Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 cincydooley wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
And he didn't call for an all black league. He called for a league of their own, which is, I think, an important distinction. And one that gets to the heart of the matter: you have mostly black workers (albeit highly paid ones) working for nearly all white owners.

Well, I'd be fine if the Clippers renamed themselves the Peaches.

I'm....uncomfortable with how much the plantation analogy is being played up here, because I don't entirely understand how it's THAT different than they NFL, a league that although 80% of the players aren't black, close to 70% are.... Source

What's the big distinction? Is the difference that in the NFL, despite the numbers being not that dissimilar, about half of the stars are actually white?

I think its simply that NFL players know they'd be cut and blackballed for saying stuff like that. Nearly all NFL players, aside from a small handful of stars on each team, are pretty replacable. The NFL is far more able to control their players, black and white, due to this. Combine that with the smaller number of players on an NBA team, and the more minimal uniform, and NBA players are marketed as stars, by themselves and the league, far more than individual NFL players. Paradoxically, its the fact that NBA players have as much security as they do that allows them to make such comemnts.

Also, fan interest is heavily tilted. Black people are more likley than average to be an NBA fan, while white people are less likley. NFL fandom is pretty color blind.

Finally, I think all the "there are no black owners argument" that is being screamed from the hilltops is foolish because it fails to accept that there simply aren't that many blacks in the US, let alone the world, that qualify financially to own any professional sports team. There simply aren't enough black billionaires.... If Oprah genuinely wanted to buy a team outright, I think she's be welcomed because she ticks two boxes. But she's about it in the US. And yes, I know everyone likes to tout that Magic Johnson is an owner of the dodgers. But let's be honest with ourselves here: he owns about 2.5% of the team (he contributed $50MM to the $2.15B the Dodgers were purchased for). That's no small chunk of change, but it's sort of a notable thing. Shaq owns, according to forbes, a similarly sized share in the Kings.

I don't say this because I don't want diversity in ownership; rather, I think the community needs to be a bit pragmatic in how it addresses ownerships....

Nobody thinks that racism is keeping black people from owning the teams. At least not in the sense that the leagues won't sell to black people. The fact that in four leagues, with over 100 teams, there isn't a single black billiionaire that can afford a team is probably what's concerning to all involved.

I think to address the overall point: I worry that people are so gunshy about accusations of racism that they just look over a comment for any sort of racial preference and assume racism. I guess it'll happen, but it's discouraging. Is Larry Johnson a racist, in the sense that he hates white people? I don't know. I really don't. I know he suggested he thinks it 'd be cool to have a league owned by black people, presumably with black players and playing for black crowds.

Is that racist? I can see how it looks racist "see! He doesn't want white people around!" But that ignores the fact that racial tension exists, that black people might not like that everybody that owns the company they work for is white. I think to find that a statement like that is racism presupposes that being a minority in a world where the majority owns nearly everything is exhausting.

I've lived as an ethnic minority as a kid, and it sucks. You can try to integrate all you want, but at the end of the day you want to be aroudn people like yourself.

Per CNBC, valuations for the Clippers are on the order of $1B right now. This guy's laughing all the way to the bank.

Nobody thinks that racism is keeping black people from owning the teams. At least not in the sense that the leagues won't sell to black people. The fact that in four leagues, with over 100 teams, there isn't a single black billiionaire that can afford a team is probably what's concerning to all involved.

I'm amazingly unconcerned about that.

According to Forbes Oprah is the only American born black billionaire. Magic's net worth is around $500MM. Bron is at like, $200MM. Jay-Z is at around $550MM. P-Diddy is one of the highest at $700MM.

