Mr. WEO Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Great story, it'd be almost true if the public hasn't been calling for his head from the beginning of this whole thing. Look, I get you don't like the new age, you're probably afraid the walls are closing in on you right now and that Twitter is out to get you. But that's not what this issue is about. This issue is about the fact the NFL's policy on domestic abuse has been a joke for far too long. If it took this to get the rules changed, what's the issue? Oh, that's right, your issue is you want to yell at ghosts. Go right ahead, bro. The Bills won this week, everything is groovy. I've already said that twice--they have been calling for his head since the first video ("the beginning"). The rest of your response is not really on topic (afraid of twitter?). Groove on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 It began with the first video. I'm arrogant because I didn't assume that may have pulled a gun or knife on him in the elevator? You need to go back to writing love posts to Jordan Palmer, man. No, you're arrogant for what I called you arrogant for, saying you knew what happened in the elevator. Otherwise I agree with most of what you said. There is no excuse for domestic abuse, the league should have been far more tough on him and others in the past. But unlike arrogant knowitalls, I understand why it's difficult to business when there are no charges and the woman it happened to said nothing happened and ended up marrying him afterwards. This is not a case of being scared of the man and staying with him, or not wanting the neighbors to know. She knew what she was doing. I think the video makes it completely different because it is proof. And, of course, since you don't actually read or understand posts you read, I always said, over and over and over, that Jordan Palmer was terrible, he was just better than Jeff Tuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Other than image, I have yet to hear anyone explain WHY the NFL should be concerned with punishing Rice. Whether he deserves it or not is irrelevant. When did we get to the point where employers need to start monitoring and punishing private conduct unrelated to employment? There is no other reason. That's the only reason needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayoffsPlease Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 The victim here, Rice's wife, now gets to suffer the loss of income for herself and her family. So in that way she is being victimized again so the NFL can feel good about itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 The world has changed quite a bit in the last five years. It's a brand new world, you either can yell about it and get passed by or figure out the new rules. Social media is pretty new, it wasn't around in the same way when other domestic abuses have been swept under the rug by the league. It's moral outrage, yes, but are you saying it's not justified? Do you not think the league has been far too lenient about it's domestic abuse policies for years? Is that really the team you want to back? The world hasn't changed that much unfortunately and all you have to do is look at the news on September 8, 2014. One dirt bag gets his due punishment and we're all wondering who knew what when. While that shiny object is impairing our vision, a washed up old doddering fool tells us all it's ok to let Penn State get off with half of their original "punishment" for allowing children to get raped for a decade. Money talks with or without social media. The NFL is trying to save some money and George Mitchell has done what he can to get PSU back on the gravy train. All in one day. Where's the barf bag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I've already said that twice--they have been calling for his head since the first video ("the beginning"). The rest of your response is not really on topic (afraid of twitter?). Groove on. And you've still yet to explain your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) There is no other reason. That's the only reason needed. Exactly. Which means all this outrage has nothing to do with any responsibility of the NFL to police domestic violence and everything to do with PR. Edited September 9, 2014 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kipers Hair Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 He will be the one domestic abuser that did not make it back to the NFL (and cheered on by a forgetful/nonchalant fanbase). This feels somehow worse - to be sure, he deserves everything he is getting, but what is left in life for him? I genuinely fear for his life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 The victim here, Rice's wife, now gets to suffer the loss of income for herself and her family. So in that way she is being victimized again so the NFL can feel good about itself. No. It's also so we the spectators can feel good about ourselves for being outraged. For the NFL, news media, and the fans it was never about the victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 The world hasn't changed that much unfortunately and all you have to do is look at the news on September 8, 2014. One dirt bag gets his due punishment and we're all wondering who knew what when. While that shiny object is impairing our vision, a washed up old doddering fool tells us all it's ok to let Penn State get off with half of their original "punishment" for allowing children to get raped for a decade. Money talks with or without social media. The NFL is trying to save some money and George Mitchell has done what he can to get PSU back on the gravy train. All in one day. Where's the barf bag? I'm in no way saying the NFL doesn't value money above all else. Quite the opposite. All I'm saying about WEO is he's got an axe to grind but it's not about domestic abuse or the NFL. It's about social media and his complete misunderstanding of it. Exactly. Which means all this outrage has nothing to do with any responsibility of the NFL to police domestic violence and everything about PR. True. Unless the league actually changes its policy, which it has. In that case, the outrage that led us to here is nothing but positive. Unless you're suggesting the league's punishment should have remained at 2 games, which isn't what you're saying I don't think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 True. Unless the league actually changes its policy, which it has. In that case, the outrage that led us to here is nothing but positive. Unless you're suggesting the league's punishment should have remained at 2 games, which isn't what you're saying I don't think. I'm saying I don't think we should expect the league to act like police; period. I don't question their ability or right to do so, I just don't agree with them assuming that role. I apply that across the board. I don't understand why the NFL tests for any drugs other than those of the performance enhancing variety, nor do I understand why a player who gets arrested for possession gets suspended by the league. It seems to me that if anyone besides the court is going to formally punish