Full Show: Stephen A reacts to 5-year George Floyd Anniversary. Diddy Courtroom Drama. NBA recap.

Stephen A. Smith is a New York Times Bestselling Author, Executive Producer, host of ESPN's First Take, and co-host of NBA Countdown.

Support the show: http://www.youtube.com/@stephenasmith

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:11):
What's up everybody. Welcome to this latest edition to The
stephen A.

Speaker 2 (00:15):
Smith Show, coming at you as I love to do
at the very least three times a week over the
digital airways of YouTube and of course iHeartRadio. As always,
I like to take a moment to thank and show
my level of gratitude, my sincere gratitude to my listeners,
my followers, my subscribers, a courtesy of the millions of
downloads we received over iHeartRadio over the last few months.
Not to mention I used to subscriber base, having eclipsed

(00:38):
one point twenty two million subscribers. That couldn't happen without
your love and support. Please know that I appreciate it
from the bottom of my heart. I'm sincerely thankful. Keep
the love coming, as I always say, and I will
keep on coming. To continue to like and follow the show,
just click the bell to get notified fire All of
our newest content and YouTube shall be considered the latest
member of the stephen A. Smiths Show family. And while

(00:59):
you doing that, make sure they can pick up a
copy of my New York Times best selling book, Straight Shooter,
a Memoir of Second Chances and First Takes. Now in paperback.
Just go to straight shoot to book dot com to
get yourself a copy. Once again that straight shoot book
dot com to get yourself a copy. Or if you notice,
you'll see over my left shoulder most of the time
or my right shoulder rather than says straight Shooter Media

(01:22):
my production company. My media company is named after the
title of my book, Straight Shooter. So again, thank you
so much. Couldn't happen without y'all. Couldn't happen without y'all.
There's a lot to get into today, primarily an interview
with David Falk, who made news to form a superagent
that's now essentially retired from the business in some respects anyway,

(01:43):
but still universally recognized as one of, if not the
greatest agent to have ever lived or represented. Michael Jordan
for many, many years, practically his entire career, obviously representing
Patrick You and Alonzo Mornan, Allen Ibson, and many, many,
many others is considered absolutely brilliant and the standard bearer
in the industry. He recently spoke about Lebron James and

(02:04):
the comparisons that one would surmise warrants Lebron James being
compared to Michael Jordan and he pool pooled that whole nonsense,
and David Falk is coming on here to speak about that,
along with a bevy of other issues that I think
you'll find pertinent. Of course, Ryan Smith, who's been all
over the P. Diddy trial, he was coming on with
us to give us the latest, the nuggets of intel

(02:26):
involving the P. Diddy trial and how much better or
worse it is looking for him. But that's going to
come later on in the show. What we need to
do first is talk about what this Sunday entails, what
it marks. It marks the five year anniversary since George
Floyd was murdered. If you remember, George Floyd and on

(02:50):
I'm Black Man.

Speaker 1 (02:53):
Was killed.

Speaker 2 (02:56):
By a white police officer in Minneapolis Met Soda in
twenty and twenty May twenty fifth, twenty twenty to be exact,
the officer, Derek Chauvin was would eventually be found guilty
on charges of murder and manslaughter and sentenced to more
than twenty years in prison.

Speaker 1 (03:18):
I think that on a daylight today, a.

Speaker 2 (03:21):
Subject that needs to be broached is not about George
Floyd specifically, because we know he was murdered. Anytime an
officer keeps his knee on an individual's neck for more
than nine minutes, that's murder. We're not debating that, no
matter how much the Ben Shapiro's of the world and
others who have talked to me about it, and I
respect their opinions, but we'd have to respectfully disagree that

(03:42):
was murder.

Speaker 1 (03:43):
That's the way that I look at it.

Speaker 2 (03:44):
Plain and simple, and I'm not deviating from that thought
process one iota. Having said that, that's not the subject
that I think today's show should warrant. I think that
the question that should be asked is, if you're an
adult in the United States of America considering the increased

(04:06):
focused that existed in twenty twenty on issues of race
and racial inequality, and whether or not that was really
really going to lead to changes that would prove the
lives of black Americans in this country.

Speaker 1 (04:25):
Has that happened? Has that happened? Because if you.

Speaker 2 (04:29):
Recall, in the aftermath of George Floyd's killing, there were
riots in the streets. Just remember that Floyd's murder occurred
just months after the killings of Ahmaud Arbery and Breonna.

Speaker 1 (04:41):
Taylor, which sparked nationwide protests.

Speaker 2 (04:45):
Millions of Americans marched in communities across the country, drawing
attention to issues of racial inequality, including the treatment of
black folks by some police officers. I don't engage in
black in saying police brutality. I say brutality on the
part of some police officers because I believe, by and large,
police officers who have vowed and took an oath to

(05:06):
protect and serve do just that. A few rogue individuals
should not castigate and stigmatize an entire entity that is
law enforcement. I'm not doing that, But with that being said,
I still think that it's important to at least broach
the subject as to whether or not real change has occurred, because,
according to recent polls, fifty two percent of yours adults

(05:30):
said the increased focus on issues of race and racial
inequality would lead to changes that would improve the lives
of black Americans. Forty six percent said it would not.
That was in September of twenty twenty. If we look
at it now, in February of twenty twenty five, according
to polls that I'm looking at, seventy two percent said
it didn't lead to changes at all, didn't lead to

(05:53):
changes at all, And when we look at that seventy
two percent, they say the increased focus on race and
racial inequality after George Flreud's killing didn't lead to improvement
to the improvement of lives of Black Americans in this country.
The share of Americans who express support for the Black
Lives Matter movement stands at fifty two percent today, a
drop of fifteen percent compared to what it was in

(06:16):
June of twenty twenty. This according to the Pew Research Center.
Commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion has also declined. Companies
have pulled back on DEI initiatives and workers view them
and workers' views of them rather have grown to be
more negative. We see that particularly since the Trump administration

(06:37):
came into play. Now, me personally, I've been one who
has been diametrically opposed to DEI being associated with Black
Americans in this country, considering the fact that white women
have been the biggest beneficiaries of DEI according to numerous statistics,
just as was the case would white women being the
biggest benefactors or the beneficiaries rather of affirmative action. I

(07:00):
get tired of black folks being seen as beneficiaries to
something someone white has benefitted from. More So, I thought
it was important to point that out. But nevertheless, the
negative connotations still get associated and connotated with black people,
and so that's something that we have to look at
moving forward. Forty nine percent express doubt that black people

(07:21):
will ever have equal rights with white Americans, even though
that's up from thirty nine percent. I said, that is
up from thirty nine percent in twenty twenty. Twenty twenty,
thirty nine percent doubted that blacks would ever have equal
rights complied to white folks, and now that number has
increased to forty nine percent again according to the Pew
Research Center. So all of these things are things to

(07:43):
pay attention to. And the thing that alarms me personally
is that Black Lives Matter certainly has brought some scrutiny.
The leaders of the movement itself brought some scrutiny upon
themselves in terms of how they were h handling finances
and things of that nature.

Speaker 1 (07:59):
We don't need to get into that today.

Speaker 2 (08:02):
And they gave folks on the right an opportunity to
come at them, to really question their validity, their intent,
their gender, and those who were down for the course,
for all the right reasons. Essentially their voices, it was
like whispering into the wind. No one really really heard them.

(08:23):
Because the few who appeared to be corrupt, whose agenda
is an intent appeared to be a bit insidious, were
the ones that ended up being the face of the movement,
and to some degree it diluted its impact and potency.

Speaker 1 (08:41):
There is no way around that.

Speaker 2 (08:43):
And one of the things that I lamented when all
of this stuff was going on, and when we saw
players taking anew a knee, whether it was on NBA
courts during the bubble, whether it was on a football
field where even Jerry Jones ended up taking a knee,
when then President Donald Trump and sulted NFL players and
stuff like that, I found myself saying, with the collective

(09:07):
value monetarily that professional athletes possessed, why don't you connect
with folks on Capitol Hill, Why don't you serve the
role of being a modern day lobbyist and making sure
that you funnel money into the coffers of whatever organization
you choose, to influence individuals on Capitol Hill to support

(09:32):
your cause, since that's what everybody else is doing, but
the professional athletes who had this cachet, who had this power,
who appeared to be committed to making this kind of difference,
never took the bull Botto horn and did that. And
so now here we are five years later, and the
question is a legitimate one. What through the riots, what

(09:56):
through the protest, what through these kind of things have
to show.

Speaker 1 (10:03):
For its efforts, what.

Speaker 2 (10:05):
Indeed has been accomplished. I don't know the answer to
this question. I just know it's a pretty damn good one.
A majority of US adults say relationships between black people
and the police hasn't changed since George Floyd's killing.

Speaker 1 (10:21):
How true is that? We don't know. We just know
what's being said, And to me, that matters. Black lives matter.
Painted in the streets of Washington, DC. That was a race.
We all know that.

Speaker 2 (10:33):
Minute Trump got in office, that was gonna be a rased.
But I'm not tripping over that personally, because I need
more than symbols. When we look at deer, when we
look at affirmative action, when we look at the positions
that are being taken, when we see some of the
things that have transpired, and I'm not blaming everything on Trump,

(10:56):
and I'm not blaming everything on his administration, because I
do think that things got to excessive, and I do
think that there were people out there that used causes
that were legit those the kind of things that were
being protested in the streets of America to empower themselves
to get whatever they could out of it instead.

Speaker 1 (11:17):
Of contributing legitimately to the cause.

