rams....

Quote :

"If conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh ever had much of a chance to be a minority owner in a successful bid to buy the NFL's St. Louis Rams, it is now over, two league sources have confirmed to SI.com. In a statement released Wednesday evening by St. Louis Blues chairman Dave Checketts -- who is heading the group that hopes to buy the Rams -- he announced Limbaugh's official exit from the bid. It is believed that Limbaugh's controversial participation would have doomed the group's effort in the eyes of NFL owners. League sources told SI.com that Limbaugh's candidacy in any Rams bid had "zero chance'' of being approved by the league's owners. In his statement, Checketts said Limbaugh's participation had become "a complication and a distraction'' to the group's efforts. According to league sources, Limbaugh comes with too much troubling baggage in terms of his outspoken views that often intersect the divisive issues of politics and race in America. In a time when the NFL is hoping to have complete uniformity among its team owners in anticipation of the tough collective bargaining negotiations to come with the players union, there was little interest within the league to associate with an owner who is paid to give his highly charged opinions on the radio for hours each week. "The league would be on pins and needles for three hours a day, five days a week,'' one league source said. "The NFL isn't interested in having its own Mark Cuban situation, where [the Dallas Mavericks owner] is fined for something he said, but then pays the fine, moves on and doesn't care what he says the next time either. The league wants the focus to always be on the game, not the opinions of any particular owner.''"

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/10/14/limbaugh/index.html?cnn=yes


*thought it suited TSB better than sports talk

10/14/2009 7:11:50 PM

karma

10/14/2009 7:17:36 PM

I thought this was The Onion or something when I first heard it... stupid to even think he'd be approved as an owner

10/14/2009 7:22:42 PM

i love it. You can have a rapper who talks about killing whitey owning part of a team, but god forbid you have a white guy with similarly stupid statements owning one. Oh no, that's just terrible!

10/14/2009 7:52:59 PM

^ Shut the fuck up and get out

10/14/2009 7:55:01 PM

wow. thanks for that brilliant addition to the topic

10/14/2009 7:58:21 PM

NFL AND ITS LIBRUL BIAS

10/14/2009 8:00:48 PM

i said no such thing.

10/14/2009 8:06:42 PM

Quote :

""I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well,'' Limbaugh said. "There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team.""

10/14/2009 8:16:48 PM

And? if it's true, then what the fuck is the problem?

10/14/2009 8:21:15 PM

I could care less about the NFL or Rush Limbaugh, but McDanger has definitely been scraping bottom on TWW these days.

10/14/2009 8:53:28 PM

so he's prevented from pursuing an opportunity because of racist comments he didn't make?

10/14/2009 8:54:07 PM

pretty much, yeah

10/14/2009 8:57:51 PM

Quote :

"The NFL isn't interested in having its own Mark Cuban situation, where [the Dallas Mavericks owner] is fined for something he said, but then pays the fine, moves on and doesn't care what he says the next time either. The league wants the focus to always be on the game, not the opinions of any particular owner."

Sounds pretty reasonable.

10/14/2009 9:25:43 PM

Quote :

"so he's prevented from pursuing an opportunity because of racist comments he didn't make?"

uh, no. he's free to pursue any team he wants. but the league and the owners will never approve him. mainly because he's a divisive blow hard, and as already quoted above, no one wants to take a chance on his bullshit.

10/14/2009 10:24:06 PM

Quote :

"If conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh ever had much of a chance to be a minority owner in a successful bid to buy the NFL's St. Louis Rams,"

I heard he backed out of the deal when he realized he was going to become a minority if he signed up.

<badum chish!>

10/14/2009 10:50:07 PM

Let's be honest he was dropped by his investors because the media and their obvious liberal bias hate Rush and his opinions. Rush stated his opinion on why Donovan McNabb got most of the praise for an Eagles team that was carried by the defense. I can understand him being dropped he is divisive but I can't help but wonder if this had been somebody like Keith Olbermann or Chris Matthews who are equally as divisive from a left perspective if the media attack dogs would be as aggressive.

The head of the NFLPA who started off the campaign worked on Obama's campaign and is obviously motivated by dislike of Rush's opinions. He also wants a black ownership group and said as much in his statement. This says to me that DeMaurice Smith is trying to pigeonhole the NFL in to picking a black ownership group or he will throw the R word out there. It doesn't matter if their bid is lower than other groups.

10/14/2009 10:58:52 PM

fuck that guy

i wouldnt wanna play for his pompus ass, racist or not

[Edited on October 14, 2009 at 11:00 PM. Reason : liberal bias or the fact they he does say some fucked up stuff?]

