For weeks, it has been rumoured that a major active professional sports star would come out of the closet and publicly admit to being gay. On April 29th, 2013, ESPN reported that Jason Collins, who played center for the NBA's Washington Wizards in 2012-13 and is currently a free agent, is that player. Collins has played 12 seasons in the NBA, averaging 3.6 points per game.
The original source of the report is a story in Sports Illustrated entitled "Why NBA center Jason Collins is coming out now". Collins says he first sensed he was different around the age of 12, which is about the time most people enter puberty. He attempted to resist it; when he was younger I dated women, and even got engaged, thinking he could "marry" his way out of it. In his words, "I kept telling myself the sky was red, but I always knew it was blue". He says he first started thinking about coming out during the 2011 NBA lockout, but what pushed him over the edge was when Joe Kennedy, his old roommate at Stanford and now a Massachusetts congressman, told him he had just marched in Boston's 2012 Gay Pride Parade. Although Collins is seldom jealous of others, he felt envious. While he was proud of Kennedy for participating, Collins was also angry that as a closeted gay man he felt he couldn't even cheer his straight friend on as a spectator. He wanted to do what he now considered the right thing and not hide anymore. He wanted to march for tolerance, acceptance and understanding. And so on April 29th, he came out.
The New York Times notes that the NBA has long included programs for training and counseling on gay issues for its teams and players, and that the NBA, NHL and MLB are following suit.
Reaction: NBA Commissioner David Stern issued a statement, saying "As Adam Silver and I said to Jason, we have known the Collins family since Jason and Jarron joined the NBA in 2001 and they have been exemplary members of the NBA family. Jason has been a widely respected player and teammate throughout his career and we are proud he has assumed the leadership mantle on this very important issue." Tributes were also forthcoming from Washington Wizards President Ernie Grunfeld and from Boston Celtics head coach Doc Rivers. Politicos got involved; both the White House and former President Bill Clinton also issued supportive statements, as well as fellow NBA player Kobe Bryant. Human Rights Campaign said that Jason Collins has forever changed the face of sports, but vaingloriously compared it to Jackie Robinson breaking the race barrier in baseball. I'm not sure all blacks are pleased at their civil rights struggle being compared to gays. A series of Tweets from others is documented HERE.
On the other side of the fence, a couple of NFL players took issue with it. NFL receiver Mike Wallace initially Tweeted "I'm not bashing anybody don't have anything against anyone I just don't understand it, All these beautiful women in the world and guys wanna mess with other guys SMH", but then backpedaled and Tweeted "Never said anything was right or wrong I just said I don't understand!! Deeply sorry for anyone that I offended". Detroit Lions cornerback Alphonso Smith merely Tweeted "Ppl are so sensitive-I have the RIGHT to not give that behavior any applause;I love everyone-don't hate anyone; not praising it! Excuse me!" and "it's a shame I have to apologize for my TRUE feelings." There are also some critical discussion threads on the F2 Anonboard; one criticizing White House support, and another decrying the gay reaction against Mike Wallace's Tweets. One F2 poster wrote "There should be a gay statue of him on the mall. Maybe it could be jason trying to swallow the washington monument".
The Toronto Globe & Mail says this matters because until everyone feels ho-hum about these announcements, it still does. They note that there are still teens who’ve suffered bullying from being perceived as “different”. However, teens have been bullied for a wide variety of reasons over the years, not just sexuality. While I believe Jason Collins is being sincere and not trying to be an attention whore, I just don't see why this matters. I personally disapprove of homosexuality; I consider it an emotional disability. But I don't feel any different towards Jason Collins now that he's out. He's still a qualified professional basketball player, and yes, he's still a man. Overplaying the "gay card" could incur the risk of backlash against gays.
ESPN is running a series of unscientific polls to gauge general public reaction. In response to the question "How surprised are you that the NBA is the first major league with an openly gay athlete?", 45 percent say they're not surprised, while 39 percent say they're somewhat surprised, and only 16 percent say they're very surprised. What would really be surprising is if an NFL player would have been the first to come out, since the NFL has an even more macho image. And in response to the question "What does 34-year-old NBA free agent Jason Collins coming out as gay do to his chances of playing next season?", 58 percent say it would have no major effect, while 28 percent say it will hurt him and only 14 percent say it will help him.
