Subscribe
Follow Us
Veteran sports analyst Stephen A. Smith reiterates his belief that there is nothing wrong about using the term “owner” to describe the majority shareholders of NBA franchises.
On the ESPN show ‘First Take' which he co-hosts, Smith offered a perfect analogy for the term. He mentioned that owning a franchise is like owning a house, adding it doesn't equate to owning the people in the house. The 51-year-old furthered that as the “owner” of the house, one is responsible in setting the rules and regulations, as well as managing expenses.
Smith pointed out he understands the sensitivity to the word “owner,” but he emphasized owning a team can be separated from owning a player.
I appreciate a lot of folks position on this. I just don’t agree pic.twitter.com/9CbFPChgHs
— Stephen A Smith (@stephenasmith) August 27, 2019
There have been plenty of concerns about the use of the word to refer to majority shareholders of team. In 2017, Draymond Green brought the issue into the spotlight in response to a controversial statement made by Houston Texans owner Bob McNair.
The NBA has since moved away from the “owner” title, opting to use “governor” or “alternate governor” instead. The Los Angeles Clippers are using “Chairman” as the title for Steve Ballmer, while the Philadelphia 76ers use titles such as managing partners and limited partners.
Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, nonetheless, remains firm on his stand to use “owner” to refer to himself. He explained he owns “equity” and that he has the right to use any title he wants on his company.
This is not the first time that Stephen A. disagrees with the controversy about the use of the said title. Last July, he also went on an epic rant on why there is nothing wrong with it.
https://twitter.com/TheNBACentral/status/1148311164679524353