10/14/2009 10:59:24 PM

IT'S THE LIBERAL MEDIA'S FAULT

hey, whatever happened to personal accountability, guy?

10/14/2009 11:06:27 PM

Rush is such an idiot

He's such an idiot, he has everyone talking about him right now, which I'm sure helps his ratings

What a fool

10/15/2009 3:36:26 AM

^Were he on the internet, that would make him a classic example of a troll.

Idiot or real-life troll, it really doesn't matter that badly... either way it has about the same value to society when given a media outlet (that is, none. Or a negative value. However you want to math it out). I don't know why anyone still seriously pays attention to him.


Anyway, as to the topic at hand, it's likely less about Rush's perceived racism and more about the desire to avoid politicizing the NFL with such a controversial figure. One can't know whether or not Rush would do that as simply the part-owner of a team (I honestly doubt that he would), but clearly they'd rather not take that chance, which is a reasonable position.

On Rush's part, it's likely just another play to get more attention. And of course it works. He's so easy to denounce and talk shit about that everyone wants to do it, which just gives him more publicity, which just gives the denouncers more to denounce. It's a big shitty circle of complete uselessness.

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 3:59 AM. Reason : .]

10/15/2009 3:57:56 AM

I understand why he was pushed out. The owner shouldn't be the story, the players and the coaches should be the story. Dallas is incredibly popular, but the mere mention of Jerry Jones is enough to make most people want to vomit. Still, the fact that he was pushed out is kind of a shame. He has as much of a right to be part of an NFL team's ownership group as anyone does.

Just like players who wouldn't want to play for a team he partially owns could simply choose not to sign with him. Sure a few will get traded to the team and the ones on the team are stuck in their contracts, but they could always underperform in order to get cut and then go elsewhere.

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 7:38 AM. Reason : /]

10/15/2009 7:37:24 AM

"Reverend" Al Sharpton, NFL Commissioner

Quote :

"NO WHITE INTERLOPERS"

10/15/2009 8:03:55 AM

The NFL is not a free enterprise. They are not going to rework their entire structure to accommodate Rush, or your idea above. They are not going to jeopardize their image, or their profits. Especially when St. Louis is a market that tends to get more than it's fair share of league revenue.

Quote :

""Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.""

Quote :

"Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?"

Quote :

"Take that bone out of your nose and call me back."

Also the recent comments about black kids beating up white kids on the bus in "Obama's America".

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 8:10 AM. Reason : .]

10/15/2009 8:04:39 AM

10/15/2009 8:09:09 AM

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/14/rush-limbaugh-al-sharpton-jesse-jackson-and-the-rams-should-t/

I guess it's perfectly fine that the new head of the players union worked for the Obama campaign and was the main catalyst behind all of this. It's either think as I do, keep it to yourself or gittttt out.

10/15/2009 8:19:45 AM

Actually the owners want to mike money and not have a guy who makes inflammatory statements for a living associated with league ownership. Nice try though.

10/15/2009 8:27:49 AM

Inflammatory to you because you don't agree with him. Nice try to be objective, though. Rush's only crime is that he stated an opinion...whereas Vick can kill dogs, Stallworth can kill people, other players and apparently coaches can assault others, not to mention league standouts like Pacman Jones, this seems a wee bit hypocritical. The thought police are out in force.

10/15/2009 8:30:51 AM

Pacman Jones is no longer in the NFL. Currently Stallworth is suspended and on house arrest, and Vick served a lengthy legal sentence. Maybe you could try "thought" before invoking the "thought police". You could start by looking up the definition of inflammatory, followed by the political leanings of NFL owners. Noone cares if NFL owners are conservative, but they don't want a fellow owner talking out of various orifices for hours a week.

10/15/2009 9:08:51 AM

^^^^ The players association isn't the same as the NFL. It's a union and separate entity.

10/15/2009 9:14:21 AM

Are people really complaining about this? NFL TEAM OWNERSHIP IS A RIGHT!

10/15/2009 9:19:06 AM

Maybe you should too because there are, GASP, liberal owners in the NFL! Rush has been given a life banishment, these other guys have been given disiplinary slaps on the wrist. None of them were barred from football for their crimes, all Rush did was state his opinion and bam he's banned. But that's how you people operate, do as I say or get out.

10/15/2009 9:21:09 AM

I'm glad it worked out this way. I don't want that bigoted drug addict ruining the only good pro sport.

10/15/2009 9:22:58 AM

^^^ I think some are complaining about the double standard by the NFL and the media covering all of this. After all, the NFL is loaded with controversial figures that are much more visible as players and coaches than any part owner.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are the arbiters of who said what--really?! Why does the media--or anyone else--listen to them about anything given all the fucked up shit they've said over the years?