Speaker 2 (11:22):
I don't need to belabor this point. I just need
you to know what kind of things I'm thinking about
as we explore what's really come of George Floyd's killing,
what our aspirations were compared to what we truly legitimately.

Speaker 1 (11:38):
Accomplished or have failed to accomplish.

Speaker 2 (11:42):
Because the fact remains that as we look at our
society right now, you would think that we wouldn't have
the complaints about the goings ons that's taking place in
today's society if those changes were indeed made. But they
weren't made, it shows that there was a bunch of
lip service, because the real change that needed to be
made involved our laws, involved participation in issues that pertain

(12:06):
to the American public, and to make sure that our
voices were heard in a resounding fashion so people would
know never to let these kind of things happen again,
That's not what's happened. As things have changed, some would
say they've remained the same. Others would say times have
gotten worse. That's just the way it is right now,

(12:31):
which means that as we move forward, maybe a little
less talking and more acting more action is necessary. I'll
say it one last time, if you got that kind
a financial cachet, considering lobbyists all across America and how
they influence our politicians on Capitol Hill, professional athletes, Hollywood,

(12:56):
and everybody in between, had an opportunity to do this
twenty twenty, folks didn't do it.

Speaker 1 (13:06):
Instead, they gave lip service.

Speaker 2 (13:08):
They protested Biden got in office, Trump was out, and
as a result, they turned their attention towards stuff like cancer,
culture and woe politics, and the other side paid their
attention to denigrating the left for focusing on those things

(13:29):
and highlighting how it would hurt the fabric of America
and the issues that existed in twenty twenty still exist today.
Go figure. Coming up, NBA playoffs are something that I
can't escape talking to, and I certainly can't escape talking

(13:50):
to the one and only David Falk, super Agent extraordin
there for many many years, made news recently talking about
Lebron James and how there's no way in hell he
should be considered the goat over Michael Jordan. That is
not a conversation you will want to miss. Yours truly
with the one and only David falk Up next right
here on the Steven Date Smith Show, over the digital

(14:10):
areas of YouTube, and of course iHeartRadio back with more
in a minute. All right, folks, I need you all
to stop what you're doing and listen up. You know
I love this time of year. Right the NBA Playoffs
are in full effect and with all this action jumping off,
the Steven A. Smith Show wants to make sure you
take advantage of it all. That's why we've partnered with

(14:33):
Prize Picks, the best place to win cash while watching sports.

Speaker 1 (14:36):
The app is easy to use. Just pick more or
less on a.

Speaker 2 (14:39):
Few player stats and you can win up to two
thousand times your cash on a single lineup. Best of all,
Prize Picks will give you fifty dollars when you play
your first five dollar lineup we Gonna lose.

Speaker 1 (14:49):
You'll get fifty bucks for playing.

Speaker 2 (14:51):
Use promo code says and download the app now again.

Speaker 1 (14:54):
Download the app and use code.

Speaker 2 (14:55):
Says to get fifty dollars instantly after your first five
dollar lineup.

Speaker 1 (15:00):
Hey, hey, run your game.

Speaker 2 (15:02):
The Indiana Paces came into Madison Square Garden and took
Game one from my beloved New York Knicks.

Speaker 1 (15:07):
We all know this.

Speaker 2 (15:08):
They cannot lift their foot off the gas tonight. So
let me get to my picks for tonight's game. First up, well,
Jaylen Brunton scored more or less than twenty nine and
a half points desperate times scored for desperate measures. He's
the closer, the clutch player of the year. I'm going
with more for this one. Next up, well, call Anthony
Town score more or less than twenty three and a
half points. I'm gonna say yes because of the game
he had last game. Do it again, damn it. Next up,

(15:30):
will Tyrese Halliburton score more or less than twenty and
a half points.

Speaker 1 (15:34):
I'm gonna go with more with him too.

Speaker 2 (15:36):
Why because he's been that dude, and why would I
think otherwise. In a series of this magnitude, twenty and
a half points ain't much for Tyrese Halliburton to put up,
particularly with the horses he's got around them last, but
not least. And finally, will Aaron Nee Smith score more
or less than thirteen points? Rather just hit sixty just

(15:57):
hit sixty three pointers in one quarter?

Speaker 1 (15:59):
As in a fourth quarter, three in the last minute.

Speaker 2 (16:01):
I think it's safe that he'll score more than thirteen
points or fourteen points in this game. I'm going with
more on this, all right, So let's revisit. That's more
for Jalen Brunson, more for Carl Anthony Towns, more for
Tyreese Halliburton, and more for Aaron Nee Smith. Okay, that's
how it goes. Flow with your brother, Flow with me.
Go to Prospects at and check out the Steven A.

(16:22):
Smith Show Community play. It's boosted twenty five percent. Check
it out. Welcome back to the show. We got to
start off this NBA segment with the New York Knicks.
He'll face off with the Indiana Paces tonight and a
massive Game two at Madison Square Garden. In case you
missed it, the Paces made in the story come back

(16:45):
in Gain one, fueld by six straight threes from Aaron
Nee Smith and a dramatic buzzer beater by Tyrese Haliburton
that went sky high off the back of the rim
before dropping in the tie the game and sending it
into overtime. The Pacers went on to win the game
one thirty eight, one thirty five and overtime. To give
you some context on the comeback or collapse, teams leading
by at least fourteen points in the final two to

(17:06):
forty five of the fourth quarter.

Speaker 1 (17:08):
Had been nine hundred and ninety four and zero.

Speaker 2 (17:14):
In the postseason since detailed play by play begame being
kept in nineteen ninety seven nineteen ninety eight season. To
make it even worse, consider this, teams trailing by nine
plus points in the final minute of the fourth quarter
over time were zero and one thousand, four hundred and
fourteen during that span.

Speaker 1 (17:37):
That same span.

Speaker 2 (17:41):
Game two US tonight, when Jalen Brunson and the Knicks
will have to show they can come back from the
type of devastate defeat that Milwaukee and Cleveland could have
in the first two rounds. Bottom line is this, You're
up seventeen with over six minutes sixteen, were just over
six minutes left, You up fourteen with two fifty one left,
yup nine with fifty two seconds left, and you lost
the damn game. Tyres Halliburn did his say sure, but
Nie Smith his six threes in the final quarter. One

(18:05):
was from thirty feet, another two was from twenty seven feet.
Three of them were in the last minute of the regulation.
And this brother looked like the second coming to Steph Curry.

Speaker 1 (18:15):
Can't happen. So here's the bottom line.

Speaker 2 (18:17):
If the New York Knicks want to even this series
and have a chance to win this series, they gotta
get back on defense. They gotta defend the three. They
can't miss twelve free throws like they did in Gay one, okay,
and they gotta find a way to control the pace
because Indiana has seven dudes, I'm sorry, eleven dudes that
were averaging at least fifteen minutes a game during the
regular season. See that's a championship coach of Rikala right there.

(18:38):
He knows what he's aiming for. Since January first, their
record is like forty three and sixteen. They're number one seed.
These brothers are.

Speaker 1 (18:45):
No joke here.

Speaker 2 (18:46):
I figure out a way to stop them. Sopefully the
New York Knicks WI figured it out, because they ain't
winning this series if they go down two. Not in
my estimation, Meanwhile, here in Oklahoma City, which is where
I'm at, Anthony Edwards and the Timberwolves are in trouble
after falling behind OH two with a one eighteen one
h three loss to the.

Speaker 1 (19:03):
Thunder last night. Shay Gills just Alexander who received.

Speaker 2 (19:06):
His MVP Trophy League MVB Trophy before the game and
then proceeded.

Speaker 1 (19:10):
To get the better of ant Man as the Thunder roll.

Speaker 2 (19:13):
The Wolves now face the big uphill battle as they
head home for Game three on Saturday.

Speaker 1 (19:16):
Teams leading too old in the best of seventh series.

Speaker 2 (19:18):
In the NBA Playoffs go on to win ninety two
percent of the time, Ladies and gentlemen.

Speaker 1 (19:22):
I came into this series thinking that Minnesota.

Speaker 2 (19:27):
Could beat OKAC, that even if OKC was the favorites,
it would take seven games. I am now scared Minnesota's
gonna get swept because let me tell you what I've noticed,
just so we all understand one another. Minnesota, outside of
ant Man can't shoot off the dribble. They've been getting

(19:50):
out on Nazi or you know, on nas Red. They've
been getting out on Dante DiVincenzo. They've been getting out
on Jada McDaniels, they've been getting out out on the kill.
Alexander Walker, here's the bottom line. Minnesota's got a bunch
of set shooters. They don't have a bunch of shop

(20:12):
shooters snipers.

Speaker 1 (20:15):
That's the problem. They got set shooters.

Speaker 2 (20:18):
But if you get out on get out on them
the way Oklahoma's defense, the top rated defense in the NBA,
may be one of the best defenses we've seen in decades.

Speaker 1 (20:27):
They can get.

Speaker 2 (20:27):
Out on shooters. So they're getting out on shooters. They're
forcing Minnesota to put the ball on the floor, and
Minnesota can't buy a basket. Needs to say, Shay Gilges
just Alexander don't have that problem. Jamorrow, you know, Jaylen Williams,
he don't have that problem. Chet Holgan is scoring on

(20:47):
fast breaks, hart Stein's catching aliyup dunks.

Speaker 1 (20:51):
This is bad.

Speaker 2 (20:52):
And I saw ant Man walking to the tunnel after
the game.

Speaker 1 (20:56):
He looks completely defeated.

Speaker 2 (20:59):
He looks it's like he knows he doesn't have enough help,
enough horses to knock these brothers off.

Speaker 1 (21:04):
That's how he looks.

Speaker 2 (21:10):
It looks like nobody could beat Oklahoma City, y'all, it
really really does. Anyway, Moving on, because I'll get in
the NBA action a little bit later on next week
or so after this weekend.

Speaker 1 (21:23):
But right now.

Speaker 2 (21:25):
I gotta go to break before I talk to my
next guest, because my next guest made news over the
last couple of days because the comments he made about
Lebron James and how asinine and silly it is to
even think that he is the goat. His name is
David Falk, the former agent of Michael Jordan. Allen iverson

(21:46):
Alonzo Morning, Patrick Ewing, along with a host of others
throughout the years, universally recognizes one of the greatest agent,
if not the greatest agent in the history of sports.
He's up now with yours truly right here on the
steven A.

Speaker 1 (22:02):
Smith Show.

Speaker 2 (22:03):
Back in a minute after I pay these bills. All right,
everybody listen up with all the big time sports action
that's happening each.

Speaker 1 (22:16):
And every day, The Steven A.

Speaker 2 (22:18):
Smith Show wants to make sure you are taking advantage
of it all. That's why we partnered with Prize Picks,
the best place to win cash while watching sports.

Speaker 1 (22:26):
The app is really easy to use. To make a lineup.

Speaker 2 (22:28):
All you have to do is pick more or less
on a few player stats, choose from any of your
favorite players Jaylen Brunton, Tyrese Halliburn, and Anthony Edwards, the
ant Man himself, all in the same entry.

Speaker 1 (22:38):
Then sit back and watch. The list is endless.

Speaker 2 (22:41):
You can play prize picks in over forty states, including
California and Texas. Best of all, prize picks will get
you fifty dollars when you play your first five dollar lineup.

Speaker 1 (22:51):
Wanna lose, You'll get fifty bucks.

Speaker 2 (22:53):
Just use promo code says and download Prize Picks now again.
Download the app and use code sas to get fifty
dollars instantly after your first five dollar lineup. Prospects, run
your game, staying in the NBA but moving off the court.

(23:13):
Michael Jordan's longtime agent, extraordinary Mister David Falk, weighed in on.

Speaker 1 (23:18):
The goat debate this week.

Speaker 2 (23:20):
Not surprisingly, Falk back to his former client, but he took.

Speaker 1 (23:24):
It a step further. Speaking with The Sports Business Journal,
Falk had this.

Speaker 2 (23:27):
To say, quote, I really really like Lebron, but I
think if Jordan had cherry picked what teams he wanted
to be on and two other superstars, he would have
won fifteen championships.

Speaker 1 (23:38):
End quote.

Speaker 2 (23:39):
This prompted a response from none other than Lebron James
agent himself, Mister Rich Paul, take a listen.

Speaker 3 (23:45):
We can't have revisionist history, and we all want to
just determine who's the gold and who's the best, and
so on and so forth. But I just thought that
was a little beneath David to say that Michael never
had to leave they you know, Michael's never been the
underdog in any finals, not one time. Michael never had

(24:11):
a twenty four hour, three sixty five news cycle. He
never had shows built strictly to criticize him. People made
millions of dollars criticizing Lebron James. That was their entire job.
Michael played for Dean Smith, Michael played for Phil Jackson,
and Michael had Jerry Krause. I'm the biggest Michael Jordan

(24:34):
fan ever. I love Michael Jordan, and I don't think
Michael Jordan would have used the term cherry picks, So
I'm not up here to just credit Michael Jordan. I
think Michael Jordan transcended our game to a level that
we all benefited from.

Speaker 2 (24:47):
What the hell do you mean, Rich Paul, when you
say Michael never had a twenty four hour, three hundred
and sixty five news cycle. He never had shows built
strict the criticize them. What shows are built strictly to
criticize Lebron James?

Speaker 1 (25:04):
See?

Speaker 2 (25:05):
This is the BS, this is the BS Recover the Sport,
It's a twenty four hours news cycle. There are plenty
of positive things that are said about Lebron James.

Speaker 1 (25:16):
On every show, every show.

Speaker 2 (25:22):
This is where the wanting and moaning accusations come from
from him and his camp. What twenty four hour, three
hundred and sixty five news cycle has shows built strictly.

Speaker 1 (25:35):
To criticize them.

Speaker 2 (25:36):
So, in other words, the shows that criticize them never
ever ever give him credit.

Speaker 1 (25:41):
Huh.

Speaker 2 (25:42):
Ever, Look, man, I ain't got time. I'm not gonna
even waste my time with this. I'm gonna get to
my next guests. I'm gonna get to my next guest
right now. I'd like to welcome to the show none
other than mister David Falk himself.

Speaker 1 (25:54):
Longtime buddy. How you doing, David? How's everything allowed to
be with the student?

Speaker 2 (26:00):
You said what you said, You've had an opportunity to
reflect on what you had to say about Lebron James.
The comparison of Michael Jordan, the floor is yours. What
would you like to say now?

Speaker 4 (26:09):
What I'm saying theynounced that clearly Lebron James is a
great player in any era. You'd be foolish to suggest
Don lost his longevity is the Testants are amazing. I
think what makes Michael to go goes way beyond the court.
I think on the court, Michael obviated the center position.

(26:32):
Prior to Jordan, you needed the Elijah Watson Ewings, the Koreem's,
the Boblonaiers, and the way Michael played, he made it
unnecessary to have a great center. Lookuen won the champions
for Bill Weddington, Dickie Simpkins, Bill cart right, and I
think that had a huge impact on the game. Secondly,

(26:52):
perhaps even more importantly, I think Michael individually broke down
every downer that existed for professorial basketball players and in
particular African American professional basketball players to become national marketing
brand ambassadors. So the whole generation of Rob's and Kobe's

(27:12):
and Steph Curry's having the run shoes and being in
commercials did not exist before Michael came in the game.
Magic didn't have it, Burr didn't have it, Doctor Jade
didn't have it, Kareem didn't have it, And I think
that's a preponderant impact. I think. Third, I believe he's
the first NBA player to become a billionaire. I believe

(27:33):
he's the first NBA player to become a majority owner
of an NBA team. And finally, he had tremendous hit
back dumb fashion. He changed the look of the way
the players play with the long shorts. He made bald
and beautiful. And so I think beyond comparing statistics, who

(27:53):
had more points, who averaged more, even who had more championships,
I think Michael's impact is extremely broad and deep in
what he did to change the game. I don't think
any other player in history kind of an impact.

Speaker 2 (28:08):
What do you make of people who would look and
I'm going to I want to get far beyond those
two individuals that we're talking about for the moment, But
I got this one question to ask you, what do
you make of folks and their assertions that the times
that we're living in now, the advent of social media,
did the digital stratusphere uh the microscope that is on

(28:30):
players in today's game like never before. The impression is
given that even the great Michael Jordan, with his and
you know, unparalleled popularity, I compare him to know one,
the only person I've ever compared him to was Michael
Jackson for Crime Out Loud. That's how popular Michael Jordan was.
When you listen to people talk today, they talk about
the climate, the environment, uh, the society that we're living

(28:53):
in today, and they say it's far more invasive than
it has ever been, which makes the road tougher for
a guy like Lebron James compared to what Jordan had
to endure during his complain his playing career. You've been
around a long time. You know this business like the
back of your hand. What do you make of that?

Speaker 4 (29:10):
Of those assertions, clearly social media has brought the fans
closer to the players. Everyone can express their opinion. You
don't have to work for a newspaper or a television
station to have an opinion. But I think that's the
natural tendency when you're the best at anything, there's a
human tendency to try to tear people down, and certainly

(29:33):
Michael had that because of his immense popularity. You know,
people criticize him, for example, for not being political enough,
not expressing his desire for certain candidates, and so sure,
I think that the social media has changed the game. Also,
I also think, if you want to be objective, the
can has changed itself. I had this discussion about a

(29:54):
month ago with Ron Thornton, who's a very dear friend
of mine who drafted Michael, and he said to me,
which I didn't know, he said, do you realize today
that the average NBA team takes one third more shots
than they did in Jordan zero. So when Jordan averaged
thirty eight points a game, if you if you increase

(30:15):
that by a third, that means he would average fifty two.
Now I think Michael could have averaged. And Michael took
one point seven threes per game, that's all they took.
I think he could have averaged almost anything he wanted
if if that was what was required to win. That's
all he cared about was winning. And I think his
record of six out of six is the greatest manaster

(30:37):
of the NBA. Never lost, never lost the championship.

Speaker 2 (30:41):
Well, don't forget he also never allowed a championship series
to get to a seventh game. He took you out
in six or less every single time. That's the Michael
Jordan that we're talking about here, David, expanding beyond Michael
Jordan and Lebron James when we think about the age
that we're living in. One of the discussion your comments

(31:01):
prompted was player empowerment and the kind of things that
have taken place in today's NBA and in.

Speaker 1 (31:08):
Today's sports world.

Speaker 2 (31:09):
As an agent, looking at the state of affairs that
exist not just in the NBA but professional sports as
it pertains to sovereignty involving players, player empowerment, et.

Speaker 1 (31:22):
Cetera, et cetera.

Speaker 2 (31:23):
What are the kind of thoughts that come to your
mind as to what we're witnessing today and whether or
not it's good or it's bad for the world of
sports in this day and age.