Showing posts with label NBA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NBA. Show all posts
Monday, April 29, 2013
Monday, April 15, 2013
Los Angeles Lakers On The Brink Of Eliminating The Utah Jazz From 2013 NBA Playoff Competition
Two of my favorite NBA teams are jockeying for the eighth and final Western Conference playoff spot, and on April 14th, 2013, one of them moved to the brink of deciding the issue. The Los Angeles Lakers, despite the loss of Kobe Bryant to an Achilles tear for anywhere from six to nine months, rose up and shot down the heavily-favored San Antonio Spurs 91-86 at the Staples Center in Los Angeles. The Lakers were fueled by Dwight Howard, who had had 26 points and 17 rebounds, Steve Blake, who scored 23 points, and Paul Gasol, who hauled down 16 rebounds. As a result, the Lakers now have a 44-37 record, while the Utah Jazz remain at 42-38.
Which one has the better chance of making the playoffs? If the Lakers defeat the Houston Rockets in L.A. on April 17th, then they finish 45-37 and are in, regardless of how the Jazz do tonight. But if the Lakers lose, then the Utah Jazz must win both remaining games to finish at 44-38. The Jazz have the tougher task because their last two games are on the road, against Minnesota (a probable win) on April 15th and Memphis on April 17th (a probable loss). The Jazz are only 12-27 on the road this season so far. Of course, if the Jazz lose to the T-Wolves tonight, the Lakers are in. But if both teams finish with the same record, Utah goes to the playoffs because they won the season series against the Lakers, two games to one.
The Jazz basically shot themselves in the foot this season. At one point during the season, they were 31-24 and seemed a certainty to make the playoffs. Then they endured a 3-12 stretch which dropped them to 34-36. Meanwhile, the Lakers, who had started out slow at 17-25, began a 19-7 stretch which elevated them to 36-32 and put them back in the playoff hunt. Although the Jazz subsequently rallied and have now won eight of their last 10, the Lakers have also remained hot. So they are in the position of having to win two games on the road just to stay in the chase, but require help from Houston. The Jazz do not totally control their own destiny.
The reward? To face the number one seeded Oklahoma City Thunder in the first round of the playoffs. This may be a dubious reward, because the Thunder have streaked to a 59-21 record and have the inside track to lock in the number one seed. Both Utah and the Lakers have 1-3 records against the Thunder this year, so it appears that whichever team gets in will bow out to the Thunder in the first round, perhaps in as few as five games. Even if Kobe Bryant was available, the Thunder would still take the Lakers, although it might take six games to do it. Basically, the Lakers and the Jazz are jockeying for the honor of serving as cannon fodder for the Thunder in the first round.
My prediction is that the Lakers will make it in, simply because I can't see Utah defeating the Memphis Grizzlies in Memphis.
Update: On April 15th, the Jazz beat Minnesota 96-80. So now it all boils down to Wednesday. The Jazz must beat the Grizzlies in Memphis AND the Rockets must beat the Lakers in L.A. for the Jazz to make the playoffs.
Update #2: On April 17th, as expected, Memphis ripped the Jazz 86-70, as the Grizzlies turned on the heat in the third quarter. So Utah is out, and the Lakers are in.
Which one has the better chance of making the playoffs? If the Lakers defeat the Houston Rockets in L.A. on April 17th, then they finish 45-37 and are in, regardless of how the Jazz do tonight. But if the Lakers lose, then the Utah Jazz must win both remaining games to finish at 44-38. The Jazz have the tougher task because their last two games are on the road, against Minnesota (a probable win) on April 15th and Memphis on April 17th (a probable loss). The Jazz are only 12-27 on the road this season so far. Of course, if the Jazz lose to the T-Wolves tonight, the Lakers are in. But if both teams finish with the same record, Utah goes to the playoffs because they won the season series against the Lakers, two games to one.
The Jazz basically shot themselves in the foot this season. At one point during the season, they were 31-24 and seemed a certainty to make the playoffs. Then they endured a 3-12 stretch which dropped them to 34-36. Meanwhile, the Lakers, who had started out slow at 17-25, began a 19-7 stretch which elevated them to 36-32 and put them back in the playoff hunt. Although the Jazz subsequently rallied and have now won eight of their last 10, the Lakers have also remained hot. So they are in the position of having to win two games on the road just to stay in the chase, but require help from Houston. The Jazz do not totally control their own destiny.
The reward? To face the number one seeded Oklahoma City Thunder in the first round of the playoffs. This may be a dubious reward, because the Thunder have streaked to a 59-21 record and have the inside track to lock in the number one seed. Both Utah and the Lakers have 1-3 records against the Thunder this year, so it appears that whichever team gets in will bow out to the Thunder in the first round, perhaps in as few as five games. Even if Kobe Bryant was available, the Thunder would still take the Lakers, although it might take six games to do it. Basically, the Lakers and the Jazz are jockeying for the honor of serving as cannon fodder for the Thunder in the first round.
