Haslam May Be Forced To Sell Browns
-
-
Skeptical2013 said:
This is a very serious matter adn the fact that a high profile guy like former FBI director Louis Freeh is representing thetrucking companies is not plesant for Haslam. The Browns will be the lat thing on haslam's mind in the coming months, no different thatit was under Lerner. Very sad.
The fact that a guy with a name that you have heard of is involved doesn't increase the ability of those companies to win.
It just brings publicity to the case that impresses celebrity jock sniffers....like you to think "Oh My God....Jesus is back walking the Earth". No, sorry. Just a name. The best attorneys are guys you have never heard of.
The fact that a guy with a name that you have heard of is involved doesn't increase the ability of those companies to win.
It just brings publicity to the case that impresses celebrity jock sniffers....like you to think "Oh My God....Jesus is back walking the Earth". No, sorry. Just a name. The best attorneys are guys you have never heard of.
That may or may not be true, but the dynamic you don't consider is publicity. Louis Freeh has a name, and that name may allow him to get on TV networks like ABC, CBS with 60 Minutes or CNN and talk about the situation, and that in turn makes the case more high profile and that in turn gets the attention of the PR conscious NFL and makes them very nervous and that in turn means more squeezing of Mr .Haslam. Some of the gamsemanship is about putting pressure on Haslam, and having a "name" attorney with the case may accomplish that. Sounds like a Grisham novel to me, with Browns fans the pawns caught in the middle somewhere.
-
The fact that a guy with a name that you have heard of is involved doesn't increase the ability of those companies to win.
It just brings publicity to the case that impresses celebrity jock sniffers....like you to think "Oh My God....Jesus is back walking the Earth". No, sorry. Just a name. The best attorneys are guys you have never heard of.
That may or may not be true, but the dynamic you don't consider is publicity. Louis Freeh has a name, and that name may allow him to get on TV networks like ABC, CBS with 60 Minutes or CNN and talk about the situation, and that in turn makes the case more high profile and that in turn gets the attention of the PR conscious NFL and makes them very nervous and that in turn means more squeezing of Mr .Haslam. Some of the gamsemanship is about putting pressure on Haslam, and having a "name" attorney with the case may accomplish that. Sounds like a Grisham novel to me, with Browns fans the pawns caught in the middle somewhere.
Skeptical2013 said:
That may or may not be true, but the dynamic you don't consider is publicity
Louis Freeh has a name, and that name may allow him to get on TV networks like ABC, CBS with 60 Minutes or CNN and talk about the situation, and that in turn makes the case more high profile and that in turn gets the attention of the PR conscious NFL and makes them very nervous and that in turn means more squeezing of Mr .Haslam. Some of the gamsemanship is about putting pressure on Haslam, and having a "name" attorney with the case may accomplish that. Sounds like a Grisham novel to me, with Browns fans the pawns caught in the middle somewhere.
Publicity is relevent. He is already an NFL owner so the spotlight on him will be very high.
The league is PR conscious....but adding Louis Freeh's name to this does not heighten or jeopardize Haslam's situation by one cabbage fart.
Maybe it has some affect on dumbasses in the public (like you apparently). It has no effect on his NFL owner partners.
Could they do something to him if he is convicted? Certainly. Yes they are PR conscious. But those NFL owners are not swayed by the fact that Louis Freeh or Clarence Darrow or F.Lee Bailey or Mickey Mouse is associated.
If JH wanted to play dueling celebrity lawyers all he would have to do is hire one of these guys;
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-ten-celebrity-lawyers-2009-10?op=1
But I can tell you, having a celebrity lawyer on the other side don't mean nothing. Celebrity lawyers clients still can get the needle.