Speaker 4 (31:32):
Great question. So Number one, I believe that players, great
players have only their empowered I think the biggest difference
between today's generation of players and if you will, Jordan's generation,
the Magic's generation, is how the players exercise the power. Now,

(31:52):
if you understand that in nineteen eighty two, that was
a long time ago, the NBA ushered in a solid
cap and for the last forty three years, the players
have essentially owned fifty percent of revenues, so their fifty
to fifty partners with the league. The only way players
can make more money is to grow the business of

(32:14):
the NBA. Now, I believe that when players exercise their
power poorly and they make statements that detigrate the game,
I think that they're impeding the ability of themselves to
make more money, which is foolished. So I'll give you
a couple of examples. You want to talk about player empowerment.

(32:37):
In nineteen eighty four and nineteen eighty five, there were
two players in the history of the game that opted
out of the group licensing program. What was named Michael Jordan,
what was named Patrick Hewing. They did not allow the
league to use them in group licensing, and I opted
about of both of them. Are you not allowed to
do that today? In nineteen eighty five, Patrick Community the

(33:00):
first player in history to have an early termination option
of his contract. He signed a ten year deal for
three times more money than Magic made the year before
as a veteran, and he had the option to opt
out after six years if market conditions change. That is empowerment.
Michael Jordan was the first player to have the Love

(33:21):
of the Game clause that did not require him to
that allowed him to practice at North Carolina in the summer,
which came to Beknas known as the love of the
Game clause. Darnell Valentine in nineteen eighty became the first
player to challenge the league's ability under paragraph thirteen B
to prevent players from doing endorsements or interviews without permission

(33:44):
of the team. That's in every contract now Valentine versus
the Portland Trail players. So I can give you one
hundred examples of player empowerment. Patrick Ewing became the first
rookie in history to be the highest paid player in
the league. He made fifty five percent more money than
koreeb who's the highest paid vetteran of all time. I

(34:05):
believe that got's some power. The Dandy Ferry did the
same thing in nineteen ninety and he clearly was not
one of the great players in the history league. So
I believe that players in every sport have always had
tremendous power. But I think that today I don't think
they use it as judiciously as they should. If the
goal is to make more money and grow the business.

Speaker 2 (34:29):
Well, let me ask you, as David, give me an
example if you can. If it's compromising, please don't bother.
But if you can give me an example of players
that have exercised influence and exercised power but you don't
believe it's necessarily for their good or for the good
of the game. Could you highlight an example that would

(34:51):
it be good to illustrate your point.

Speaker 4 (34:53):
Well, it's a seference to what I would say is
is triggers. Okay, Now, I personally, personally probably made ten
or fifteen major trades. I bade the Patrick Ewing trade
to see how I didn't want to make it. I
didn't believe in it, but he and the next agreed
would be best to have a change of scenery. It
was a thirteen player trade. I traded stuff on Marlbury

(35:15):
in New Jersey and the thirteen player trade with Sam Cassell.
I did that behind the scenes. The minute you announced
publicly as a player that you're not going to play
anymore hard as an example, you know, it makes it
so much harder to make the trade for the exact
reason that Rich Paul indicated. It's hard for Lebron because

(35:35):
you're shining the spotlight on the player, and the other
teams around the league know that the player is demanded
a trade, he doesn't want to be there, it's going
to be a problem, and so they're not going to
offer fair value, and so the very goal the player
has of moving he frustrated. So it makes more difficult by,
you know, by publicly announcing it. Now, the opposite of

(35:59):
that interesting lead to me, and I'm a big Niko
Harrison fan, is the fact that Dallas only talked to
one team to trade Luca. You know, Lucas were on
the top five players in the league, and it wasn't
competitive bidding. I know they had their reasons for it.
I don't understand all the dynamics, so I'm not here
to criticize it, but it surprised me that if you're

(36:22):
if you're going to sell one of the most valuable
assets in the league, that you wouldn't want to have
the highest level of competitive bidding. But the trade is
the easiest example I could give you, Steven, or now
I'll give you an example on the agent side, Okay,
I believe that every time an agent comes out publicly
and says any of the following, my player's not getting

(36:43):
enough playing time, it's not getting enough shots, not making
enough money, the teams taking advantage of them. They are
advertising that they've done a really lousy job of being
an agent, because if they are doing a good job,
none of those things would be happening. And if they
were happening, then the answer is to sit down with
the owner or the general manager behind the seeds and

(37:06):
try to figure that a way to improve. And I'm
gonna tell you a funny story, Okay, in two thousand,
I saw my only high school player in my fifty
year career, a guy named Darius Miles. He was the
third pick in the draft. And yes, I went to
a game one night in LA to see Elton Brand.
Our company at that time represented eight of the players

(37:28):
on the Clippers eight. I didn't represent the ball myself.
I only had Elton. I walk into the locker room
to see Elton and he motions beat it talk to Darius.
Apparently on the way from the locker room from the
court into the locker room, Darius hadn't played a minute.
He cursed out the coach, Albert Gentry, who I've known

(37:50):
since he was the assistant coach of Very Brown and kids,
squeak guy. So I go over to Alvit. I say, Alan,
what's the problem. He said, David, I love it. I
love Darius, but is not working hard enough? Okay? So
I told Darius to come to by hotel them the
next day and I said to him, Son, if you
want to play or do you want to sit on
the bench. I said, of course I want to play,

(38:12):
mister Faulk. That's why I'm unhappy. I said, well, I
don't think you want to play. And he said, why
would you say that? I said, because if you want
to play, you have to show the coach that you
want to play. And the way you show him is
by working harder. He doesn't feel you work hard enough.
And I promise you that if you want Carter, he
will play more. That was on a Thursday. The next

(38:36):
night they played the Houston Rockets. Darius played thirty minutes.
I had twenty one or nine. I went to congratulate
him after the game, couldn't find him. Where do you
think he was? He was in the weight.

Speaker 1 (38:48):
Room, probably after the games in the weight room.

Speaker 4 (38:52):
Now, I went up to coach Gentry, who I really like.
I said, Alvin, is this complicated? You want him to play.
You want them to work, and he wants to play. Now,
most coaches in the NBA to day are reluctant to
tell the players that aren't working hard enough. Now I'm
not talking about the Papaviches or the pat Rileys. I'm
talking about the younger coaches because they're afraid they're going

(39:15):
to lose the relationship with the players. The players are
so much of them. They don't want to tell the
coach that is bothering them that they're not playing. They
don't think that's cool. And I think you need to communicate.
So my job is to talk to a guy like
Alvin and tell them that, and it solved the problem.
And so I think that I think on both sides,

(39:37):
this is a thing that should be done behind the
scenes pridately. My mom, who's a very highly educated woman,
my life mentor she taught when I was very never
hang your derby bogging out publicly. And so I think
demanding trades, complaining about how much you're making those things
are not productive to achieving the results that you want.

(40:00):
And on top of it, I think it demeans the game.
And I think one of the great differences between Jordan's
era and today's I think the players had a much
greater as a whole. I'm not saying every single player
had a much greater respect for the game as as
a whole. I'm going to tell you a great story,
and you've never heard when Michael Jordan please was recruited

(40:22):
by Ted leonsis the current owner of the Washington Wizards
to come to Washington being the president. The day he
was going to get final approval from a Poland west
Son Selton is the GM of the team and the
face of the franchise for many years from nineteen sixty seven.
This is nineteen ninety nine. He called me up and
asked me the set up a meeting for him with Michael.

(40:44):
I didn't attend the meeting, but apparently at the meeting,
West told Michael who's been leading with Michael came and
Michael told him if you leave all of dot Com
I respect you. You paid the path that young players
are the sell. What's the problem and West I'd have
nothing to do with you. A Poland runned around telling

(41:04):
everyone else that he's like my father, and I'm the
lowest paid general manager in the entire NBA. He's he's
disrespecting me and I'm quitting. And Michael said to him,
do please, don't quit. I will take care of this.
So what to Poland's house and Poland says to him,
I'm ready to hire. I'm very excited to hire you.

(41:24):
What should I pay you? And Michael, who's a very
very intelligent man and a very saddened businessman, said pay
me what you think is fair. And Poland said to him, well,
I understand the range of sellars for the President team
is between one million and two milline so I'll have
to pay you one million. And I think Ted probably
had a heart attack when he heard that, because he

(41:45):
figured it all work, will go over and do it.
And coming to Poland And said, I have a suggestion.
Why don't you pay me two millions? Give one by
two million to West and I'm going to give the
other million to charity. He worked for free and he
took care of us. So Michael had a tremendous respect
for the players that paved the path before him. You know,
one of the things that he's done is he's allowed

(42:08):
the whole generations that came after him for the past
four years to enjoy incredible commercial success off the board,
and again that's one of the reasons I think he's
the goat. But he always expressed a tremendous whatever differences
he might have had with Jerry Krause, and if you
saw the last dance, they were many.

Speaker 5 (42:30):
Of course, of course that kept the problem.

Speaker 1 (42:34):
Now.

Speaker 4 (42:34):
I was amused with Rich Paul. I really liked said
that Michael had the advantage of having Jerry Crouse. And
I don't want to say anything angry about Jerry Krouse
because he died and I'm good friends at rhyin Star.
But if you ask me what I put when I
put him in my top twenty five gms over the
last fifty years, I would not I would note if

(42:54):
he made a lot of great imprudent decisions. He drafted
Charles Oakley, Karl Malone, he drafted Brad Sellers over Johnny
Dawk as a national player there, and he made a
lot of terrible decisions, but they won, and that's all.
That's all it matters.

Speaker 1 (43:13):
David.

Speaker 2 (43:14):
I want to know, I'm very I've always been very
interested in asking you this question. When Magic Johnson and
Larry Bird came into the league, obviously they deserve an
immense credit for building the popularity of the NBA brand.
Most would argue Jordan took it to another level, but
he did so because his individual greatness was so supreme,

(43:38):
so so so awesome that you know, he took the
game in a different direction, but it also individualized the
game more and as a result, people view that as.