a player for conduct unrelated to the league it should be the team he's contracted to play for. The way I see it, the league undertook this role to try to shape its image and now is realizing the unintended consequences it now faces as a result. It is now not only allowed to, but is EXPECTED to play the role of police, judge, jury, and executioner. And now it must do so according to the whims of a fickle public, the bulk of which operates primarily on emotion rather than logic, particularly with these kinds of matters. I'm actually okay with Goodell getting canned over this; just probably for the opposite reason that everyone else does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Other than image, I have yet to hear anyone explain WHY the NFL should be concerned with punishing Rice. Whether he deserves it or not is irrelevant. When did we get to the point where employers need to start monitoring and punishing private conduct unrelated to employment? It's in the Collective Bargaining Agreement that the players association and the NFL agreed to. Its a contract. So WHY wouldn't the NFL and players have to follow their contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) I'm saying I don't think we should expect the league to act like police; period. I don't question their ability or right to do so, I just don't agree with them assuming that role. I apply that across the board. I don't understand why the NFL tests for any drugs other than those of the performance enhancing variety, nor do I understand why a player who gets arrested for possession gets suspended by the league. It seems to me that if anyone besides the court is going to formally punish a player for conduct unrelated to the league it should be the team he's contracted to play for. The way I see it, the league undertook this role to try to shape its image and now is realizing the unintended consequences it now faces as a result. It is now not only allowed to, but is EXPECTED to play the role of police, judge, jury, and executioner. And now it must do so according to the whims of a fickle public, the bulk of which operates primarily on emotion rather than logic, particularly with these kinds of matters. I'm actually okay with Goodell getting canned over this; just probably for the opposite reason that everyone else does. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but the flip side to this is that the NFL is a business. If you ran a business, would you fire a guy who committed some horrific crime? The one thing that I absolutely cannot stand is how everyone is going after Goodell. In my opinion, something outside of the game should be dealt with by the specific franchise. The League and Commish should punish breaking rules of the NFL, but the owners handle all other matters. The Ravens are the worst people in this story and it's not even close. (edit) I misread your post completely, I just realized we said the exact same thing. Carry on. Edited September 9, 2014 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 It's in the Collective Bargaining Agreement that the players association and the NFL agreed to. Its a contract. So WHY wouldn't the NFL and players have to follow their contract? I'm trying really hard to think of a dumber response to my post, but so far I'm not coming up with anything. I'll let you know if I think of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) This will be unpopular, but Ray Rice needs some serious help right now. His life as he knew it is over. For ever. I hope there's a path out of this mess, but I would not be surprised if this story ends in tragedy. Kinda has . in its way. That girl must be lifelong case for therapy. he should be punished in the criminal justice system . Edited September 9, 2014 by 3rdand12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I'm trying really hard to think of a dumber response to my post, but so far I'm not coming up with anything. I'll let you know if I think of one. You are the genius who can't figure out why the NFL should be concerned with punishing a player. You could go the legal route, marketing, financial, etc. Pick one and you could come up with plenty of reasons. But uh yea, I'm dumb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 It's in the Collective Bargaining Agreement that the players association and the NFL agreed to. Its a contract. So WHY wouldn't the NFL and players have to follow their contract? It's stupid. The guy who signs the players' checks should deal with conduct. Not the commissioner. The commissioner should be busy tinkering with extra points and on-the-field issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Exactly--and the "embarrassment" comes from the barking of the media and the public, who are also reacting only to a salacious video of a player knocking out his woman--not because they always get this amped up over domestic violence in the NFL. Or domestic violence anywhere else. I said it earlier (in this thread, I think): the real travesty is that Rice can plea-bargain down to an intervention program and no jail time. It's not the NFL's job to punish abusers, it's the court's. Yet Rice got a stiffer punishment from the NFL than he did from the justice system even BEFORE he was cut today...and everyone's bitching that the league is the organization not doing enough to combat domestic violence? The whole "issue" here is craven and cowardly, because everyone wants to take the lazy path of focusing on the convenient boogey-man ("The NFL goes easy on domestic abuse!"), because it's easy and doesn't require any effort. But no one - including the justice system - wants to deal with the non-public figure who throws his wife down a flight of stairs, or rapes and beats his girlfriend into a coma and brags about it on Facebook. Outrage at a convenient target is MUCH easier than actually giving a **** about the problem. I mean, yes, !@#$ Goodell. Shitbird couldn't take a moral stand to save his life - even now, when he PRETENDS to take a moral stand, it's a matter of convenience and half-assed PR. But !@#$ all of you that think Goodell's the real problem, too. Of all the parties involved in this cluster-!@#$, he's one of the least responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I'm trying really hard to think of a dumber response to my post, but so far I'm not coming up with anything. I'll let you know if I think of one. My post before the edit was pretty dumb. I argued with you, then made the point you had just made. It was a bold strategy, let's see if it works out for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 It's stupid. The guy who signs the players' checks should deal with conduct. Not the commissioner. The commissioner should be busy tinkering with extra points and on-the-field issues. Holy crap, you and Rob's house are not using your brain. Is this going to be like 5th grade where you have to write an essay to a prompt, "If you were in charge of a multi-billion dollar industry, what are the pros and cons of caring if your players (image) beat their wives? Remember at least three reasons!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts