Donald Sterling recorded making some racist comments | Page 5 | Syracusefan.com

Donald Sterling recorded making some racist comments

ssbriefcase said:
No doubt it's hard, but do you think it won't be done? Yes, he's been this way for years or his whole life for that matter. That's not a flash point like the public hearing those words and conversation on tape. That's a game changer. Something definitely should've been done long ago and there were things in the courts etc. But what does that matter now after this new thing arises? So everyone should just stand by again after all this and not be trying to deal with it?
My point is "forcing" a sale is likely incredibly difficult. I would, if in charge, basically exile him and greatly penalize his team such that it made it virtually worthless. Now the nba won't do this because this is about money and sponsors and not about racism to them (no matter how much they feign it). If they really wanted to punish him they'd basically do things to make his franchise worthless. For example, for the next 5 years he can only have white dudes on his roster. And Isaiah Thomas has to run the team. Stuff like that. Make him pay.
 
My point is "forcing" a sale is likely incredibly difficult. I would, if in charge, basically exile him and greatly penalize his team such that it made it virtually worthless. Now the nba won't do this because this is about money and sponsors and not about racism to them (no matter how much they feign it). If they really wanted to punish him they'd basically do things to make his franchise worthless. For example, for the next 5 years he can only have white dudes on his roster. And Isaiah Thomas has to run the team. Stuff like that. Make him pay.
Cruel and unusual punishment!
 
In what society do you live in where your words and actions are immune to repercussion? If this was Joe Blow who owned a private contracting business, then yeah, there wouldn't be any recourse as far as making him sell the business. The NBA is a different animal. It's a conglomeration broken up into a number of companies (or franchises). There are standards that these organizations have to adhere to. Having an openly racist owner probably means you are not meeting those standards. I guess we will find out what sort of legal recourse the NBA has here.

Where in any posts above did I say that his actions are "immune to repercussion?" In fact, I suggested that there will be ramifications that stem from the public / players / coaches--just that I don't expect him to be publicly stoned to death to satisfy a group of offended people. What I DID say is that he has the right to exercise free speech, even when the opinions expressed are ignorant. What I said is that there is a big difference between fines / suspensions / penalties from the league and the NBA fan public pocket vetoing the Clippers if that's what they choose to do, and the groundswell of support calling for an immediate professional lynching. In the big scheme of things, Sterling once again exposed himself as a bigot--and this latest incident might not even be as "bad" [whatever that means] as past incidents.

Lots of public figures say dumb things that could be construed as racist or discriminatory--on a daily basis. Others use reverse discrimination against other groups: see: Larry Johnson's suggestion, which is equally divisive.

As you say, we will see what sort of legal recourse the NBA has here. Especially if this conversation was illegally taped, or intentionally released as part of an extortion attempt. And for the record it doesn't appear that there is language in the franchise agreement to warrant him being forced to sell, so...
 
Last edited:
My point is "forcing" a sale is likely incredibly difficult. I would, if in charge, basically exile him and greatly penalize his team such that it made it virtually worthless. Now the nba won't do this because this is about money and sponsors and not about racism to them (no matter how much they feign it). If they really wanted to punish him they'd basically do things to make his franchise worthless. For example, for the next 5 years he can only have white dudes on his roster. And Isaiah Thomas has to run the team. Stuff like that. Make him pay.
Interesting thought. Ill go with..

Starters
Goran Dragic
Kyle Korver
Dirk Nowitski
Kevin Love
Marc Gasol

Bench
Steve Nash
JJ Redick
Chandler Parsons
Pau Gasol
Marcin Gortat
 
Where in any posts above did I say that his actions are "immune to repercussion?" In fact, I suggested that there will be ramifications that stem from the public / players / coaches--just that I don't expect him to be publicly stoned to death to satisfy a group of offended people. What I DID say is that he has the right to exercise free speech, even when the opinions expressed are ignorant. What I said is that there is a big difference between fines / suspensions / penalties from the league and the NBA fan public pocket vetoing the Clippers if that's what they choose to do, and the groundswell of support calling for an immediate professional lynching. In the big scheme of things, Sterling once again exposed himself as a bigot--and this latest incident might not even be as "bad" [whatever that means] as past incidents.

Lots of public figures say dumb things that could be construed as racist or discriminatory--on a daily basis. Others use reverse discrimination against other groups: see: Larry Johnson's suggestion, which is equally divisive.

As you say, we will see what sort of legal recourse the NBA has here. Especially if this conversation was illegally taped, or intentionally released as part of an extortion attempt. And for the record it doesn't appear that there is language in the franchise agreement to warrant him being forced to sell, so...

You said you defend his rights to express himself without repercussions. Maybe that statement isn't as specific as you meant it to be. Of course he has a right to free speech. Free speech protects you from the government. The government isn't prepared to make a law saying owners of NBA teams can't make racist comments. But the NBA might decide that having a racist owner of one of it's franchises is detrimental to their brand, and is going to cost them money. Now I don't know if the NBA can legally force Sterling to sell, but it certainly has the right to explore that option.
 