Speaker 1 (43:49):
Hurting the game. I look at Lebron and not.

Speaker 2 (43:53):
That he decided to depart from Cleveland to Miami, but
how he handled it as you talk about respecting the game,
respecting the league, respecting the owner, etc. And the fact
that he was willing to be so publicly defiant or
dare I say dismissive of Dan Gilbert at that time.

(44:13):
I thought it served to compromise player empowerment to some
degree because collective bargaining negotiations took place thereafter. Remember there
was a Chris Paul trade to the Lakers that was
ultimately nixed once Dan Gilbert had raised holy hell by
writing a public letter to the league, et cetera. When
you think about the damage that has been done to
the league, which obviously is flourishing, and so we got

(44:35):
to be careful with that word damaging. But if there's
a negative. Is it veering away from team with Bird
and Magic and Boston in LA to the individual greatness
of a Michael Jordan, Or is it along the lines
of player empowerment and sovereignty exercised by the likes of
Lebron James that clearly has appeared to have a residual impact.

Speaker 1 (44:59):
What is your thought? What about that question?

Speaker 4 (45:01):
Well, first of all, well, Lebron went to Miami. He
was a free agent. He had the right to pick
any team in the league that he thought would best.
I have no I think the mistake he made, in
my opinion, it was a few mistate, if pr misteak
was when he did the show the Decision with Jim
Gray and he said I'm gonna win not one, not two,

(45:21):
not three, but eight titles, which he still has one.
I think if I were Lebron's and I love Maverck Carter,
I'm very good friends with Marverck Carter, who's Lebron's marketing guy,
I would have told him do the interview and the
day you win your first ring, the first not a
have a show, hold up the ring and say this

(45:44):
is why I came to Miami, this is I couldn't
achieve this in Cleveland. Now, interestingly, if I can give
you a contrast, and I'm not saying one is right
one's wrong, It's just personal preference. I asked Michael once,
would you ever like to play with bird in Magic
so like to recreate the dream Team Olympic Barns, And

(46:04):
he said, are you nuts? I would never want to
play with bird Magic. I wanted to beat their butts
every night on a one on one competitive level. And
just different personalities. That doesn't make Lebron's choice wrong. And
I want to be crystal clear, I'm great respect for
Lebron as a player. I think his longevity, his impact.

(46:26):
He's a great athlete. You know, I think he probably
could have played on the sports And clearly, you know,
when they asked me, do I think he's in the
top ten, of course I think he's the top ten. Now,
I had an interesting discussion over dinner with President Obama
about this very subject, like who's number one, who's number two?
I would say to you publicly, what difference does it

(46:49):
make who's number two? Oh? Thing it makes the difference
is who's number one? You know who runner around four years?
I say, God, don't you think that the team that
lost that Super Bowl was a great team. No, they
didn't win the Super Bowl. Either one or you're not.
And clearly Lebron will be in the pantheon of great

(47:10):
players for a lot of years.

Speaker 1 (47:12):
Now.

Speaker 4 (47:12):
You could say arguably that the greatest player was Bill
Russell because he won most championships eleven out of thirteen.
You could say Oscar Robertson was the greatest player because
he average of triple double. When Michael was asked in Cleveland,
when they presented the top seventy five players of all time,
who do you think is the greatest player of all time?

(47:35):
Without hesitating, he said Oscar Robertson. When they asked Lebron,
who's the greatest player of all time? Without hesitating, he
said Lebron James. Now, if someone asked me, who do
you think is the greatest agent ever of all time?
I say Larry Fleischer. He was the head of the Union.
He created the rules that allowed free agency, all the

(47:58):
things he did. Now thought that I was the greatest,
I would let them say that, I would let you
say that. I would never say that myself. I just
don't think it's appropriate for you to have to make
that coming, But I want to be crystal clear nationally,
I would never want to offend Lebron James. I like him.
I think we have a good relationship. I think I

(48:19):
have a pre good relationship with Rich and Maverick. And
I monel Lebron for his commitment to the game, his longevity,
and I think he's a completely different kind of a
player than Michael. Most people that I respected basketball, if
you were comparing Kobe and Lebron, say Kobe's more like

(48:41):
Michael and Lebron's more like Magic. And I can make
an argument that Magic Johnson is one of the greatest
players of all time. Now, think about this, dudd Okay.
In nineteen seventy nine in the NCAA Final, Magic squared Africanst. Burn.
At the time, it was the highest rated game in
the history of basketball at any level. Magic won. One

(49:05):
year later, the Lakers were playing Philly and your home
to in the NBA Finals and in game kriets her
Magic play center. I remember the exactly. I think he
had thirty seven and fourteen, had the baby hook.

Speaker 1 (49:18):
To win the game. He had forty two. He had
forty two, yep.

Speaker 4 (49:22):
Two and seventeen, right huge rebounds he won. The game
was the finals MVP and Rookie of the Year. Now,
if he had a one year career, and I'm here
to give my props to Magic Johnson from the time
he won the NC Double A to the time he'd
be in the Hall of Fame. Just for that one year.
That was one of the greatest impacts in basketball, college

(49:44):
and pro in one year. On top of that, you know,
as popular as Michael is, I think if Magic had
the proper representation as were working and we try to
sign it, we actually thought we'd go to represent Magic.
I think Magic could have done a lot of the
things that Michael did at eighty four in nineteen seventy nine,

(50:05):
but he didn't have an agent that had the marketing
background or savvy right to understand the impact that Magic
made in the number one media market entertainment market in
the United States.

Speaker 2 (50:17):
David, before I'll let you get on out of here,
i'd be remissing neglecting to ask you this question. You
and I go back many years, many decades. We've known
each other since nineteen ninety five. For crying out loud
rough around the edges at the beginning, because I was
ignorant and didn't know any better, and then appreciate your
brilliance until later on when you took me under your wing.
It taught me so many things over the years. I

(50:38):
can't even express my level of gratitude to you, and
we're friends to this day. I wonder and I want
to end this interview by asking you, being I'll say it,
arguably the greatest agent ever in any sport, considering what
you know, what you've negotiated, the connections that you have had,

(50:59):
the roads you have made along the way to influence
the game, to influence sports overall. What are your thoughts
about today's business as it pertains to agents in today's
business compared to what it was when you were doing it.
I'll give you the floor. That's my very last question
to you. Take the floor and answer that question.

Speaker 1 (51:20):
Please.

Speaker 4 (51:21):
It's a great it's a great question. So Number one,
I think that the preciple role of an agent in business,
whether a Hollywood agent or sports agent, is to negotiate contracts,
and something approximately seventy percent of all the contracts in
the NBA today are not negotiated at all. If you're

(51:42):
win BYAMA and you're coming in the league as the
number one Peck or Coopal Flag, there's no negotiations. As
a wage scale. If you're a great player like Lebron
or Kerg, Kevin Durant, luc and Donsis, there's no negotiations.
There's a maximum. If you're an average player. Most of
the teams are pretty well cap There are mid level exceptions,

(52:03):
bi annual exceptions. There were minimums, and so the role
of an agent has been dramatically curtailed by the rules.
It's very hard to make an impact. If I can
give you an example, So in my career, as I mentioned,
I had two rookies who are the highest paid players
of all time. I negotiated the first ever one hundred

(52:23):
million dollar contract Balonzo Morning in nineteen ninety five for
one hundred and sixteen million dollars for thirteen years, and
I made him turn it down. One year later, he
signed for one hundred and five for seven. He would
have played six years for free, and he thought I'd
lost my mind when I told him to turn it down.

(52:44):
That was dramatically higher. I negotiated contract the same year
for Juwan Howard, who was a great friend and a
great player. He made seventy percent woman than Chris Weber
on the same team, playing the same position. They went
to the same college. I couldn't do that today, I remember,
you can't do it. So the ability to separate. Like

(53:06):
in football, a great receiver separates himself, That's how he
captures the ball. In today's NBA, an agent can't separate himself,
and that frustrates me. It takes away a lot of
your creativity, a lot of the things that I did
that enabled me. Now I was I was. I want

(53:27):
to return the favorite of my friend Rich Paul. I
was disappointed that Rich Paul mistakenly compared by comment about
cherry picking, which means that you are you are picking
where you want to go, which which your players every
right to do. Is a free agent to the fact
that three of the greatest coaches in the history of
college basketball, Dean Smith, John Thompson and Coach pay recommended

(53:49):
me to their players. And the reason he recommended me
wasn't because they liked me. It's because our track record
with the rookies was so superior to anyone else in
the business that was an easy decision for them. Now,
if I can give you and your listeners an analogy
to answer your very specific question, student, I think the
greatest investor in the history of the United States was

(54:12):
Warren Buffett, and he's also one of the richest men. Now,
if the Securities Exchange Commission, which regulates investments, passed a
rule and said no investment manager can get more than
a six percent return, you know, it's illegal to get
more than six percent, he would turn Warren Buffett into

(54:35):
a first year kid out of business school. I'll give
you another example. Okay, I use this frequently. I'm going
to take Lebron back to his days in Cleveland. Okay,
early days. The NBA passes the rule they say no
player could score more than twelve points a game. It's
like fouling out. Once you had twelve, you got to

(54:55):
sit down. Now, a gy like Lebron James would score
twelve points in the first three minutes of the game.
He can literally go to a movie, come back and
meet with his teammates, you know, after the game. So
the season ends and he goes out to lunch with
his teammate Matthew Dalla Vadovo, and he says, Dalli, what
kind of year.

Speaker 5 (55:14):
Did you have?

