Matt39 Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 there is a proper punishment for Richie Incognito and it's slightly less than electric chair Matt i gotta ask are you a friend of the family or from the same hometown? I can't understand how anyone can defend Richie Incognito so blindly. Because you seriously believe the first sentence you wrote. I find the minds of the thought police amusing, nothing more. Why you want that type of punishment for someone who didnt commit a crime I cant understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kleckineau Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Electric chair seems like a fair punishment to me. He is too large to ride the lightning. A special chair would have to be made on taxpayer money. It would be like when they fried Michael Clark Duncan in Green Mile. ☺ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 yes. this is all the media's fault. clearly. I didn't use the word fault. you did. I used the word run. which they are and the sheep(you) eat it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Isn't it funny that the vast majority of NFL personnel who have an issue with gay players are closeted in their hate? Maybe because they don't want their thoughts to be misconstrued? Anything other than throwing bouquets at Michael Sam and you'll have the pitchforks at your door. Look what happened to his old man for god's sakes. It's sad we cant have an open dialect about these types of issues. Anything other than Klecko's personal beliefs will apparently not be tolerated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Maybe because they don't want their thoughts to be misconstrued? Anything other than throwing bouquets at Michael Sam and you'll have the pitchforks at your door. Look what happened to his old man for god's sakes. It's sad we cant have an open dialect about these types of issues. Anything other than Klecko's personal beliefs will apparently not be tolerated. We can absolutely have an open dialect about these issues. Its unfortunate that Michael Sam's father feels the way he does but he still supports his son which is the most important thing. I didn't see anyone beating him up. And if it was some media type that did it kind of proves my point, doesn't it? The media has the bigger issue. Michael Sam's father doesn't agree with his son's lifestyle and probably shared too much detail of his reaction to finding out but he still supports his son and wants him to be happy and successful. If the media freaks out over it that's their deal. It's unlikely their reaction will have any impact inside the Sam household. Just like it's unlikely the media's reaction to a gay player in the NFL will have much of an impact on what happens inside that player's locker room. Your whole BS about the "thought police" is just that - YOUR BS. Anybody can think whatever they want. However, when you start spewing hate speech you should understand that the vast majority of people are going to have a problem with it. I actually like when bigots identify themselves by speaking their mind. It removes the guesswork for me. I know not to pay attention to anything they have to say after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 We can absolutely have an open dialect about these issues. Its unfortunate that Michael Sam's father feels the way he does but he still supports his son which is the most important thing. I didn't see anyone beating him up. And if it was some media type that did it kind of proves my point, doesn't it? The media has the bigger issue. Michael Sam's father doesn't agree with his son's lifestyle and probably shared too much detail of his reaction to finding out but he still supports his son and wants him to be happy and successful. If the media freaks out over it that's their deal. It's unlikely their reaction will have any impact inside the Sam household. Just like it's unlikely the media's reaction to a gay player in the NFL will have much of an impact on what happens inside that player's locker room. Your whole BS about the "thought police" is just that - YOUR BS. Anybody can think whatever they want. However, when you start spewing hate speech you should understand that the vast majority of people are going to have a problem with it. I actually like when bigots identify themselves by speaking their mind. It removes the guesswork for me. I know not to pay attention to anything they have to say after that. Fair enough on the Sam point, I agree. The media cant help themselves with a witch-hunt. The poor guy is in a nursing home and he's suddenly front page news and labelled a bad father, by folks who don't even know him. When it's the media's deal, it's everyone's deal. I haven't seen any hate speech with regards to Sam's announcement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I haven't seen any hate speech with regards to Sam's announcement. you're not looking hard enough I guess. From the time he made that announcement till eternity, anything remotely critical about him is bigotry. think he's undersized , you hate gays, think he's a third day pick at best? You hate African Americans AND gays . personally, I think he's one of the greatest human beings to ever engage in organized athletics and believe he'll win many participation trophies over the course of his career Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 you're not looking hard enough I guess. From the time he made that announcement till eternity, anything remotely critical about him is bigotry. think he's undersized , you hate gays, think he's a third day pick at best? You hate African Americans AND gays . personally, I think he's one of the greatest human beings to ever engage in organized athletics and believe he'll win many participation trophies over the course of his career You're a monster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Why you want that type of punishment for someone who didnt commit a crime I cant understand. the things Richie Incognito did are actually crimes. Assault. Harassment. Intimidation. Extortion (of 10k for a vegas trip). These are crimes by the book. he wasn't arrested or charged but to say he didn't commit a crime is somewhat false. He got away with multiple crimes, that, if a normal person did in public would be considered criminal. In fact if you throw a racial aspect in there, these are possibly hate crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 the things Richie Incognito did are actually crimes. Assault. Harassment. Intimidation. Extortion (of 10k for a vegas trip). These are crimes by the book. he wasn't arrested or charged but to say he didn't commit a crime is somewhat false. He got away with multiple crimes, that, if a normal person did in public would be considered criminal. In fact if you throw a racial aspect in there, these are possibly hate crimes. Well I'm speechless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Well I'm speechless. when an NFL player tackles another NFL player that would be considered assault under normal circumstances. but obviously not a crime because it is within the game. The central disagreement here is where that line stops. I don't think it extends beyond the field of play. The modern NFL player has to be a crazy man on the field and a gentleman off it. The days when a player could be excused for boys will be boys behavior is long gone. You and other incognito defenders seem to believe that because they work for the NFL they can do whatever. But no man is above the law. ps- don't even make me play the "what if Richie incognito wasn't white" card. It could blow everyone's mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 when an NFL player tackles another NFL player that would be considered assault under normal circumstances. but obviously not a crime because it is within the game. The central disagreement here is where that line stops. I don't think it extends beyond the field of play. The modern NFL player has to be a crazy man on the field and a gentleman off it. The days when a player could be excused for boys will be boys behavior is long gone. You and other incognito defenders seem to believe that because they work for the NFL they can do whatever. But no man is above the law. ps- don't even make me play the "what if Richie incognito wasn't white" card. It could blow everyone's mind. Frankly I find your use of the word "gentlemen" sexist and offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Because you seriously believe the first sentence you wrote. I find the minds of the thought police amusing, nothing more. Why you want that type of punishment for someone who didnt commit a crime I cant understand. Because in reality, the punishment for Incognito isn't the one that's wrong. It's the punishment for those who do commit legitimate crimes that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I haven't seen any hate speech with regards to Sam's announcement. Vilma essentially saying, 'but what if he stares at my dick' falls dangerously close to that category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Vilma essentially saying, 'but what if he stares at my dick' falls dangerously close to that category. I actually thought Thomas was worse, but the problem is that it was also so ridiculously hysterical that it was hard to feel anything but pity. YOU MEAN WE WONT BE ABLE TO ACT GAY IN THE LOCKER ROOM ANYMORE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Vilma essentially saying, 'but what if he stares at my dick' falls dangerously close to that category. How? He's not entitled to be uncomfortable showering with a gay teammate? I don't agree with him as it wouldn't bother me at all, but muzzling his opinion and labeling it hate speech is silly. Putting hate speech next to someones name is potential career ending. It's a dangerous precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 How? He's not entitled to be uncomfortable showering with a gay teammate? I don't agree with him as it wouldn't bother me at all, but muzzling his opinion and labeling it hate speech is silly. Putting hate speech next to someones name is potential career ending. It's a dangerous precedent. Because, his potential discomfort in the shower is the reason he wouldn't welcome a player on the team. Perhaps he could have said, "I'd be a bit uncomfortable in the shower with him, but that's something I'd have to deal with." Same concept you're portraying, said without the idea that "because I'm uncomfortable he shouldn't be allowed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Because, his potential discomfort in the shower is the reason he wouldn't welcome a player on the team. Perhaps he could have said, "I'd be a bit uncomfortable in the shower with him, but that's something I'd have to deal with." Same concept you're portraying, said without the idea that "because I'm uncomfortable he shouldn't be allowed." Of course he should have worded it differently- that doesn't mean we need to immediately label it hate speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Of course he should have worded it differently- that doesn't mean we need to immediately label it hate speech. It's not about a mistake of wording. It's that his intent was to say that "because I'm uncomfortable, he has to go." He didn't misspeak and you and Vilma are saying different things. I'm not carrying any torches. Nor suggesting that anyone should. Just pointing out that those comments were discriminatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 It's not about a mistake of wording. It's that his intent was to say that "because I'm uncomfortable, he has to go." He didn't misspeak and you and Vilma are saying different things. I'm not carrying any torches. Nor suggesting that anyone should. Just pointing out that those comments were discriminatory. I don't think that was his intent, but the power always lies in the party offended I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I don't think that was his intent, but the power always lies in the party offended I guess. “I think (an openly gay teammate) would not be accepted as much as we think he would be accepted.” I mean... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 “I think (an openly gay teammate) would not be accepted as much as we think he would be accepted.” I mean... This is the whole quote "I think that he would not be accepted as much as we think he would be accepted," Vilma said. "I don't want people to just naturally assume, like, 'Oh, we're all homophobic.' That's really not the case. Imagine if he's the guy next to me and, you know, I get dressed, naked, taking a shower, the whole nine, and it just so happens he looks at me. "How am I supposed to respond?" "You have people that can be more outgoing, more open-minded. You have people that are a little more close-minded," Vilma said (via Nola.com). "Some people grew up with or without the acceptance of gays within their families. You have a lot of different elements within the locker room that you just don't see right now. Me being on the inside for 10 years, inside the locker room, I've been around that. "And it's not to say that the locker rooms are bad, it's to say that there are going to be people that accept it willingly as soon as he comes in, welcome him with open arms, and then unfortunately, there will be some, I'm about 99 percent sure the minority, will say, well, they're not comfortable with that yet, they don't know how to respond to that. That's just what's going to happen in the first whatever, the first year, two years. When have more players like Michael Sam coming out and saying that they're gay, the transition will be a lot smoother." He's addressing a silly hypothetical situation...no where was he saying we wouldn't want him in the locker room. Reality is there could be an adjustment period for some guys in the locker room- even if you deem it silly or homophobic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Just out of curiosity, Vilma and the other players are okay with straight dudes checking their junk out but not the gays?? So long as no sexual advancements are made, I fail to see any difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Just out of curiosity, Vilma and the other players are okay with straight dudes checking their junk out but not the gays?? So long as no sexual advancements are made, I fail to see any difference. Jake Gyllenhall wasn't making any sexual advancements at first, and we saw how it worked out for those guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Just out of curiosity, Vilma and the other players are okay with straight dudes checking their junk out but not the gays?? So long as no sexual advancements are made, I fail to see any difference. Reporter should have asked him that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Jake Gyllenhall wasn't making any sexual advancements at first, and we saw how it worked out for those guys. So now that we have gays in the locker room, we're no longer allowed to heterosexually act gay!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 So now that we have gays in the locker room, we're no longer allowed to heterosexually act gay!? THANKS OBAMA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 When you've got junk as magnificent as mine, you don't care who see's it. Gay, straight, male, female, black, white or those other colors. You just flaunt that sh*t and let everyone get a glimpse of the male anatomy in its finest form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 When you've got junk as magnificent as mine, you don't care who see's it. Gay, straight, male, female, black, white or those other colors. You just flaunt that sh*t and let everyone get a glimpse of the male anatomy in its finest form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 When you've got junk as magnificent as mine, you don't care who see's it. Gay, straight, male, female, black, white or those other colors. You just flaunt that sh*t and let everyone get a glimpse of the male anatomy in its finest form. Brett Favre Jr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kleckineau Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 So Philbin fired the o-line coach and head trainer today. Guess this fixes everything for them and now Incog can go to another team and pull his douche bag act for the 4th time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Dude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 When you've got junk as magnificent as mine, you don't care who see's it. Gay, straight, male, female, black, white or those other colors. You just flaunt that sh*t and let everyone get a glimpse of the male anatomy in its finest form. Good point. But I really can't relate my belly protects mine. Unless someone is 1'5" they ain;t seeing nothing but gut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kleckineau Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Good point. But I really can't relate my belly protects mine. Unless someone is 1'5" they ain;t seeing nothing but gut. 1'5" ain't bad as long as they have a flat head to rest your beer on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.