-
-
Skeptical2013 said:
That may or may not be true, but the dynamic you don't consider is publicity
Louis Freeh has a name, and that name may allow him to get on TV networks like ABC, CBS with 60 Minutes or CNN and talk about the situation, and that in turn makes the case more high profile and that in turn gets the attention of the PR conscious NFL and makes them very nervous and that in turn means more squeezing of Mr .Haslam. Some of the gamsemanship is about putting pressure on Haslam, and having a "name" attorney with the case may accomplish that. Sounds like a Grisham novel to me, with Browns fans the pawns caught in the middle somewhere.
Publicity is relevent. He is already an NFL owner so the spotlight on him will be very high.
The league is PR conscious....but adding Louis Freeh's name to this does not heighten or jeopardize Haslam's situation by one cabbage fart.
Maybe it has some affect on dumbasses in the public (like you apparently). It has no effect on his NFL owner partners.
Could they do something to him if he is convicted? Certainly. Yes they are PR conscious. But those NFL owners are not swayed by the fact that Louis Freeh or Clarence Darrow or F.Lee Bailey or Mickey Mouse is associated.
If JH wanted to play dueling celebrity lawyers all he would have to do is hire one of these guys;
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-ten-celebrity-lawyers-2009-10?op=1
But I can tell you, having a celebrity lawyer on the other side don't mean nothing. Celebrity lawyers clients still can get the needle.
Publicity is relevent. He is already an NFL owner so the spotlight on him will be very high.
The league is PR conscious....but adding Louis Freeh's name to this does not heighten or jeopardize Haslam's situation by one cabbage fart.
Maybe it has some affect on dumbasses in the public (like you apparently). It has no effect on his NFL owner partners.
Could they do something to him if he is convicted? Certainly. Yes they are PR conscious. But those NFL owners are not swayed by the fact that Louis Freeh or Clarence Darrow or F.Lee Bailey or Mickey Mouse is associated.
If JH wanted to play dueling celebrity lawyers all he would have to do is hire one of these guys;
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-ten-celebrity-lawyers-2009-10?op=1
But I can tell you, having a celebrity lawyer on the other side don't mean nothing. Celebrity lawyers clients still can get the needle.
I think it's wonderful you think that NFL owners could care less et al and bad PR wouldn't impact them, but there are many instances in politics, sports and corporate life where I have seen similar situations where people dig in, only to capitulate in the end due to a mounting, irreversible tide of media and public dismay and call for action. If we learn there is irrefutable evidence that Haslam had a hand in the price fixing, he is toast as an owner in the NFL. Period. You may not believe it. But I do.
-
Yeah, the FBI and irs are never wrong. Just ask the guy they tried to blame for trying to poison the president. Then go ask some of the conservative political groups the irs was targeting.
:neutral_face: -
Just walked into flying j to buy my nieces some candy. Sign in the aisle says 2 king sized candies for 3 bucks. They ring up as $1.89 a piece, I ask why they are not 2 for $3. The lady tells me I need a customer loyalty card. No big deal, besides the irony of it, but why continue to flaunt the same types of promotions that has fucked you up in the first place? Now its not the same as what happened to the truckers, but these types of things annoy the average 'disloyal' customer. The way I see it they should be in damage control......hell this place is no where near as full as it was months ago. Theyre a business they can charge what they want, but just stop it already with this semi fraudulent type of bullshit promotions. I don't want to seem like I'm pissed about a dollar, but if it was more money I would be pissed about the gimmicks that wasted my time and money.
Long story short: these guys really aren't good business strategists and are probably gonna get fucked with no lube in court.
-
Yeah, the FBI and irs are never wrong. Just ask the guy they tried to blame for trying to poison the president. Then go ask some of the conservative political groups the irs was targeting.
Yeah, the FBI and irs are never wrong. Just ask the guy they tried to blame for trying to poison the president. Then go ask some of the conservative political groups the irs was targeting.
Big difference. The investigation into Flying J has been ongoing for over 2 years.
-
Publicity is relevent. He is already an NFL owner so the spotlight on him will be very high.
The league is PR conscious....but adding Louis Freeh's name to this does not heighten or jeopardize Haslam's situation by one cabbage fart.
