tOffical all things Sterling thread

[True Lakers Fan]

I just love how this board knows more about the legalities of the league than the league does. Nevermind that the commish is a lawyer, as is most of the execs that run the NBA. Anyone here that seriously thinks they didn't know their case was solid before going against an owner that LOVES to sue is out of their mind.

It may take years......but the NBA has a pretty solid case. They have proof that Sterling has damaged the league in that all advertisers have pulled out - that won't be arguable in court. They have proof the evidence against Sterling that was leaked was legally obtained. They have the threat of a player boycott.

Sterling doesn't have an angle here he can work that will win in arbitration. He has very little grounds to win in court. His lawyers will have a HELLUVA job to get him outta this one.

I agree, but I said from the beginning that I didn't think the owners would start that process without a leg to stand on and I was confident that all of them had signed a good moral clause. JDM is thinking law as how an ordinary business works, while the NBA does not have the anti-trust exemption that the MLB has, they have plenty of exemptions and powers with their own constitution - there is just no way in hell that any owner like Frank McCourt or Sterling is going to be allowed to stick around and bankrupt the entire organization - that wouldn't make sense any more then we would allow a corrupt president like Richard Nixon stay in office. They are called checks and balances

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Starbigd:

I have a question for you. Do you think that in the unlikely event that the owners are afraid of a long drawn out process in the courts - in order to force Sterling out - they could changes the rules of the game enough to make it a disadvantage for Sterling?

 

[JDM]

I just love how this board knows more about the legalities of the league than the league does. Nevermind that the commish is a lawyer, as is most of the execs that run the NBA. Anyone here that seriously thinks they didn't know their case was solid before going against an owner that LOVES to sue is out of their mind.

It may take years......but the NBA has a pretty solid case. They have proof that Sterling has damaged the league in that all advertisers have pulled out - that won't be arguable in court. They have proof the evidence against Sterling that was leaked was legally obtained. They have the threat of a player boycott.

Sterling doesn't have an angle here he can work that will win in arbitration. He has very little grounds to win in court. His lawyers will have a HELLUVA job to get him outta this one.

No, they don't. Every reason to kick an owner out is listed in their constitution and there isn't one that even is in the ballpark of applying here. It is an open and shut case that will only take years because the lawyers will exploit every attempt at a loophole possible to delay it in the hopes that he dies before it gets to trial. They know for a fact they have a 0% chance to win this in court. They will get shredded.

There is a list of all the reasons someone can be kicked out. None of those reasons are in play. It's that simple.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

No, they don't. Every reason to kick an owner out is listed in their constitution and there isn't one that even is in the ballpark of applying here. It is an open and shut case that will only take years because the lawyers will exploit every attempt at a loophole possible to delay it in the hopes that he dies before it gets to trial. They know for a fact they have a 0% chance to win this in court. They will get shredded.

There is a list of all the reasons someone can be kicked out. None of those reasons are in play. It's that simple.

Every reason is not listed - it's a general statement that can widely used. Today the NBA released additional information not previously disclosed to the general public - they have signed contracts and a signed moral clause signed by each owner. The NBA is not a typical business and works very similar that a franchise works. The NBA owns the name and has the right to revoke any team from using the NBA name - just like McDonalds can shut you down as an owner IF YOU DO NOT COMPLY

It's that simple and so simple that you will never understand

 

[Psych-Ward]

Every reason is not listed - it's a general statement that can widely used. Today the NBA released additional information not previously disclosed to the general public - they have signed contracts and a signed moral clause signed by each owner. The NBA is not a typical business and works very similar that a franchise works. The NBA owns the name and has the right to revoke any team from using the NBA name - just like McDonalds can shut you down as an owner IF YOU DO NOT COMPLY

It's that simple and so simple that you will never understand

Because he is to much of a simpleton to understand it!!!!

