- Thread starter
- #101
Good ol Bud I still have my GoTitans t shirt of him giving the middle finger somewhere.Imagine if Bud Adams would have
used email...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Good ol Bud I still have my GoTitans t shirt of him giving the middle finger somewhere.Imagine if Bud Adams would have
used email...
Meanwhile DeShaun Watson and Antonio Brown remain in the NFL because they didn't call Goodell a fag.
You don’t see issue with this if he wasn’t part of the investigation at all and someone just happened upon some emails meant for only those in the To/From, from 10 years ago and getting fired (forced to resign) off public opinion of those contents?
Consider all possibilities here, who determines the “ist”? Not a fan of his actions at all and think he’s pretty stupid for using his work email in which he is expected to comply with user agreement. If this wasn’t found by the league’s own IT’s at some point recently after sending, then it just looks as if the NFL was fine with this up until the WFT investigation found it or they don’t enforce their own user agreement. So to me, gruden would be a symptom, not the disease and the NFL’s complicity is the bigger issue. That’s especially true since nothing illegal was done, just unfavorable jokes/ statements/ opinions, whatever you want to call them.
it does matter if he was specifically part of the investigation. That means he was a person of interest in the “culture” problem in Washington and with comments like this, could be considered a contributor to that culture. Just still not sure why it took the NFL 10 years to find their own emails failing to meet user agreements.
So the same public opinion that wants Gruden ousted (which he is) should also be clamoring for further NFL investigations to all 32 teams, league offices, and potentially shut them down for being complicit on the matter.
Don’t pick and choose, boycott the NFL until they make changes to stop hurtful (potentially) emails. Better monitor and record all locker room conversations too, have zero doubt that all kinds of inappropriate conversations that involve all the “ists” take place within the NFL’s place of business. And that’s currently, I can only imagine what was said back in the 60’s.
I’m glad you’re taking a stand to shut down the NFL. Good for you and good luck in your mission.
Is that you Goodell?No one is going on any witch hunts in the NFL. I doubt anyone set out to “get Gruden.” And he was certainly unlucky that this email came to light. It was rather random that it did, and I can completely understand the sense of unfairness that comes from that. I get that part of what you are saying. But there is no way that once it comes out those perceivable unfair factor can mitigate the out. Regardless of how it came out or the circumstances surrounding it, the jeenie is out of the bottle, the damage is done and nothing can be done about.
I disagree with a lot of this but you’re right in the idea it can’t be unseen.No one is going on any witch hunts in the NFL. I doubt anyone set out to “get Gruden.” And he was certainly unlucky that this email came to light. It was rather random that it did, and I can completely understand the sense of unfairness that comes from that. I get that part of what you are saying. But there is no way that once it comes out those perceivable unfair factor can mitigate the out. Regardless of how it came out or the circumstances surrounding it, the jeenie is out of the bottle, the damage is done and nothing can be done about.
I disagree with a lot of this but you’re right in the idea it can’t be unseen.
It didn’t need to be publicly released. No one gains anything from that unless it’s (another) attempt by the NFL to appear as if they’re sensitive to these issues. They are 100% not.
The NFL also should recognize that this was 10 years ago and partially on them for not catching it sooner/being a part of a larger company allowing the redskins to operate like they did.
I also don’t like the general “intimidate until resign” or fire people for historical communications.
A) it is not consistently enforced (note our POTUS as an example).
B) it is assumed that people don’t change and something said 10 years ago is still representative of them today. (I’ll ask anyone here, are you the same as you were 10 years ago? Especially if you’ve had any life epiphany?)
C) why is our general society ok with life training/rehabilitation in so many other settings but come across something like this, assume he meant the absolute worst, and has no ability to learn or receive some sort of training to learn why not to say/do this? For comparison sake, the US largely believes that someone who kills another person, can be taught and learn to still go back among society. I’d say this is a much lesser crime and likely easier to teach from. We’re a country built on many second chances after major mistakes. This has been deemed up redeemable from.
on point.Very respectful post of all viewpoints on the matter.
I heard a phrase last night on a news program discussing the cancel culture. "Thought crimes" are more severely punished than "violent crimes" in this new cancel culture. And the problem with this is just as you pointed out above. "Thought crimes" are subjective and can not be enforced fairly and equally. Truthfully, they can not even be defined in non arbitrary terms.
