Jump to content

Rebranding the Braves?


coco1997

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

In a direct answer, is having a stadium in a mostly white area a bad thing?

 

Translation: "Will someone please take the bait? I have a really great (insert false equivalency/reverse racism/etc. here) argument that I'm just dying to make." B)

 

BB52Big.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply
30 minutes ago, rams80 said:

 

If you are explicitly moving there because it is mostly white, it's not a good look.

I think you're using the word affluent and white interchangeably. From what I read, the county they moved to paid for about $400 million of the stadium.The move also solved the issue of traffic fans had been having with the downtown location. On top of that it allowed the Braves to build a large amount of infrastructure around the park to lease out to businesses (all of which they own). The only color the Braves really cared about was green. The area is also majority white (although not anywhere near totally white). My original point was, using the word "lilly-white" as a pejorative term to describe an area, while implying that moving to a majority white area is a negative in and of it self ,without giving a reason as to why, comes across as needlessly divisive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

Translation: "Will someone please take the bait? I have a really great (insert false equivalency/reverse racism/etc. here) argument that I'm just dying to make." B)

Did I live up to your imagined version of me? I believe what you did is called "building a straw man". I hate using popular nomenclature in a debate, it just feels lazy, but I feel it described your post pretty well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

Did I live up to your imagined version of me? I believe what you did is called "building a straw man". I hate using popular nomenclature in a debate, it just feels lazy, but I feel it described your post pretty well.

I think you just described yourself, personally. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

My original point was, using the word "lilly-white" as a pejorative term to describe an area, while implying that moving to a majority white area is a negative in and of it self ,without giving a reason as to why, comes across as needlessly divisive

And the point of others is that it looks bad for the team to move from an ethnically diverse neighbourhood to one that's mostly white. 

It comes across as the team not wanting to associate with non-white fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I think you just described yourself, personally. 

I'm a straw man?

16 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

And the point of others is that it looks bad for the team to move from an ethnically diverse neighbourhood to one that's mostly white. 

It comes across as the team not wanting to associate with non-white fans.

To feel this way is to ignore all of the problems , not based on race, that came with staying in the metro area. The problems of the metro location have nothing to do with it being non white, and the solutions provided by the new location have nothing to do with the demographics being mostly white. This was a decision driven by money. Racism exists, blatant explicit racism. This isn't that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, O.C.D said:

I'm a straw man?

I feel like you're constructing your own straw men to fight against. You're ignoring the reasons why people are critical of the Braves' move and creating your own to be mad about. 

No one said having a stadium in a mostly white neighbourhood is bad. That's an argument no one's making that you insist on arguing against regardless. 

The issue people have isn't that the stadium is in a mostly white neighbourhood. The issue people have is that they moved from a diverse neighbourhood to a mostly white one, sending the message that non-white fans weren't welcome. 

 

I'm quite happy you chose to adresss that point eventually and offer an alternative interpretation. You were constructing straw men there for a while though. 

 

3 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

Racism exists, blatant explicit racism.

Racism can be blatant and explicit. It can also be subtle and under the radar. Neither should be acceptable. 

 

6 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

To feel this way is to ignore all of the problems that came with staying in the metro area.

Again, thanks for eventually addressing that people weren't criticizing the stadium being in a white neighbourhood, but rather the move from a diverse one to a less diverse one. I feel like had you made this point earlier instead of arguing against a position that no one was making we'd all be further along. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I feel like you're constructing your own straw men to fight against. You're ignoring the reasons why people are critical of the Braves' move and creating your own to be mad about. 

No one said having a stadium in a mostly white neighbourhood is bad. That's an argument no one's making that you insist on arguing against regardless. 

The issue people have isn't that the stadium is in a mostly white neighbourhood. The issue people have is that they moved from a diverse neighbourhood to a mostly white one, sending the message that non-white fans weren't welcome. 

 

I'm quite happy you chose to adresss that point eventually and offer an alternative interpretation. You were constructing straw men there for a w

I initially responded to someone calling a suburb lilly white in a pejorative way. It wasn't the only reason he thought the move was bad (bad was an over simplified term, I should have said "an issue"), but the whiteness of the area was a reason. So while no one explicitly said "having a stadium in a mostly white neighborhood is bad", a problem they have is the fact that the stadium moved to a mostly white area, after being in a more racially diverse area. I asked the question "why is moving to a mostly white area a bad thing?" and the answer I got was (essentially) "the old stadium was in an area where more non white people lived, and we feel this move says non-whites aren't welcome anymore"

To say "The issue people have isn't that the stadium is in a mostly white neighborhood" is false. It's 50% of this particular issue (the other 50% being that it's moving from a higher non white population zone) if they had moved to an area that wasn't majority white I don't think it wouldn't be brought up as an issue people have with the move. It's not like the Braves left a better deal on the table in Atlanta just to get out of the city, if that were the case i'd be more inclined to see things your way.

 

With all that being said, to ignore all the financial (and practical) benefits of this move in order to frame this as a racial issue, is not only missing the bigger picture of why this move actually happened, it is also being needlessly divisive. These are my opinions, I understand other people have different opinions. I don't think i've portrayed anyone's position inaccurately, and so, I don't agree that i've been building and fighting straw men. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, O.C.D said:

Did I live up to your imagined version of me? I believe what you did is called "building a straw man". I hate using popular nomenclature in a debate, it just feels lazy, but I feel it described your post pretty well.

 

Pretty much.

 

With regard to your "straw man" bit, see Ice_Cap's replies to your posts. There's no need for me to repeat what he said. 

 

BB52Big.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

if they had moved to an area that wasn't majority white I don't think it wouldn't be brought up as an issue people have with the move.