My prediction is that the Lakers will make it in, simply because I can't see Utah defeating the Memphis Grizzlies in Memphis.
Update: On April 15th, the Jazz beat Minnesota 96-80. So now it all boils down to Wednesday. The Jazz must beat the Grizzlies in Memphis AND the Rockets must beat the Lakers in L.A. for the Jazz to make the playoffs.
Update #2: On April 17th, as expected, Memphis ripped the Jazz 86-70, as the Grizzlies turned on the heat in the third quarter. So Utah is out, and the Lakers are in.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Billionaire Ron Burkle Surfaces As Possible "Savior" Of The Sacramento Kings; NBA Commish David Stern Intrigued
The drama involving the Sacramento Kings of the National Basketball Association took an interesting turn on April 14th, 2011, and it may result in the Kings staying put.
During the April 14th meeting with the NBA Board of Governors at the St. Regis Hotel in New York City, various parties made their respective pitches. The three Maloof brothers (George, Gavin, and Joe), the current co-owners of the Kings, made a pitch to their fellow owners about what's good and bad about Sacramento and Anaheim. George Maloof claimed they made progress, and are likely to seek formal seek permission to move the team, most likely to Anaheim, by the league-imposed deadline of Monday April 18th. However, he suggested that the Kings could stay in Sacramento if they sense that owners are opposed to the move.
Anaheim Mayor Tom Tait was also present, and later said that he made the case to the NBA that the Anaheim could support the team and that they are very excited. Tait also noted that he did not get questions from the NBA owners he met with. AP news video embedded below:
But overshadowing the Maloofs was the emergence of a possible buyer with serious financial stroke, who wants to keep the Kings in town. Sacramento lobbyist Darius Anderson, representing billionaire Ron Burkle, presented his principal's plan alongside Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson. Burkle, whose wealth is estimated at $3.2 billion, wants to buy the team and keep it in Sacramento. However, it appears he'll insist upon a new arena, although Anderson did not specify who would pay for it. Sacramento voters previously rejected an attempt to build a new arena with tax dollars.
The mere mention of Burkle's name clearly piqued the interest of the most influential voice in the NBA. When Kevin Johnson told Commissioner David Stern he might have a buyer for the Kings, Stern made a crack about it being a local car dealer. But when Johnson mentioned Burkle's name, Stern reportedly got real quiet and said, "You've got Burkle?" Burkle co-owns the NHL's Pittsburgh Penguins and was instrumental in getting a new arena built in Pittsburgh to keep the team from moving to Kansas City three years ago.
The Sacramento Bee reports that if Burkle is unsuccessful in his attempt to buy the Kings, and the Kings leave town, he's likely to try to buy another NBA franchise and relocate it to Sacramento. The New Orleans Hornets, a troubled franchise literally taken over by the league in 2010, would be the most likely candidate. Although the Maloofs have previously stated they don't want to sell the Kings, the team's value has steadily declined. According to Forbes, the team's value has dropped from $350 million in 2008 to $293 million this year, ranking the Kings at 24th in the NBA. The prospect of further decline might make an offer by Burkle more attractive.
The best-case scenario would be to keep the Kings in Sacramento. Despite the fact that they've fallen on hard times artistically during the past three years, the fans continue to support the team. Yahoo Sports details the top five moments in Kings' history HERE. Some indicate they'll continue to support the team even if it moves. There's also a potential legislative roadblock to an Anaheim move; the leader of the California state Senate, President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, has introduced a bill requiring the Maloofs to repay a $77 million loan to the city of Sacramento before they can move the club to Anaheim. The bill is broadly worded and would prohibit any professional sports club from relocating within California unless the franchise has paid off its existing debt.
Furthermore, as much as I would like to see Anaheim get an NBA team, the Kings are not the answer. SoCal already has two teams, the Lakers and the Clippers. While both share the Staples Arena, L.A. is Lakertown, and the Clippers will always be the "little brother". A move to Anaheim, preferably without Clippers owner Donald Sterling, would enable them to get a fresh start and develop a true identity of their own.
During the April 14th meeting with the NBA Board of Governors at the St. Regis Hotel in New York City, various parties made their respective pitches. The three Maloof brothers (George, Gavin, and Joe), the current co-owners of the Kings, made a pitch to their fellow owners about what's good and bad about Sacramento and Anaheim. George Maloof claimed they made progress, and are likely to seek formal seek permission to move the team, most likely to Anaheim, by the league-imposed deadline of Monday April 18th. However, he suggested that the Kings could stay in Sacramento if they sense that owners are opposed to the move.
