The Anti-Lebron Bias Runs Strong.... But Why?

[Celtics4ever]

For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. One action towards Bron is to overhype him and declare him a king and a possible best player ever.

That's absurd. So there has to be an equal and opposite reaction to that.

Not to mention the guy is a coach killer if he does not get his way.   How do his supporters square with that?    Is that the decent thing to do?  I can't wait to hear, it is some form of charity or good will.

[Moranis]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

[celticsclay]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

You've put in a short article from LA Times entertainment news from 7 years ago that mentions some excitement about raising money for the decision? That certainly deserves some explanation of what point you are trying to prove.

[Celtics4ever]

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

That articles says his partners gave and nothing of LeBron giving.  So nice try, LeBron gave nothing but time, again illustrating no real sacrifice on his part.   Do you think he would do it again?   I don't that has haunted him for years.

It's hard when we find out our heroes are not so magnanimous.

[Moranis]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

You've put in a short article from LA Times entertainment news from 7 years ago that mentions some excitement about raising money for the decision? That certainly deserves some explanation of what point you are trying to prove.

the point is that James did the Decision because the proceeds went to charity.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.  That is how Jim Gray sold Maverick Carter on doing it who then took it to James.  Without th3 charity component the Decision doesn't happen

[wayupnorth]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

You've put in a short article from LA Times entertainment news from 7 years ago that mentions some excitement about raising money for the decision? That certainly deserves some explanation of what point you are trying to prove.

the point is that James did the Decision because the proceeds went to charity.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.  That is how Jim Gray sold Maverick Carter on doing it who then took it to James.  Without th3 charity component the Decision doesn't happen

And without the brand building and exposure the event created, it doesn't happen either.

So I don't understand where you are going with this.

[moiso]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

You've put in a short article from LA Times entertainment news from 7 years ago that mentions some excitement about raising money for the decision? That certainly deserves some explanation of what point you are trying to prove.

the point is that James did the Decision because the proceeds went to charity.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.  That is how Jim Gray sold Maverick Carter on doing it who then took it to James.  Without th3 charity component the Decision doesn't happen

[celticsclay]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

You've put in a short article from LA Times entertainment news from 7 years ago that mentions some excitement about raising money for the decision? That certainly deserves some explanation of what point you are trying to prove.

the point is that James did the Decision because the proceeds went to charity.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.  That is how Jim Gray sold Maverick Carter on doing it who then took it to James.  Without th3 charity component the Decision doesn't happen

And without the brand building and exposure the event created, it doesn't happen either.

So I don't understand where you are going with this.

Thank you. That is where I am at with it also. Lebron is very calculated for his brand in everything he does. Strange to think he would do bad business decisions for his brand to raise money for charity

[Moranis]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

You've put in a short article from LA Times entertainment news from 7 years ago that mentions some excitement about raising money for the decision? That certainly deserves some explanation of what point you are trying to prove.

the point is that James did the Decision because the proceeds went to charity.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.  That is how Jim Gray sold Maverick Carter on doing it who then took it to James.  Without th3 charity component the Decision doesn't happen

And without the brand building and exposure the event created, it doesn't happen either.

So I don't understand where you are going with this.

so you agree with me that he doesnt do the event without the charity.  Also, how did the Decision build his brand?

[celticsclay]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

You've put in a short article from LA Times entertainment news from 7 years ago that mentions some excitement about raising money for the decision? That certainly deserves some explanation of what point you are trying to prove.

the point is that James did the Decision because the proceeds went to charity.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.  That is how Jim Gray sold Maverick Carter on doing it who then took it to James.  Without th3 charity component the Decision doesn't happen

And without the brand building and exposure the event created, it doesn't happen either.

So I don't understand where you are going with this.

so you agree with me that he doesnt do the event without the charity.  Also, how did the Decision build his brand?

in Lebrons mind it was probably establishing himself as something beyond just a basketball player. It was something that had never been done before and could take him to a level of celebrity that had never been seen before in sports. He obviously cared about that stuff very much to do something that is risky. The fact that you apparently believe he was doing this just for charity and not thinking it help his brand and beyond laughable to me. I've seen some things this make me incredulous on this board fairly frequently but this take that one of the richest people in the world is making decisions all Willy Nilly cause it raises a few millions for charity is not even approaching common sense.

