jrodmc wrote:Glad you bumped this Nalod.

So lets recap:
Mark Jackson got hired as a completely untried, unexperienced head coach for a Bay Area NBA franchise. Near San Francisco. As a supposedly homophobic Christian man. And lasted there a few years and got the team to a level it hadn't been since Rick Barry was playing.

Mark Jackson develops documented issues with members of ownership and the management, but is well-liked by his players.

After bowing out in the 1st round this season, he is summarily fired. No one mentions the personality issues have anything to do with homophobia, which most would agree, if possible, any casual person observing the media today would know the media would sell their own bodily organs to be able to publicize.

Now Mark Jackson, the ex-Knick, ex-NYC native is not a fit for the Knicks because he doesn't happen to morally agree with the sexual preference of homosexuality, for stated religious reasons. I would think most in here would be able to acknowledge that what you prefer to do with your dick is a question of morality. Especially if you feel the need to announce it to the world and label yourself by said preference.

Charlie Ward, John Starks and Alan Houston are all Christians and ex-Knicks and some present/former members of management who would probably hold somewhat the same opinion along the same lines.

Now follow me, here, because I realize many of you post and type words without bothering to even wonder what they actually mean.

Homophobia is defined as an irrational fear, aversion or discrimination against homosexuals. Does Mark Jackson strike you as someone who's afraid, averse or discriminating against homosexuals? Is a man's morality now something he should keep in the closet, in order not to offend those who think their morality is the only one fit for public display? Is morality irrational, unless you leave it in your own home?

There are those of you truly living in a bizarro world where you would actually worry about a person's moral stance costing some shekels to an owner who has had some of the most documented public relations nightmares in the history of the NBA (and seems to enjoy them) and use this angst as your primary reason to keep from endorsing someone for a coaching job. I suppose if he was gay, we'd be waving banners and picking out ties for him to wear on the bench at MSG. Does that strike you as just a bit intolerant and bigoted?

Can the man coach this team? Would he be a hard azz with JR? Would he be able to push Melo? Can he get more out of Tyson? Would he be able to embrace the Dear Triangle and possibly get Shump/Pablo/Toure to run it? What affect would he have on THJr? What kind of talent scout is he?
These are important questions.

rick welts, the warriors team president, is gay. it seems like mark jackson's christian values could not be repressed enough to not cause friction. it was an unhealthy situation on an inter-social, i mean interpersonal, level. you pick a vibe of intolerance and discrimination-- not irrational fear but intolerance-- and it can have consequences. real talk.

yes, morality is irrational because it is based on religion and religious values, not humanism. religion is at heart irrational which is why humanism has supplanted it. what matters is whether one is ethical, that is, behaving in a way that does not harm others. more people have been murdered and slandered in the name of religion than just about any other cause.

mark jackson won't be able to coach in new york unless dolan insists, in which case we are back to the same farce we are trying to get out of.

but can mark jackson coach? some people think that he is basically saying "give it to curry and let things happen." sound familiar? that won't fly in new york under jackson, phil jackson.

jrodmc wrote:

dk7th wrote:

jrodmc wrote:Glad you bumped this Nalod.

So lets recap:
Mark Jackson got hired as a completely untried, unexperienced head coach for a Bay Area NBA franchise. Near San Francisco. As a supposedly homophobic Christian man. And lasted there a few years and got the team to a level it hadn't been since Rick Barry was playing.

Mark Jackson develops documented issues with members of ownership and the management, but is well-liked by his players.

After bowing out in the 1st round this season, he is summarily fired. No one mentions the personality issues have anything to do with homophobia, which most would agree, if possible, any casual person observing the media today would know the media would sell their own bodily organs to be able to publicize.

Now Mark Jackson, the ex-Knick, ex-NYC native is not a fit for the Knicks because he doesn't happen to morally agree with the sexual preference of homosexuality, for stated religious reasons. I would think most in here would be able to acknowledge that what you prefer to do with your dick is a question of morality. Especially if you feel the need to announce it to the world and label yourself by said preference.

