Skip to content

Report: Michael Jordan again stays quiet during labor talks after leading owners’ hard line away from the table

Nov 6, 2011, 10:00 AM EST

San Antonio Spurs v Charlotte Bobcats Getty Images

If Jordan wanted to make a statement, this was his chance. After all, he knows exactly where the players are coming from. He was there, 12 years ago, fiery and livid with a group of billionaires demanding that a group of millionaires cover their mistakes. He could have played the good cop, saying that he understood what they were feeling but that this was unavoidable and they can get off the tracks or get hit by the train. He could play the bad cop, saying that the owners weren’t going to allow for anything else to happen to jeopardize profitability and that the players didn’t cut the checks, didn’t take the risks. Jordan could have been a leader, for better or worse. Instead?

His Airness stayed quiet as still air.

From Yahoo! Sports:

After reports that Charlotte Bobcats owner Michael Jordan had become one of the most vocal of hardline owners, union officials were anxious for him to speak up in Saturday night’s meeting. Union officials, just as they wanted to do back at the last labor meeting that Jordan attended on All-Star weekend, were determined to throw back at Jordan many of his old anti-ownership screeds from the 1990s.

As one official said, “He never opened his mouth, not once.”

via NBA owners give players drop-dead offer – NBA – Yahoo! Sports.

Jordan’s not a negotiator, he’s not a lawyer, an economist, or a league official. He’s just a constituent. If Dan Gilbert had stayed quiet, we’d be praising him for coming to his senses and knowing his role. But with Jordan, it just feels like more hypocrisy, talking about the players behind their backs and making money off them through the Bobcats and Jordan Brand, then staying quiet when the players are ready to confront him. Multiple players tweeted disappointment with the GOAT on Saturday, and it’s got to be a pretty big downer to discover that not only is your idol actively working against you, but he won’t even stand up and tell you so.

Maybe reports are exaggerated and Jordan’s not the hard-line ringleader he’s been made out to be. Maybe he was just in New Yorks as a prop piece, another bargaining tactic being used by Stern. But if reports are accurate and he did want to take a line that refused more than 47 percent, not only has he sold out the players, but he then also buckled to Stern when Stern offered the 49-51 band on Saturday night.

If you take out the name, if you take out “The Shot,” the dunk contest, the crying over the championship trophy, the double-nickel, all of it, if you just looked at Jordan’s post-career behavior, his executive decisions regarding the draft and team building, and his stances during the lockout, what would you really think of him?

  1. djstat - Nov 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM

    For most of MJs career he was under paid. He made his fortune through endorsements. He has always been a miserable person. But what owner would ever want to first split revenue and then pay the rest of their bills? I hope they cal the season.

  2. snoopy2014 - Nov 6, 2011 at 12:20 PM

    “If you take out the name, if you take out “The Shot,” the dunk contest, the crying over the championship trophy, the double-nickel, all of it, if you just looked at Jordan’s post-career behavior, his executive decisions regarding the draft and team building, and his stances during the lockout, what would you really think of him?”

    I’d think he’s another inept owner/executive in a league full of them. Who is trying his damned hardest to enact a CBA that will save him from his own destructive stupidity.

  3. kandh2004 - Nov 6, 2011 at 4:36 PM

    Yo Matt you have some white stuff on your mouth still.

  4. goforthanddie - Nov 6, 2011 at 5:19 PM

    Again I ask, why was he allowed to buy a team? Bob Johnson didn’t want to spend, Jordan wants to even less and still has cash problems. Maybe he should take his own advice and sell.

  5. surly1n1nd1anapol1s - Nov 6, 2011 at 9:35 PM

    Hypocrisy? He’s an owner now. Why is it relevant what he thought as a player?

    Assume he’s not an owner. Can’t he change his mind? This Jordan stuff on this blog is getting pathetic.

  6. bigbuffguy95 - Nov 7, 2011 at 10:47 PM

    “If you take out the name, if you take out “The Shot,” the dunk contest, the crying over the championship trophy, the double-nickel, all of it, if you just looked at Jordan’s post-career behavior, his executive decisions regarding the draft and team building, and his stances during the lockout, what would you really think of him?”

    This right here is a great example of the general idiocy of the basketball press. So if we take away every great thing that Jordan ever did as a player and only left his poor record as an executive, what would we think? What kind of a question is that? If we took away everything he did as a player, he would just be a bad executive. Although, really, he wouldn’t be an executive at all–let alone an owner–without his accomplishments as a player. What is your point? Anyone who can’t understand why it is intellectually and logically consistent for Jordan to be on one side as a player and the opposite side as an owner should be disqualified from writing about the NBA. Take a persuasive writing class, dude.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Could Sixers be worst team in NBA history?
Top 10 NBA Player Searches
  1. D. Rose (8974)
  2. D. Wade (7252)
  3. K. Durant (6822)
  4. D. Howard (6703)
  5. P. Gasol (5960)
  1. K. Martin (5659)
  2. T. Jones (5502)
  3. R. Westbrook (5368)
  4. T. Harris (5183)
  5. G. Hill (5025)