08-14-2012, 07:34 AM #1
Property of Twins
I know that Thrylos' thread was closed and if TPTB decide to delete this one as well that is fine.
I think that the Property of Twins was appropriate in regards to Delmon and it had nothing to do with race.
I believe that players are Property of their clubs until they have achieved enough service time to become free agents. Up until that time, the club owns their rights and it is their choice whether or not the players are a part of the team.
After they become free agents the players can the control and can choose which team they want to play for, thus they are referred to as members.
08-14-2012, 07:43 AM #2
That makes sense as property implies ownership, which clubs have over players for six years. I have no real problem with the use of the word, though I can understand how others may feel differently.
But whether you agree or disagree with its usage, the term certainly does not make Dick Bremer a racist.
08-14-2012, 07:52 AM #3
My feeling is that if the players had a big problem with this it would be mentioned by the Player's Association. I don't think it would be the worst thing to have the term banned in the next CBA.
But I'm not going to call for people getting fired over it either. This is an educational problem, not a knee-jerk one.
08-14-2012, 07:59 AM #4
Give Dick a break and safely conclude that property means absolutely nothing and was one word out of a thousand different words uttered in the space of 3 hours of a slow moving game... That was game 115 out of a 162 game season.
Also... How closely do you have to listen and pay attention to the thousands of words said in game 115 out of 162 to even catch "property" or "member" and who the hell else notices such things? How hard do you have to look for it???
You pretty much need a microscope to see racism in this situation and industrial strength molehill to mountain machinery to even present it to others.
Last edited by Riverbrian; 08-14-2012 at 08:03 AM.
08-14-2012, 08:09 AM #5
I'm gonna say he's a racist, not KKK outwardly but a closet racist like 90% of America.
08-14-2012, 08:18 AM #6
As a middle-class white male, stuff happens around me all that time that I never consider "racist" or "hurtful" but that doesn't mean it isn't hurtful to others. Admittedly, I'm oblivious to many such incidents because they don't affect me, my heritage, or my immediate circle of friends/family.
Either way, it does not make him a racist. It might make him a little oblivious to things he says (something we're all guilty of doing, no matter your race or creed) but it doesn't make him some kind of White Devil and calling him out as such is over the top and unnecessarily inflammatory.
08-14-2012, 08:21 AM #7
08-14-2012, 08:21 AM #8
A site run and populated by a bunch of white 20-30 something year old males, I'm shocked no one else has taken offense to this.
08-14-2012, 08:22 AM #9
08-14-2012, 08:27 AM #10
I heard the statement last night. My eyebrow raised for a second, especially after saying that Thome was a member of the team. And then I continued watching the game and forgot about the comment. It wasn't Bremer's finest word choice, but I don't think he meant it the way some are interpreting. If he wants to apologize to Delmon, fine. If not, I don't think anyone will really notice.Posts on other sites:
08-14-2012, 08:33 AM #11
Speaking of inflammatory, how are you this morning, DPJ?
08-14-2012, 08:37 AM #12
08-14-2012, 08:39 AM #13
Can someone please find an example of Jason Whitlock or Doug Glanville describing a player as a team's property to put this inane discussion to bed?
The using the word property to describe an athlete belonging to a sports franchise has been around forever. Being that it has been used for both white and non-white individuals, it cannot be described as a racist. If you, average joe, take offense at being called property, it's not racist, just offensive to you.
If you dig hard enough, you can "find" -ism in just about any comment made describing an individual, especially if the comment is not positive. Racism, sexism, ageism... Where does the line stop?
08-14-2012, 08:39 AM #14
08-14-2012, 08:45 AM #15
Listen, I heard Bremer say that last night too, and my first thought was that it is a very unfortunate way of saying that he was under team control. It's a saying that most announcers and sports writers have used. I would never feel comfortable saying it myself. But there was no racially motivated tone to it.
It's certainly not meant as a racist comment. The same can be said for Mastroianni, Deduno, Delmon or anyone who signs a baseball contract.
Because of baseball's anti-trust exemption, frankly, players can be traded elsewhere without their permission. that's a sad part of the game. It makes Bremer's statement accurate.But like I said, I think there are other phrases that could be used to state the same thing.
Please note - I think this is a good, fair discussion. I do think it is a fair topic for discussion. The reason that Thrylos's thread was taken down last night was because of the name-calling, not because of the topic. There is a better way to tell Thrylos that you/we disagree with him. There are several comments above that are offensive, and that's ridiculous!
08-14-2012, 09:26 AM #16
I don't know how most of you caught the statement. Bremer drones on and on so much my ears automatically tune him out most of the time.
Technically, I think, it is the player's contract that is property of the club, not the player. But I wouldn't call Bremer out on this specific example. I suspect that he might have applied the same terminology to Valencia or Neshek or Breslow or any number of other former Twins players -- and I think many of us may have used the same terminology on occasion. Especially if we are speaking or in live chat where you don't review and edit your comments the way you can here.
There is a lot of racism in this world. I know I'm guilty at times (although I hope I catch it in my mind before I speak or act on the thought). Bremer's statement just isn't a very good example.
(Oh, and the differentiation with Thome may have been as much due to his age and professional accomplishments as much as race. Okay, that's probably age-ism but most of us are guilty of that, too)
08-14-2012, 09:36 AM #17
The "Property Of ____" term has been around for quite awhile to describe all players as others have mentioned. Before Free Agency in the 1970s, it was probably a little more accurate (but of course, it was still no comparison to actual human trafficking, which continues today in many parts of the world) . It doesn't help matters that one player (Thome) was described as "a member of" and another (Delmon) as "Property of" in the same telecast. It is a terminology that should be dropped. "Under team control" is more likely the best way to put it.
I'd like to give Dick Bremer the benefit of the doubt and assume that he just used an outdated and unfortunate term.
What do people think of the t-shirts that are seen all over the place that say "Property Of ____ Athletic Department" ? Is that a different thing? Do people wear them ironically?
08-14-2012, 09:36 AM #18
08-14-2012, 09:44 AM #19
08-14-2012, 09:49 AM #20
The thing that ticked me off last night was that he describe a black guy as "property of" and a white guy as "member of" in the same sentence.
Is he a "racist"? I don't want to think so, but I still believe that these terms are unfortunate and his word choice to describe the 2 former Twins also unfortunate. Yes I might be sensitive on the subject. As far as whether someone is a "property" of a team (metaphorically), I think that actually a player has more power than the team as far as a working relationship goes. Yes his contract can be sold to another team but he will be making the same money. The team cannot fire him without paying him the rest of the what he is owed, but he can quit anytime (retire...)
Just an unfortunate wording.
About the property of... shirts (and scrubs in hospitals btw.) It is the shirt that it property of, not the wearer In the Old days practice shirts were property of athletic departments and they had to stay there after games etc. Nobody could have then (thus a forbidden fruit that started that craze in the 70s and 80s...) and then colleges sold them at their bookstores.
I might have over reacted but it was the use of different word for teammates of different race that did it. I don't even think that the guy meant it... but he needs to know that was he said is about as Kosher as what Delmon did in NYC...
As far as the tone of the commentary on the other thread, if someone decides to not argue on the topic but on the poster, I tune them out-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch