SQ_Crazies;381397 wrote:What did I say?
I said he isn't hands off owner.
That is a fact. In all this time you've been spending arguing with me, you could have been doing some research on professional owners who literally own a franchise because they're right and it's a cool social thing to do. Those are hands off owners. But since I said you don't know shit if you think he's hands off, you instantly jump to the conclusion that I'm saying he's Mark Cuban. LOL...wtf? I didn't say that either, just simply, he isn't hands off.
So fucking easy to get you pawns sweating, tells me all I need to know.
Wow, for the first time in this thread you actually gave a reason as to why he's a "hands on" owner. Congratulations. Was that so hard to do an hour ago? You are saying that he's a hands on owner because he actually invests in the franchise. That's an alright opinion to have. It's not a fact, but it's what you perceive a hands on owner to be....and by the way I'm not sweating, I'm pretty cool and collected. I haven't used half as many swear words as you and actually most of them were quoting/mocking you. I'm just bored.
See the problem with your definition is that there are very few MAJORITY owners who fit your criteria for being hands off. Would you say Usher is a hands on owner of the Cavs? I mean he shows up every once in a while, he's been at some press conferences, he has a cool Cavs jacket....is he hands on? Is Jay-Z a hands on owner of the Nets? I mean he only actually owns about 1% of them but he's always talking about them. He spearheaded the move to Brooklyn. He's always sitting courtside at games. I suppose that makes him hands on.
To me a hands on owner is one that is directly involved with most of the operations and personnel decisions of the team and one that constantly has a presence over the team and in the media. Dan Gilbert doesn't do that with the Cavs (unlike his actual businesses like Quicken Loans, Fathead, and his Casino he's putting in Cleveland among others) so to me he's not a hands on owner. See I could own stock in a company. I could invest my money into the company. I could even attend a shareholders meeting. Does that make me a hands on owner of the company? No. In your opinion with your criteria he may be hands on....that's fine. But don't act like your definition of "hands on" is the all-world definition of hands on. I've got papers to write, I've proven my point, in a few hours people are going to read this thread and point out how dumb you look and you don't have to care because you're on this different level of sports knowledge than the rest of us. Go ahead and stay there, I won't be joining you. I prefer using reason and logic to throwing out blanket opinions as facts......have fun on nutjob island