This paradigm shift really worries me as an older person. I view this cancel culture methodology in the same light as I do vigilante justice, lynch mob and witch hunt mentality. Individuals and their livelihood are arbitrarily destroyed to advance economic power interests of a segment of the population. And it utilizes socio/political/religious frustrations from the populus as its power base to do so. Lynch mobs, Witch Trials, totalitarianism, communism, hell- even getting an entire country to support genocide- it all follows the same basic formula. Left unchecked, it is very dangerous to the preservation of our current way of life in this US.
Very respectful post of all viewpoints on the matter.
I heard a phrase last night on a news program discussing the cancel culture. "Thought crimes" are more severely punished than "violent crimes" in this new cancel culture. And the problem with this is just as you pointed out above. "Thought crimes" are subjective and can not be enforced fairly and equally. Truthfully, they can not even be defined in non arbitrary terms.
This paradigm shift really worries me as an older person. I view this cancel culture methodology in the same light as I do vigilante justice, lynch mob and witch hunt mentality. Individuals and their livelihood are arbitrarily destroyed to advance economic power interests of a segment of the population. And it utilizes socio/political/religious frustrations from the populus as its power base to do so. Lynch mobs, Witch Trials, totalitarianism, communism, hell- even getting an entire country to support genocide- it all follows the same basic formula. Left unchecked, it is very dangerous to the preservation of our current way of life in this US.
on point.
While the Gruden case on its own is really not all that big a deal, match with a lot of other similarly subjective instances and we have entered a slippery slope of approval on these topics and how they’ve been handled. There is absolutely a bigger pictures issue when people defend Gruden not to mention the misunderstanding of defending Gruden in a freedom of speech fashion vs defending what he actually said.
There is a a general misunderstanding (or unwillingness to) that defending an a$sh01e’s opinion to say something (really words don’t hurt anyone, we can all ignore and move on) is not the same as defending and agreeing with the specifics of what was said.
I think there is some misdirected annoyance (anger is likely too strong a word) in this thread.
The real problem is the piece of trash that released this information. There really was no reason for Gruden's emails with a friend to be released to the public (or for so-and-so's tweets from x years ago to be brought back up, or... ). The people doing that kind of stuff are the real enemy here. dg1979us is right, there's no way Gruden could've stayed in his current job with this information brought to light; but that's not on the NFL (a business), that's on our idiotic culture.
There are plenty of instances where I think "cancel culture" goes to far, but in saying that, this situation isn't cancel culture. Every time someone loses their job it doesn't mean it is because of "cancel culture". He wasn't fired because of political views (like a certain QB who many of you didn't mind being canceled), religious views, etc etc. He was fired because of racial, sexist, and homophobic slurs. Do you think it is ever ok to fire a person because of things they say?
Why were they publicly embarrassed? Did the NFL, the Raiders, or the Redskins release this info?There isn't an employee in the country who is going to stand buy and let one of their employees embarrass them publicly, and not punish that person in some fashion or another. You guys act like the whole concept of someone being fired is something new, it isn't. People have long been fired for these types of situations.
only if it violates the freedom of speech exclusions as defined by our constitution and local written and valid LAWS Eg- inciting a riot, not endangering others etc.
Do you think it’s ok for only one segment of society to be given free reign to use particular words?
You are another saying CK was canx.There are plenty of instances where I think "cancel culture" goes to far, but in saying that, this situation isn't cancel culture. Every time someone loses their job it doesn't mean it is because of "cancel culture". He wasn't fired because of political views (like a certain QB who many of you didn't mind being canceled), religious views, etc etc. He was fired because of racial, sexist, and homophobic slurs. Do you think it is ever ok to fire a person because of things they say?
Why were they publicly embarrassed? Did the NFL, the Raiders, or the Redskins release this info?
second, as I stated, why is there no opportunity for training/rehab? There are other instances equally, if not more egregious than this, where that was a possibility and even backed by the company.
I think the NFL MAY have released this in an effort to appear as if they care about these issues and only Gruden was the cost. Maybe we should expect to see more from the WFT investigation and this is part of the NFL’s distraction.
As am I. I think that will be a huge detail in what, if anything more, ever comes of this story.I am interested if we ever find out who was leaking his emails, it certainly appears someone had an axe to grind with him.