Red Sox Willing To Go Over Luxury Tax Threshold Hurricanes Seeing Smaller Crowds So Far Orlando City's Rawlins Still A Fan First Franchise Notes Red Sox Spend Big With Ramirez, Sandoval Bills Say Stadium Will Be Ready For Sunday AHL Checkers Likely To Leave Hornets' Arena NFL Franchise Notes Bills Plan To Practice, Play In Buffalo This Week Rockies Brass Conducts Twitter Q&A With Fans
Should NFL Accept Controversial Rush Limbaugh As Rams Owner?
Published October 8, 2009
|Writer Says NFL Should
Think Twice On Limbaugh
BAD FOR BUSINESS? FANHOUSE.com's Kevin Blackistone wrote, "It is true that freedom of speech in the country is a protected right. Limbaugh can say whatever he likes and so can you and I. ... But that doesn't mean a potential business partner or employer can't refuse him like a restaurant does of diners who refuse to don shirts and shoes. They can and the NFL should." If the league accepts "whatever bid the group including Limbaugh puts up, it would be a slap in the face to at least two-thirds of its players, and that is selling short the other third." Blackistone: "It would be public relations suicide for the NFL to vote Limbaugh into its ranks and, I would hope, commercial suicide for it as well. At the very least it could be suicide for the Rams. What black player would want to toil for someone like Limbaugh if he didn't have to?" (FANHOUSE.com, 10/7). ClickOnDetroit.com's Rob Parker said, "As a black person, I would have a hard time going to a Rams game, paying money to a person who I believe has very little regard to black people." ESPN's Skip Bayless: "You could make a case maybe he could be a silent partner -- a so-to-speak ‘minority owner’ -- and stay out of the limelight” ("ESPN First Take," ESPN2, 10/8).
THE ULTIMATE WILD CARD: In St. Petersburg, Gary Shelton wrote, "I don't agree with all of Rush's politics. ... Still, I find the notion of Limbaugh owning an NFL team an intriguing idea." Shelton added, "Wouldn't the owners' meetings be interesting?" (TAMPABAY.com, 10/7).