The great Jim Brown

[Cheddar's Dad]

I don't know if this is the right forum for this topic. If it isn't, I'm certain that someone will remove it or criticize me for posting it but here goes.

 

I'm old enough to remember the great Jim Brown; the power, the speed, and the disappointment upon hearing of his somewhat premature retirement. He really was an amazing athlete.

 

Jim Brown always impressed me as an angry black man; angry about the treatment of minorities in 1950/1960 America and for good reason. But it was his always seemingly angry atitude that I noticed. He always had a chip on his shoulders.

 

Brown had a problem, a few years ago, with Mike Holmgren and his Cleveland Brown's staff. He apparently did not feel he received the respect he feels he deserves. He recently appeared on the NFL Network and was introduced as "the great Jim Brown". Later one of the regulars on the program stated, "Jim Brown's greatness will always be respected". I wish I knew the inside story of what went on with Brown and Holmgren but I can't help but wonder if Brown, himself, isn't part of the problem. Does he expect homage a bit too much?

 

I recall when he and the beautiful Raquel Welch made 100 Rifles years ago. There was a kissing scene between the two and Welch wrote in a book years later that she was angred when Brown thrust his tongue into her mouth during that scene.

 

Does Jim Brown seem to expect a little too much homage beyond what he earned as a football player. I'd welcome the opinion of others that read this forum. Does he come across to you as a little too entitled?

[dogman]

I think that chip is something many great competitors have. He did put his money where his mouth was (no reference to Rachel Welch issue) and form the Negro Industrial and Economic Union along with Jabbar, Ali, and Bill Russell. This was designed almost as a private bank to help black start-up businesses. So I guess I'd give him some slack, but he did always seem angry/intense to me.

 

The Rachel Welch thing... go for it!

[mrags]

I wasn't around when Brown was making a name for himself but from what I can see now and looking back at some of the headlines, he seems to be an angry man who felt entitled.

 

Greatest player in history IMO (from my experiences watching films and documentaries about him) but yeah, I think he probably had that Darrell Revis type chip on his shoulder, only more intense because of the times.

[bills7834]

I'm not old enough to have watched him live. From all the footage I saw of him he was a man amongst boys. He was Bo Jackson before Bo Jackson.

 

I also have very little respect for him as a man. He decided to beat the snot out of women for the majority of his life. I have no tolerence for that type of man.

 

Sorry for the rant, but I'm not sure why his name is not linked to this. Many men have been tarred and feathered by the media for far less.

[Bufcomments]

Jim Brown WAS the Cleveland Browns . My Pops used to tell me story about him all the time.

 

The way Holmgren did him was just plain wrong. He hired his own people and rubbed Brown the wrong way. Pure lack of respect to a guy that helped all sorts of people in the Cleveland area.

 

I am glad to see he is back in the Browns organization. He should be a Brown for the rest of his life.

 

Not going to judge his actions of the field. Heck I would have kissed Raquel Welch too if I had the chance lol

[tombstone56]

JIM BROWN AND COOKIE GILCRIST were outstanding running backs and both dealt with overt racism during there careers. COOKIE even more so THAN J.B. playing in the CFL. ...THAT being said they never could separate the past from the present .R.I.P. Cookie but Brown seems to feel he was A FOOTBALL GOD , not just a football player. ABSOLUTELY he acts and treats others around him as if hes owed something!!

BY THE WAY if you saw Cookie play you might not think Brown was the best!

[Buftex]

Yeah, as another, not young enough to have really seen him play (I was born in 1965), I assume he was as great a football player as he has been made out to be. But, like many, I also remember all the lurid headlines...whether beating up somebody with a golf-club in a case of road-rage, or throwing a woman off the balcony of a hotel, I think he has definitely had some issues over the years. It also bothered me, a few years ago (maybe 10 years ago, I can't even remember when) he was charged with domestic vilonce, but eventually, his fiance (was if wife?) dropped charges...but he did jail time for "vandalism" because he smashed the windows out on her car, in a public place....at the time, IIRC, he was offered a lighter sentencs, but wanting to play the martyr, he took the jail time, and made a lot of noise about being unjustly persecuted, the inference being that this happened becasue he was black. As I recall, his fiance/wife, had visable physical injuries. So, at the very least, he was guilty of being angry enough to smash the **** out of an automobile, but, as he seems to always do, he turned his transgression from an embarassment for him, to a soap-box moment, to further his own legend as an activist and civil rights hero. I always thought he was a chicken-**** coward with a martyr complex.

