The Kansas City Chiefs of the National Football League have decided to release running back Larry Johnson after deciding to suspend him after he "he posted on his Twitter account a gay slur, insulted followers and questioned the competence of head coach Todd Haley."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/11/09/chiefs.ap/index.html
Some say his dismissal was because it was what was best for the team. However, others believe that fans played a large role in the decision...
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4622503
Which set of reasoning do you believe? Did the fans ultimately make the decision? Would listening to the fan base when making decisions like this be a positive thing or does it open the club up to potential problems in the future? Is it ultimately right that Larry Johnson was released for making candid comments? (due 11/15)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The fans hold a crucial role in the game. With no fans, there can be no profit. Ultimately, the coach has the final say in this type of situation. He may have been flooded with people saying he should let Johnson come back, but he could have denied it and he could have made the decision keep Johnson out, but i think decided he listened to the fans and put him back in in order to satisfy them.
ReplyDeleteI believe that in some cases, suspending somebody because of insulting fans and your head coach is a good thing. If the fans end up being unhappy with something such as this, the coach wants to do something that is ultimately right. What was right is suspending Larry Johnson. So in some cases, this can be a positive outcome.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Calvin. The fans do play a major role. The fans are what thrive the team. Without fans, attendence goes down, and without attendence, the team itself may go down. The coach did the right thing.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think you may need to go and read the linked articles. The Chiefs did not allow him to play, they released him from his contract. The fans started a petition to get him released so that he would not have the opportunity to break a team reccord.
ReplyDeleteI agree with John in the sence that the coach made a good role in staying on the fan's side. This will most likely increase the amount of attendance for a short wile. But i dont think he did the right thing completely. If johnson was about to break a team record, he was obviously a good player. Releaseing him from his contract may have actually been bad in the long-run.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the Kansas City Chiefs had a key role in Johnsons removal from the team. He angered the fans who are obviously the backbone of the NFL, especially in this economic recession. If a played says something to anger a fan they will not want to go to the game and the teams game participation will be harmed. This will in tern harm the team. The fans are truly the controllers of the NFL. Some might say that if the NFL player offends Lebron he has great control over the NFl,but the fans have much more power.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Calvin on saying that the coach did a good job of staying out of a bad situation. Some might say he tried to avoid the situation but if he commented more on the insults from Johnson he could have made it worse. He did the right and mature thing of letting others judge the situation and the outcome seemed to be fine. If he had joined in this insulting he would have made fans look at him in a different light.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Johnny when he says that suspending Johnson was the right thing to do. He angered the fans who hold great influence over the NFL. If he felt that way about those people he insulted he could have just kept it to himself. Instead he crossed the line and got what he deserved for it. Nothing on the internet is private anymore and those were things he should have kept private.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Calvin. The fan base is probably the most important thing to these organizations other than winning a super bowl because obviously they are the ones who keep them in business. Now do i agree with the strict policy over the gay slurs and things like that? No. They're grown men and American and should have the right to say whats on their mind.
ReplyDeleteThis was obviously not that big of a deal for the kansas city chiefs. I deffinately think it was a cover up to say that. I mean come on, they are 1-7 with a big time quarterback thats brought little results and their coach is younger than Mr. Stryker. I think they got bigger things to worry about than what larry johnson puts on his twitter. I think since it was an individual act that just the NFL should have to deal with it, not the organization.
ReplyDeleteI think the fans play a big role in this situation especially. I think listening to the fans is a positive thing, because the fans are the reason the club is there. I think Larry Johnson should have gotten released for his comment. Insulting your fans doesn't only make you look bad, it makes the club look bad too.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with joey when he says that Larry Johnson had a right to say whats on his mind, if it was someone in your class, yeah who cares what they say. But when you are a celebrity you don't have that freedom, because you are in the spotlight and what you say reflects who you are representing. Think before you speak.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Calvin when he says fans are a majority in business. I also agree when he says the coach has the final decision because what his players say is all put back on him, he takes the blame for what they say. I think the coach was right to listen to the fans.
