I missed the Jordan special on ESPN this evening, remembered it just in time to flip and see the closing credits. However, one of the things I find interesting about it is that the author made it sound like it was common knowledge that Jordan was banned for gambling, but after further review, he found that to be false.
They brought it up on the afternoon saloon when interviewing the producer of the Jordan special with Jurko saying "he always believed this". Even hearing Jurko, it sounded like he was talking out his ass just to try and bring up the topic and didn't really believe it.
I mean really? Did this honestly take further review?
Guys like Ruben Patterson have raped people without being suspended and have had it covered up with the help of their teams, but the league was going to decide to ban Jordan due to gambling while he was probably generating a 500 million a year for the league? Please.
The NBA knew exactly how much money Jordan brought in for the league. When he was out, there was talk about the whole league getting together and offering him a league salary on top of his Bulls salary to entice him to come back.
The NBA wasn't going to ban Jordan, the very idea is simply preposterous, especially given the things they've covered up in the past. It surprises me that this theory was given so much credibility over the years, especially given that Jordan had talked about winning and retiring well before retiring, before his dad died and felt betrayed by the media.
I just can't believe that anyone ever seriously gave this thought any credibility whatsoever, but maybe I'm the crazy one.
Sorry, just had to get that off my chest.