http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-sternnba031511 I don't like the messenger - but I fear the message is right on. I wish the owners would remember that Stern works for them - not vice-versa. Maybe the impending needless debacle of a lock-out will embolden some of them to act.
I've been a Stern opponent for years, but this mean-spirited article is hypocritical when it calls Stern mean-spirited. Lack of substance never stops Woj from meeting his writing deadline. He's usually right about his choice of targets, but he usually lacks ammunition, so he connects his few fact bullets within an accusatory web of clouds.
I have to say that I agree with jlprk, and that's an unusual occurrence. Stern's definitely a little Napoleon who doesn't tolerate criticism from the peons very well, but I'm not sure that I get the connection with Donald Sterling & the Clips cheapness. Seems like Woj has taken the opportunity to pile on two people over two separate issues in one column. But then, I don't think much of Woj either.
No offence, but I think you missed the point. Sterling isn't just "cheap", he does things that are unethical and dishonest. Crooked business practices, like questionable reffing, are an attack on the integrity of the league. Stern doesn't care. It's all about him - the best interests of the league get lost in the shuffle.
The fact that Sterling has been allowed to maintain ownership of that franchise for so long is a stain on the NBA. MLB was able to force out Marge Schott from Cincinnati for less.
Sorry, but I still think it's crappy writing. If there's a case to be made against Stern, make it. Don't say that Sterling does cheap and unethical stuff and that Stern is guilty of the same simply because he allows it to go on. First, he doesn't really make a case that Sterling is contractually obligated to do anything more than he does. He may be a stingy, unscrupulous Grinch, but that doesn't mean that there's something outside the legal requirements of his contracts with his employees. Second, just because it goes on doesn't mean Stern necessarily approves. He just may not have any basis in league rules to do anything about it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not fond of Stern at all, but I'm even less fond of yellow journalism.
Agreed. If I can find any fault with what Woj wrote, it would be that he did not go far enough. Stern did a very good job in the beginning of his tenure, but as with anyone who maintains a great authority for a prolonged period (i.e. politicians) the damage and taint at the end far outweighs the good intentions of the beginning.