 

Yeah, I'm guessing that no one would have brought up the Braves moving to a "majority white" area if the Braves hadn't moved to a "majority white" area. Astute observation. Well done. 

 

BB52Big.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

I don't think i've portrayed anyone's position inaccurately,

I disagree. No one ever said a stadium in a white neighbourhood was bad. That's a position you pulled out of thin air to argue against. IE a straw man. 

 

The argument was that the team was sending a message that non-white fans weren't welcome. 

In my opinion? You successfully provided a counter argument by emphasising the logistical and economic advantages to the move. Had you gone straight to that rather than going on about an argument no one was making we wouldn't be in this rut.

 

18 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

it is also being needlessly divisive. 

I don't think so. It was a legitimate concern. Your economic and logistical argument is a fine counter argument to it, and I truly wish that you had gone there instead of inventing the phantom argument of "why do people think it's bad to have a stadium in a white neighbourhood?" 

That was more divisive than anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

Pretty much.

 

With regard to your "straw man" bit, see Ice_Cap's replies to your posts. There's no need for me to repeat what he said. 

You built a straw man of me. Ice_cap said I was building a straw man. I responded to his statement. You didn't respond to mine. Repeating Ice_Caps response would have no relevance to what you said.

 

9 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

Yeah, I'm guessing that no one would have brought up the Braves moving to a "majority white" area if the Braves hadn't moved to a "majority white" area. Astute observation. Well done. 

Let me explain the idea behind the statement you're referring to. See, what I was trying to convey here was the idea that if all things remained the same in the equation of why the Braves moved, but it was to an area with a non-white majority, I think no one would say it was a move fueled by racism. Were the Braves being racist when they moved? You might think they were. If they moved into an area with the exact same benefits, but the majority race was non white, would you still consider the motives racist? I'd think probably not. If all things were the same, and all you changed was the majority race of both areas, but you'd think of one move as racist and the other as not, you're not seeing the financial reasons that made the move happen, and you're assuming you know the character and intent of the people who made this decision. I hope you better understand what I was trying to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I disagree. No one ever said a stadium in a white neighbourhood was bad. That's a position you pulled out of thin air to argue against. IE a straw man. 

 

The argument was that the team was sending a message that non-white fans weren't welcome. 

In my opinion? You successfully provided a counter argument by emphasising the logistical and economic advantages to the move. Had you gone straight to that rather than going on about an argument no one was making we wouldn't be in this rut.

 

I don't think so. It was a legitimate concern. Your economic and logistical argument is a fine counter argument to it, and I truly wish that you had gone there instead of inventing the phantom argument of "why do people think it's bad to have a stadium in a white neighbourhood?" 

That was more divisive than anything.

I agree that no one said having a stadium in a white neighborhood was bad. I saw lilly white as a negative portrayal of the area they moved to simply because it was a white area. Maybe I read into a phrase an intent that wasn't meant, i'm willing to coincide that. I think we can both see that some people see the move from a more racially diverse area into a majority white area as a negative (not because the area they moved to is majority white, but that moving to a majority white area after being in a racially diverse area is seen as an attempt to get away from non white fans). That seems to have answered my initial question, but that wasn't the response I first got, so I asked again and we've gotten to this point. 

 

I can see why people would view this as an issue. It's seems like a difference of opinions between what motivated the move. I might be underestimating how many truly racist people exist, and how deeply their motivations are effected by it, or the other side might be seeing racism in a situation that was only really motivated by money, or maybe it's a mixture of both. I don't know. I'd rather not assume the worst of the people who made the move, and in general i'll try not to assume the worst of people on here either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
On 5/16/2017 at 5:52 PM, aawagner011 said:

 

While the reasons for moving can be debated, the area around Turner Field had always been poor. Acres and acres of parking lots and run down buildings. While it was still downtown, it was nowhere within walking distance of really anything. The Braves tried for years to develop around the stadium but the city wouldn't permit it because the city owned the parking lots and didn't want to give them up. 

 

Atlanta is very much a commuter city. The vast majority of the fan base lives in the suburbs. Driving through the city to get to games was a nightmare as our two main highways converge into one single main road right through downtown. It could take 2 hours to go 25 miles. The closest our rail lines would drop you off was still about a mile away from the stadium. 

 

Turner Field was built for the Olympics and is now being converted to a football facility for Georgia State University and the surrounding area is finally being redeveloped. It's really a win-win for everyone. Georgia State gets a nice facility (and they are building a baseball park where Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium used to be). The stadium is now going into its "third life," which is almost unheard of for Olympic facilities now. So many Olympic stadiums are white elephants months after the games end. 

 

The Braves are only 12 miles or so up the road and now have things to actually do around the ballpark. You can basically spend the entire day there if you want. At Turner, all you could do was pull your car up and tailgate out in the lot. There was literally nothing to do. The Battery development around the new park is incredible and the stadium is very nice, too.

But Cobb County still won't let  MARTA in, so.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2017 at 8:32 PM, Ice_Cap said:

And the point of others is that it looks bad for the team to move from an ethnically diverse neighbourhood to one that's mostly white. 

It comes across as the team not wanting to associate with non-white fans.

I know one thing... predominantly black neighborhoods tend to be as or less diverse than suburbs, the foolishness identity politics encourages just causes most people to ignore this.

Given that folks would consider the area I live in diverse (I'm black, my neighbors on one side are white, and there are a good number of Mexican families on the block), I can't fault the Braves for not wanting to whitewash graffiti or chase drug addicts away on a regular basis, for example.

Anything else on the subject, I think I'll say in the lounge.

2016cubscreamsig.png

A strong mind gets high off success, a weak mind gets high off bull🤬

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.