conduct of the team owner(s). The Association (NBA, NFL, etc.) wouldn't risk losing its tax benefits or monopoly rights in this instance, in my opinion.

Ultimately, it is up to individual team (at its current format). I doubt the owners would endorse something like that, what owner would.

Uhh ... They are run like private corporations. Today's decision shows that. The only difference is their antitrust exemption and that has no bearing on Sterlings mess.

You ok, slim?

[Everything_Ravens]

Let me play devils advocate for a moment and pose this question.

What if he says "it wasn't me on the recording".

The nba commish has power to do what he pleases regardless because its a private business. But from legal perspective .....what if he says its not him on the tape....it was doctored ...

[Terpsfan82]

I don't get all of the sympathy for Sterling. Is it a case of playing devil's advocate? Do we really fancy ourselves as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires", as Steinbeck put it? Are people really that naive? Or are people truly that insensitive?

[Raveninwoodlawn]

Let me play devils advocate for a moment and pose this question.

What if he says "it wasn't me on the recording".

The nba commish has power to do what he pleases regardless because its a private business. But from legal perspective .....what if he says its not him on the tape....it was doctored ...

Considering his history, the court of public opinion, his employees and his business partners and CEO would not change this outcome.

He gets very, very limited benefit of the doubt here and frankly, this may be just be the NBAs chance to finally get rid of him.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Dade]

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.

Your free to make that decision. But as Raveninwoodlawn said, why should you leave or someone else be fired because the employer is a bigot and created a hostile work environment?

I would agree that sometimes political correctness goes too far in our society. I do not think that is what happened here. There comes a point when we as a society shouldn't accept racist behavior or comments. The people who act and think this way should be ousted. There is no room for their bigotry in a free society. Having a dialogue will only go so far. And applying economic hardship to someone who is already a billionaire can seem futile, or at the very least take an extraordinary amount of time to make a difference or could cause people to, as you said, mask who they are to get your dollar. The dialogue should be how do we move forward not to create more Don Sterlings in the future. Dialogue has to lead to action. In today's world, decades of dialogue has led to racist comments/actions to not be acceptable. And the perpetrators to be removed from the societal equation.

[Everything_Ravens]

I don't get all of the sympathy for Sterling. Is it a case of playing devil's advocate? Do we really fancy ourselves as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires", as Steinbeck put it? Are people really that naive? Or are people truly that insensitive?

are you responding to me?
i thought i made it very clear some post ago that the sympathy for this guy from some posters lead me to believe that some people agree with sterlings view of the world.

[Dade]

Let me play devils advocate for a moment and pose this question.

What if he says "it wasn't me on the recording".

The nba commish has power to do what he pleases regardless because its a private business. But from legal perspective .....what if he says its not him on the tape....it was doctored ...

He has already confirmed to the league that it was him on the recording.