Speaker 4 (55:15):
And Dallas says average forty one minutes and twelve points
a game. And how'd you do Lebron. Lebron say, will
average three minutes and twelve points a game, and Dallas says, well,
I guess we both the same coin of players because
the rules have homogenized Lebron's ability to be Lebron, and

(55:35):
that's what the agent business, in my opinion, has become.
So I was intrigued when the current MVP shake Gilgos
Alexander decided to represent himself. And while I think that
there are many reasons that shake yogis Alexander needs an agent.
He may want to get traded, he may be having
problems with the team. And there's a famous expression Steven

(55:57):
that a lawyer who represents himself as a full for
a climb. And so it's very difficult to walk in
and say I should be you know, I don't want
to be here. That's why you need third party people.
But I think that that I think that a lot
of great players are going to do what Kevin Durant
did with Rich Climbing a little bit what Lebron did

(56:21):
with with Maverick Carter, and have one person as sort
of like their business manager, because the role of the
negotiations has to climb. Now, the other part that's critically
important is marketing, and you know, I think that, you know,
I'm something with Aaron Goodwin. I think Aaron at one
point had Lebron, Dwight Howard, Kevin Durant, and Horford. He

(56:44):
did an amazing job for those guys in marketing. He
got Lebron a one hundred million dollar deal with Nike
as a rookie, got a big deal for Dwight Howard royalties.
I think, you know, I think he's and I think
there's a very very important role for the star player
to have someone off the court. But as I said
at the conference, if I were coming out of law

(57:05):
school today, based on the state of the Union of
the sports world, I would definitely want to be in sports,
but I probably would not want to be an agent.
I almost definitely would not want to be an agent.
And that's why this spring, when my last client, OTTO
port Junior retired, I've let it run out. I don't
want to sign any more players. I love basketball, love

(57:27):
what it's done for me. I am humbled by the
fact that some fourteen Hall of Fame players have the
trusted their careers for me, including the Goat. Everyone knows
you know how important that relationship has been in my life.
I would expand that include Patrick Coach Thompson, who's the
number one John Thompson in my books. You know, if

(57:49):
you read my book The Ball Truth, John Thompson was
the most influential man in my life. Not the most
influential coach, not the most influential client, the most influent.
I learned so much from John that he should have been.
And so I've been privileged to work for the best
of the brightest, privileged to meet people who are great

(58:11):
be a profession like you. I admire what you've done
in your career since we've known each other from the
time they were cub report in Philly. And and I
want to end by saying this is not this, you know.
Last thing I want to say in the day magic isaaah.

(58:32):
Mark mc guire her boy. And so I really like
represented by a guy and Charlie Talker. He was a
fun guy, and I like Charlie and our guys they
were more urban guys. Our guys all came, as Rich
pointed out, from Carolina Duke Georgetown, Kansas. You know, and
the coaches basically gave us the players. They didn't do
it to do us a favor. They didn't do it

(58:54):
because they had any benefit. They did it because they
wanted their players to make the most money that they could.
And it was sort of like it was like the
Bloods and the Crypts. There was sold a little competition
during the All Star Game in eighty five. I would
name names some of the players from that group try
to recruit Michael to leave us and go with Charlie Tucker.

(59:15):
And Michael was really offended because he's such an incredibly
loyal person, and so it's not a battle between Michael
and Lebron. I think that two of the greatest players
in history, not necessarily the two greatest players, two of
the greatest players in history. Lebron's earned my respect, you know,
a long time ago, and if I say anything that

(59:38):
offended him, I would publicly apologize. Not my intent. I think,
as Michael correctly points out, maybe it's a good way
to end the discussion. It is almost impossible to could
play players from different eras. When Bill Russell won eleven titles,
there are only eight teams in the league. When UCLA

(59:58):
won all those championships in a row. There was only
sixteen teams in the NCAA tournament. It's a lot easier
you start out in the sweet sixteen today. Getting to
the sweet sixteen is a pretty good accomplishment for a
lot of teams. But what I think separates Michael from
every other player is not how many games you want
or how many points he scored. It's the impact that

(01:00:20):
he made on the game in so many different areas.
As I mentioned earlier, being the first player to be
a majority owner, the opportunities that he personally and individually created.
You know, there was a whole a bunch of people
Stephen after Jordan came to the league. It's like the

(01:00:40):
search for the fautain of youth. They want to know,
is Harold Minor nicknamed baby Jordan? Was he going to
be the next guy? Was Penny Hardaway going to be
the next guy? At one point it was gonna be
Ron Harper was going to be the next guy. And
the truth is they'll never be another Michael, They just won't.
He came from an incredible family, two failed you know,

(01:01:01):
credible coach, and so let's leave it that. Let's leave
it thatwer.

Speaker 1 (01:01:08):
Well, listen, we'll leave it that way.

Speaker 2 (01:01:09):
I mean, Michael Jordan is my goat as well, but
that's no disrespect to Lebron James. There's no disrespect in
being perceived as one of the top two players in
the history of basketball or anything like that. But the
bottom line is this, No matter how grateful we all
are to have seen great players and have witnessed the
greatness of gods like them, I've also been great, very
very grateful and very lucky to witness the greatness of you,

(01:01:31):
my man. We go back decades, and I appreciate all
you've done to edify me and help me along the
way in my career. And I'm honored to have had
this conversation with you.

Speaker 1 (01:01:41):
David Falk. You're one of the best ever, so.

Speaker 2 (01:01:43):
I really really appreciate you taking time out of your
busy schedule to sit down with me and talk with
me about this subject.

Speaker 1 (01:01:48):
Right, you take care of yourself, Okay, we'll talk.

Speaker 4 (01:01:50):
So thank you for your time. Job are very grateful.

Speaker 2 (01:01:53):
All right, my man, take care The one and only
David Falk right here when the Stephen A. Smith Show
of the digital areas of YouTube and of course our
Heart Radio.

Speaker 1 (01:02:04):
Welcome back to Stephen Asmith Show.

Speaker 2 (01:02:06):
Now onto the latest in the Sean Diddy Combs trial,
where Diddy is facing five federal charges involving sex trafficking
and racketeering. The trial is wrapping up a second full
week of testimony. This week, we heard testimony from Combe's
former personal assistant, David James, who testified he told Cassie Ventura,

(01:02:26):
Comb's former girlfriend that she needed to quote get out
end quote VN. Ventura claimed she couldn't because Combs controlled
so much of her life. On Tuesday, we heard testimony
from Regina Ventura, the mother of Cassie Venturer, who told
jurors that she was quote scared for my daughter's safety
end quote, and that she documented the physical abuse Cassie

(01:02:49):
suffered at the hands of Colmb's, who prosecutors claim coers
the younger Venturer and others into participating in drug fueled
sex shows. And yesterday jurors heard testimony from musician and
actor Kid Cutting. He told the court that he briefly
dated Cassie Venturer, and he believes the rap mogul, in

(01:03:11):
a fit of rage and jealousy, broke into his home
and coordinated the firebombing of his high end sports car.

Speaker 1 (01:03:19):
He said the pair dated only briefly, but yet.

Speaker 2 (01:03:21):
It was marked by violent threats from Combs that prompted
him and Ventura to stop seeing one another.

Speaker 1 (01:03:27):
Well, we know that's bad. We know that's bad, and
I got a lot of stuff to say about that.

Speaker 2 (01:03:32):
But not at the expense of taking time away from
my next guest, who is a legal analyst for ABC,
obviously a sports at an anchor for ESPN, does an
outstanding job for the Disney family. The one and only
Ryan Smith Legal Analysts is straordinaire right here with stephen A.

Speaker 1 (01:03:46):
How you doing, Ryan, how's everything?

Speaker 5 (01:03:48):
I'm good? How are you doing?

Speaker 1 (01:03:49):
I'm doing all right.

Speaker 2 (01:03:50):
So you heard that intro, and is there anything there
that you believe is ultra damaging to diddy ing? The
charge is sex trafficking and racketeering. I mean, we know
it doesn't look good for him. Domestic violence and how
people feel for their lives, we get that part, but
I'm still waiting to hear about sex trafficking and racketeering.

(01:04:13):
Is there anything that you've heard over the last week
or so that would indicate such a charge is valid?

Speaker 4 (01:04:20):
Yeah?

Speaker 6 (01:04:20):
Absolutely, But I think The way people have to look
at it is they have to look at it as
a very broad.

Speaker 5 (01:04:25):
Puzzle that's being put together.

Speaker 6 (01:04:28):
I think when people look at cases like this Steven
and they look for that smoking gun. Oh, this is
the thing that proves that did he ran a criminal
enterprise and he had all these people involved to facilitate
this criminal activity over a period of year. That's essentially
the racketeering parts. But you have to put it together methodically.
So what you have is Cassie talking about what happened
to her, other people talking about what they experienced. You

(01:04:49):
have people coming in talking about being flown in doing
freak offfs in different states.

Speaker 5 (01:04:54):
That gives it a federal aspect.

Speaker 6 (01:04:55):
And then you have assistance talking about cleaning up people
telling Cassie different things. But she's feeling coerced to stand relationships.
That's part of the sex traffick case. Sex trafficking case.
So all of this, as hard as it might be
for people to see, all of this are pieces of
a puzzle that are slowly coming together to prove the
case the prosecution is offering.

Speaker 2 (01:05:16):
I'm wondering how damaging her mother's testimony was to Diddy
as opposed to herself herself. I mean, you're her mother,
What do you mean you was worried about your daughter's safety?
But still, you know, you allowed the situation to continue
for a lengthy period of time, spanning years. I don't
know how believable the mom comes across when you suddenly

(01:05:39):
say you were so worried about your daughter's safety. Nevertheless,
we don't see was there any effort whatsoever to relieve.