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I don't think it will take years to get Sterling out - I think by October the NBA will have a deal worked out that allows Sterling to get his money and get out. If Sterling stays - he risks bankrupting the Clippers. The Clippers cannot and will not survive if the sponsers refuse to purchase advertisement spots and the fans may refuse to come. Then the players may start demanding trades.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

In the week since announcing it was banning Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling for life, with the hopes of getting approval from the league's owners to force him to sell the team, little has been known of the NBA's exact legal strategy.
While the league's constitution, publicly revealed for the first time by the league last Tuesday, made it clear that grounds exist to remove an owner if that owner "fail(s) or refuse(s) to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association," it remained unclear what contracts Sterling might have violated when he made his racist statements in a private conversation with his mistress V. Stiviano that was later published by TMZ.
But sources with knowledge of the league's strategy say there are, in fact, actual contracts that it will maintain Sterling violated should he choose to fight the league's desire to force him to sell the team if the league can get the required 75 percent of owners to agree to make the move.
One of those documents, which Sterling signed when he first bought the Clippers in 1981, and signed various amended versions since, states that an owner will not take any position or action that will materially and adversely affect a team or the league. Owners also sign morals clauses, which state that they will be upheld to the highest standard of ethical and moral behavior.
When morals clauses are enacted and result in termination of agreements, including endorsement deals, the courts are often charged with interpreting who was right, but sources with knowledge of the NBA's legal strategy believe that they have enough to force Sterling to sell.
Many big names, including a team of Oprah Winfrey, Oracle's Larry Ellison, the fifth-richest man in the world according to Forbes, and entertainment magnate David Geffen have expressed their interest in perhaps buying the team, which could sell for upwards of $1 billion.
But that assumes that Sterling, a lawyer by trade who is very familiar with the legal system, won't drag the league into court.
On Saturday, the league announced they would appoint a CEO that would take over day-to-day operations of the Clippers. On Tuesday, the NBA announced that Sterling's right-hand man, team president Andy Roeser, would be taking an indefinite leave of absence.
Still remaining as part of the ownership team is Shelly Sterling, who has been separated from her husband for several years, though still married. She has distanced herself from him, saying she supports the league's action, and released a statement calling herself "co-owner," leading some to believe that she too could put up a fight if she so desired. Sources have told ESPN.com's Ramona Shelburne that Shelly Sterling has spoken to the league expressing her desire to keep the team.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I don't see how the NBA can allow the Sterling family to retain ownership - the wife has known that her estranged husband has had affairs with bimbos and entertained them and she has also been accused of racism - Her ownership would only be seen as an extension of Donald Sterling working the team through her.

 

[starbigd]

Some people here will never get it.

Sterling is OUT. He has no real legal recourse, he's clearly going to lose. They knew that when they banned him - because they are all lawyers as well. They wouldn't have even attempted to remove him if they KNEW they had 0% chance to win in court - considering Sterling LOVES to sue.

He's done. He'll soon be gone. And some here will be upset about it arguing the same discredited theories over and over and over.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

The best weapon there is to remove the Sterling family completely from the Clippers is for the sponsers and the fans to stay away from the games. The Clippers have had zero sponsers since this news broke out. The Clippers orgnization had to put black tarps over all of their sponser's ad's because all ten of them withdrew their business. Zero customers will force Sterling to sell the team or go broke being stubborn.

 

[JDM]

Some people here will never get it.

Sterling is OUT. He has no real legal recourse, he's clearly going to lose. They knew that when they banned him - because they are all lawyers as well. They wouldn't have even attempted to remove him if they KNEW they had 0% chance to win in court - considering Sterling LOVES to sue.

He's done. He'll soon be gone. And some here will be upset about it arguing the same discredited theories over and over and over.

Wrong. It delayed the biggest PR blow until the season is over and it won't affect playoff games, then, when sterling wins, they can say they tried.


That is the only reason they made the decisions they did. They know he will win easily.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

LMAO - at the Clippers being the only team in any major league sports still playing without any sponsers whatsoever. You want racist Sterling to remain as owner of the company - that's fine with me -because I don't watch the shitty Clippers anyway - let the racist keep the company and let's see how long the Clippers stay

By the way - look up the rules on contraction -

 

[True Lakers Fan]

In the latest development - the NBA is considering ousting Mrs Sterling who was not approved by the board of governors to be an owner - since she was never approved by the board of governors, she has never been recognized as such. Therefore she is also going to be out.

In addition the NBPLA via Lebron James has announced that the players will refuse to play for any Sterling period, but recognize that it will take some time to remove the entire ownership

 

[trojanfan12]

In the latest development - the NBA is considering ousting Mrs Sterling who was not approved by the board of governors to be an owner - since she was never approved by the board of governors, she has never been recognized as such. Therefore she is also going to be out.

In addition the NBPLA via Lebron James has announced that the players will refuse to play for any Sterling period, but recognize that it will take some time to remove the entire ownership

I'd be surprised if it matters. Because he owns the team, as his wife, she is legally entitled to 50% of the team whether the other owners approved of her or not. It likely just means that she has no say or vote in league matters.

I doubt that Jim Buss has been approved either, yet he still has ownership in the team. Jeanie likely has because she is the Lakers representative in league business matters.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I'd be surprised if it matters. Because he owns the team, as his wife, she is legally entitled to 50% of the team whether the other owners approved of her or not. It likely just means that she has no say or vote in league matters.

I doubt that Jim Buss has been approved either, yet he still has ownership in the team. Jeanie likely has because she is the Lakers representative in league business matters.

California is a community property state, so they can force her to be a silent partner at the worst, but the NBA will hit a big issue with that if they don't force all of the Sterlings to sell. Most of the sponsers are refusing to come back until they see stability and how the ownership is resolved because even though Sterling has been banned - the money is still going into his and his wife's pocket and that is not acceptable. Lebron James has already stated that the players will refuse to play for the Clippers if any of the Sterlings remain as owners. The Sterling name is tainted. Interestingly enough Donald has apologized, but I think it was a little to weak and a little to late to help him now

 

[trojanfan12]

California is a community property state, so they can force her to be a silent partner at the worst, but the NBA will hit a big issue with that if they don't force all of the Sterlings to sell. Most of the sponsers are refusing to come back until they see stability and how the ownership is resolved because even though Sterling has been banned - the money is still going into his and his wife's pocket and that is not acceptable. Lebron James has already stated that the players will refuse to play for the Clippers if any of the Sterlings remain as owners. The Sterling name is tainted. Interestingly enough Donald has apologized, but I think it was a little to weak and a little to late to help him now

Lebron and the players have already started to back up a little. Lebron said that they don't want anyone from the Sterling family owning the team but that they understand that it's going to take awhile to make it happen.

I think that they are starting to realize that this isn't going to happen as quickly as they'd like and that once it goes to court, it will essentially be out of the NBA's hands re: when or if they ever completely get rid of the Sterlings.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Lebron and the players have already started to back up a little. Lebron said that they don't want anyone from the Sterling family owning the team but that they understand that it's going to take awhile to make it happen.

I think that they are starting to realize that this isn't going to happen as quickly as they'd like and that once it goes to court, it will essentially be out of the NBA's hands re: when or if they ever completely get rid of the Sterlings.

The general consensus that I get is that they will wait out the time to see what happens, but that they do expect the Sterlings to be removed completely. I think the best weapon that all of the NBA has, is to simply refuse to play or work for the man - in the summer- players will refuse to sign and existing players an sponsers will quit or ak to be traded or whatever.

So do you believe his apology or do you think it's a pile of crap?

 

[trojanfan12]

The general consensus that I get is that they will wait out the time to see what happens, but that they do expect the Sterlings to be removed completely. I think the best weapon that all of the NBA has, is to simply refuse to play or work for the man - in the summer- players will refuse to sign and existing players an sponsers will quit or ak to be traded or whatever.

So do you believe his apology or do you think it's a pile of crap?

I really don't think the players will ultimately boycott if the Sterling's still own the Clippers next season, especially if it's still in litigation. You might have a couple of FA's here and there who won't sign/re-sign with the Clippers to make a point, but at the end of the day, it's still getting millions of dollars to play basketball. Ultimately, there is one color that rules the NBA and that's green.

As for his apology, I don't believe any apology that starts with or contains the words "If I offended anyone......"

Obviously you offended someone, otherwise, why are you apologizing?

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I really don't think the players will ultimately boycott if the Sterling's still own the Clippers next season, especially if it's still in litigation. You might have a couple of FA's here and there who won't sign/re-sign with the Clippers to make a point, but at the end of the day, it's still getting millions of dollars to play basketball. Ultimately, there is one color that rules the NBA and that's green.

As for his apology, I don't believe any apology that starts with or contains the words "If I offended anyone......"

Obviously you offended someone, otherwise, why are you apologizing?

Three things that makes me think of his apology as garbage

Beginning with "IF I HAVE OFFENDED ANYONE" -Thats crap

Then another sentence - "Magic Johnson is not a good role model for kids" Why is he talking about Magic Johnson while trying to clean up his pig pen? Magic did nothing wrong - leave him out of it.

Waited two weeks to apologize and only after seeing that he is about to lose a 500 million dollar franchise what will cost him a ton in capital gains profit taxes.

 

[sjballer03]

I bet Adam Silver is secretly happy that Sterling keeps talking out of his ass.