Now if they can just ban Charles Barkley racism will be eliminated from the NBA.

TheMoody1 wrote:Now if they can just ban Charles Barkley racism will be eliminated from the NBA.

Naw...that's turruble.

asu66 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2014/04/2 ... on-by-nba/

Poetic justice = Magic owning the Clippers

Maddog1956 wrote:

asu66 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2014/04/2 ... on-by-nba/

Poetic justice = Magic owning the Clippers

Only one teeny-weeny little problem. Magic doesn't have $575,000.000.00. He spent his last dime on the LA Dodgers.

Its a good penalty but at the same time Sterling is 81 years old. A life ban doesn't really hit him as hard. 2.5 million dollar ban? This dude uses million dollar bills as toilet paper. So not exactly hurting him much. As far as forcing him to sell his team I agree with Cuban that is a slippery slope. He bought the team and it is his investment. It would make more sense to kick the team he owns out of the league and allow the players from that team to sign as free agents if they choose to leave his team. BUT forcing someone to sell their business because of a racist comment is pushing the limits a bit.

appdaze wrote:Its a good penalty but at the same time Sterling is 81 years old. A life ban doesn't really hit him as hard. 2.5 million dollar ban? This dude uses million dollar bills as toilet paper. So not exactly hurting him much. As far as forcing him to sell his team I agree with Cuban that is a slippery slope. He bought the team and it is his investment. It would make more sense to kick the team he owns out of the league and allow the players from that team to sign as free agents if they choose to leave his team. BUT forcing someone to sell their business because of a racist comment is pushing the limits a bit.

Thank you, being an idiot racist is not against the law. I have a problem with this and I am a really liberal guy. This is a situation that society should be able to handle. If it is a problem fans should speak by not buying tickets or apparel. The franchise would start losing money and the billionaire racist would bail. The path chosen is the easy way out and is a sign of the times we live in. Again, this dude is scum and in the end I don't feel sorry for him but the former governor of Texas had ranch named N head, where's the outrage? The supreme court struck down the voting rights act and a key piece of affirmative action law recently. Where's the outrage? This idiot owns a basketball team and ultimately is NOBODY! Yet society reacts violently because he does not want his black mistress to hang out with black people. WHO CARES.

Being a Reds fan, I'm thinking Marge Schott here. I know we are talking two different entities, but didn't MLB force Schott to sell her shares of the team?

appbio91 wrote:

appdaze wrote:Its a good penalty but at the same time Sterling is 81 years old. A life ban doesn't really hit him as hard. 2.5 million dollar ban? This dude uses million dollar bills as toilet paper. So not exactly hurting him much. As far as forcing him to sell his team I agree with Cuban that is a slippery slope. He bought the team and it is his investment. It would make more sense to kick the team he owns out of the league and allow the players from that team to sign as free agents if they choose to leave his team. BUT forcing someone to sell their business because of a racist comment is pushing the limits a bit.

Thank you, being an idiot racist is not against the law. I have a problem with this and I am a really liberal guy. This is a situation that society should be able to handle. If it is a problem fans should speak by not buying tickets or apparel. The franchise would start losing money and the billionaire racist would bail. The path chosen is the easy way out and is a sign of the times we live in. Again, this dude is scum and in the end I don't feel sorry for him but the former governor of Texas had ranch named N head, where's the outrage? The supreme court struck down the voting rights act and a key piece of affirmative action law recently. Where's the outrage? This idiot owns a basketball team and ultimately is NOBODY! Yet society reacts violently because he does not want his black mistress to hang out with black people. WHO CARES.

The difference is the NBA is a business/club that can make their own rules and have their own contact. No one is forced to buy a club or be a member. It's just like joining the KKK and they find out you're not really a racist, no one will keep them from kicking you out.

Otherwise Chris Paul would be playing for the Lakers.

asu66 wrote:

Maddog1956 wrote:

asu66 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2014/04/2 ... on-by-nba/

Poetic justice = Magic owning the Clippers

Only one teeny-weeny little problem. Magic doesn't have $575,000.000.00. He spent his last dime on the LA Dodgers.

Magic Johnson's net worth alone is 500 Million alone, his INC. is worth over a billion and his partners purchased the Dodgers for 2 billion. $500 million is change if someone wants the clippers.

appbio91 wrote:

appdaze wrote:Its a good penalty but at the same time Sterling is 81 years old. A life ban doesn't really hit him as hard. 2.5 million dollar ban? This dude uses million dollar bills as toilet paper. So not exactly hurting him much. As far as forcing him to sell his team I agree with Cuban that is a slippery slope. He bought the team and it is his investment. It would make more sense to kick the team he owns out of the league and allow the players from that team to sign as free agents if they choose to leave his team. BUT forcing someone to sell their business because of a racist comment is pushing the limits a bit.

Thank you, being an idiot racist is not against the law. I have a problem with this and I am a really liberal guy. This is a situation that society should be able to handle. If it is a problem fans should speak by not buying tickets or apparel. The franchise would start losing money and the billionaire racist would bail. The path chosen is the easy way out and is a sign of the times we live in. Again, this dude is scum and in the end I don't feel sorry for him but the former governor of Texas had ranch named N head, where's the outrage? The supreme court struck down the voting rights act and a key piece of affirmative action law recently. Where's the outrage? This idiot owns a basketball team and ultimately is NOBODY! Yet society reacts violently because he does not want his black mistress to hang out with black people. WHO CARES.