[Green-18]

I agree with everyone who is citing "The Decision" as the catalyst for the hatred towards LeBron.  The Miami Heat welcome party only made things worse.  Then LeBron gave up against the Mavericks in a series that the Heat were supposed to dominate.  A few years later LeBron used his own statistics as a claim that there was nothing more he could do against the Spurs.  Then he conveniently engineered a trade to the Cavs and took control of the entire organization.

From a competitive standpoint LeBron has always taken the easy way out.  My dislike stems from the arguments that cite him as the greatest player of all-time.  When the comparison is Michael Jordan then all of the little stuff counts. 

[Moranis]

If they think its a trash league now, what the heck did they think of it 10-12 years ago? 

The anti-Lebron thing is somewhat easy.  He has been the main guy standing in the way of the Celtics for a decade now.  Their single biggest rival has a been a man, not a team. It's Lebron.  That obviously leads to a ton of hate.  That's sports fandom. 

Bigger picture, there is a significant amount of slightly older sports fans who grew up with Jordan as the greatest player in the world and he has become deified over the years.  Lebron is the one is who often compared again him and the older segment will side with Jordan.   There are also grating elements to Lebron's personality. "The Decision" was a horrible decision on his part and that turned a lot of people off him for good.

The funny part about the Decision is that they raised $6m for the Boys and Girls Club. This is almost never discussed.

They did but the Decision was as much as about brand building for himself as it was for the Boys & Girls Club.

what brand building would come out of the decision?  James was already by far the largest brand in basketball and there really is no good that could have come from the decision from a brand perspective.  James has said multiple times that the only reason he did the decision was to raise money and awareness for the boys and girls club.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.

His own branding, of course.  You really think professional athletes & their reps stop worrying about personal branding at 25?  Jordan continued to grow his brand throughout his career. 

Plenty of athletes do stuff for charity with little or no fanfare.  Certainly not with a nationally televised television special.

Plenty of athletes have been free agents and signed elsewhere with far, far, far less spectacle than a nationally televised special. 

Sure, he might not have done the special without the charity aspect but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that was the driving force behind it.  Because it almost certainly wasn't.

Sure, but how was the Decision going to grow Lebron's brand?  At that time, he was already the biggest basketball star in the world, with countless national endorsements, etc.  Assuming the best case scenario, what exactly was the Decision going to do for his brand?  i.e. How would the Decision improve his personal brand?

Here is an article published before the Decision actually aired which shows how it came about.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

You really believe that Lebron had maximized his branding and share of the shoe, shirt, and peripherals market? You really think that the increased exposure didn't open even more commercial endorsements or possibilities in Hollywood? The same way Lavar Ball gets free advertising from his exposure because of his big mouth, Lebron got free advertising for his brand to expand. And that doesn't even consider the exposure he built amongst the players to promote Rich Paul and help to build and expand his player representation agency.

ah but he did all that with the Decision being a disaster, so the Decision had absolutely nothing to do with it.  That is the point.  The Decision in its absolute best case wouldn't have done much of anything for Lebron James.  A Hollywood producer isn't sitting down with Lebron James because of a one-off television show.  A Hollywood producer is sitting down with Lebron James because he is a champion and best player in the world.  A major company isn't signing the Decision's Lebron James to a massive marketing deal, though they would for Lebron James 4 time MVP. etc.

The Decision had very little upside and a lot of downside for Lebron James.  The only real benefit was the 6 million dollars for charity and the attention he brought to the Boys and Girls Club.  He doesn't do the Decision without the charity because there just wasn't any real benefit outside of the charity.

Come on Moranis, this is a bit ridiculous. Very few people in the world do things that only have downside for themselves. This guy isn't exactly known as Ghandi for the suffering he does to better the world. He also regrets the decision himself:

"If I could look back on it I would probably change a lot of it,” he said. “The fact of having a whole TV special, and people getting the opportunity to watch me make a decision on where I wanted to play, I probably would change that. Because I can now look and see if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a fan, and I was very passionate about one player, and he decided to leave, I would be upset too about the way he handled it."

He thought it would bring him positive attention and adoration and ut didn't work out that way.
Nothing to really argue beyond that...

The upside was bringing 6 million dollars to charity.  James doesn't do the Decision without the charitable side of it.  I don't really see why that is a controversial statement. 

James obviously handled the actual spectacle of it poorly (James came off cold and uncaring, and Jim Gray was absolutely horrible dragging it out for so long, etc.) and it probably never would have been well received (though certainly could have been better received), but at the end of the day there was never really much that would have come out of it.  Even had he stayed in Cleveland, he would have been ridiculed for making a television spectacle out of staying home.  The only real upside was the charity and that is overshadowed by the negatives.

