Ray Lewis on Ray Rice

[packs]

I don't know guys. You're talking about marginalized African Americans and women and somehow equating their experience to that of white men in America. Doesn't seem to match up.

You posted a general summary of what he said. Not what he actually said. Which was that he believed African Americans don't have money, scare white people, the cheerleading team is too black, and even the kiss cam is too black. That's not a good way of expressing your views on racial divide in your city.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't know guys. You're talking about marginalized African Americans and women and somehow equating their experience to that of white men in America. Doesn't seem to match up.

You posted a general summary of what he said. Not what he actually said. Which was that he believed African Americans don't have money, scare white people, the cheerleading team is too black, and even the kiss cam is too black. That's not a good way of expressing your views on racial divide in your city.

You also have posted your interpretations of his words, with some spin, and not what he said.

I have no idea whether or not the blacks in questioned are 'marginalized'. I do now that, having lived in the Atlanta area for 12 years, and Seattle for 8, that the race dynamics thing is hugely different between the two areas, and it has to do mainly with specific attitudes in the two geographies. Questions as to what race fans are would never come up in Seattle, whereas it is obviously somewhat important in Atlanta. There are reasons for that, and fault lies on both sides. I'm telling you this from experience, not from theory.

I'm not going to go dig up the email, but I don't believe he said that African Americans don't have money, only that there weren't enough of them interested in spending it on basketball, and that's key - he was running a business, which required that he get more attendance. The 'primarily black' formula wasn't/isn't working. Your comment that he said "the cheerleading team is too black" is also a bit misleading - he wanted some white cheerleaders so it didn't look like his team was designed only for black fans. What is wrong with that?

Nothing either of us have said has or will change the facts in Atlanta.

I think the owner used the 'LA Clippers debacle' to get out of being an owner of the Hawks. He knew that if he published that email and volunteered to sell, he'd be allowed off the hook quickly and painlessly. Bye bye bad business situation.

[packs]

Here's where he implied that he believes African Americans don't have money:

"And many of our black fans don’t have the spendable income which explains why our f&b and merchandise sales are so low. At all white thrasher games sales were nearly triple what they are at hawks games (the extra intermission explains some of that but not all)."

This statement is not based in fact or studies, just his impression that the reason they aren't selling more merchandise is because African Americans don't have any money. It says nothing about not wanting to spend money on the Hawks. It just assumes there's no money to be spent. But of course all the white people have tons of money to throw around.

All I'm trying to point out is that even if he had some valid points, they were all overshadowed by the language he used to express them.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Beat your fiancée, get banned from the NFL.

Get drunk and kill someone (Josh Brent), serve 180 days in jail and welcome back to the NFL.

Domestic violence > manslaughter, only in the NFL.

Not trying to minimize what Ray Rice did in any way, but I hope he sues the H3LL out of the NFL.

[2dueces]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Beat your fiancée, get banned from the NFL.

Get drunk and kill someone (Josh Brent), serve 180 days in jail and welcome back to the NFL.

Domestic violence > manslaughter, only in the NFL.

Not trying to minimize what Ray Rice did in any way, but I hope he sues the H3LL out of the NFL.

Don't forget about smoking pot and getting banned for a year.
But there are two current players with domestic violence charges playing Sunday and 1 was just sentenced in July. Without a video, I guess it didn't happen.

[clydepepper]

Talk about someone who remains employable in spite of everything:

Donté Stallworth Timeline

On March 1, 2008, Stallworth signed a seven-year, $35 million deal with the Cleveland Browns.[5] However, he had just 17 catches for 170 yards and one touchdown for the Browns in 2008 and then missed the entire 2009 season after being suspended by the NFL following his conviction on manslaughter charges. On February 8, 2010, after being reinstated by the NFL, the Browns terminated Stallworth's contract.[6]

On February 16, 2010, Stallworth signed a one-year, $900,000 deal with the Baltimore Ravens.[7]On August 28, 2010, Stallworth broke his foot in a preseason game against the New York Giants. Head Coach John Harbaugh stated that this injury was not season-ending and Stallworth would be back after the Ravens' bye week. Stallworth made his return to the active Ravens roster in October, but his highlight of the season came during a game against the Carolina Panthers where he made his first catch as a wide receiver for the franchise during a regular season game.[8]

