Jamalisms Posted April 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Interesting concept and I agree somewhat, but what if there is a genuinely interested and willing heir to the throne. Would that be up for an owners meeting vote, and if it is denied can you imagine any sort of law suit that would follow. I would assume that in this case, the league may allow the "sale" to an heir. That'd be up to the league's normal sale guidelines, and if there was a feeling that someone was truly interested and capable... I'm sure they would receive special consideration. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opus74 Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Franchises are a license that the league sells to the owner. Once sold, they can't be arbitrarily cancelled. The league would have a hard time instituting a rule that would have that kind of negative financial effect. I don't think any court in the land would uphold that sort of rule. It comes back to the basic concept of "property." A franchise is the team owner's property and is part of his estate. It's called Capitalism. However, I would make an exception for Mike Brown. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted April 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 It would simply be a modification of the license, then. There is no financial loss, as the family gets proceeds from a sale. --- This is all theoretical, as the owners would have to agree to cut their own families out of a cherished endeavor... and even Benson likely believe his granddaughter will come around... because we're all capable of hopeful self-delusion. But in discussing the theory, the arguments against it seem easily offset. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.