Charlie Ward, John Starks and Alan Houston are all Christians and ex-Knicks and some present/former members of management who would probably hold somewhat the same opinion along the same lines.

Now follow me, here, because I realize many of you post and type words without bothering to even wonder what they actually mean.

Homophobia is defined as an irrational fear, aversion or discrimination against homosexuals. Does Mark Jackson strike you as someone who's afraid, averse or discriminating against homosexuals? Is a man's morality now something he should keep in the closet, in order not to offend those who think their morality is the only one fit for public display? Is morality irrational, unless you leave it in your own home?

There are those of you truly living in a bizarro world where you would actually worry about a person's moral stance costing some shekels to an owner who has had some of the most documented public relations nightmares in the history of the NBA (and seems to enjoy them) and use this angst as your primary reason to keep from endorsing someone for a coaching job. I suppose if he was gay, we'd be waving banners and picking out ties for him to wear on the bench at MSG. Does that strike you as just a bit intolerant and bigoted?

Can the man coach this team? Would he be a hard azz with JR? Would he be able to push Melo? Can he get more out of Tyson? Would he be able to embrace the Dear Triangle and possibly get Shump/Pablo/Toure to run it? What affect would he have on THJr? What kind of talent scout is he?
These are important questions.

rick welts, the warriors team president, is gay. it seems like mark jackson's christian values could not be repressed enough to not cause friction. it was an unhealthy situation on an inter-social, i mean interpersonal, level. you pick a vibe of intolerance and discrimination-- not irrational fear but intolerance-- and it can have consequences. real talk.

yes, morality is irrational because it is based on religion and religious values, not humanism. religion is at heart irrational which is why humanism has supplanted it. what matters is whether one is ethical, that is, behaving in a way that does not harm others. more people have been murdered and slandered in the name of religion than just about any other cause.

mark jackson won't be able to coach in new york unless dolan insists, in which case we are back to the same farce we are trying to get out of.

but can mark jackson coach? some people think that he is basically saying "give it to curry and let things happen." sound familiar? that won't fly in new york under jackson, phil jackson.

Like I stated, then why isn't Rick Welts posting "Jackson the Homophobe" all over the world? Because that's not the issue, obviously. Is Welts christophobic? Is he afraid of alienating the Duck Dynasty crowd in the Bay Area? Consequences would show themselves and not be hidden and covered up in your humanist utopia freak world you're living in. Reality.

Ethical, and where does your "don't harm others come from", might I ask? Your mindless, purposeless, ever evolving DNA? And why do the majority of the population of the earth subscribe to irrational religions, since humanism has supplanted it? What planet are you living on now, Superman?

Pol Pot (communist atheist), Hitler (Darwinist atheist), Stalin (communist atheist) and Chairman Mao (communist atheist) all say hello. Count up those bodies in your atheistic, humanistic utopias and get back to me about the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Salem Witch Trials. Are you really this idiotic? These are facts that have been available since you were in fourth grade.

Some people? Really? Mark Jackson is being cited in the links you can read on the main page here at the UK as a an excellent coach who led his team to winning records in the vaunted, tough Western conference. The Warriors were cited most of this past season for their defensive prowess. And that with No D-Lee! But it's all about "hand the ball to curry" because 1) you say "some people think", and 2) you're overarching fear of hiring a religiously motivated coach who might not agree with your humanistic, incoherent worldview.

Why don't you try thinking for a little while.

if you are going to go off the deep end here at least know how to tread water. your hysterical rhetoric is hardly worth addressing at this point. but if you want to get a sound thrashing by me, just ask.

smackeddog wrote:How is Marc Jackson an upgrade over Woody? He attracted the same criticism for his poor offensive schemes and reliance on iso.

Completely agree. Jackson had a wealth of very talented scorers and the best offense he could cool up was ISO ISO ISO. Now, I'm not someone who is anti-ISO as it has it's time and place but Mark Jackson did not seem to be very imaginative on offense. I know, I know, 51 wins, playoffs, OK. Woodson had a largely similar resume in NYC before the wheels came off and he was certainly exposed in the playoffs last year and at the end of games this year where opposing teams knew EXACTLY, 100 % of the time, bet your mothers life on what was coming.

I'm not a fan of hiring Mark Jackson, I'm just not. However, IF Phil does make the call and hire him I will be on board. I've states countless times for the time being and until proven that Phil Jackson is a nincompoop Prez/GM I'm trusting in his moves and won't levy criticism. I guess I'm still in the honeymoon phase. Hopefully the ugly divorce/bitter/now were doomed to suck for another decade phase doesn't come this time as it has so many times before.

jrodmc wrote:

dk7th wrote:

jrodmc wrote:Glad you bumped this Nalod.

So lets recap:
Mark Jackson got hired as a completely untried, unexperienced head coach for a Bay Area NBA franchise. Near San Francisco. As a supposedly homophobic Christian man. And lasted there a few years and got the team to a level it hadn't been since Rick Barry was playing.

Mark Jackson develops documented issues with members of ownership and the management, but is well-liked by his players.

After bowing out in the 1st round this season, he is summarily fired. No one mentions the personality issues have anything to do with homophobia, which most would agree, if possible, any casual person observing the media today would know the media would sell their own bodily organs to be able to publicize.

Now Mark Jackson, the ex-Knick, ex-NYC native is not a fit for the Knicks because he doesn't happen to morally agree with the sexual preference of homosexuality, for stated religious reasons. I would think most in here would be able to acknowledge that what you prefer to do with your dick is a question of morality. Especially if you feel the need to announce it to the world and label yourself by said preference.

Charlie Ward, John Starks and Alan Houston are all Christians and ex-Knicks and some present/former members of management who would probably hold somewhat the same opinion along the same lines.

Now follow me, here, because I realize many of you post and type words without bothering to even wonder what they actually mean.

Homophobia is defined as an irrational fear, aversion or discrimination against homosexuals. Does Mark Jackson strike you as someone who's afraid, averse or discriminating against homosexuals? Is a man's morality now something he should keep in the closet, in order not to offend those who think their morality is the only one fit for public display? Is morality irrational, unless you leave it in your own home?

There are those of you truly living in a bizarro world where you would actually worry about a person's moral stance costing some shekels to an owner who has had some of the most documented public relations nightmares in the history of the NBA (and seems to enjoy them) and use this angst as your primary reason to keep from endorsing someone for a coaching job. I suppose if he was gay, we'd be waving banners and picking out ties for him to wear on the bench at MSG. Does that strike you as just a bit intolerant and bigoted?

Can the man coach this team? Would he be a hard azz with JR? Would he be able to push Melo? Can he get more out of Tyson? Would he be able to embrace the Dear Triangle and possibly get Shump/Pablo/Toure to run it? What affect would he have on THJr? What kind of talent scout is he?
These are important questions.

rick welts, the warriors team president, is gay. it seems like mark jackson's christian values could not be repressed enough to not cause friction. it was an unhealthy situation on an inter-social, i mean interpersonal, level. you pick a vibe of intolerance and discrimination-- not irrational fear but intolerance-- and it can have consequences. real talk.

yes, morality is irrational because it is based on religion and religious values, not humanism. religion is at heart irrational which is why humanism has supplanted it. what matters is whether one is ethical, that is, behaving in a way that does not harm others. more people have been murdered and slandered in the name of religion than just about any other cause.

mark jackson won't be able to coach in new york unless dolan insists, in which case we are back to the same farce we are trying to get out of.

but can mark jackson coach? some people think that he is basically saying "give it to curry and let things happen." sound familiar? that won't fly in new york under jackson, phil jackson.