On December 23, 2010, Stallworth was voted by his teammates and awarded the Ed Block Courage Award for 2010. But his stats were grim. He had just two receptions for 82 yards, and seven rushes for 45 yards.[9]

[B]Stallworth signed a one-year deal [/B]with the Washington Redskins on July 29, 2011. On November 8, 2011, Stallworth was released by the Washington Redskins and put on waivers.[10] On November 15, 2011, he re-signed with the Redskins after wide receiver, Leonard Hankerson, and defensive end, Kedric Golston, were put on injured reserve.[11] After his return to the team, Stallworth would catch a touchdown pass in the endzone in Week 11 against the Dallas Cowboys allowing the Redskins to go into overtime.[12] At the end of 2011 season, Stallworth recorded 22 receptions, 309 receiving yards, and two touchdowns.[13]

On March 19, 2012, Stallworth signed with the New England Patriots.[14] On August 27, 2012, Stallworth was released by Patriots.[15] On December 3, 2012, Stallworth re-signed with the Patriots because of a broken right foot suffered by wide receiver Julian Edelman and lack of depth at the wide receiver position.[16] On December 11, it was reported that Stallworth was placed on injured reserve with an ankle injury after only playing in one game during his brief return and making a 63 yard reception for a touchdown.[17]

Stallworth re-signed with the Redskins on June 12, 2013.[18][19] On August 26, 2013, Stallworth was waived by the Redskins again.[20]

So some of the political pundits are all over former New England Patriots receiver Donte Stallworth, who was just named a politics fellow at The Huffington Post, where he will cover national security, because he once publicly stated that Osama bin Laden wasn’t responsible for the 9/11 attacks. But if the 
politicos think that’s odd, wait till they hear about Donte’s Martian alter ego, Nicco!

Ray Rice may be the best thing that ever happened to Donte Stallworth.

As Casey used to say, "AMAZIN'!"

[vintagetoppsguy]

I'm surprised Aaron Hernandez isn't out while awaiting trial and playing for the Patriots.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

Here's where he implied that he believes African Americans don't have money:

"And many of our black fans don’t have the spendable income which explains why our f&b and merchandise sales are so low. At all white thrasher games sales were nearly triple what they are at hawks games (the extra intermission explains some of that but not all)."

This statement is not based in fact or studies, just his impression that the reason they aren't selling more merchandise is because African Americans don't have any money. It says nothing about not wanting to spend money on the Hawks. It just assumes there's no money to be spent. But of course all the white people have tons of money to throw around.

All I'm trying to point out is that even if he had some valid points, they were all overshadowed by the language he used to express them.

Got you - missed that part of spending on merchandise.

My experience of watching people at sports events, is that yes, they do have tons of money to throw around - I haven't spent any time looking at the skin-color of purchasers, so I have no insight into that. But if the fans at Hawks games don't spend money except to get in the door, regardless of their race, then yes, that should be a business concern. I guess his formula, like anyone's, would be 'get more fans with more money'. He apparently thinks affluent whites are the way to go and he wants to attract more of them. I agree that re-wording the email could help. Something like: "we need to sell more tickets to affluent people while continuing to attract our current fan-base, which apparently is dead-ass broke."

When I used to go to games at the Astrodome, I sat in the outfield cheap seats, and I did notice that there was a large percentage of Hispanic fans. Didn't matter, but it was a fact. Ticket prices were never a factor in my decision to go to games, as I could get in for practically nothing. Now that I am self-employed, I do have to consider ticket price, and as a result have only been to one Mariners game all year. If I still had a cheap-seat outfield option, I'd be at the game all the time. I wonder if the higher ticket prices at the new stadiums is driving other lower-income folks away from games? (I rhetorically wonder). Maybe the Hawks need to build a more expensive arena, driving away anyone with financial concerns, and turning the seats over to corporations, which seems to be the present trend.

Also, I would love to see your politically-correct re-write of his email. If I get really bored, maybe I'll come up with one

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't know guys. You're talking about marginalized African Americans and women and somehow equating their experience to that of white men in America. Doesn't seem to match up.