From what I understand, Limbaugh was approached about this--he didn't seek it out. And the folks who asked him to come in on the deal were well aware of his 20-plus years in radio and TV--they wanted his money.

And as far as I can tell, no one here has said that NFL team ownership is a right. Who are you arguing that with?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XZDzOGFXts

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 9:33 AM. Reason : .]

10/15/2009 9:28:37 AM

^^^ There are probably a few liberal NFL owners, most of them are probably not though. The other guys are also players, not owners. If somebody came off the street with no ability to play in the NFL and tried out, the coach would likely say he had "zero chance'' of being approved as a player.

And are you saying everyone has a right to own a team in the NFL?

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 9:29 AM. Reason : [.][.]

10/15/2009 9:28:56 AM

http://www.rr.com/sports/topic/article/rr/9003/9211887/NFL_owners_look_at_Rush_and_see_next_Marge_Schott/full/

Take off your tin foil hat and step outside for a moment.

What liberal owner blocked Rush Limbaugh from owning a team?

10/15/2009 9:29:48 AM

Quote :

"double standard by the NFL and the media covering all of this. After all, the NFL is loaded with controversial figures that are much more visible as players and coaches than any part owner."

The owners have actual power, which is not impacted by public perception. An owner who is controversial has much more potential to damage the league as a whole than a controversial player.

10/15/2009 10:15:27 AM

Quote :

"Actually the owners want to mike money and not have a guy who makes inflammatory statements for a living associated with league ownership. Nice try though."

Bingo. This has very little to do with his political leanings and everything to do with your point. There is a recent precedent for this in professional sports by the way. I don't remember the outrage about it when it happened, though. I'll have to check through TWW to see.

MLB told Mark Cuban to not even bother trying to buy the Cubs or any other MLB team because there was no way he was going to allow him to become an owner. He was far too inflammatory and hands on.

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 10:52 AM. Reason : just saw the Cuban reference earlier... still applies b/c he was actually denied by mlb]

10/15/2009 10:49:38 AM

Quote :

"The owners have actual power, which is not impacted by public perception."

The NFL's very existence is based upon the support--or lack thereof--of the "public." The owners' decisions are very much affected by public perception.

10/15/2009 10:59:13 AM

Quote :

"i love it. You can have a rapper who talks about killing whitey owning part of a team, but god forbid you have a white guy with similarly stupid statements owning one. Oh no, that's just terrible!"

care to provide proof of that?

10/15/2009 11:43:21 AM

Quote :

" I don't want that bigoted drug addict ruining the only good pro sport."

Hockey is far better than football. Stunning contribution to this thread, I know, but I figure my comment isn't any less inane than the rest of the thread.

10/15/2009 11:54:24 AM

I think he's talking about JayZ owning part of the Nets.

Which is a different league, one that isn't averse to having controversial and outspoken owners (see Mark Cuban).

10/15/2009 11:54:56 AM

Wlfpk4Life, care to throw out another erroneous, unsubstantiated or irrelevant complaint?

10/15/2009 12:02:37 PM

^^^^ This is pretty close:

Quote :

"[Jay-Z] is a part-owner of the New Jersey Nets NBA team paying a reported $4.5 million for his share. He is interested in relocating the team to Brooklyn."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay-z

Quote :

"No more white lies / My president is black!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuE4WDFaibA

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 12:04 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2009 12:03:16 PM

WHOA WHOA WHOA

that rhyme is WAY to controversial for my liking

that's it

HE HAS GOT TO GO

10/15/2009 12:07:47 PM

As I said, NBA and NFL are different. The NBA has had some struggles recently, any more hype they get is good for them.

NFL is the most popular league in America, they don't want anything to rock the boat, especially from the ownership.

Also, where has JayZ talked about killing whitey?

10/15/2009 12:08:59 PM

^^^ that's not close at all, actually. It's not surprising you can't understand that though.

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 12:10 PM. Reason : ]

10/15/2009 12:10:48 PM

he hasn't

that's the funny thing

10/15/2009 12:11:40 PM

Um. . .I wasn't the one who brought up the "kill whitey" thing--but it wouldn't surprise me. The point is that there are plenty of objectionable characters who own sports teams and who play in the leagues.

The fact that many of you foaming moonbats came crawling out of the woodwork screeching when Limbaugh was being considered reveals much. It's just hypocritical racial bullshit.

And the NFL is a bit different than the NBA. The NBA probably has more convictions.

10/15/2009 12:19:55 PM

haters get hated

[Edited on October 15, 2009 at 12:33 PM. Reason : set em up the hate]

10/15/2009 12:30:49 PM