Apparently the players had threatened to boycott tonights playoff games. I'm sure there was also pressure from sponsers. The Clippers don't operate in a vacuum, the NBA teams share revenue and largely exist as single product. I think the other owners anticipated the hits to their own wallets, as did Silver, and they decided to act before their fortunes began declining (using the provisions of an agreement that each NBA owner freely entered into). This is the free market working; its one of the most libertarian solutions to a problem that I've ever seen.

Also, just a point of note - the Supreme Court did strike a key portion of the voting rights act. It did not strike down a key portion of affirmative action law. The Michigan voters ended affirmative action, by passing a constitutional amendment banning the use of race in admissions. The Supreme Court upheld the Michigan's right to ban the use of race in admissions, but didn't limit the ability of other states to use race in admissions (though there are already some restrictions on how public schools can use affirmative action, those restrictions have been in place for about 10 years; cases are Grutter and Gratz).

wataugan03 wrote:

appbio91 wrote:

appdaze wrote:Its a good penalty but at the same time Sterling is 81 years old. A life ban doesn't really hit him as hard. 2.5 million dollar ban? This dude uses million dollar bills as toilet paper. So not exactly hurting him much. As far as forcing him to sell his team I agree with Cuban that is a slippery slope. He bought the team and it is his investment. It would make more sense to kick the team he owns out of the league and allow the players from that team to sign as free agents if they choose to leave his team. BUT forcing someone to sell their business because of a racist comment is pushing the limits a bit.

Thank you, being an idiot racist is not against the law. I have a problem with this and I am a really liberal guy. This is a situation that society should be able to handle. If it is a problem fans should speak by not buying tickets or apparel. The franchise would start losing money and the billionaire racist would bail. The path chosen is the easy way out and is a sign of the times we live in. Again, this dude is scum and in the end I don't feel sorry for him but the former governor of Texas had ranch named N head, where's the outrage? The supreme court struck down the voting rights act and a key piece of affirmative action law recently. Where's the outrage? This idiot owns a basketball team and ultimately is NOBODY! Yet society reacts violently because he does not want his black mistress to hang out with black people. WHO CARES.

Apparently the players had threatened to boycott tonights playoff games. I'm sure there was also pressure from sponsers. The Clippers don't operate in a vacuum, the NBA teams share revenue and largely exist as single product. I think the other owners anticipated the hits to their own wallets, as did Silver, and they decided to act before their fortunes began declining (using the provisions of an agreement that each NBA owner freely entered into). This is the free market working; its one of the most libertarian solutions to a problem that I've ever seen.

Also, just a point of note - the Supreme Court did strike a key portion of the voting rights act. It did not strike down a key portion of affirmative action law. The Michigan voters ended affirmative action, by passing a constitutional amendment banning the use of race in admissions. The Supreme Court upheld the Michigan's right to ban the use of race in admissions, but didn't limit the ability of other states to use race in admissions (though there are already some restrictions on how public schools can use affirmative action, those restrictions have been in place for about 10 years; cases are Grutter and Gratz).

Thanks, my point is these rulings as well as the one that says idiots like this can give as much as they want to political campaigns with no transparency are a bigger threat the black America than a fool old man who owns an NBA team

I just wonder if Larry Johnson's (LJ) comments about forming an All Black League will receive any scrutiny from the NBA?

Inside ASU wrote:I just wonder if Larry Johnson's (LJ) comments about forming an All Black League will receive any scrutiny from the NBA?

It won't.

Inside ASU wrote:I just wonder if Larry Johnson's (LJ) comments about forming an All Black League will receive any scrutiny from the NBA?

If he doesn't play for the NBA anymore there's not much they can do about it. If he forms another league, they will have their own rules.

Inside ASU wrote:I just wonder if Larry Johnson's (LJ) comments about forming an All Black League will receive any scrutiny from the NBA?

The NBA isn't black enough for him? Remember kids, only blacks now have the right to be racist.

Maddog1956 wrote:

Inside ASU wrote:I just wonder if Larry Johnson's (LJ) comments about forming an All Black League will receive any scrutiny from the NBA?

If he doesn't play for the NBA anymore there's not much they can do about it. If he forms another league, they will have their own rules.

If I'm not mistaken, he works for the Knicks.

No matter who is partially or totally at fault, this rings tragic for all professional sports, not just the NBA, in my humble opinion.

HeffnerIV wrote:

Maddog1956 wrote:

Inside ASU wrote:I just wonder if Larry Johnson's (LJ) comments about forming an All Black League will receive any scrutiny from the NBA?

If he doesn't play for the NBA anymore there's not much they can do about it. If he forms another league, they will have their own rules.

If I'm not mistaken, he works for the Knicks.

I think his status is "unknown" (since Phil Jackson), however certainly they could ban him from owning a team, lol

It was the right move, but also the best move, and seemingly the only viable move. It isn't a case of a lone idiot and people being able to ignore him. The NBA is a business in the entertainment market, not a market in itself. Just as a business would need to fire such an idiot to protect itself, the NBA had to fire this idiot to protect itself. The protection is from within the business as much as from outside the business. Beyond it being a basic sound business decision, it also is the right thing to do. It sends a strong message that unfortunately still needs to be expressed. Too many people (e.g., Clive Bundy) still live in the dark ages, and such stupidity should be highlighted and ostracized by society.