Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
NJDevs4978

NFL Week 3

Recommended Posts

NJDevs4978    219

So who would have thought Rams-49ers would be a shootout?!  On Thursday night no less, in front of tens of thousands of empty seats :P

Good thing for the Rams they got Fisher out of there before he could completely ruin Goff, my god the difference from year one to year two is remarkable.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NJDevs4978    219

So the Pats might actually lose two in a row at home, this week's gonna screw up some suicide pools :P

Houston is sending a message after their horrible Week 1, they could have actually challenged the Pats in the playoffs last year if they had a QB not named Brock Osweiler, and Watson doesn't need to be a hero, he just needs to be Russell Wilson (when he actually had an o-line) type good to matter.

Eh so much for that, Brady punked the GREAT Houston defense again at the death.

Edited by NJDevs4978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Puppet should just hand his rings to Brady (maybe one to Butler as well).  Amazing what Brady has had to overcome time and time again.  A fvcking rookie QB had Puppet completely befuddled today.  I feel sorry for the team that takes a shot with him as their head coach.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel    375
37 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Puppet should just hand his rings to Brady (maybe one to Butler as well).  Amazing what Brady has had to overcome time and time again.  A fvcking rookie QB had Puppet completely befuddled today.  I feel sorry for the team that takes a shot with him as their head coach.   

Whatevs, I finally decided to load up on Patriots — Gronk and Brady — for my fantasy team and it’s paying major dividends.  

Dolphins might be in the running for sucking for   Sam, which would be interesting.  Ross would utterly mess that up somehow just how he messes up anything football related.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Whatevs, I finally decided to load up on Patriots — Gronk and Brady — for my fantasy team and it’s paying major dividends.  

Dolphins might be in the running for sucking for   Sam, which would be interesting.  Ross would utterly mess that up somehow just how he messes up anything football related.  

Yeah, I made the mistake of taking Aaron Rodgers over Brady.  So far not so good...Rodgers has really had tough first halves in all of his games so far.  I have Amendola, Hogan, and the Pats' D/ST.  Didn't play Amendola today, but Hogan's been pretty good to me as my flex player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NJDevs4978    219

Yeah my taking Brady for fantasy doesn't look so bad in Weeks 2-3 lol

I took the Pats this week in the little board knockout pool on top of it (didn't really want to take them against Houston but figured they wouldn't lose two home games in a row and almost all the other matchups I didn't like for one reason or another), the late rally saved me there while others took the Fins and Packers :P

Edited by NJDevs4978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel    375

So we'll see if I stick with it, or if it'll be godfather 3, but I've decided I'm done watching the NFL.  No Dolphins on Sunday, no playoffs, no Super Bowl.  I'm out.  

The players have decided to go all in support of someone who supports Communist dictatorships and cop killers (yes, objectively that's what he supports).  In the meantime they obviously could care less when one of their own murders a bunch of people, beats up on women or their kids, or when they rob or rape.  None of these a$$holes said peep about Aaron Hernandez (a bunch of players actually supported him), Ray Rice (woman beater), Jeramy Stevens (serial rapist), Adrian Peterson (child abuser), just to name a few.  So you know what, I'll do my part to make the thugs and their apologists that make up the NFL are slightly poorer.  

My only fear is that this virus will infect the NHL.  SJW writers like Wyshenski and virtually everyone that writes for the Atheletic are itching for it, but hopefully they're irrelevant as they always were.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadDog2020    1,928

More stupid protest takes. I guess what the Moron-In-Chief said the other day is okay though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NJDevs4978    219
9 hours ago, Daniel said:

The players have decided to go all in support of someone who supports Communist dictatorships and cop killers (yes, objectively that's what he supports).

Look if you want to quit watching football, vaya con dios...you clearly are the Randy Quaid (circa Major League 2) of Dolphin fans and don't seem to get any actual enjoyment from the sport anyway.  

But if you think yesterday was about following 'someone who supports Communists and cop killers' that's ridiculously nieve and narrow at best. Yesterday was about free speech and solidarity, it wasn't about a blackballed NFL player or BLM or the other reasons the initial kneel protest started. The protest wasn't even a story this season till Friday when a bitter POTUS - who's still smarting from the USFL debacle he caused thirty years ago - again stuck his beak in where it didn't belong.  Did you expect no response at all from anyone when the leader of the United States said the NFL should fire people for protesting and fans should boycott the sport?  Even freaking Kraft who's a toady for the administration came out strongly against the statements yesterday.  Everyone no matter their background should be able to agree free speech should be non-negotiable and worth protesting. Yes there are consequences for speech - look no further than Kaepernick - but that shouldn't be up to the government to decide on punishment for private entities like the NFL, ESPN, etc.  Cause then it isn't free speech, it's government-controlled.

And I'm someone that hated the initial protest, but there's a big difference between not agreeing with the vehicle for protesting and not acknowledging the right to do it at all.  I wish sports wasn't politicized as often as it is now (and really we shouldn't be going down this road TOO much, there's a politics board here for a reason), but when the leader of the country decides to politicize it, there's no avoiding it then. But this idea that athletes or entertainers like Jimmy Kimmel have to 'stay in their lane' and not use their pulpit to say anything needs to die in a post-Apprentice presidency.

Edited by NJDevs4978
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NJDevs4978    219
1 hour ago, MadDog2020 said:

Here's something to counter Daniel's abject stupidity: https://mobile.twitter.com/brennanmgilmore/status/911960316220764160


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He'll just give you the guy in Pittsburgh who stood up.  I'm sure some vets think players should stand up, just like some vets think they have every right not to.  But the fact there is a difference just proves all the more there's no moral or legal right or wrong in using the anthem to protest, everyone thinks of it differently.  But what should be different and why there was near unanimity yesterday is free speech.  I don't care if you're a vet or a crooked former realty TV host, every American citizen on all sides of the political spectrum should be defending free speech, especially the leader of the government.

Edited by NJDevs4978
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as actual on-the-field gameplay goes...what the hell got into the 'Skins yesterday?  They held the Raiders to 128 yards, and a chunk of that came in complete garbage time at the end of the game...and the 10 points that the Raiders did manage to score were set up by a pair of Redskin miscues.  One of the most impressive defensive displays I've seen in quite sometime...they never let up at all. 

Ditto Jacksonville with their across-the-pond curbstomping of Baltimore.  Was a surreal kind of day on a lot of levels yesterday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beezer34    101
1 hour ago, NJDevs4978 said:

Look if you want to quit watching football, vaya con dios...you clearly are the Randy Quaid (circa Major League 2) of Dolphin fans and don't seem to get any actual enjoyment from the sport anyway.  

But if you think yesterday was about following 'someone who supports Communists and cop killers' that's ridiculously nieve and narrow at best. Yesterday was about free speech and solidarity, it wasn't about a blackballed NFL player or BLM or the other reasons the initial kneel protest started. The protest wasn't even a story this season till Friday when a bitter POTUS - who's still smarting from the USFL debacle he caused thirty years ago - again stuck his beak in where it didn't belong.  Did you expect no response at all from anyone when the leader of the United States said the NFL should fire people for protesting and fans should boycott the sport?  Even freaking Kraft who's a toady for the administration came out strongly against the statements yesterday.  Everyone no matter their background should be able to agree free speech should be non-negotiable and worth protesting. Yes there are consequences for speech - look no further than Kaepernick - but that shouldn't be up to the government to decide on punishment for private entities like the NFL, ESPN, etc.  Cause then it isn't free speech, it's government-controlled.

And I'm someone that hated the initial protest, but there's a big difference between not agreeing with the vehicle for protesting and not acknowledging the right to do it at all.  I wish sports wasn't politicized as often as it is now (and really we shouldn't be going down this road TOO much, there's a politics board here for a reason), but when the leader of the country decides to politicize it, there's no avoiding it then. But this idea that athletes or entertainers like Jimmy Kimmel have to 'stay in their lane' and not use their pulpit to say anything needs to die in a post-Apprentice presidency.