ReplyDeleteI think it was completely justifiable that the Chiefs released him from his contract and that the fans signed a petition to make sure he didn't break a team record. Making gay slurs is definitely a good reason to remove someone from a team because it hurts fans and makes the team look ignorant and gives them a bad name.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Taylor becuase like i said earlier, it was his personal decision on his personal account. He didn't say the kansas city chiefs say this about gays...it said larry johnson did. Whats sad is Larry Johnson is the Chiefs best player. They are already bad enough and they release their best player for something like this. I totally disagree with it all.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the Chiefs made the right decision on realsing Larry Johnson. The gay comments he made on the internet were not acceotable for a NfL player to do and made the chiefs look bad.I also believe that a fans had a major role in the realse of Larry because the team would of made them selves look worse if they would not of released him.
ReplyDeleteI agree with calvin that The fans are in control if the bussniss odf the team. They are in control because they can decide to not attend the games anf this will drop the teams profits and they will lose money. This is wy i believe calivin i right.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Taylor that it was a good idea to remove his contract because of the gay comments he made. He has to take the punishment for offending people and being a bad role model for kids and others. I also agree with taylor that he made the team look bad when he did these actions and they were sort of forced to take actions on this proplem.
ReplyDeleteI think that Kansas City made the right choice. Making "gay" comments is completely inappropriate and detramental to the Chiefs organization. It should not be tolerated in a professional job such as this.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the punishments were just for larry. I think he recieved the consequences that he deserved. I strongly believe that the fans have the right to petition that because they are the ones who the team is mostly dependent on. I think that larry needed to see what words can do to others. Especially negative ones. I think he did learn from this, and i think the coach did what was right for everybody.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both John and Gavin. I believe that the outcome was one that could be seen as positive, and i think that the fans are the main contributers to what the punishments were. The fans hold a lot of power. They do have a say in what happens. Also i think i agree with larry's agent when he says that everybody learned something from this. And can be positive.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Joey, i think what happened happened and the chiefs should take it as seriously as any other ordeal. I believe that the problem was appropiate enough to not be taken lightly. I think there was sufficient amount of thought and attention put into it that larry recieved his jut punishment. He had no right to say the things he did, especially with his image. He is a rolemodel and he messed up, which lead to consequences just like anybody else.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Eric. Making gay slurs should not be tolerated. It is extremely degrading and extreme measures should be taken. It is the same as making racial slurs. Any kind of slur hurts. No one should be hurt like that. Larry Johnson should receive the most extreme punishment possible.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kylie. The problem should not just be taken lightly. Larry is a role model and was given the appropriate punishment for his mistake. He should be treated just like everyone else. Just because he is somewhat of a celebrity doesn't mean that he can just get off easy. His punishment was perfect.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is important that the fans have some say in what goes on with the team. The fans look up to these people, and when they do things that make them and the team look bad, they should face the consequences. I think it is a wise idea to listen to the fan base, especially because they are the ones who follow the team. If Larry Johnson "insulted followers", then the fans have every right to be upset and they should have a say in the decisions made in that type of circumstance.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Joey. Larry posted everything on the internet which makes it not private. Even if it was on his account, the purpose of twitter is to inform everyone about what is going on. So, therefore it doesn't matter if the comments were made on his personal account. He is the one who made the decision in the first place to put in on his account and make it public.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Margaret. The fans do have a major influence over the team, and when you insult your fans or do anything to anger the fans it makes the team look bad too. Why would the chiefs want to keep someone on their team who only makes their image bad? I think that the fans had every right to make the petition, and if had a influence on the teams decision, then so be it. The fans felt it was important for someone good to represent the Kansas City Chiefs, and Larry Johnson wasn't that person.
ReplyDeleteI believe the fans had a big part it in. Just as Roncalli games the student section is a big part of the game. If there was no student section then it would be tottally different. In this situation the fans make up the club. The fans have a right to express how they feel about the comment because they are the main reason for this club. I would feel this way if I was a fan because if I'm supporting something I have to like it to support it and if I think it is wrong then i would say something.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brendan and Calvin. I think the fans have a big part in all this. The fans and the there money is the support for this and if they dont have that then they will not succeed and the business will go down. If the business goes down then there will be no club. So celebrities need to watch what they say because it goes out into the media really quick.