The absurd level of wealth required to purchase a professional sports team in the US in 2014, for black Americans, simply isn't there....yet. I think that just needs to be kept in consideration when people start wringing their hands. I mean, I almost wish they could convince Aliko Dangote or Isabel dos Santos to purchase a controlling interest in the Clips. I think it would be a great thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The NBA clearly isn't opposed to diverse ownership; Vivek Ranadive, who's net worth is on par with Combs, just became the primary owner of the Kings.

 cincydooley wrote:
According to Forbes Oprah is the only American born black billionaire. Magic's net worth is around $500MM. Bron is at like, $200MM. Jay-Z is at around $550MM. P-Diddy is one of the highest at $700MM.

The absurd level of wealth required to purchase a professional sports team in the US in 2014, for black Americans, simply isn't there....yet. I think that just needs to be kept in consideration when people start wringing their hands. I mean, I almost wish they could convince Aliko Dangote or Isabel dos Santos to purchase a controlling interest in the Clips. I think it would be a great thing.

Again, I think most people are aware that there aren't a lot of super rich black people. Its just that, as facts go, its not the most reassuring one for a situation like this.

Digging deeper, the fact that I find a touch concerning is that all of the black wealth is concentrated in entertainment and sports.

I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the NBA will bend over backwards to sell the clips to a black owner. Which may end up being the most interesting cause of action sterling can bring. I dobut he'll be able to win in court to keep his team, but if he can show they didn't take the largest offer... that's just not right, IMO.

 Polonius wrote:


Digging deeper, the fact that I find a touch concerning is that all of the black wealth is concentrated in entertainment and sports.

I think it's interesting that Magic is actually the only one of the group I listed that didn't acrue the bulk of his wealth from those industries; Most of magics wealth is from investments and the foresight to get on board early with Starbucks franchises.

I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the NBA will bend over backwards to sell the clips to a black owner. Which may end up being the most interesting cause of action sterling can bring. I dobut he'll be able to win in court to keep his team, but if he can show they didn't take the largest offer... that's just not right, IMO.

I'm right with you. It's going to be really interesting.

 cincydooley wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
It's still wrong.

While I agree, that's not an objective fact.

Maybe it's just me, But I don't see pedophiles and racists on the same level.

I would certainly agree that I would prefer my 14 year old "haafu" daughter to associate with a racist than with a paedophile. However I would much prefer her not to associate with either of them, and to find some nicer friends instead.

 Polonius wrote:
I think to address the overall point: I worry that people are so gunshy about accusations of racism that they just look over a comment for any sort of racial preference and assume racism. I guess it'll happen, but it's discouraging. Is Larry Johnson a racist, in the sense that he hates white people? I don't know. I really don't. I know he suggested he thinks it 'd be cool to have a league owned by black people, presumably with black players and playing for black crowds.

Is that racist? I can see how it looks racist "see! He doesn't want white people around!" But that ignores the fact that racial tension exists, that black people might not like that everybody that owns the company they work for is white. I think to find that a statement like that is racism presupposes that being a minority in a world where the majority owns nearly everything is exhausting.

I've lived as an ethnic minority as a kid, and it sucks. You can try to integrate all you want, but at the end of the day you want to be aroudn people like yourself.

Remember we DID have exactly that in Baseball in the 1910s-40s, and the Negro Leagues folded because they simply couldn't maintain enough interest among their communities to keep the ticket sales up. Combine that with the Majors picking up Jackie Robinson and there really was nowhere for them to go.

I honestly don't know if society has changed to a point where a minority basketball league would survive. It would absolutely NEED star power, and I simply cannot see Lebron or someone of his "stature" leaving the money of the NBA to a startup league. It'd be one sure way to get blacklisted if/when this fictional "black league" folded.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I think to address the overall point: I worry that people are so gunshy about accusations of racism that they just look over a comment for any sort of racial preference and assume racism. I guess it'll happen, but it's discouraging. Is Larry Johnson a racist, in the sense that he hates white people? I don't know. I really don't. I know he suggested he thinks it 'd be cool to have a league owned by black people, presumably with black players and playing for black crowds.