My personal beef with the whole thing is just that Has. What is this all about in the first place? I think whenever anyone has a movement, and\or protest that engulfs an entire country.. that can potentially be extremely dangerous, and create a dystopian groupthink environment. I agree, America is far from perfect.. and there are issue's we need to address with solutions at hand. But it's difficult to listen with an open mind when the leader of all this wore socks with pigs dressed as law enforcement.. and said he wasn't going to vote for either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump in last years election, because they were both racists. When you kick-start your mantra in the light.. people become very defensive, and won't listen (or don't want to listen) to whatever it is that you were trying to illustrate in the first place.

Furthermore.. is it pragmatic to coalesce every single sentiment that's being played out here? By my count you have 3 main issues as play: #1)The 1st Amendment Right\Free Speech. #2)Whatever the issue(s) the players are\were protesting to begin with. (BLM, Cops, etc) #3)The players\owners who are protesting being told that they have limited first amendment rights. I think all these issues seemingly being combined is what's causing immense conflict and frustration with people. You can't have clear conversations anymore.. and now the entire crusade has seemingly been reduced to yet another Anti-Trump Cliche.

When you say: "free speech should be non-negotiable" --I think the main issue people take with that is: Even with free speech, there are limitations in the workplace. Yes..... under the constitution, I have the right to go into work tomorrow and walk around the office with one fist up in the air to demonstrate if I wanted to. I have the right to continually repeat "Fvck the Police" if I wanted to. Equally.. my company would be in the right handing me a letter of termination. Because despite free speech.. there's a code of conduct to adhere to at the workplace. That behavior isn't allowed. Many people have countered me with: "well.. it's allowed in the NFL" --the problem is, it isn't. The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. Under United States Code 36, USC § 301 the behavior you're seeing from some players protesting is not allowed.. and could result in "fines, suspensions, and\or disciplinary action" from the league. The NFL is not enforcing this.. and for whatever reason you may want to think.. THAT is what people want clarity on.

Regarding the Jimmy Kimmel's having to "stay in their lane" and keep away from political topics.. again, I think moderation is called for. There's quite a difference between staying off topic, and beating a dead horse. Why does it always have to be one extreme or the other in this country. I know it's been common practice to take shots and joke about the President and politics for the past hundred years. But when you get to the point when every single time you turn on late night talk.. or go to a broadway show.. or watch sports.. or watch an award show.. this is continually being force fed and jammed down your throat. There is no longer a place for someone to escape anymore. The result is a paradigm shift transpiring before our very eyes. Is there a coincidence that talk show revenue is down? Or that NFL ratings are down? Or that the Emmy's broke records with their lowest ratings in history? :noclue:

At the end of the day, I don't know what to think anymore. I think my confusion is shared by many. I just know that I'm extremely thankful to be an American, and to live in this great country. Despite all it's flaws.

Edited by Beezer34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel    375
2 hours ago, MadDog2020 said:

Here's something to counter Daniel's abject stupidity: https://mobile.twitter.com/brennanmgilmore/status/911960316220764160


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No actually, you're the one that's ignorant and stupid, and it starts with your belief that this has something to do with free speech or a right to protest.  I know you don't believe any of that because, despite your new found respect for a "right to protest" (a concept you don't really understand) you could have cared less when ESPN fired Curt Schilling for what he said and probably supported it, or Google firing one of it's employees for his political speech and so forth.  Or you didn't bat an eye when Ross sent one of his players to mandatory PC reeducation when the player tweeted that  he was grossed out by two men kissing.  In the same way, you'd be demanding that a player be cut immediately if he had a Confederate flag decal on his car, and didn't immediately grovel in penance, or something like that.  Or, I imagine that you wouldn't have really cared if the Bruins disciplined Tim Thomas for not going to the White House because it was Obama that was the President at the time.  So you don't really believe in free speech, you just believe in speech you agree with. 

And there was a time when teams did something about it.  The NBA fined a player (something Abdul Raif) in the late 90s for not standing during the national anthem.  The NFL should have done the exact same thing when Kaepernick started his "look at me" bullsh!t.

I know a lot more about the First Amendment and history in general than you and these largely illiterate football players.  But hey, so long as they say how much they hate cops and Trump (I don't like Trump either, but saying how much you hate Trump isn't really a brave stance to take despite what left wing navel gazers say) and maybe even say how much they love Communist dictators, they can go on raping, killing, and beating their kids, wives and girlfriends.  None of that sh!t seems to animate them, but when their wittle wittle feewings were hurt  they decide to get all political and stuff.

So here goes, the NFL and individual teams, subject to whatever is contained in the collective bargaining agreement and maybe some statutes in particular states, have a right to discipline their players for their speech.  It's not particularly controversial if you take the position that you, if you owned a business, could fire an employee you discovered was active on neo-Nazi websites.  You never had a problem with the concept until now apparently.  And I am upset that virtually all of the players (who seem to have zero self awareness in not recognizing how fvcked up they are as a group) and owners are condoning outwardly unpatriotic and disloyal gestures that were started by a guy who, yes, supports the murder of police officers and who hypocritically and disgustingly supports Communist dictatorships.   And I've decided that I'm not supporting it anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadDog2020    1,928
No actually, you're the one that's ignorant and stupid, and it starts with your belief that this has something to do with free speech or a right to protest.  I know you don't believe any of that because, despite your new found respect for a "right to protest" (a concept you don't really understand) you could have cared less when ESPN fired Curt Schilling for what he said and probably supported it, or Google firing one of it's employees for his political speech and so forth.  Or you didn't bat an eye when Ross sent one of his players to mandatory PC reeducation when the player tweeted that  he was grossed out by two men kissing.  In the same way, you'd be demanding that a player be cut immediately if he had a Confederate flag decal on his car, and didn't immediately grovel in penance, or something like that.  Or, I imagine that you wouldn't have really cared if the Bruins disciplined Tim Thomas for not going to the White House because it was Obama that was the President at the time.  So you don't really believe in free speech, you just believe in speech you agree with.  And there was a time when teams did something about it.  The NBA fined a player (something Abdul Raif) in the late 90s for not standing during the national anthem.  The NFL should have done the exact same thing when Kaepernick started his "look at me" bullsh!t. I know a lot more about the First Amendment and history in general than you and these largely illiterate football players.  But hey, so long as they say how much they hate cops and Trump (I don't like Trump either, but saying how much you hate Trump isn't really a brave stance to take despite what left wing navel gazers say) and maybe even say how much they love Communist dictators, they can go on raping, killing, and beating their kids, wives and girlfriends.  None of that sh!t seems to animate them, but when their wittle wittle feewings were hurt  they decide to get all political and stuff.

So here goes, the NFL and individual teams, subject to whatever is contained in the collective bargaining agreement and maybe some statutes in particular states, have a right to discipline their players for their speech.  It's not particularly controversial if you take the position that you, if you owned a business, could fire an employee you discovered was active on neo-Nazi websites.  You never had a problem with the concept until now apparently.  And I am upset that virtually all of the players (who seem to have zero self awareness in not recognizing how fvcked up they are as a group) and owners are condoning outwardly unpatriotic and disloyal gestures that were started by a guy who, yes, supports the murder of police officers and who hypocritically and disgustingly supports Communist dictatorships.   And I've decided that I'm not supporting it anymore.

 

 

No, you're a moron... You're ignorant. You're probably racist. You know nothing of what you speak. And I've forgotten more about free speech and the right to protest than you could ever hope to know. You think you're the smartest guy in the room, but every time you say something, you sound dumber than you did the time before. Go lick Trump's balls some more. You're an embarrassment.  

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel    375
2 hours ago, NJDevs4978 said:

Look if you want to quit watching football, vaya con dios...you clearly are the Randy Quaid (circa Major League 2) of Dolphin fans and don't seem to get any actual enjoyment from the sport anyway.  

But if you think yesterday was about following 'someone who supports Communists and cop killers' that's ridiculously nieve and narrow at best. Yesterday was about free speech and solidarity, it wasn't about a blackballed NFL player or BLM or the other reasons the initial kneel protest started. The protest wasn't even a story this season till Friday when a bitter POTUS - who's still smarting from the USFL debacle he caused thirty years ago - again stuck his beak in where it didn't belong.  Did you expect no response at all from anyone when the leader of the United States said the NFL should fire people for protesting and fans should boycott the sport?  Even freaking Kraft who's a toady for the administration came out strongly against the statements yesterday.  Everyone no matter their background should be able to agree free speech should be non-negotiable and worth protesting. Yes there are consequences for speech - look no further than Kaepernick - but that shouldn't be up to the government to decide on punishment for private entities like the NFL, ESPN, etc.  Cause then it isn't free speech, it's government-controlled.