Like I stated, then why isn't Rick Welts posting "Jackson the Homophobe" all over the world? Because that's not the issue, obviously. Is Welts christophobic? Is he afraid of alienating the Duck Dynasty crowd in the Bay Area? Consequences would show themselves and not be hidden and covered up in your humanist utopia freak world you're living in. Reality.

Ethical, and where does your "don't harm others come from", might I ask? Your mindless, purposeless, ever evolving DNA? And why do the majority of the population of the earth subscribe to irrational religions, since humanism has supplanted it? What planet are you living on now, Superman?

Pol Pot (communist atheist), Hitler (Darwinist atheist), Stalin (communist atheist) and Chairman Mao (communist atheist) all say hello. Count up those bodies in your atheistic, humanistic utopias and get back to me about the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Salem Witch Trials. Are you really this idiotic? These are facts that have been available since you were in fourth grade.

Some people? Really? Mark Jackson is being cited in the links you can read on the main page here at the UK as a an excellent coach who led his team to winning records in the vaunted, tough Western conference. The Warriors were cited most of this past season for their defensive prowess. And that with No D-Lee! But it's all about "hand the ball to curry" because 1) you say "some people think", and 2) you're overarching fear of hiring a religiously motivated coach who might not agree with your humanistic, incoherent worldview.

Why don't you try thinking for a little while.

Jrod: Let me preface this with saying that I'm an atheist, just like Pol Pot, etc. I know you're too smart to lump us all into a group whose primary trait in common is genocidal mania so I'll work under the assumuption you were generalizing and using hyperbole to prove a point to DK

Ok, I'm an atheist but I am not anti religion, anti Christian, etc. I am
however, anti fanatic. Any kind of fanatic: religious, political, atheistic (sp?), you name it. Now, I'm not implying Mark Jackson is a fanatic as I don't know the man, but I've seen some troubling stories about how he kept a mistress (I'm assuming he admonished sin and sinning and sinners in his sermons as pastor--unless I missed some new developments in Christian thought and perhaps dispensations for those types of indiscretions are once again being doled out), and further tried to push his beliefs onto others, etc. This, to me, is troubling. Just as I don't push my atheism on others, I would immediately lose respect for anyone in a position of power over me who tried to push their beliefs on me. I'm sorry, but I just cannot abide by that. If it's true Mark Jackson's RELIGION in any way interfered with his job as coach of an NBA team, that is just not acceptable in my opinion.

When a persons religious beliefs begin to spill over into the workplace or even into the media vis a vis their workplace, or they actively try to impose these views on others, I am immediately turned off. I apologize if this is offensive to religious people but I have never once told a Christian or a Jew or an Arab that their deeply held convictions and beliefs are a load of bull**** and that I cannot even fathom how someone in the 21st century could think there's a dude IN THE SKY who gives two flying fuhucks who some bag of chromosomes sticks their ding-a-ling at night, or who wins the Super Bowl

See, that would be a pretty offensive thing to say I would imagine if I said I to a religious persons face. Conversely, if Mark Jackson was my coach and stated ranting about the devil after him, or that he is "praying" for gay married couples, etc etc I would similarly be uncomfortable. That may sound silly but it's true. Implying there is a devil whose gonna roast me indiscriminately for all eternity right next to serial killers and rapists because I don't happen to go to church or pray is offensive, ya know?

TL;DR--Religious? Antireligious? Keep your beliefs to yourself at work.

- Chris Herring

Have not read all the post so if this is redundant I apologize. The link is to an articles which point out the split between the owner and MJ based upon the conflict between the owner's sexual orientation and Jackson's religious view as well as the interference with Jackson's pastoral duties and coaching

Clean - the Golden State Warriors won big without one of their best players, David Lee, and the best you can offer is some tripe about not getting open shots?

Did the a Warriors love their coach and play hard for him?

Yes or no?

misterearl wrote:How many times during the season did you watch Golden State and think, "gee, I wish my team hustled, played defense and shared the ball like that?"

Be honest.