 

I also take some issue with his continued "harrassment" of modern star athletes (Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods come immediately to mind) for not being willing to take a more verbal and visible stand on racial and political issues. I would commend Woods and Jordan for doing so, but I really don't think it is any of Jim Brown's business how these guys conduct themselves. He can act as though they owe him something for being a "pioneer" for the black athlete, but he doesn't really acknowledge the fact that he has made a pretty good living simply off of being Jim Brown (certainly more than his less popular peers in pro-football), NFL football legend. He may not have made the big bucks that modern guys make..but he has sustained himself on his name alone. What does he really do for the Cleveland Browns, other than be a cheer-leader?

 

I had an ongoing argument with an overnight sports talk-show host (JT the Brick) on this subject for years. Brick loves him, idolizes him, and thinks he is an exemplary human being... he points out all of the charity work he does, and all of the work he does, and has done, for inner-city poverty and to prevent gang-violence. All those are noble things, and I am sure Brown is sincere in his efforts...but I just can't get past the man on woman violence issue. It is something th at dogged him, going all the way back to his days at Syracuse. He was accused (though the case was tossed, and was likely trumped up) of raping a coed. Again, the ugly rape accusations turned up in the 1980's...

 

I guess, in the end, Jim Brown is like most of us...an imperfect human being. I do sympathize, to a degree, with Brown and his situation with Holmgren. He was, by all accounts, a tremendous football player, and after all this time, still the face of the Browns franchise. He has paid whatever price deemed appropriate for his non-football transgressions, so, in my book, you can't judge somebody for the rest of their life. And, Holmgren has always struck me as a smug prick. Funny thing though, Brown (I saw an interview on NFLN over the weekend) says that Holmgren didn't "respect him", and said he was "making too much money". In all likelyhood, he probably was making too much money for whatever he was doing.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Buftex

[808]

i dont think he deserves all the hand holding around that org. he played a game 50 years ago. what does he do now to deserve a roll with them? i understad him being a figure head but he ***** all over the browns every chance he gets. for someone who wants a roll with a team he sure doesnt help his case.

[26CornerBlitz]

i dont think he deserves all the hand holding around that org. he played a game 50 years ago. what does he do now to deserve a roll with them? i understad him being a figure head but he ***** all over the browns every chance he gets. for someone who wants a roll with a team he sure doesnt help his case.

 

Jim Brown deserves a role with the Browns because the current ownership understands that he's revered in Cleveland and around the NFL. His presence gives the franchise a certain measure of respect that the Browns have not merited for quite a long time.

 

He's got a role cause that's how the Browns roll.

Edited June 3, 2013 by 26CornerBlitz

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I don't think it's fair to judge any man unless you've closely studied him and know all of the intimate details of his life.

 

We're talking about a black man who was born in 1936.

 

Virtually none of us have any idea what he's gone through.

 

This topic is patently unfair and an invitation for a lot of people who have no idea what they're talking about to give their opinions.

 

That is all.

[26CornerBlitz]

I don't think it's fair to judge any man unless you've closely studied him and know all of the intimate details of his life.

 

We're talking about a black man who was born in 1936.

 

Virtually none of us have any idea what he's gone through.

 

This topic is patently unfair and an invitation for a lot of people who have no idea what they're talking about to give their opinions.

 

That is all.

 

Par for the course unfortunately on many subjects within and beyond the realm of football.

[Doc]

Holmgren didn't want Brown upstaging him and fired him. Now Holmgren is gone and Brown is back.

[Jauronimo]

I don't think it's fair to judge any man unless you've closely studied him and know all of the intimate details of his life.

 

We're talking about a black man who was born in 1936.

 

Virtually none of us have any idea what he's gone through.

 

This topic is patently unfair and an invitation for a lot of people who have no idea what they're talking about to give their opinions.

 

That is all.