Speaker 1 (01:05:48):
Your daughter from being in that situation.

Speaker 5 (01:05:51):
You know, that's part of the defensi's case right there.

Speaker 6 (01:05:52):
They're going to make the argument that, hey, she was
voluntarily in a relationship and you didn't help get her out.
But I like that you use the word allow, because
that's what the prosecution is really trying to hook onto.
They're trying to take onto the idea that there was
no allowing because the tentacles were so deep into Cassie,
the coercion was so strong it was almost as if
she wasn't able to get out. Now.

Speaker 5 (01:06:13):
I know people are going to hear that and say, look,
she had free will.

Speaker 6 (01:06:15):
She was in this relationship for so long, there were
many things she could have done.

Speaker 5 (01:06:19):
Absolutely, But I think part.

Speaker 6 (01:06:21):
Of what people are trying what the prosecution is trying
to show here what sex trafficking is. The coersion can
be so strong, the elements of bringing somebody in, having
them used for a commercial sect act, and then force,
using force, coercion, threats, things like that to keep them
in the activity makes it hard for the person to
get out. You've heard people talk about how Cassie said, hey,

(01:06:42):
everything I have is tied into this. In many ways
I'm paraphrasing, but when you have that kind of situation,
the allowing part goes away, and for the prosecution it's
about proving it wasn't about allowing. She could not get
out of this thing because of the criminal enterprise that existed.

Speaker 2 (01:06:58):
Well, here's the interesting part too, because David James, the
former personal assistant, said that he had told Cassie to
get out excuse me, But she says she.

Speaker 1 (01:07:06):
Couldn't get out.

Speaker 2 (01:07:07):
Why because she could She could have because Combs controlled
so much of her life.

Speaker 1 (01:07:14):
So now we get into a tricky portion of it. Ryan.
There's bosses.

Speaker 2 (01:07:18):
There's always if you're in a subordinate role, there's always
someone who could have.

Speaker 1 (01:07:23):
Some degree of control over your career.

Speaker 2 (01:07:26):
But that control is relatively subjective, like certain situations you
walk away from say hell, no, I'm not dealing with that.

Speaker 1 (01:07:33):
Bye, I'll walk out. I'll walk out.

Speaker 2 (01:07:35):
So one could easily argue, what do you mean control,
Because if he wasn't stopping you from walking out the door,
if he wasn't stopping you from walking on with your
walking on with your life, but you just may not
have enjoyed the level of success that you're having right now.

Speaker 1 (01:07:50):
Yeah, that's not great.

Speaker 2 (01:07:52):
But in the same breath, a lot of people in
America have to deal with circumstance. Not obviously the sex
acts and all of that stuff, but I'm talking about
the level of control on an individual with power may
have over somebody's career.

Speaker 1 (01:08:04):
What do you say to.

Speaker 6 (01:08:05):
That, Yeah, I say that what you're talking about essentially
is consent. You're talking about a situation where people can
walk away, And I think that's a great point.

Speaker 5 (01:08:13):
But the flip side of that is.

Speaker 6 (01:08:15):
Is she in a situation And I'm not making the
case for it, but I'm kind of coming from where
the prosecution is coming from. It's so deep in some ways,
and this is where things come in, like the drugging
and the threats and the violence. It's so deep the
coercion and the control that the person feels like there
is not a way out of the situation, despite what

(01:08:37):
assistants are saying, despite what the mother is talking about
people urging her to get out. That's part of the
case they're trying to build. And that's how it broadens
out to the commercial, to the criminal, to the rico
enterprise that they're alleging, and the sex trafficking. That in
many of these cases, people are in a situation they're
being engaged for this sex act, and that the coercion,

(01:08:59):
the threats, all of that, the.

Speaker 5 (01:09:00):
Violence, it's so powerful.

Speaker 6 (01:09:01):
Hey, if you I'm giving an example here, Hey, if
you leave, I'm gonna do this.

Speaker 5 (01:09:05):
I'm gonna do that.

Speaker 6 (01:09:05):
The drug age, Cassie testified about how the drugging went
on for a long period of time, as did the
freak costs. That she's in this sort of fog and
it's haze, all of that stuff contributing to the fact
that the aspect of control that some of us might
feel like we have a say at a job where
we're being mistreated and we want to leave and we
just walk is different from this circumstance here.

Speaker 5 (01:09:25):
That's how they're trying to paint it.

Speaker 2 (01:09:27):
So with that being said, I'm looking at Ditty right
now and it doesn't look good for him. There's no
way around that. However, I find myself asking Ryan, where
are the other Where are the other villains in all
of this?

Speaker 1 (01:09:41):
Who are they?

Speaker 2 (01:09:42):
Because sex trafficking and racketeering one man, one individual. I
don't want to accuse the District Attorney of prosecution of
grant standing, but most people out here feel like we
need to see more.

Speaker 1 (01:09:56):
Than just Diddy.

Speaker 2 (01:09:57):
If it's as comprehensive as they're trying to make this
all seen to that, you say, what, yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:10:03):
To that, I say, they're using assistance and other people
they're giving immunity. So you've heard people talk who have
immunity in this case, who said, Hey, I was a
part of this. I cleaned up certain things. I tried
to get her out of there. I saw some of
this stuff go down. And that's where the conspiracy aspect
of this, that's where we start seeing as they see
it and enterprise being built operated by Diddy, Didty associated

(01:10:25):
with it to try to make these things happen over
a period of years. That's where we see the freak
off context come in, but you're talking about a different situation.
You're talking about the bigger names, the people who might
have been involved. They're not approaching that just yet.

Speaker 5 (01:10:37):
Is that a part of where they might go in
some ways? Possibly?

Speaker 6 (01:10:41):
But I think for them it's easier to get the
people who they know or involved based on all the
evidence they secured and say hey, we're going to offer
you an immunity if.

Speaker 5 (01:10:49):
You tell us what happened.

Speaker 6 (01:10:51):
And I think for many people this is going to
be interesting for the jury because the jury is hearing
all this, and just remember, when you hear all of this,
it's important for the prosecution that the jury not here,
did he.

Speaker 5 (01:11:03):
As a bad guy or a weird guy or a
guy who does crazy things, but not criminal things. The
criminal part comes.

Speaker 6 (01:11:11):
In when you start bringing in the associates who talk
about all the different levels of things that happened. One
person testified about carrying a bag of cash there.

Speaker 5 (01:11:20):
Another person talked.

Speaker 6 (01:11:21):
About the payoff that was made to the hotel, all
these different things. To sustain the criminal enterprise, it's those people,
those underlings, all those associates that he had with them
that they want to get to try to build that enterprise,
not the big names that you might be thinking of.

Speaker 2 (01:11:37):
What about the actual sex itself? And what I mean
by that, Ryan, is this, if you were one of
those individuals that engaged in the actual sexual activity, you
are being somebody that was a participant. But isn't it
possible that you may have had nothing to do with
the actual sex trafficking and racketeering allegations. You were just

(01:12:00):
a participant engaging in sexual activity.

Speaker 5 (01:12:03):
That's right. And they had a couple, they had some
people testify like that.

Speaker 6 (01:12:07):
They had a guy testify his nickname is the Punisher,
talked about how he was hired to have sex with Cassie.
He's not somebody who's part of the enterprise. Who he
is is somebody who was engaged to come in and
have this sex trafficking activity with Cassie. The other reason
why you bring in a guy like that is he
talked about how freak coughs happened in different states. Now
you're seeing the federal aspect of this case, which is

(01:12:29):
why it's a federal case and not a state case,
which is why you can allege things like rico, which
is why some of these charges which involve interstate commerce
come into play because some of these activities they're alleging.

Speaker 5 (01:12:40):
For the prosecution, they're saying, did he had these things?

Speaker 6 (01:12:43):
He controlled this enterprise over multiple states, and he brought
people in to engage in this sex to continue the
means of what he wanted to do. He used all
these this large Jesse had this power, this influence to
create this criminal enterprise using these people.

Speaker 2 (01:12:59):
But but where are the other women other than Cassie
who are alleged to have been participants in.

Speaker 1 (01:13:06):
All of this.

Speaker 6 (01:13:07):
I think they're going to start trying to weave some
of those people in because it's not just about Cassie.
There are other people I think the prosecution is going
to try to bring into this case to say they
were involved in this in some way.

Speaker 1 (01:13:17):
But stephen A.

Speaker 6 (01:13:18):
For them, Cassie is the star witness. She is everything
in this case. You have to believe Cassie and what
she went through and believe that she is coerced. Why
because you have the video which sticks out more than anything.
When you talk about what juries see in a courtroom,
you can hear testimony for days that is harrowing, But
when you see a videotape of somebody being abused.

Speaker 5 (01:13:38):
That is the one thing that sticks in your mind
more than anything.

Speaker 1 (01:13:42):
More than that.

Speaker 6 (01:13:42):
Also, it's the fact that she had this long standing
relationship with Sean Ditty Combs, so she had a front
row seat to the freak costs everything that happened to
everybody else. So she is the main player in all
of this. There might be other people weaved in who
were subject to this, who did he coerced way, at
least according to the prosecution, to try to facilitate this

(01:14:03):
criminal enterprise.

Speaker 5 (01:14:04):
But it all comes down.

Speaker 6 (01:14:05):
To her and how the jury sees her, which is
why it's so important for the prosecution that they don't
see her as a voluntary, consensual partner, but rather someone
who was worced into being in this relationship and could
not get out.