You said you defend his rights to express himself without repercussions. Maybe that statement isn't as specific as you meant it to be. Of course he has a right to free speech. Free speech protects you from the government. The government isn't prepared to make a law saying owners of NBA teams can't make racist comments. But the NBA might decide that having a racist owner of one of it's franchises is detrimental to their brand, and is going to cost them money. Now I don't know if the NBA can legally force Sterling to sell, but it certainly has the right to explore that option.


Sure, the league does have the right to explore all of those actions. Just as they have the obligation to explore if it was actually Sterling who said those things [which seems likely], and if the statements were illegally recorded, so that he isn't subjected to a knee jerk witch hunt. The government might not be prepared to make a new law, but it DOES afford protections. So too do the franchise agreement Sterling has in place with the league. Meaning that Sterling has recourse to explore legal actions to protect his interests, as well, if action is taken by the league that doesn't jibe with the franchise agreement.

Will be interesting to see how things play out.

Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of Sterling? :cool:
 
Last edited:
Isn't that like the best thing that could happen here? The devaluation of his franchise value. The alternative is to write him a high 9 or 10 figure check... That'll teach him!

Devaluation is not good for the other 31 owners...no.
 
Alright just get him out NOW! It's going to happen, just make it happen quick so the media can go back to talking about basketball.

These playoffs are too good.

And this Clips/Warriors matchup is too good...this old fart can't ruin it! End this story please!
 
My point is "forcing" a sale is likely incredibly difficult. I would, if in charge, basically exile him and greatly penalize his team such that it made it virtually worthless. Now the nba won't do this because this is about money and sponsors and not about racism to them (no matter how much they feign it). If they really wanted to punish him they'd basically do things to make his franchise worthless. For example, for the next 5 years he can only have white dudes on his roster. And Isaiah Thomas has to run the team. Stuff like that. Make him pay.
That's why the first thing I said was "no doubt it's hard". But I think that's the road their headed down. The thing is people just want him gone, not punished. By making his team suck, it affects the league and fans and the players. That's the last thing they want to do.
 
Sure, the league does have the right to explore all of those actions. Just as they have the obligation to explore if it was actually Sterling who said those things [which seems likely], and if the statements were illegally recorded, so that he isn't subjected to a knee jerk witch hunt. The government might not be prepared to make a new law, but it DOES afford protections. So too do the franchise agreement Sterling has in place with the league. Meaning that Sterling has recourse to explore legal actions to protect his interests, as well, if action is taken by the league that doesn't jibe with the franchise agreement.

Will be interesting to see how things play out.

Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of Sterling? :cool:

Haha I think you have mentioned that. I think we are more or less on the same page here. I think if the NBA can force him to sell, then they absolutely should.
 
He'll get closer to a billion but I still can't see how the nba can force a sale. Best they can probably do is a schottzie like vacation...

If he decides to fight it, will it play out similarly to wrongful dismissal suits? As in, if he's been like this for a long time and it was not addressed by the league (ergo, condoned), why was it okay 20 years ago, 10 years ago, 5 years ago, but suddenly not now? And if he keeps the team but the league makes it unreasonably onerous while trying to make him sell it, doesn't that constitute a form of constructive dismissal as well? If he wants to go quietly, I'm sure it would be to the benefit of all but I don't think he sees the world that way; and if he wants to fight, it is California after all, where the law can be a little goofy.
 
Last edited:
Now I don't know if the NBA can legally force Sterling to sell, but it certainly has the right to explore that option.

There's probably some clause somewhere that allows the league to take the franchise from him under certain conditions, although they'd have to give him what amounts to fair market value for it. But that would be a huge ... (you see it coming, don't ya?) ... "black eye" :rolleyes: for the league; and then the other owners would have to confront the uncomfortable reality that something similar could also be done to them downstream, so I can't imagine they would want to establish that kind of a precedent. Once the genie is out of the bottle, there's no telling where it will go, but it surely won't want to go back in.
 
Last edited:
There's probably some clause somewhere that allows the league to take the franchise from him under certain conditions, although they'd have to give him what amounts to fair market value for it. But that would be a huge "black eye" :rolleyes: for the league; and then the other owners would have to confront the uncomfortable reality that something similar could also be done to them downstream, so I can't imagine they would want to establish that kind of a precedent. Once the genie is out of the bottle, there's no telling where it will go, but it surely won't want to go back in.
A huge black eye for the league? How? Doing what's right and having a punishment for not acting like a human in civil society? What, other owners would have to confront the uncomfortable reality that they can't be a racist? The horror. And if that means other things have to be all good too, so be it. It's probably time. Everyone else players included have had to adapt to different things. There's already screening of ownership before hand in many other sports. And regardless of this outcome, you can surely bet the league is already working on tightening the reigns. At the end of the day the fans and sponsors are the life blood, and for sure this won't be tolerated.
 
