Multiple new outlets are reporting today that the NBA is considering doing away with the term "owner" as it applies to the individuals who legally possess the NBA team franchises.

 

Reasoning is that, particularly given the respective demographics of the majority of NBA's players and owners, the term comes off as racially insensitive in regard to the way it can harken back to the "slave-to-master" relationship from America's past.

 

What say you?

:popcorn:

:lol2:

:ohbrother:

I've got a better idea: let's do away with team owners.

How about, MOnetary Responsible Party...MORP!

So here's my thing....owner is one of THE most basic terms when it comes to legal writing, and frankly there really aren't that many synonyms for the word "owner".

 

Merriam-Webster only gives 3 synonyms of "owner": holder, possessor, proprietor.

 

So....what do we actually call them now??

So here's my thing....owner is one of THE most basic terms when it comes to legal writing, and frankly there really aren't that many synonyms for the word "owner".

 

Merriam-Webster only gives 3 synonyms of "owner": holder, possessor, proprietor.

 

So....what do we actually call them now??

 

Franchisee

PC police are surrendering credibility with absurd movements like this.

Franchisee

 

True. I'd have to think that would pretty certainly be it if they do drop "owner".

How could anybody possibly have an issue with this change if it were to occur?

How could anybody possibly have an issue with this change if it were to occur?

 

Because it is stupid.

Par for the course nowadays.

Because it is stupid.

 

Like they say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. This is people looking for something to be upset about.

Like they say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. This is people looking for something to be upset about.

 

Agree.

 

There are so many choices for our time these days and just when I got a little interested in the NBA again they had to rain on the parade.