Speaker 2 (01:14:21):
Are we gonna see any videos of the freak offs,
because I know the media has been asking for access
to that. Is that going to happen?

Speaker 5 (01:14:30):
I think it's going to be debatable.

Speaker 6 (01:14:31):
I'm interested, you know, it's one of those issues where
I'm just not sure. I know the defense is gonna
fight at tooth and nail, and.

Speaker 5 (01:14:37):
They have good reason.

Speaker 6 (01:14:38):
When you start seeing as I said earlier, when you
see a video that sticks with you more than anything else.
So if you see Hiddy in a video with a
bunch of people having sex for the defense, that's going
to look to the jury like he's orchestrating the entire thing.
Their whole point is these are parties, consensual parties.

Speaker 5 (01:14:55):
This is not anything more than that.

Speaker 6 (01:14:57):
So for them to have that video in the courtroom,
it's extremely damaging. They're going to fight a tooth and nail,
and it's all gonna come down to the judge. Is
it the kind of evidence that's important to the prosecution's
case to help prove the case and won't have the
prejudicial value of disrupting the defense's case on the other side.

Speaker 5 (01:15:13):
The judge will have to decide that. But these videos,
if they do.

Speaker 6 (01:15:17):
Come out in that courtroom, extremely damaging for Diddy because
his mere presence in the video while people are and
I'm just making I don't know what's in them, but
if people are presumably having sex with him being there,
that's incredibly damaging because that's the very orchestration view that
the prosecution is trying to get the jury to see.

Speaker 2 (01:15:37):
Last question on this particular subject, and it's not necessarily
a legal question, it's just your level of expertise because
of what you know about this business, about the law,
about the impact on a jury, et cetera, based on
your expertise at this moment in time, even without the
videos of freak offs being seen, just based strictly on

(01:15:57):
cashivent or testimony, the course examine the nation she endured,
witnesses and participants that came and testified already, including her mother,
not that she was a participant, but you know, just
having a relationship with her daughter.

Speaker 1 (01:16:11):
Does did he look the same better or worse than
when this trial first started?

Speaker 6 (01:16:19):
Far worse, far worse, because we know all the details now.
It's more than just what we might have read in
the papers. It's more than just the scuttle but that
people heard. Now we know the details of what went
down from people who actually experienced it.

Speaker 5 (01:16:34):
And it's just from the.

Speaker 6 (01:16:36):
Perspective of the kind of person he was, how he
treated Cassie, how she tried to.

Speaker 5 (01:16:42):
Get out of it.

Speaker 6 (01:16:43):
Kid Cutty talking about the threats we had heard kid
Cutty talking about did he before this trial, but what
he said about him being a Marvel supervillain, allegations of
fire bombing his car far worse, far worse now. But
here's the key. Being a bad does not make you
a criminal. And so for me, this case is not

(01:17:05):
fully put together yet. It's just beginning. They're just starting
to put the puzzle together, but the puzzle is not complete.
I think having the threat, say, for example, kid Cutti
shows things like obstruction, we're trying to threaten him to
keep people silenced to say what's happening in this criminal enterprise?

Speaker 5 (01:17:19):
But do we clearly see the enterprise yet? Do we
clearly see the sex trafficking? Yet?

Speaker 6 (01:17:24):
Are we clearly as a jury believing that this isn't
in a voluntary relationship and a consenting relationship.

Speaker 5 (01:17:30):
I think that remains to be seen. But no matter what,
no matter how you come out of this, in no
way does he look good. He looks far hoarse, and
he looks like a person who is completely out of
control to this jury.

Speaker 6 (01:17:43):
I think, if I'm sitting in that jury box, the
question I have if I'm a jury is is he
just an extremely bad person? Or is he a criminal?

Speaker 2 (01:17:51):
Last question, I apologize that one thing you just said
that made me think of this. Yeah, what if they
don't know whether or not sex trafficking and racket hearing
has been proven, but they consider him so despicable and
they consider his behavior criminal because of what he was
seeing on video doing the Cassie and what have you,

(01:18:11):
that they convict him anyway. I mean, if they find
him guilty, it's not as if a judge or a
defense attorney is going to be able to definitively say.

Speaker 1 (01:18:22):
You know what your case.

Speaker 2 (01:18:24):
You know, sex trafficking and racketeering was not why you
made this decision. You made this decision against him because
of his acts of domestic violence. It's not like they're gonna.

Speaker 1 (01:18:32):
Be able to prove that.

Speaker 2 (01:18:32):
If the jury comes back and says, we think you're
behind needs to go to jail, I mean, what can
you do.

Speaker 6 (01:18:37):
You're making a couple You're making me think of a
couple of things there. The first thing is, I think,
no matter what happens here, they're gonna appeal. So they're
gonna appeal, and they're gonna argue that the case wasn't proven.
The defense is just gonna say they didn't prove the
elements of the case, and they're gonna try to get
information to try to figure out what happens here. But
more than that, they're gonna say the elements of the
case weren't proven. The other thing is you're talking about
what if a jury looks at this and says, didn't

(01:18:58):
rise to the level of Rico or second trafficking, but
it's something lesser.

Speaker 5 (01:19:01):
Sometimes juries get compromised verdicts.

Speaker 6 (01:19:03):
They look at the other charges and they say, well,
I see the obstruction of justice or I see elements
of the conspiracy charges, the lesser charges, so let's convict
them of that stuff and not the bigger stuff that
I don't necessarily see, like rico. So that is something
the events also wants to look out for and the
prosecution doesn't want to happen. The prosecution wants them to
see a full enterprise. They want to get as many

(01:19:25):
years in prison as they can, and when you got
an obstruction connection, that's not a lot of time. So
the jury has a lot of ways they can go here,
which is why it's so important for them to put
the puzzle together fully if you're the prosecution. But there
is always a risk when you're trying a case like
this that a jury doesn't fully see what you're trying
to explain, and they either compromise, or they end up

(01:19:47):
in a mistrial or for the prosecution.

Speaker 5 (01:19:49):
Worst of all worlds, they say not guilty, Ryan.

Speaker 2 (01:19:53):
Before I let you get on out of here, I
need to switch subjects and I need your counsel on
something here. Thursday, the Trump administration re votd Harvard University's
ability to enroll into national students and its escalating battle
with the Ivy League school saying thousands of current students
must transfer to other schools or leave the United States
of America. Just as an aside to our audience, before

(01:20:15):
I ask you about this, the Department of Homeland Security
says Harvard has created an unsafe campus environment by allowing
quote anti American pro terrorists agitators end quote to assault
Jewish students on campus. It also accused Harvard or coordinated
with the Chinese Communist Party, saying it hosted and trained
members of a Chinese paramilitary group as recently as twenty

(01:20:37):
twenty four this morning, just this morning, Harvard challenged the decision,
calling it unconstitutional retaliation for defining a White House's political demands.
In a lawsuit filed today in federal court, Harvard said
the government's actions violates the first Amendment and will have
an immediate and devastating effect for Harvard and more than
seven thousand visa holders. And then hours later, a federal

(01:20:58):
judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from carrying out its plan.

Speaker 1 (01:21:03):
Your thoughts about.

Speaker 2 (01:21:04):
This situation and how it will ultimately unfold based on
your level of expertise, sir.

Speaker 6 (01:21:10):
Yeah, First of all, Harvard is looking at this like
a First Amendment issue, and they're seeing this really as
the government trying to come in and determine what they teach,
who teaches it, and how they do it, and they're saying.

Speaker 5 (01:21:22):
That violates their First Amendment rights.

Speaker 6 (01:21:25):
The government on the other side is saying, hey, you
are facilitating on campus anti Semitism things of that nature,
and that's why we need to take certain action against you.
But what this really is is an ongoing fight between
these two sides, and from Harvard's perspective, it's the government
trying to control how they run their university, which, if

(01:21:46):
you're a university, you have to look at that and
say that cannot happen.

Speaker 5 (01:21:49):
That's a slippery slope for us. This day, it's this thing.

Speaker 6 (01:21:52):
The next day, it's the next thing, the third day,
they're controlling exactly how we run our university and that
can't happen. So how this play out? I think right now,
as you said to tro it's been blocked. The order
has been blocked. But this is I think the government
in many cases has done this recently. The government has
been testing the limits of the law, testing what they

(01:22:13):
can do to exercise control over what they see at
certain campuses, over how they view those campuses should be run.
So I see this eventually going to the higher courts,
if not the Supreme Court, because this has been sort
of the pattern of the government recently. It's been this
idea of hey, if it's not working the way we
want it to work, or if we see something happening
that we think is wrong, then we're going to try

(01:22:34):
to put down a real heavy hammer on them, see
if there's a pushback, and then let.

Speaker 5 (01:22:38):
It go to the court and see how it plays out.
I would not be surprised if this ends up in
the Supreme Court at the end of the day.

Speaker 2 (01:22:44):
Ryan Smith, Legal analysts extraordinary for ABC Sports Center, anchor
for ESPN, and a host of other things. The Brothers
gifted make no mistake about it, honor to have him
on the show as always. Enjoy your weekend, my man.
We will talk soon and you take care of yourself
all right, Thank you so much too.

Speaker 6 (01:22:59):
Man.

Speaker 1 (01:23:00):
Here we'll not only Ryan Smith right here on the
StepN Nate Smith Show. That tip. For this edition to
the Stephen Nate Smiths Show. I've covered the whole gamut.
I gave you everything, now you got it. Enjoy your
week and everybody, thanks for joining the stephen A. Smith Show.

Speaker 2 (01:23:11):
I'll holler at you on Monday and tell them Peace
of love, everybody. Stephen A signing off.