What is unfair about forming an opinion about something or someone? Everyone with capacity for thought is constantly evaluating, processing and categorizing. If you aren't forming opinions then you're likely a vegetable. So now that we've established that we are constantly forming opinions and changing them so as to reflect new and additional information, what is unfair about opining? Is there something about expressing an opinion that is unfair?

 

Why is non-judgementalism seen as such a virtue now? None of us are standing in any type of meaningful judgement of the man, like sentencing him to death. If we were to wait for complete and total information before forming any type of opinion or judgement how would we function?

[San Jose Bills Fan]

What is unfair about forming an opinion about something or someone? Everyone with capacity for thought is constantly evaluating, processing and categorizing. If you aren't forming opinions then you're likely a vegetable. So now that we've established that we are constantly forming opinions and changing them so as to reflect new and additional information, what is unfair about opining? Is there something about expressing an opinion that is unfair?

 

Why is non-judgementalism seen as such a virtue now? None of us are standing in any type of meaningful judgement of the man, like sentencing him to death. If we were to wait for complete and total information before forming any type of opinion or judgement how would we function?

 

I don't see too many opinions here being formed. I see a lot of opinions being stated. And I'm seeing plenty of uninformed judgementalism which is certainly worse in my book than non-judgementalism.

 

We're talking about a 77 year old man who grew up as a maligned minority for most of his life. Jim Brown was born the same year as another iconic black athlete, Wilt Chamberlain and six years before Muhammad Ali was born.

 

Angry in what context? Was his anger justified? Entitled? Really? Entitled in what way?

 

If people want to give fair, informed takes, I wouldn't take exception.

 

But if you weren't alive during the civil rights demonstrations in this country or if you have little to no understanding as to what was happening in our country during most of the 20th century then maybe it would be better to not pass judgement or opinion.

 

This is a bit different from a football discussion.

 

I'm done here. Carry on by all means.

[EasternOHBillsFan]

I don't think it's fair to judge any man unless you've closely studied him and know all of the intimate details of his life.

 

We're talking about a black man who was born in 1936.

 

Virtually none of us have any idea what he's gone through.

 

This topic is patently unfair and an invitation for a lot of people who have no idea what they're talking about to give their opinions.

 

That is all.

 

These men don't have the same attitude or are wife beaters, and have sterling legacies:

 

Lenny Moore, Baltimore Colts, b. 1933.

Willie Davis, Cleveland Browns/Green Bay Packers, b. 1934.

Jim Parker, Baltimore Colts, b. 1934.

 

Jim Brown has an attitude problem and despite what affected him, he's still acting like he's entitled. Experiences don't justify crime, so why should we justify how Jim Brown acts?

Edited June 3, 2013 by BmoreBills

[Jauronimo]

I don't see too many opinions here being formed. I see a lot of opinions being stated. And I'm seeing plenty of uninformed judgementalism which is certainly worse in my book than non-judgementalism.

 

We're talking about a 77 year old man who grew up as a maligned minority for most of his life. Jim Brown was born the same year as another iconic black athlete, Wilt Chamberlain and six years before Muhammad Ali was born.

 

Angry in what context? Was his anger justified? Entitled? Really? Entitled in what way?

 

If people want to give fair, informed takes, I wouldn't take exception.

 

But if you weren't alive during the civil rights demonstrations in this country or if you have little to no understanding as to what was happening in our country during most of the 20th century then maybe it would be better to not pass judgement or opinion.

 

This is a bit different from a football discussion.

 

I'm done here. Carry on by all means.

So it makes you uncomfortable or upset and things that make you uncomfortable or upset shouldn't be discussed. You have the opportunity to set the record straight, so to speak, seeing as you've dropped several thinly veiled references to your expertise on the matter. By all means, weigh in.

 

Understanding why he is who he is may make him more sympathetic, but plenty of people have faced hardship and don't strike women. Is labeling someone who beats women wrong because they faced discrimination? Is it wrong to call an angry man, angry? I'll try to ignore the duality of pushing for non judgement while you judge those who have offered a take.

[Chandler#81]

Take a chill pill, SJBF. Brown was NOT a maligned minority for most of his life. Sure, he experienced racism through his 1st couple decades, but by the time he shocked the sports world and quit at 29, that crap was disappearing across the nation and he was already an icon and a household name.