A huge black eye for the league? How? Doing what's right and having a punishment for not acting like a human in civil society? What, other owners would have to confront the uncomfortable reality that they can't be a racist? The horror. And if that means other things have to be all good too, so be it. It's probably time. Everyone else players included have had to adapt to different things. There's already screening of ownership before hand in many other sports. And regardless of this outcome, you can surely bet the league is already working on tightening the reigns. At the end of the day the fans and sponsors are the life blood, and for sure this won't be tolerated.

AYFKM? You obviously haven't stopped to think about the kind of stuff that could potentially come out. If he's long been as reprehensible as the general opinion around here is, what kind of crap was he pulling for how long? And why didn't the league act on it? The implication will be that by choosing not act on it, they effectively condoned it. You think they'll claim they didn't know, when it will be easy to prove they did?

Do you think he doesn't know where a whole slew of "bodies are buried?" And what about when he begins defending his own character, claiming he was not out of line because it's part of league culture to think and talk like that, especially for the things he's heard players and other owners say and do for many years. Wait until he starts pointing fingers stating this guy did this, that guy said that. Why is it okay for players to say worse things on the floor, on the bench or in the locker room? Do you think he's the only owner who ever said something rash?

Do you also think the media won't be all over it, publicly spreading the most salacious details, day after day?

And once the precedent is set that the league can revoke a franchise for reprehensible behavior, do you think that racism will be the only grounds for something like that?

Do you think the league, at the height of its popularity, wants any of that kind of trouble? It's bad business to do things that devalue your product, and that's right where this is headed unless it's handled with considerable discretion.
 
Last edited:
Why is it okay for players to say worse things on the floor, on the bench or in the locker room? Do you think he's the only owner who ever said something rash?

Agreed.

Where's the moral outrage to ban players from the league over using racial epithets on a daily basis that are publicly considered to be far more heinous, offensive, and demeaning than the words Sterling used?
 
AYFKM? You obviously haven't stopped to think about the kind of stuff that could potentially come out. If he's long been as reprehensible as the general opinion around here is, what kind of crap was he pulling for how long? And why didn't the league act on it? The implication will be that by choosing not act on it, they effectively condoned it. You think they'll claim they didn't know, when it will be easy to prove they did?

Do you think he doesn't know where a whole slew of "bodies are buried?" And what about when he begins defending his own character, claiming he was not out of line because it's part of league culture to think and talk like that, especially for the things he's heard players and other owners say and do for many years. Wait until he starts pointing fingers stating this guy did this, that guy said that. Why is it okay for players to say worse things on the floor, on the bench or in the locker room? Do you think he's the only owner who ever said something rash?

Do you also think the media won't be all over it, publicly spreading the most salacious details, day after day?

And once the precedent is set that the league can revoke a franchise for reprehensible behavior, do you think that racism will be the only grounds for something like that?

Do you think the league, at the height of its popularity, wants any of that kind of trouble? It's bad business to do things that devalue your product, and that's right where this is headed unless it's handled with considerable discretion.

First of all, you're assuming a hell of a lot. What's at play right now, is his own voice on a recording. He said she said is a reach, and certainly nothing in comparison with this. And it's already being discussed on why something wasn't done sooner when it was out there before, which when this was addressed in an earlier post, I asked how does that lessen what's on the table now? Do you think him saying, "so and so did this too" is going to help? Or deflect? Will people believe him after he's caught in the act? Like a jailhouse snitch trying to get their sentence reduced. No credibility. Not without a recording it won't. Not even close. And you're talking about him producing a hell of a lot of proof.

You're really comparing players saying something like this to an owner saying it?? Wow. The owner has control and power over people and his employees. A player has nothing on that. And since you're dealing with a lot of if's and buts. How about the possibility of civil rights abuse? They certainly could have a case. There's nothing more serious than that imo. And it doesn't matter if he's the only owner that said something like this. What's that got to do with him on tape and the public hearing HIM?
And I said in my last post about if they need to do some more things to tighten up ownership other than racism so be it. But can we just start with if there was one thing out there to revoke ownership it should be racism and blatant at that? And saying it about ex players and players that he's an employer of? Dam if that's not a reason then I don't know of one..
And if the league wants to continue it's popularity, it would be to do the exact opposite of what you suggest, and that's to deal with it as they get it, not sweep it under the rug. But this is first and foremost.
 
Aw man, don't tell me you've never seen this :cool: ...


I've seen Rocky Horror a bunch of times. Was just curious why your avatar is a transvestite from Transylvania.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
446
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Football
Replies
6
Views
360
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Football
Replies
5
Views
447
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Football
Replies
9
Views
506

Forum statistics

Threads
167,694
Messages
4,721,254
Members
5,915
Latest member
vegasnick

Online statistics

Members online
98
Guests online
1,670
Total visitors
1,768


Top Bottom