David Stern RealGM Fan Approval Ratings

ffz2000 · Post #1 » by **ffz2000** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:22 pm

I always get a kick out of these approval ratings when bush royally screws up (all the time) so lets see the approval ratings after this whole ref fiasco and Childress thing.

MartyConlonOnTheRun · Post #2 » by **MartyConlonOnTheRun** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:59 pm

Shows that he does not at all care for small market teams. He let the Sonics leave, and when asked if the Bucks were bought by an owner who wanted to move them he said he would not interfere.
Really betrays the average joe fan.

Post #3 » by **tsherkin** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:14 pm

Obviously at some point, he was good for the NBA as it rose to prominence but he needs to be replaced DESPERATELY, especially because the Euroleague ball clubs are starting to make financial commitments to players from the NBA and otherwise preventing talent from coming over (as they should).

CrookedJ · Post #4 » by **CrookedJ** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:17 pm

I hate the way he handled Seattle & Vancouver moving, the refs scandal etc. More than what he does, its his smug arrogant demeanor that pisses me off. Every appearance and comment is made through this thin veil of indifference. He simply does not care about anything other than profit or the opinions of the owners, which are also entirely based on profit.

I respect that NBA is a business, I am a small business owner and I know that side of things all to well. Its one thing to be concerned about profit, another to ONLY be concerned about profit.

Muzzleshot · Post #5 » by **Muzzleshot** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:18 pm

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:Shows that he does not at all care for small market teams. He let the Sonics leave, and when asked if the Bucks were bought by an owner who wanted to move them he said he would not interfere.
Really betrays the average joe fan.

NBA owners voted 28-2 in favor of the move. One of those votes against was by Paul Allen who owns the Seattle Seahawks. I think it's safe to say that he had to vote against it.
Stern is not some dictator that can do what he wants. He does the bidding of the owners.

The last thing the owner of an NBA team wants to hear is that he has to stay in the current location regardless of how the economics of owning that team change over the years.

SA37 · Post #6 » by **SA37** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:22 pm

I think he has done great things for the NBA, but recently he's been quite shaky. I am interested to see what he and the league come up with when the CBA expires. We'll have a much better idea of whether the European teams will continue to recover European player or convince good American players to go over and where the US dollar stands in comparison to the Euro.

He absolutely disgraced the league with his handling of the Seattle situation. I think the league needs to seriously consider contraction, but I think Stern is the last person who would consider this.

The ref situation bit him in the @$#, but we'll see how he responds.

I think if things are still as uncertain as they are now when the CBA expires, the league has to seriously consider replacing him.

Milkdud · Post #7 » by **Milkdud** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:31 pm

I guess im in the middle. Recently like other have mentioned he's been pretty terrible. (Sonics, Ref issues) He also comes off very arrogent and smug. That said he has helped the NBA alot over the years to gain popularity. He also has done a very good job promoting the NBA on a world market.

jenn_gp · Post #8 » by **jenn_gp** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:41 pm

Muzzleshot wrote:
MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:Shows that he does not at all care for small market teams. He let the Sonics leave, and when asked if the Bucks were bought by an owner who wanted to move them he said he would not interfere.
Really betrays the average joe fan.

NBA owners voted 28-2 in favor of the move. One of those votes against was by Paul Allen who owns the Seattle Seahawks. I think it's safe to say that he had to vote against it.
Stern is not some dictator that can do what he wants. He does the bidding of the owners.
The last thing the owner of an NBA team wants to hear is that he has to stay in the current location regardless of how the economics of owning that team change over the years.

Are you serious? Stern CAN do whatever he wants and he showed it by orchestrating the Sonics move to OKC. HE is the one who set up a meeting between him, Clay Bennett, and Howard Schultz when Schultz was looking to sell the Sonics. HE was the one looking to help out a friend.

You're telling me a move to a much smaller market--when speaking about population and economics makes sense? What about Mark Cuban--he also voted no against it, and he was adamant that a move from the 14th largest market to the 45th was not a right move. His vote was about the pure economics and business of the game.

And don't forget--yes, the Seattle and state government screwed up in this deal. But Stern came rolling into town ONCE throughout the past two years when Bennett owned the team to propose a HALF A BILLION DOLLAR arena. ONCE he came. He showed no support--it was all about helping out his friend in Clay Bennett.

The BOG vote still doesn't make any sense to me. For example, Larry Miller, the owner of the Jazz went on Seattle Sports Talk Radio and said he was voting against the move and said that moving to a smaller market doesn't make sense. Then after the vote, he actually voted for the move.

Conspiracy theory much? In any interview Stern has given, he has had a very smug demeanor. He's shown that you shouldn't cross him or piss him off. During a press conference after the BOG vote on the move, he did act like a dictator--by saying that the Sonics were moving and that Seattle will never have the NBA back again if it's not careful. Who is he to determine that? I thought it was up to the BOG?

Excuse me, that actually sounds like a member of the mob, not dictator.

Obviously my vote was "strongly disapproves" He cares ZERO about the fans. "NBA Cares" shouldn't be their slogan...more like a slap in the face.

HarlemHeat37 · Post #9 » by **HarlemHeat37** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:58 pm

I didn't mind him before, but after he gave away a title in 2002, I'm only neutral now..

Nate505 · Post #10 » by **Nate505** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:11 pm

Before the Sonics move I would have gave him a neutral or an approve.

After the Sonics move, nothing less than a strongly disapprove is how I feel about the douchebag. I hate his guts and hope he gets ousted soon, although that is unlikely.

Post #11 » by **tsherkin** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:46 pm

CrookedJ wrote:I hate the way he handled Seattle & Vancouver moving, the refs scandal etc. More than what he does, its his smug arrogant demeanor that pisses me off. Every appearance and comment is made through this thin veil of indifference. He simply does not care about anything other than profit or the opinions of the owners, which are also entirely based on profit.

I respect that NBA is a business, I am a small business owner and I know that side of things all to well. Its one thing to be concerned about profit, another to ONLY be concerned about profit.

I pretty much concur with this entire post. In only caring about his profit margin, he's also sabotaging future profits, which is definitely a bad move.

BubbaTee · Post #12 » by **BubbaTee** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:53 pm

I disliked him back when he came up with the stupid age rule and the stupider dress code and stupider-er rule about taking away players' iPods.

Nothing he's done since - changing the ball, inconsistently applying rules regarding suspensions and game replays, massively fining anyone who stands up to him, failing to make the officiating review process transparent, letting personal feelings influence the Sonics situation - has improved my opinion of him.

Post #13 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:08 am

He hates small markets so much he...let a big market team go to a small market.... - :-?