ReplyDeleteI agree with molly and Margaret that the fans are a big indfluence. The reason why fans are there is because they like the team or what they support. If a person makes the team have a bad image then why would they want that person on that team. You need to have people you like on a team to support them. I believe the fans have a right to petition
ReplyDeleteI believe the decision was ultimately made in the best interest of the team. Larry Johnson has been suspended by the team in three straight seasons. With declining productivity, it is obvious that both need to go in separate directions. A professional team can not deal with acting players like Johnson and expect to win.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brennan in the sense that the fans did play a role in the decision, but i belive that the decision was made more for the good of the team. This is obvious through the actions of players like Terrel Owens and Ron Artest. They have a lot of talent but teams can not win with players that believe they are bigger than the team and do not buy into the team concept
ReplyDeleteI agree with Johnny in saying that suspension and eventual release was the right decision. It is crucial for teams to have chemistry if they are going to win. It seems as if Johnson is detrimental to that chemistry. Michael Jordan was probably the greatest basketball player to ever play the game, but he gave it up for two years in part because he said that he hated playing with Scottie Pippen and for Phil Jackson. If Jordan can not overcome those things, it is ridiculous to ask an organization like the Chiefs to do so.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Clayton in the sence that Johnson might have been an acting player. But if he was about to break a record, then they should have cept him on the team. Now, many teams might be trying to get Johnson on thier team. And with an active player like Johnson off the team, he may be out for revenge.
ReplyDeleteBrennan makes a good point. He is a role model and people look up to him. If he does offend and make people upset, others will lose that mindset. He is also a part of the team and that when he makes a remark such as this, fans get the impression that the players on the team are this way also.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it was a good idea for the Chiefs to release Larry Johnson after his gay slurs. We all get upset and angry when we lose or disagree with someone. Sure he shouldn't have used gay slurs but thats no justifications for releasing a great athlete.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Eric's statement. The statements made by Larry Johnson were not detrimental to the Chiefs organization. They were detrimental to his own career. The Chiefs should not have releaed him.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Clayton. The releasing of JOhnson was not in the best interest of the team. He was a good running back. They shouldn't have prevented him from trying to break a record. Johnson shouldn't have said those things but they also shouldn't have released him.
ReplyDeleteI believe that what Larry Johnson said was inappropriate but I also believe that he was released because the team doesn't need someone like that. They haven't been doing well this year and this being in the news probably wasn't too good for the team. Getting rid of him my have been the best decision for the team as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Johnny. He is a role model and fans look up to them. People want their children to look up to soome one who is respectful and someone who doesn't say rude and unnecessary comments. They may also lose fans because the fans may think the whole team feels the way Johnson does.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Clayton. I agree with him because I think that Johnson wasn't helping the teams chemistry in order to make a good team you have to have chemistry with your teammates. This is in which Johnson was not creating.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the Kansas City Chiefs did not listen to the fan base when they decided to release Larry Johnson. I think that no matter what, even if you think that it will affect your fan base then your right but also wrong. You have dedicated fans that do not like Larry Johnson, but vice versa you have fans how love Larry Johnson. I do believe that the outcome will be positive in the long run. It is an example of how much this league does not want to get involved with certain matters such as gay slurs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Genna, what she said is exactly what i said in my post. Getting rid of him was the best choice of all. Even though the suspended him, that meant that he could be on the side line, but now he cannot even do that. So all the attention will go off of them and onto someone else.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Brennan in saying that fans had a major part. I believe that they did not have a major role. The chiefs have a big enough fan base that no matter what the decision they will still have a large crowd. If you look at where they are, the closest team is the St. Louis Rams, and they aren't good. So the Chiefs have nothing to worry about with their fan base.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the fans had a major part in this decision. without the fans the league makes no money and isn't even a league. the fans know that they have the power to influence the coaches decision because they have the money that goes into the pay of everyone in the league.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Massing because he forgets that the fans control everything about the league. no matter how big the fan base they still need to keep the majority happy to make any money. even if they did only lose a couple fans that would cause a downward spiral and cause more people to dislike the chiefs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Genna because without good team chemistry you won't have a good team. Without every part of the machine working perfectly the whole machine will break down. The same principle works for teams. if one player doesn't play by the rules it ruins everyones morale. So losing him was a positive thing and ultimately a good choice by the Cheifs.
ReplyDeletei think that the fans ultimately have a say in what goes on in the club. if they dont like the way the club is being run then they wont go to see games and the chiefs will lose money. thats why i believe the fans have a say in whats going on in their favorite sports club.
ReplyDelete