And I'm someone that hated the initial protest, but there's a big difference between not agreeing with the vehicle for protesting and not acknowledging the right to do it at all.  I wish sports wasn't politicized as often as it is now (and really we shouldn't be going down this road TOO much, there's a politics board here for a reason), but when the leader of the country decides to politicize it, there's no avoiding it then. But this idea that athletes or entertainers like Jimmy Kimmel have to 'stay in their lane' and not use their pulpit to say anything needs to die in a post-Apprentice presidency.

The government did not punish anything and could not punish anything.  Trump, as any President or person is allowed to do, expressed an opinion about what owners should do with players like Kaepernick.  If the NFL decided, for instance, not to allow Trump to attend games or to encourage teams not to accept invitations to the White House, I wouldn't have had a problem with it and probably would have supported it.  But instead they encouraged their players to be disrespectful to the country, and express their solidarity with a loathsome individual like Kaepernick. 

And the idea that it has nothing to do with Kaepernick or his beliefs is like a guy who does a Hitler salute saying he doesn't hate Jewish people, he's just being pro-German.

Edited by Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadDog2020    1,928
The government did not punish anything and could not punish anything.  Trump, as any President or person is allowed to do, expressed an opinion about what owners should do with players like Kaepernick.  If the NFL decided, for instance, not to allow Trump to attend games or to encourage teams not to accept invitations to the White House, I wouldn't have had a problem with it.  But instead they encouraged their players to be disrespectful to the country, and express their solidarity with a loathsome individual like Kaepernick. 

Guess what- even Kraft- one of Trump's biggest butt boy supporters, said he was out of line. When you call black football players SOB's but don't denounce nazis, you're a piece of sh!t. And I would've done the same thing- you're gonna call me an SOB? Go fvck yourself. I'll kneel on both fvcking knees just to shove it in your face.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel    375
13 minutes ago, MadDog2020 said:

No, you're a moron... You're ignorant. You're probably racist. You know nothing of what you speak. And I've forgotten more about free speech and the right to protest than you could ever hope to know. You think you're the smartest guy in the room, but every time you say something, you sound dumber than you did the time before. Go lick Trump's balls some more. You're an embarrassment.  

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

You know you've won an argument when someone just calls you a racist, it's the corollary to Godwin's Law.  In any event, below are some simple questions to see if you really understand the First Amendment or the concept of free speech.

Does an employer have the right to fire an employee he finds out is a neo-Nazi, notwithstanding the fact that the First Amendment unconditionally gives that employee the right to be a neo-Nazi?  Was ESPN wrong to fire Curt Schilling for his speech, or more precisely was it illegal for them to do so? Same question for James Damore and Google?  Did Stephen Ross have any right to discipline one of his employees for something he wrote on Twitter?  If you believe in the concept of free speech to the extent you claim you do, the content of the speech or the individuals I'm naming should be irrelevant, but somehow it always is.  As Nat Hentoff said, free speech for me, but not for thee.

And for the record, I have always despised Trump, even when people thought him to be this iconoclastic businessman.  I thought so little of him that I brought myself to praise that no-talent hack Rosie O'Donnell when she was one of the few celebrities who realized it before it was fashionable to say so.  He is grossly unqualified to run a lemonade stand, much less be the President.  However, I appreciate and know enough about this country, the Constitution and our system of government in general to know that even someone like Trump can do very little damage on his own, the only exception (obviously a big one) of starting a nuclear war. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel    375
7 minutes ago, MadDog2020 said:


Guess what- even Kraft- one of Trump's biggest butt boy supporters, said he was out of line. When you call black football players SOB's but don't denounce nazis, you're a piece of sh!t. And I would've done the same thing- you're gonna call me an SOB? Go fvck yourself. I'll kneel on both fvcking knees just to shove it in your face.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You and Trump definitely have one thing in common, it's always, always about him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadDog2020    1,928
You know you've won an argument when someone just calls you a racist, it's the corollary to Godwin's Law.  In any event, below are some simple questions to see if you really understand the First Amendment or the concept of free speech. Does an employer have the right to fire an employee he finds out is a neo-Nazi, notwithstanding the fact that the First Amendment unconditionally gives that employee the right to be a neo-Nazi?  Was ESPN wrong to fire Curt Schilling for his speech, or more precisely was it illegal for them to do so? Same question for James Damore and Google?  Did Stephen Ross have any right to discipline one of his employees for something he wrote on Twitter?  If you believe in the concept of free speech to the extent you claim you do, the content of the speech or the individuals I'm naming should be irrelevant, but somehow it always is.  As Nat Hentoff said, free speech for me, but not for thee. And for the record, I have always despised Trump, even when people thought him to be this iconoclastic businessman.  I thought so little of him that I brought myself to praise that no-talent hack Rosie O'Donnell when she was one of the few celebrities who realized it before it was fashionable to say so.  He is grossly unqualified to run a lemonade stand, much less be the President.  However, I appreciate and know enough about this country, the Constitution and our system of government in general to know that even someone like Trump can do very little damage on his own, the only exception (obviously a big one) of starting a nuclear war. 

 

 

I'm well aware that a private employer can do whatever they see fit- free speech doesn't guarantee no consequences or that you keep your job for protesting or expressing a certain opinion on company time. You can protest or speak your mind, but it doesn't mean you won't be disciplined by an employer if you do it on their time. I loathe Curt Schilling and his views, but I'd die for his right to express them. ESPN reserved the right to can him because of what he said, right or wrong, because ESPN is a private business. ESPN is also liberal when it comes to politics, so they're more likely to fire someone like Schilling for expressing his views than say, Jemele Hill. Is that right? No, I don't believe it is. But that's the world we live in. I'll bet if I worked at Fox News and told Sean Hannity that he's a fvcking POS and that the President is an unrepentant dipsh!t who should be impeached the minute its first possible, I'd probably be fired. And for the record, I'd also die for your right to express the views you just did, regardless of how much I disagree with them. The POTUS is entitled to his stupid, ignorant, misguided opinion on this matter as much as the next person. However, his remarks were not becoming of someone in his position. He's done nothing but divide. The fact that several owners who supported Trump saw fit to condemn his comments and stand arm-in-arm with their players should tell you just how out of line Trump was to say what he said. And after being called a bunch of SOB's by the leader of the free world for trying to bring attention to an issue (police brutality, which is what the spirit of this whole thing was supposed to be about), I don't blame any player that took a knee or a seat on the bench to, in essence, tell Trump to go fvck himself.  

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadDog2020    1,928
You and Trump definitely have one thing in common, it's always, always about him.

It's okay. You can just admit that I'm right and you're wrong. I know it may hurt, but I think you'll live.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel    375
2 minutes ago, MadDog2020 said:


I'm well aware that a private employer can do whatever they see fit- free speech doesn't guarantee no consequences or that you keep your job for protesting or expressing a certain opinion on company time. You can protest or speak your mind, but it doesn't mean you won't be disciplined by an employer. I loathe Curt Schilling and his views, but I'd die for his right to express them. ESPN reserved the right to can him because of what he said, right or wrong, because ESPN is a private business. ESPN is also liberal when it comes to politics, so they're more likely to fire someone like Schilling for his views than say, Jemele Hill. Is that right? No, I don't believe it is. But that's the world we live in. And for the record, I'd also die for your right to express the views you just did, regardless of how much I disagree with them. The POTUS is entitled to his stupid, ignorant, misguided opinion on this matter as much as the next person. However, his remarks were not becoming of someone in his position. He's done nothing but divide. The fact that several owners who supported Trump saw fit to condemn his comments and stand arm-in-arm with their players should tell you just how out of line Trump was to say what he said. And after being called a bunch of SOB's by the leader of the free world for trying to bring attention to an issue (police brutality, which is what the spirit of this whole thing was supposed to be about), I don't blame any player that took a knee or a seat on the bench to, in essence, tell Trump to go fvck himself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with everything you said, except for blaming players for being disrespectful during the national anthem.  I do blame them for that, I vehemently disapprove of it, and it shows their ignorance and pettiness.  It reveals their belief that Trump (or any President for that matter) is somehow the country.  And frankly, it shows their ignorance of how Trump, against all probablity, became the President in the first place, and no, it is not connected to anything liberals claim it is.  It shows the NFL's hypocrisy in its claim that it's somehow committed to free speech, which it is not and never has been.  So for the time being, I'm going to do something more productive with my time, like read a book, instead of supporting their silly "look at me" protest.