I guess all I can do is laugh at this take at this point.

so what do you think of the countless articles like this one http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/usually-when-an-agent-scores-a-big-deal-they-like-to-boast-about-itbut-creative-artists-agency-has-been-curiously-mum-about.html

I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make with this

if you don't understand my point then maybe you shouldn't respond to me

You've put in a short article from LA Times entertainment news from 7 years ago that mentions some excitement about raising money for the decision? That certainly deserves some explanation of what point you are trying to prove.

the point is that James did the Decision because the proceeds went to charity.  He wouldn't have done it without the charity aspect.  That is how Jim Gray sold Maverick Carter on doing it who then took it to James.  Without th3 charity component the Decision doesn't happen

And without the brand building and exposure the event created, it doesn't happen either.

So I don't understand where you are going with this.

so you agree with me that he doesnt do the event without the charity.  Also, how did the Decision build his brand?

in Lebrons mind it was probably establishing himself as something beyond just a basketball player. It was something that had never been done before and could take him to a level of celebrity that had never been seen before in sports. He obviously cared about that stuff very much to do something that is risky. The fact that you apparently believe he was doing this just for charity and not thinking it help his brand and beyond laughable to me. I've seen some things this make me incredulous on this board fairly frequently but this take that one of the richest people in the world is making decisions all Willy Nilly cause it raises a few millions for charity is not even approaching common sense.

I said he doesn't do it without the charity not that he did it only for charity.  Two vastly different things and again shows your irrational stalking of me is in full force. And people have been televising decisions on where they will play for decades.

[tenn_smoothie]

It’s pretty simple isn’t it?  When you’re the best, people want to knock you down.

I mean, don’t get me wrong, people can will certainly will come up with reasons (e.g., the decision).  But the real reason is that he’s too [dang] good and people don’t like it.

Why hate this particular guy? I'm sure there's some closeted racism involved with the analysis, but is there anything else?

Huh ?   Why are you so sure there is some "closeted racism involved with the analysis" ?
That assumption tells me that you are brainwashed, with very little ability to think for yourself.

Personally, my problem with Lebron James is about his BEHAVIOR. There are a hundred examples, but one small moment that I remember that said a lot about the guy was when he FINALLY got past Boston in the playoffs a few years back and he drops to his knees at midcourt, face-in-hands with this fake sobbing going on. Then he gets up and will not leave the court. He literally wanders around looking for a camera to stick his face in so that he can continue this embarrassing exhibition of fake emotion he wants out there as part of his image.

[green_bballers13]

It’s pretty simple isn’t it?  When you’re the best, people want to knock you down.

I mean, don’t get me wrong, people can will certainly will come up with reasons (e.g., the decision).  But the real reason is that he’s too [dang] good and people don’t like it.

Why hate this particular guy? I'm sure there's some closeted racism involved with the analysis, but is there anything else?

Huh ?   Why are you so sure there is some "closeted racism involved with the analysis" ?
That assumption tells me that you are brainwashed, with very little ability to think for yourself.

Personally, my problem with Lebron James is about his BEHAVIOR. There are a hundred examples, but one small moment that I remember that said a lot about the guy was when he FINALLY got past Boston in the playoffs a few years back and he drops to his knees at midcourt, face-in-hands with this fake sobbing going on. Then he gets up and will not leave the court. He literally wanders around looking for a camera to stick his face in so that he can continue this embarrassing exhibition of fake emotion he wants out there as part of his image.

Read my initial post. I was talking about guys that I know that don't watch basketball, but have very strong opinions of Lebron and his "big, ugly nose". He's very polarizing, even for non basketball fans. These are the same guys that have strong opinions of Colin Kaepernick, even though they might be able to only name a handful of NFL players. I know I didn't post this earlier, but they are the same guys that call basketball "African handball".

Who is brainwashing me, and what are they saying?

[tenn_smoothie]

They are teaching you that any negative opinions about a black person always includes some degree of racism.

Also - it isn't necessary to know anything about football to be negative about Kapernick because he has so much hate for this country that most of us love.

Your other point, your friends don't like Lebron because he has an unattractive facial feature not uncommon to black people ? Are they disliking his physical appearance or judging what type of a person he his based strictly on his nose ?