Anaheim Mayor Tom Tait was also present, and later said that he made the case to the NBA that the Anaheim could support the team and that they are very excited. Tait also noted that he did not get questions from the NBA owners he met with. AP news video embedded below:
But overshadowing the Maloofs was the emergence of a possible buyer with serious financial stroke, who wants to keep the Kings in town. Sacramento lobbyist Darius Anderson, representing billionaire Ron Burkle, presented his principal's plan alongside Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson. Burkle, whose wealth is estimated at $3.2 billion, wants to buy the team and keep it in Sacramento. However, it appears he'll insist upon a new arena, although Anderson did not specify who would pay for it. Sacramento voters previously rejected an attempt to build a new arena with tax dollars.
The mere mention of Burkle's name clearly piqued the interest of the most influential voice in the NBA. When Kevin Johnson told Commissioner David Stern he might have a buyer for the Kings, Stern made a crack about it being a local car dealer. But when Johnson mentioned Burkle's name, Stern reportedly got real quiet and said, "You've got Burkle?" Burkle co-owns the NHL's Pittsburgh Penguins and was instrumental in getting a new arena built in Pittsburgh to keep the team from moving to Kansas City three years ago.
The Sacramento Bee reports that if Burkle is unsuccessful in his attempt to buy the Kings, and the Kings leave town, he's likely to try to buy another NBA franchise and relocate it to Sacramento. The New Orleans Hornets, a troubled franchise literally taken over by the league in 2010, would be the most likely candidate. Although the Maloofs have previously stated they don't want to sell the Kings, the team's value has steadily declined. According to Forbes, the team's value has dropped from $350 million in 2008 to $293 million this year, ranking the Kings at 24th in the NBA. The prospect of further decline might make an offer by Burkle more attractive.
The best-case scenario would be to keep the Kings in Sacramento. Despite the fact that they've fallen on hard times artistically during the past three years, the fans continue to support the team. Yahoo Sports details the top five moments in Kings' history HERE. Some indicate they'll continue to support the team even if it moves. There's also a potential legislative roadblock to an Anaheim move; the leader of the California state Senate, President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, has introduced a bill requiring the Maloofs to repay a $77 million loan to the city of Sacramento before they can move the club to Anaheim. The bill is broadly worded and would prohibit any professional sports club from relocating within California unless the franchise has paid off its existing debt.
Furthermore, as much as I would like to see Anaheim get an NBA team, the Kings are not the answer. SoCal already has two teams, the Lakers and the Clippers. While both share the Staples Arena, L.A. is Lakertown, and the Clippers will always be the "little brother". A move to Anaheim, preferably without Clippers owner Donald Sterling, would enable them to get a fresh start and develop a true identity of their own.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Human Rights Campaign Gets Campy Because They Think Lakers Superstar Kobe Bryant Called A Referee A "Faggot"
The self-appointed gay rights watchdog Human Rights Campaign (HRC) has called upon Los Angeles Lakers superstar Kobe Bryant to apologize for allegedly calling a referee a "fucking faggot" during an April 12th, 2011 game between the Lakers and the San Antonio Spurs in Los Angeles. They cite as anecdotal evidence the fact that TNT play-by-play announcer Steve Kerr apparently reacted, announcing on the air that TNT "might want to take the camera off him right now, for the children watching". As additional evidence, HRC cites a statement by English rugby star Ben Cohen, described as a straight ally who is a staunch supporter of LGBT equality, in which Cohen condemns Bryant as well.
HRC issued the following statement:
Another gay-rights watchdog has joined the hunt. The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has contacted the Lakers and is demanding disciplinary action. Outsports, a LGBT sports website, wants Bryant suspended for one playoff game.
But did Kobe Bryant actually use the word "faggot"? Watch the video below; you'll see it at the 0:35 minute point:
http://youtu.be/t84p7mcK2Pk
It looks like it, but one cannot be absolutely sure. He could have said the phrase "fucking fake". It is also quite possible that Steve Kerr was cautioning the television audience because of the use of the word "fucking". And why does it really matter, anyway; such words are used in the heat of battle. Kobe Bryant has a reputation for being foul-mouthed, but no one has called him out for taking the name of the Lord in vain.