If it were me, I would have done what the NBA did, and I would have started fining and suspending players who were disrespectful during the national anthem, the second it happened.  If you want to go off on your twitter page or whatever, that's fine, although we, as any private employer, reserve the right to discipline you if you say something that's way out of line and otherwise bad for business.  Way out of line would not include criticizing the President, but it might include wearing a Fidel Castro t-shirt.  Communist dictators are just as loathsome as fascist dictators.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadDog2020    1,928
I agree with everything you said, except for blaming players for being disrespectful during the national anthem.  I do blame them for that, I vehemently disapprove of it, and it shows their ignorance and pettiness.  It reveals their belief that Trump (or any President for that matter) is somehow the country.  And frankly, it shows their ignorance of how Trump, against all probablity, became the President in the first place, and no, it is not connected to anything liberals claim it is.  It shows the NFL's hypocrisy in its claim that it's somehow committed to free speech, which it is not and never has been.  So for the time being, I'm going to do something more productive with my time, like read a book, instead of supporting their silly "look at me" protest.
If it were me, I would have done what the NBA did, and I would have started fining and suspending players who were disrespectful during the national anthem, the second it happened.  If you want to go off on your twitter page or whatever, that's fine, although we, as any private employer, reserve the right to discipline you if you say something that's way out of line and otherwise bad for business.  Way out of line would not include criticizing the President, but it might include wearing a Fidel Castro t-shirt.  Communist dictators are just as loathsome as fascist dictators.

Re: what you mentioned about the NBA- it's actually in their CBA that players have to stand for the anthem- that's why fines and suspensions were able to be doled out by the league with regard to not standing. The NFL owners, even if they wanted to discipline players for this, can't do it because it's not written into the CBA that players have to stand for the anthem. If there are certain NFL owners that want that to change, they best bring it to the negotiating table in a couple years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel    375
5 minutes ago, MadDog2020 said:


Re: what you mentioned about the NBA- it's actually in their CBA that players have to stand for the anthem- that's why fines and suspensions were able to be doled out by the league with regard to not standing. The NFL owners, even if they wanted to discipline players for this, can't do it because it's not written into the CBA that players have to stand for the anthem. If there are certain NFL owners that want that to change, they best bring it to the negotiating table in a couple years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again, as I've said before, it's always subject to any sort of state statute or what's in the CBA.  My guess is that the NFL CBA doesn't say anything specifically about it one way or the other, although I wouldn't be surprised if it did, since the same law firms/lawyers generally draft all the CBAs for all the sports leagues and it might be boilerplate at this point.  Even so, the CBA didn't say anything specifically about domestic abuse or deflating footballs, but there are catch-all provisions that allow the commissioner to do whatever he wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MadDog2020    1,928
Again, as I've said before, it's always subject to any sort of state statute or what's in the CBA.  My guess is that the NFL CBA doesn't say anything specifically about it one way or the other, although I wouldn't be surprised if it did, since the same law firms/lawyers generally draft all the CBAs for all the sports leagues and it might be boilerplate at this point.  Even so, the CBA didn't say anything specifically about domestic abuse or deflating footballs, but there are catch-all provisions that allow the commissioner to do whatever he wants.

AFAIK and from what I've heard (not like I've sat down and read the NFL CBA), there's nothing specific pertaining to this issue in there. Because when they drew the document up six years ago, standing or not standing for the anthem wasn't a thing. Now that it's become a national mega-controversy, I think there will probably be very specific language in the next CBA which spells out what is and isn't permitted regarding anthem participation (assuming the players are amenable to it, which would take a lot at this point).

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×