Maybe it has some affect on dumbasses in the public (like you apparently). It has no effect on his NFL owner partners.
Could they do something to him if he is convicted? Certainly. Yes they are PR conscious. But those NFL owners are not swayed by the fact that Louis Freeh or Clarence Darrow or F.Lee Bailey or Mickey Mouse is associated.
If JH wanted to play dueling celebrity lawyers all he would have to do is hire one of these guys;
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-ten-celebrity-lawyers-2009-10?op=1
But I can tell you, having a celebrity lawyer on the other side don't mean nothing. Celebrity lawyers clients still can get the needle.
I think it's wonderful you think that NFL owners could care less et al and bad PR wouldn't impact them, but there are many instances in politics, sports and corporate life where I have seen similar situations where people dig in, only to capitulate in the end due to a mounting, irreversible tide of media and public dismay and call for action. If we learn there is irrefutable evidence that Haslam had a hand in the price fixing, he is toast as an owner in the NFL. Period. You may not believe it. But I do.
Skeptical2013 said:
I think it's wonderful you think that NFL owners could care less et al and bad PR wouldn't impact them, but there are many instances in politics, sports and corporate life where I have seen similar situations where people dig in, only to capitulate in the end due to a mounting, irreversible tide of media and public dismay and call for action. If we learn there is irrefutable evidence that Haslam had a hand in the price fixing, he is toast as an owner in the NFL. Period. You may not believe it. But I do.
Either you can't read, or you choose not to. I did say that PR is an important issue to the NFL. But I also said that no one in the NFL gives a shit that Louis Freeh...or any other celebrity lawyer's name is attached to this case. There are 32 owners and 32 coaches and 500 NFL players who are more famous than this "celebrity" lawyer. No one gives a shit about his name.
And if Haslam is involved in defrauding his customer's out of rebates (you couldn't even get what he was accused of right), he is by no means "toast" as an NFL owner.
They will only ask him to remove himself if his legal situation causes his financial situation to suffer....and thereby causing the Browns financial situation to suffer.
If he is "merely" convicted of a crime, he could be suspended for a period...just so the NFL can show they are doing something affirmative about a "criminal" in their midst....but unless they teams situation is in jeapordy, they will not force him to sell.
Again, I use situations where a person outside legal/financial issues cause great concern to the NFL team:
A. Banks were threatening to foreclose on and attach the Ravens...thus Modell was putsched.
B. Same basic deal with Kiam. He lost his wad on his razor business...and one of his business partners...Orthwein I believe was making noise about coming after the Pats. To resolve that situation, Kiam sold out to Orthwein, removing himself....and Orthwein in like 2 years sold out to Robert Kraft.
C. Leonard Tose, Eagles owner amassed huge gambling debts to Atlantic City Casinos. The casinos wanted a piece of the Eagles action.....and no fucking way was the NFL going to allow that, so they forced Tose to sell the Eagles.
If it comes down to the point that lawsuits/criminal penalties etc. would affect the Browns...then Haslam could be forced out...but that is unlikely because all those guys would first go after Pilot....and that is a very valuable venture....far more valuable than the Cleveland Browns. They would have to go a long, long way before affecting the Browns.
But....you believe what you wish. And keep looking to the sky, Chicken Little.
-
Read this new article out at SI.
As I've said before and will say again: If you've got proof that Haslam will actually be forced to sell, show it. Your assumptions mean nothing - and negative crap about Haslam is nothing but slander.
-
Read this new article out at SI.
As I've said before and will say again: If you've got proof that Haslam will actually be forced to sell, show it. Your assumptions mean nothing - and negative crap about Haslam is nothing but slander.
Read this new article out at SI.
As I've said before and will say again: If you've got proof that Haslam will actually be forced to sell, show it. Your assumptions mean nothing - and negative crap about Haslam is nothing but slander.
It is not slander...legally. But it may, indeed, be misinformed...and totally premature.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better π
Register Login