IS Michael Jordan a sell out for being a hardliner owner?!

salsadancer7

salsadancer7

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
Now, I would have added this to the NBA lockout thread, but there are some huge reasons. ONE, Jordan was a catalyst in getting HUGE paychecks in his final years with the Bulls. Two, when HE was a players during one of the player/owner disputes ...he went hard at David Sterns during meetings. IF anyone can put perspective into the negotiations, it would MJ.... But NOW, from the looks of it...he wants to end the union and wants to be a hardliner.

At worse, he is a sellout...and best, he is a hypocrite.


MJ sells out players with hard-line stance
Updated Nov 5, 2011 10:07 AM ET

Michael Jeffrey Jordan finally found a cause he can get behind off the court: being an obstacle for any black kid dreaming of matching or exceeding Jordan’s wealth.

Sellout.

And I don’t throw that word around liberally. But there’s no better description for Jordan now that he has reportedly decided to be the hard-line frontman for NBA ownership’s desire to rob NBA players of their fair share of the revenue the league generates.

Sellout.

...

For the full story:

Whitlock: If MJ sides with owners, he's a sellout - NBA News | FOX Sports on MSN
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dsnow3

dsnow3

Member
Nov 12, 2008
5
0
Sounds like MJ is a bit of a hypocrite...

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 
Jimbo

Jimbo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
64,696
4,691
NW Ohio - Buckeye Country
Not a basketball fan at all, but isn't MJ looking out for the side he's on now and nothing more.
When he was a player, he looked out for the players, now he's on management side, he's looking out for that side ....

Or is MJ not currently doing either side, I don't know anymore.
 
Will94

Will94

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jul 11, 2008
749
3
USA
It seems to me that MJ expanded the popularity of the NBA to the point that he was personally responsible for a significant amount of new revenue. Since his retirement, okay retirements, the league has been unable to hold onto those new fans. I couldn't tell you the last time that I watched an NBA game. It's probably been close to ten years.
 
Rey

Rey

@ your service
Supporting Founder
Feb 8, 2008
26,896
561
Florida
I don't get why mj is now a sell out or hypocrite. He's no longer a player! He's an owner,period.we would all do the same so let's cut the crap.
 
Geronimo

Geronimo

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 9, 2003
12,035
1,618
Hypocrite isa strong word but ,to be honest ,there is irony in this given the fact that MJ had previously chastised owners who could not make money under the OLD deal and now he is unwilling to accept a deal that would be more generous to the owners
 
salsadancer7

salsadancer7

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
Hypocrite isa strong word but ,to be honest ,there is irony in this given the fact that MJ had previously chastised owners who could not make money under the OLD deal and now he is unwilling to accept a deal that would be more generous to the owners

Some common sense..thank you!
 
Rey

Rey

@ your service
Supporting Founder
Feb 8, 2008
26,896
561
Florida
No I don't see any common sense here.it's logical for him to take care of his own hide as an owner and nothing else.again,you and I and everyone else here wouldn't take the players side if we were an owner in these NBA negotiations. Why should MJ?what I do find hypocritical is the criticism towards mj when none of us in his shoes would take the players side.give me a break
 
salsadancer7

salsadancer7

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
rey_1178 said:
No I don't see any common sense here.it's logical for him to take care of his own hide as an owner and nothing else.again,you and I and everyone else here wouldn't take the players side if we were an owner in these NBA negotiations. Why should MJ?what I do find hypocritical is the criticism towards mj when none of us in his shoes would take the players side.give me a break

Then we agree to disagree Rey. He has been on both sides, he knows the games Sterns plays from both a players prespective and now from an owners side.

Did you read the article?
 
salsadancer7

salsadancer7

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
Yeah I did.:)

And that is why I posed the question. I think he has insight that can end this NOW...at this very moment. But Michael has NEVER, EVER made a stance about anything...from what I recall...EVER.

But now that I read what I posted, he HAS decided to back a stance....as a hardline owner.

I wish every single CURRENT player that wears his Nike brand "Jumpman" shoes, would protest against him and put a black piece of tape over the brand. Of course they cannot refuse to wear because they have signed contract to wear the shoe.
 

Similar threads

S
Replies
1
Views
869
AntAltMike
A
mccoyrj
Replies
27
Views
2K
Geronimo
Geronimo
SabresRule
Replies
11
Views
1K
Jimbo
Jimbo

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top