The L.A. Times reports that Bryant expressed public regret over the incident, saying "what I said last night should not be taken literally. My actions were out of frustration during the heat of the game, period. The words expressed do NOT reflect my feelings towards the gay and lesbian communities and were NOT meant to offend anyone." But HRC doesn't think that's good enough because it creates one of those legendary "teachable moments"; presumably, they want him to go on the pro-gay trail and "atone" for his actions. I'm sure HRC wouldn't be too upset if Kobe Bryant shoveled some money at them, either.
Why is Kobe Bryant so upset over a technical foul? Because it's his 15th of the season, and if he reaches 16, he'll face a one-game suspension from the league. But he won't serve the suspension until the first game of the 2011-12 season, because technical foul totals are reset when the playoffs begin. So he won't be suspended during the playoffs, which means he over-reacted.
Public Reaction: Comments posted to the TMZ story are distinctly unsupportive of HRC.
Grace makes an interesting point. Why wasn't HRC offended by the use of the OTHER f-word?
HRC issued the following statement:
“What a disgrace for Kobe Bryant to use such horribly offensive and distasteful language, especially when millions of people are watching. Hopefully Mr. Bryant will recognize that as a person with such fame and influence, the use of such language not only offends millions of LGBT people around the world, but also perpetuates a culture of discrimination and hate that all of us, most notably Mr. Bryant, should be working to eradicate. Bryant and the Lakers have a responsibility to speak up on this issue immediately. America is watching.”
Another gay-rights watchdog has joined the hunt. The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has contacted the Lakers and is demanding disciplinary action. Outsports, a LGBT sports website, wants Bryant suspended for one playoff game.
But did Kobe Bryant actually use the word "faggot"? Watch the video below; you'll see it at the 0:35 minute point:
http://youtu.be/t84p7mcK2Pk
It looks like it, but one cannot be absolutely sure. He could have said the phrase "fucking fake". It is also quite possible that Steve Kerr was cautioning the television audience because of the use of the word "fucking". And why does it really matter, anyway; such words are used in the heat of battle. Kobe Bryant has a reputation for being foul-mouthed, but no one has called him out for taking the name of the Lord in vain.
The L.A. Times reports that Bryant expressed public regret over the incident, saying "what I said last night should not be taken literally. My actions were out of frustration during the heat of the game, period. The words expressed do NOT reflect my feelings towards the gay and lesbian communities and were NOT meant to offend anyone." But HRC doesn't think that's good enough because it creates one of those legendary "teachable moments"; presumably, they want him to go on the pro-gay trail and "atone" for his actions. I'm sure HRC wouldn't be too upset if Kobe Bryant shoveled some money at them, either.
Why is Kobe Bryant so upset over a technical foul? Because it's his 15th of the season, and if he reaches 16, he'll face a one-game suspension from the league. But he won't serve the suspension until the first game of the 2011-12 season, because technical foul totals are reset when the playoffs begin. So he won't be suspended during the playoffs, which means he over-reacted.
Update: CNN now reports that the NBA has fined Kobe Bryant $100,000 for "offensive and inexcusable" comments he made during Tuesday night's game. Bryant also personally apologized to HRC President Joe Solomonese. GLAAD has issued a statement supporting the NBA's decision.
Public Reaction: Comments posted to the TMZ story are distinctly unsupportive of HRC.
Posted at 7:58 AM on Apr 13, 2011 by MAXny:
WOW!!! As a proud, proud gay man I DO NOT find it offensive. The Human Rihts Campaign DOESN'T speak for all LGBT persons. Stop making a mountain out of a molehill. There are much bigger problems in the world, than Kobe saying, f*ggot. Stop crying, man up, bitches.
Posted at 8:06 AM on Apr 13, 2011 by Bigeasy:
Stupid made up organization trying to become known over a non-issue. That ref didn't see what Kobe said and I'm sure even the players next to him couldn't hear it. So basically Kobe is being criticized for someone reading his lips and guessing what he said. Get over it.
Posted at 8:09 AM on Apr 13, 2011 by onedollarbill:
Jesus, people need to get the sand out of their collective vagina. So what... Kobe was pissed and said something off color in the moment. I'm sure there is not a person here that hasn't said something insensitive, racist, or other when pissed driving on the freeway. The only reason this is even "news" is that it's coming from someone on TV. The country and its political correctness is one in a long list of things that is wrong.
Posted at 8:11 AM on Apr 13, 2011 by Grace:
I am offended with his use of the f***k word just as much as the next word. Bad language is never acceptable when referring to ANYONE!
Grace makes an interesting point. Why wasn't HRC offended by the use of the OTHER f-word?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)