login
Lifetime Ban (Page 4)
-
No new posts
|
 2014-05-03 8:56 PM in reply to: So Fresh So Clean |
Extreme Veteran  1001  Highlands Ranch, Colorado |  Subject: RE: Lifetime BanIt will be interesting to see how long this is drug out. My guess is that there will be a Lawsuit that will go on for years and the NBA will eventually drop the Lifetime Ban. Back in the 1990s and 2000s I remember several pro athletes that received "Lifetime Bans" and could apply for reinstatement, most were back on their teams within 6-12 months. |
| 2014-05-05 2:20 PM in reply to: rick4657 |
| Subject: RE: Lifetime Ban Originally posted by rick4657 It will be interesting to see how long this is drug out. My guess is that there will be a Lawsuit that will go on for years and the NBA will eventually drop the Lifetime Ban. Back in the 1990s and 2000s I remember several pro athletes that received "Lifetime Bans" and could apply for reinstatement, most were back on their teams within 6-12 months. Sterling won't be back in the NBA. The public won't allow it. I'm not saying that's fair or not...it's just the way it is. The public is generally more forgiving of athletes than they are of rich owners. Kobe Bryant has already gone through cheating on his wife, possibly getting away with rape, and uttering a gay slur...yet he's still one of the most popular players because he brings high entertainment value to the game. Owners bring zero entertainment value. Thus the public can get extremely upset about them when they screw up. The one situation I could see where a person of power could screw up and he would be forgiven is someone like Phil Knight. I'm sure he could do some really bad stuff and the people at Oregon would likely not crucify him because of the hundreds of millions of dollars he pumps into the school out of donations. Again...you can generally judge how bad a person's actions are when people are willing to turn their back on them when they have something to lose. The NBA has nothing to lose by kicking out Sterling. Nor does the public, players, or the fans. If kicking Sterling out meant that four NBA franchises would fold and 48 players would have terminated contracts...I'm sure the NBA would be singing a different tune.
|
| 2014-05-05 5:48 PM in reply to: Jason N |
Champion 10154   Alabama | Subject: RE: Lifetime Ban Originally posted by Jason N Originally posted by rick4657 It will be interesting to see how long this is drug out. My guess is that there will be a Lawsuit that will go on for years and the NBA will eventually drop the Lifetime Ban. Back in the 1990s and 2000s I remember several pro athletes that received "Lifetime Bans" and could apply for reinstatement, most were back on their teams within 6-12 months. Sterling won't be back in the NBA. The public won't allow it. I'm not saying that's fair or not...it's just the way it is. The public is generally more forgiving of athletes than they are of rich owners. Kobe Bryant has already gone through cheating on his wife, possibly getting away with rape, and uttering a gay slur...yet he's still one of the most popular players because he brings high entertainment value to the game. Owners bring zero entertainment value. Thus the public can get extremely upset about them when they screw up. The one situation I could see where a person of power could screw up and he would be forgiven is someone like Phil Knight. I'm sure he could do some really bad stuff and the people at Oregon would likely not crucify him because of the hundreds of millions of dollars he pumps into the school out of donations. Again...you can generally judge how bad a person's actions are when people are willing to turn their back on them when they have something to lose. The NBA has nothing to lose by kicking out Sterling. Nor does the public, players, or the fans. If kicking Sterling out meant that four NBA franchises would fold and 48 players would have terminated contracts...I'm sure the NBA would be singing a different tune.
You can't "punish" the man. He will get fair market value for the team. He is a billionaire and will get 800m for the team. Any action taken might make some feel better but is not going to mean anything. He will cry all the way to the bank. |
| 2014-05-05 6:17 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
| Subject: RE: Lifetime Ban Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Jason N You can't "punish" the man. He will get fair market value for the team. He is a billionaire and will get 800m for the team. Any action taken might make some feel better but is not going to mean anything. He will cry all the way to the bank. Originally posted by rick4657 It will be interesting to see how long this is drug out. My guess is that there will be a Lawsuit that will go on for years and the NBA will eventually drop the Lifetime Ban. Back in the 1990s and 2000s I remember several pro athletes that received "Lifetime Bans" and could apply for reinstatement, most were back on their teams within 6-12 months. Sterling won't be back in the NBA. The public won't allow it. I'm not saying that's fair or not...it's just the way it is. The public is generally more forgiving of athletes than they are of rich owners. Kobe Bryant has already gone through cheating on his wife, possibly getting away with rape, and uttering a gay slur...yet he's still one of the most popular players because he brings high entertainment value to the game. Owners bring zero entertainment value. Thus the public can get extremely upset about them when they screw up. The one situation I could see where a person of power could screw up and he would be forgiven is someone like Phil Knight. I'm sure he could do some really bad stuff and the people at Oregon would likely not crucify him because of the hundreds of millions of dollars he pumps into the school out of donations. Again...you can generally judge how bad a person's actions are when people are willing to turn their back on them when they have something to lose. The NBA has nothing to lose by kicking out Sterling. Nor does the public, players, or the fans. If kicking Sterling out meant that four NBA franchises would fold and 48 players would have terminated contracts...I'm sure the NBA would be singing a different tune.
I agree. This won't hurt Sterling's wallet overall...but why should it? Making racist comments isn't against the law. Should racist comments in a private conversation be worth completely forfeiting the ownership of a $800 million team with no compensation? I think not. But the punishment does serve it's purpose. It makes the public feel better, thus sponsors can support the NBA without worry of public backlash. Whether that's right or wrong isn't the point...it's just the way it is. |
|
|
|
|
| |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK