True, but I’m not suggesting the other owners are concerned about his sharing secrets. Heck, I’ll go as far as saying that underneath it all, the other owners are his great friends and kind of want him hanging around. Maybe they even send him inside faxes and other trinkets because they like him.
But if (if!) they decide that his partial ownership will be detrimental to the overall good will of the NFL (er, that’s good will in the accounting/business sense, not touchy-feely good will of the vernacular) then their decision is theirs to make.
How are you using ‘rights’ and ‘standing’? Are you saying that the government should step in because obnoxious assholes are a protected class? That the government should invalidate the framework of the NFL that gives the owners such power? Or is it because the government should start enforcing consistency in decisions? I’m sure there’s an arguable difference between a player and an owner, but if it’s not strong enough or germane, perhaps the government should force them to fire Vick. Either way, you have government intervention and invalidation of a fundamental agreement. What’s next, death panels?!
Again, this is likely a basic business decision, one that has nothing to do with the other owners’ personal listening habits or their opinion of Rush as a person. Maybe it’s unfair that the United Beer Swillers of Football are driving the potential boycott and are keeping him out. But the fundamental decision seems fairly grounded in pragmatics.
Again, I have no pony in this show, so I’m probably missing somethign grand and am sounding like a fool (what the hell am I doing in a football thread? Why do the other owners get a vote?
Because it’s their league, and they say so. I’m sure when Paul Brown and George Halas, etc. started the NFL, they set it up so that the existing owners would have sayso over who joins the owners club in the future. I don’t know why that would change just because they’re dead now and the teams have new owners now.
Respect? Because he disagrees with his politics. If I were Rush and some players tried that stupidity and invest in every team in the NFL that he could. Chase the idiots to the UFL.
And Jerry Jones isn’t? You’re right that they are allowed to consider their business interests, and my comment might’ve been premature. Ultimately he should be considered more on his merits as the potential owner of a business than as a political figure.
I’ll give this much: the Huffington Post piece makes it sound like he plans to be a significant piece of the ownership group, not just a guy with a tiny stake - and the comment about the Bloods and the Crips is really bad.
Yep, respect. Rush is a private individual- he’s free to hold his own politics and buy whatever team he wants. The players are also private individuals- they are free to hold their own politics and to choose who they work for. If they vote with their feet, more power to them.
To extend- if I were to find out that the owner of the company I work for is in the KKK, I’d quit.
You can’t own more than one team. I leave it to you to figure out why. Anyway if you’re allowed to demand a trade because you don’t like the offensive scheme or the coach, you can turn down an offer from an owner because you don’t like the way he made his money.
Living in the Bay Area I strongly oppose this move, as one which would put the Raiders’ top draft pick at risk.
Seriously, I assume there are rules for owners, and as long as he follows them, I’m fine with him throwing away his ill-gotten gains. I’m also fine with players not wanting to play for him.
I’m sure there are other Republican owners, but they don’t go around publicly spewing hostile, racist puke every day on the radio.
Whether Limbaugh has a “right” to buy into the NFL depends on whether the league, as a whole, feels like it it would help or hinder the business health of the league as a whole. If it would result in a toxic franchise where players don’t want to play, then it would hurt the entire league. It’s a business decision, and, as such, the league is free to make whatever business decision it wants. Limbaugh is not automatically entitled to buy in.
The list shows who was arrested. Not who was convicted.
All of the charges seem to be felonies and/or crimes. Neither of the quotes mentions anything about not wanting to play with/for arrested people. They said they didn’t
a.) want to play for jerks
b.) want to play for people who said on the air “white kids are getting beat up on the bus while black kids are chanting 'right on”
And Dante Stallworth killed someone and he is still allowed to play. I’m sure that he has shown repentance as well, but Mr Reyes is still dead and Stallworth is still playing.
I’d say that the bar is set pretty low regarding membership in the NFL.
Maybe so, but it is legal. Didn’t the US bankruptcy judge just reject the offer of the James Basillie because he wasn’t acceptable to the NHL? Hockey isn’t football, that’s true, but the idea that sports leagues can control who joins their little club has been very recently upheld.
I don’t have a problem with someone with the type of views as Limbaugh owning a team, for he is no different than any other rich white male slave owner, but I have no doubt that it will not succeed.
But he is an unrepentant scumbag who hasn’t killed anyone yet. I don’t give two fucks how repentant Stallworth is. Tell that to Reyes’ kids. My point is that if the NFL has the good graces to allow killers, even accidental ones, than a blowhard or two should have no problem getting in at any level.
It’s all about whether they hurt business. If players don’t want to play for a racist, scumbag owner, then that’s bad for business. It doesn’t matter if you think the players are consistent or fair. All that matters is the bottom line. It’s called the free market. What should we do, have the government decide who people are allowed to turn down as business partners?
Nope, I think RL should be able to buy into anything he wants. My comments were directed to those wringing their hands over his politics or whatever. The facts are that the NFL is full of bigger scumbags than Limbaugh. He should not be excluded simply because he rubs some the wrong way. Agree?
