BlueDragon

April 6th, 2011 at 10:08 PM ^

In Ohio his name is mud as far as the pitchfork-and-torch-wielding townsfolk are concerned.  I'm not much of an NBA person and I think he's scum.  I don't actively root against the Heat because they have one of the Fab Five on their squad but they aren't my favorite team in the world, either.

Edit:  According to JBE, it looks like we were both wrong.  I'll bow to JBE's superior knowledge on this topic.

MGoChippewa

April 6th, 2011 at 10:36 PM ^

No, JBE is correct.  Kobe Bryant was the one accused, but not found guilty, of rape in Vail, CO.  I was being sarcastic and trying to make a point about the view of LeBron v. the view of Kobe.  LBJ is one of the most hated athletes in sports for what he did, while Kobe being accused of rape has been washed away with a few championsips.

goblue20111

April 6th, 2011 at 11:40 PM ^

Kobe wasn't ever found not guilty, Kobe never went to trial.  The accuser refused to testify.  He was accused of rape and it was pretty clear once all the evidence made its way out that this girl was full of shit.  There's a reason she filed a civil suit the same time she refused to testify.  People didn't  forget because he won a few rings (he had rings before that too ya know).  People forget because it's about 99.99999999% sure that he didn't rape her.  He cheated on his wife and TBH I don't give a shit who Kobe fucks as long as he's still enjoyable to watch. 

LeBron on the other hand is a monumental douchebag.  TBF, both are probably douches.  LeBron just shines more because he puts himself in the position.  A lotta people think Kobe is a dick but that's just his attitude.  LeBron goes way out of the way to showboat for the media.  Celebrity first, NBA player second. 

MGoChippewa

April 7th, 2011 at 12:02 AM ^

LeBron is a celebrity first? Yeah, he took all that flack from the media and less money to play in Miami so he could have the cameras on him.  "The Decision" wasn't his idea, and while he should've realized it was a bad idea, which mistake would you rather have made, LBJ's or Kobe's?  The guy wants to win, plain and simple.  Kobe gets painted as the hero because of his championships, and his leadership.  The guy is a great leader, but he is responsible for the Lakers' recent titles like Jeter is for the Yankees' world series titles.  He was an integral part, but without Shaq/Gasol, the guy has one ring, maybe two.  If you think I'm wrong, look at how successful his teams were between Shaq being traded and Gasol being acquired.

JimLahey

April 6th, 2011 at 9:33 PM ^

I'm sure he owns a petty share of it and Liverpool just wanted the publicity of having a major American celebrity to sit in the stands periodically and generate buzz. It's hard to believe, but even the richest athletes don't have nearly enough money to be major players in the sports ownership business. That's a game for billionaires.

JimLahey

April 6th, 2011 at 10:27 PM ^

Michael Jordan is not the rule though. Even so, I doubt he has the cash to drop 500 mil on one investment. I accept your point though. I'm coming off as a cynical dick here, my only point was that Lebron is a doucher, and he owns Liverpool like J-Lo owns the dolphins...that is all.

BlueinLansing

April 6th, 2011 at 10:56 PM ^

investment this was a smart one.  Fenway pretty much stole Liverpool from the previous owners with the help of the banks.  Gillette and the other douche financed their previous purchase of Liverpool with huge amounts of debt and when things went wanky in the markets the banks called their debt due.

 

Fenway bought Liverpool at a pretty substantial discount to the asking price of Gillette and that other douche.

 

If Fenway can do to Liverpool what they've done with the Red Sox as far as a profitable, marketable product that receives top dollar then LeBron will do just fine in this investment.

BrownJuggernaut

April 7th, 2011 at 4:39 AM ^

...to hate Liverpool. I disliked Liverpool to begin with, then FSG has to go out and buy them, creating a conflict of interests for me since I'm a Sox fan. Lebron's "investment" in Liverpool solidifies my hatred for them.

It's a good investment though. 

To answer the questiona above about debt, in short yes. Many of the clubs are in debt, but FIFA is instituting fairplay rules which will only allow owners to spend what the clubs make. The club that I support, Arsenal, are in debt because they invested money in a new stadium. This stadium has seen their match day revenue grow tremendously. Over the last couple years, they have reduced their debts significantly, and they should be debt free in the next couple years. It is probably the most conservatively run club in the Premiership. Others are much more frivolous with their spending.

Salinger

April 7th, 2011 at 7:57 AM ^

1) for hating on Cleveland when Cleveland already has to hate on itself (probably the worst city of all time!!)

2) For buying token shares in the worst football club of all time!  Liverpool can burn.