 

I have no use for him, for all the reasons mentioned -and, he's a terrible actor. Ha! He's still so full of his damn self, he has no idea how foolish he appears to many, if not most people. This is the guy who so disliked Franco Harris' running style and threatening his career totals, he claimed he'd come out of retirement at 47 and play for the Raiders, just to keep Harris at bay from his record. He's the only person on earth who thought he was able to do it and he probably still does.. He's on record of despising OJ as well, waaaay before the murder of his wife. He's a pathetic, hateful man and will likely continue to be all his days.

 

It's an entirely new Cleveland Browns. His teamed moved to Baltimore. I, for one, am glad to see his career records fall further and further from the top. And, I know what I'm talking about, SJBF.

[Cheddar's Dad]

I don't see too many opinions here being formed. I see a lot of opinions being stated.... But if you weren't alive during the civil rights demonstrations in this country or if you have little to no understanding as to what was happening in our country during most of the 20th century then maybe it would be better to not pass judgement or opinion.

 

I'm pretty sure I formed this opinion before stating it. BTW, I was born in 1942 and, I'm quite sure, I've witnessed more of the 20th century than you have.

[Buftex]

I don't see too many opinions here being formed. I see a lot of opinions being stated. And I'm seeing plenty of uninformed judgementalism which is certainly worse in my book than non-judgementalism.

 

We're talking about a 77 year old man who grew up as a maligned minority for most of his life. Jim Brown was born the same year as another iconic black athlete, Wilt Chamberlain and six years before Muhammad Ali was born.

 

Angry in what context? Was his anger justified? Entitled? Really? Entitled in what way?

 

If people want to give fair, informed takes, I wouldn't take exception.

 

But if you weren't alive during the civil rights demonstrations in this country or if you have little to no understanding as to what was happening in our country during most of the 20th century then maybe it would be better to not pass judgement or opinion.

 

This is a bit different from a football discussion.

 

I'm done here. Carry on by all means.

 

Respectfully San Jose (I normally agree with you) most of us here are old enough to have already formed an opinion about Jim Brown. He is someone that I have read a lot about. The issues you bring up about race are valid, but they don't negate everything. When he threw a woman off of a hotel balcony, was he sure she wouldn't die? Honeslty, for all the good things he has done, he is one failed murder attempt from being OJ Simpson.

 

Not sure if it was directed at me, but I never mentioned "angry black man"....just that I think he has pretty consistantly displayed a pattern of somebody with anger management issues. I also happen to think he has hid behind some of those civil rights issues to distract from real crimes he has committed.

 

Maybe the closest thing to a contemporay that Jim Brown had, was Bill Russell. They are about the same age, and both were, to some degree, pioneers in their sport. Both were active in the more radical elements (as viewed by mainstream America) of the civil rights movement...and both were described at various times as "angry black men". They couldn't be more different. Russell wasn't a self promoter...he spoke with his actions. No fists needed.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Buftex

[Mr. WEO]

Take a chill pill, SJBF. Brown was NOT a maligned minority for most of his life. Sure, he experienced racism through his 1st couple decades, but by the time he shocked the sports world and quit at 29, that crap was disappearing across the nation and he was already an icon and a household name.

 

I have no use for him, for all the reasons mentioned -and, he's a terrible actor. Ha! He's still so full of his damn self, he has no idea how foolish he appears to many, if not most people. This is the guy who so disliked Franco Harris' running style and threatening his career totals, he claimed he'd come out of retirement at 47 and play for the Raiders, just to keep Harris at bay from his record. He's the only person on earth who thought he was able to do it and he probably still does.. He's on record of despising OJ as well, waaaay before the murder of his wife. He's a pathetic, hateful man and will likely continue to be all his days.

 

It's an entirely new Cleveland Browns. His teamed moved to Baltimore. I, for one, am glad to see his career records fall further and further from the top. And, I know what I'm talking about, SJBF.

 

This is the post that should (but won't) end this thread. 100% agree.

 

Jim Brown is bitter. I never got the sense it was because he is a black man. I think he regrets retiring so soon. Decades later and the football nation is still sucking his dong and he still has a chip on his shoulder??

 

Jim can take that goofy kufi and head over to the casino and work as a greeter. Or Walmart. Maybe he will learn humility as an anonymous elderly man.