Is that racist? I can see how it looks racist "see! He doesn't want white people around!" But that ignores the fact that racial tension exists, that black people might not like that everybody that owns the company they work for is white. I think to find that a statement like that is racism presupposes that being a minority in a world where the majority owns nearly everything is exhausting.

I've lived as an ethnic minority as a kid, and it sucks. You can try to integrate all you want, but at the end of the day you want to be aroudn people like yourself.

Remember we DID have exactly that in Baseball in the 1910s-40s, and the Negro Leagues folded because they simply couldn't maintain enough interest among their communities to keep the ticket sales up. Combine that with the Majors picking up Jackie Robinson and there really was nowhere for them to go.

I honestly don't know if society has changed to a point where a minority basketball league would survive. It would absolutely NEED star power, and I simply cannot see Lebron or someone of his "stature" leaving the money of the NBA to a startup league. It'd be one sure way to get blacklisted if/when this fictional "black league" folded.

Oh, of course it wouldn't work. It would also get sued out of existence, as you can't legally run a "blacks only" business any more than you can run a "whites only" one.

Even the old Negro Leagues were never really major league in caliber. They had some great players, but only a handful of franchises that were able to operate for mroe than a few years. There are some interesting stories about black business owners under Jim Crow that were ambivilant about integration, due to the loss of their own virtual monopolies. Tellingly, they all supported it anyway, because they felt that when not even money could buy respect, it wasn't worth as much.

There are two differences now: even at their peak, black players were never more than a significant minority in baseball, while the NBA has only a small white minority (much of that international). This also is position independent, with hall of fame level players of both races at all positions (compare to the NFL, with few white Wide Recievers but few (if any) black kickers). Second, there are black businesses that can really handle the finances of a league.

Realistically, nobody is going to start a league and alienate potential fans.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I saw this, and I feel like it's an interesting, but probably not feasible option: sell the team to public shareholders, like the Packers.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/02/opinion/gingrich-sell-clippers-public/index.html?hpt=hp_t4

 Frazzled wrote:
Per CNBC, valuations for the Clippers are on the order of $1B right now. This guy's laughing all the way to the bank.

I suspect Mr. Already-has-more-money-than-he-can-spend would rather own a flashy cool sports team than (sigh) another billion dollars. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most sports teams money pits for their owners?

Teams, I don't think so. Stadiums usually are. The money in sports is really in merchandise, franchise, advertisement. The stadiums are usually huge money pits which is why many stadiums are owned by other companies (for advertisement).

Stadiums are usually owned by government entities which have bamboozled the voting public into sinking billions of dollars for minimal benefit.

According to Forbes 4NBA teams had a negative operating income in 2013: the nets (new stadium), the 76ers (who went on a 26 game losing streak this year), the t-wolves (who are terrible) and the Hawks (-3.6MM) whom I don't have any real explanation for other than that watching on TV hawk home games seem to be as abysmal as Heat home games in terms of interested attendees.

 Frazzled wrote:
Stadiums are usually owned by government entities which have bamboozled the voting public into sinking billions of dollars for minimal benefit.

Word.

Many stadia are boondoggles got up by local city governments on the principle that attracting a major sports team will bring a lot of money and stuff.

 cincydooley wrote:
According to Forbes 4NBA teams had a negative operating income in 2013: the nets (new stadium), the 76ers (who went on a 26 game losing streak this year), the t-wolves (who are terrible) and the Hawks (-3.6MM) whom I don't have any real explanation for other than that watching on TV hawk home games seem to be as abysmal as Heat home games in terms of interested attendees.

I believe that Atlanta faces the same problems that the Tampa Bay Rays (baseball) do. Their stadium location is such that you'd either have to leave real early from work to make the game on time, or miss half+ of the game, and be out till 2am the next day. I'm sure that there are many other issues with the Hawks, but their biggest one this past season was attendance at home games (this is just from listening to ESPN radio, as it should be clear by now that I strongly dislike the sport of basketball).