You posted a general summary of what he said. Not what he actually said. Which was that he believed African Americans don't have money, scare white people, the cheerleading team is too black, and even the kiss cam is too black. That's not a good way of expressing your views on racial divide in your city.

Here is, at least, a portion of what he said:

Bruce Levenson, the managing partner of the Atlanta Hawks, became the second NBA owner in the past five months on Sunday to surrender his franchise over racially insensitive remarks.

In a statement, Levenson announced his intent to sell his controlling stake in the team and apologized for a 2012 e-mail regarding the Hawks’ attendance problems and inability to attract suburban whites that included “inappropriate and offensive” comments.

“My theory is that the black crowd scared away the whites and there are simply not enough affluent black fans to build a significant season ticket base,” Levenson wrote in the e-mail, which also claimed that the Hawks were attracting an “overwhelming black audience” and noted that “there are few fathers and sons at the games.”

No one I know, black or white, is comfortable being the 'overwhelming' racial minority in any social situation. Most of us are more comfortable when the crowd racial makeup has us in the majority or at least about even. That's a natural feeling and there is nothing is wrong with it. Anyone who thinks that is racism has problems of their own in that area.

[packs]

I just don't see how you can dismiss the stereotyping going on in his statements. Look at how he assumed there are few fathers and sons at games because of the African American audience. That is not based in any kind of fact. It is an extension of the long held stereotype that African Americans are dead beat dads. That statement alone is so problematic I don't see how you could get past it without rolling your eyes.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

No one I know, black or white, is comfortable being the 'overwhelming' racial minority in any social situation. Most of us are more comfortable when the crowd racial makeup has us in the majority or at least about even. That's a natural feeling and there is nothing is wrong with it. Anyone who thinks that is racism has problems of their own in that area.

It's that way in a lot of geographical areas, but not everywhere. Lots of factors to consider. Quite frankly, I'm surprised (if it's even true) that whites in the Atlanta area are "afraid" to go to Hawks games. But I have had situations in downtown Atlanta where I walked in the wrong direction after a game, trying to find our car or train, and it was downright dangerous. I actually once told my teenage son that we needed to begin moving very quickly, and I hate scaring my kids. I can't imagine such a situation in Seattle near any of the venues. There are some cultural issues in the Atlanta area that can't be completely ignored if you have any survival instinct.

Originally Posted by packs

I just don't see how you can dismiss the stereotyping going on in his statements. Look at how he assumed there are few fathers and sons at games because of the African American audience. That is not based in any kind of fact. It is an extension of the long held stereotype that African Americans are dead beat dads. That statement alone is so problematic I don't see how you could get past it without rolling your eyes.

How did you decide he had "assumed" something based on stereotypes? It sounds like you have a stereotype of how wealthy white guys think. You don't think he ever goes to games and actually uses first-hand data? If you see lots of couples or groups of men, and few men with children, then you pretty much CAN draw a valid conclusion about the make-up of the attendees.

[packs]

Here is what he said:

then i start looking around our arena during games and notice the following:

-- it's 70 pct black
-- the cheerleaders are black
-- the music is hip hop
-- at the bars it's 90 pct black
-- there are few fathers and sons at the games


There is a direct correlation between his opinion that there are fewer fathers and sons at games because there are mostly African American fans there.

I'm content with being a minority of one that thinks this guy's comments are way off base and out of touch.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

Here is what he said:

then i start looking around our arena during games and notice the following:

-- it's 70 pct black
-- the cheerleaders are black
-- the music is hip hop
-- at the bars it's 90 pct black
-- there are few fathers and sons at the games


Ok, so here is a direct correlation between his opinion that there are fewer fathers and sons at games because there are mostly African American fans there.

I'm content with being a minority of one that thinks this guy's comments are way off base and out of touch.

Packs, you need a lesson in logic. You might as well make the assumption that because the bars are 90% black and all men, that none of the men have sons.

[packs]

Well here's a question for you. How come there are no variables in any of his observations? He makes no distinctions between day games and night games. Weekday games and weekend games. Ages of fans. Etc.

Also, how is that an accurate assumption? Do you know if someone has a son by looking at them? Wouldn't it be equally as reasonable to assume there are less people with children attending the games? Why lump that point in with three or four other points that all reference race, if you don't think race is the driving factor?