|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Just last month, a minority led consortium was able to buy a major league team -- a soccer team -- which is the first. There have been other well financed consortiums (consortia?) who attempted to buy teams in the past. |
Quote:
Who said anything about soccer? Soccer is probobly the least expensive out of any major sports franchise to purchase. You made a statement about how the lack of black owners in the NFL should be looked on as a negative. |
Quote:
Sonny. |
I assume you mean the first minority owned soccer team?
|
So to hijack slightly but
DeltAlum- after reading this entire thread, I have to say that I am proud to call you a fellow Ohio University Alum. I might not always agree with you, but you at least try and be respectful of others. end hijack As for Tony Dungy, I live in Indianapolis and after seeing the way he handles himself both on and off the football field, I am proud that he is going to be the "face" of the Colts at the SuperBowl. He handled a very difficult situation (the death of his eldest son) in the glare of the spotlight with so much dignity. I don't know much about the Bears coach, but if he is anything like Dungy, the Bears have much to be proud of as well. |
Quote:
See, the whole thing here, Delt, is that you're speaking in absolutes, and not even in correct ones at that - it's fine to decry the rhetorical strategies of others, but . . . well, you know . . . |
Quote:
Actually, I've met and talked with Bob Johnson and gave him a tour of the old TCI Digital TV Center. The point, I think, is that major league sports took decades before any real progress was made toward minority ownership. At least that's my opinion, which I believe history will confirm. |
Quote:
Also, although not always, I generally say, "I think," or "In my opinion." Thanks. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The real issue is societal - that a very small percentage of those rich enough to purchase a sports franchise (valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars) are minorities. It's not that rich white guys are choosing not to sell the teams to rich black guys - I don't think there's any evidence of this at all. This is completely different from coaching opportunities - there is no such monetary barrier. This means while there are probably still racial issues at play, it's a matter of scale - one is a societal issue of wealth distribution, while the other is much more direct (hiring practices). It's nonsense to lump them together, which is what shinerbock and Macallan are saying (I think) - it's just not a similar comparison, although it sounds pretty to throw them together. One is simply not the same as the other . . . no matter what your "opinion" may be - that's not an 'out' to lack of logic. |
Quote:
It is my feeling that both of these gentlemen would prefer the spot light not be on them, but on the players and the game. Do they desearve it, YES. Did they earn it, YES! The coach I admire the most is Eddie Robinson of Grambling who did not get the recognition that He so richly desearved. Oh, for those who do not know, he was happy at what he was doing and where he was with the school, his team, and its athletes. |
Quote:
Right. Wealth distribution and unequal access to opportunities are the biggest factors. The racial inequality occurs further down the line so that a very small % of minorities get past the glass ceilings and opportunity hoarding, on the part of white males, in order to compete in the franchise game. This discussion initially was not about team ownership, which is a different beast altogether, but about head coaching. You don't need to discuss the full extent of wealth distribution to discuss head coaching. Of course if you discuss outliers such as team ownership you will be unable to make a more substantive correlation. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:18 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.