Another Bills reporter trying to make himself the story

[Bob Chandler's Hands]

3 hours ago, whatdrought said:

 

I think the issue is that the conversation was one that happened exclusively because of his status as a reporter. So everything gained in the conversation (specifically what’s he commenting on) exists because he was being a reporter and Fromm was being and interviewee. 
 

So I don’t see the distinction in that regard. When reporters retweet or tweet or like stuff that I disagree with I don’t care that much because it’s impossible to separate “Reporter Marcel” from “person Marcel” I’m social media. But when he uses his official platform to talk trash about a player simply cause he disagrees, I find it distasteful. 
 

My $.02

Excellent points

[C.Biscuit97]

15 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

A cop out of what? I think it was a polite way of saying he doesn't want to step into a political debate. I respect that decision. Maybe you and I are on the same page here.

 

Why does a football player need to answer that question to the media? He didn't state an opinion one way or the other. Some girl put out an image of a private conversation he had over a year ago where he made a dumb and tasteless joke. Does that mean he now has to be the face of racial equality for the rest of his career? MLJ was baiting him, plain and simple.

 

Still better than Mike Rodak though.

He literally said only elite whites should be able to buy guns and there has been a whole social movement going on.  If he didn’t say that, he won’t be asked. 
 

again, read what Allen said about black lives matter.  It was a very good response.  

[freddyjj]

2 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

You act like hes quoting the sermon on the mound.   

LOL my friend - some levity required here.

 

"1st pitch - Chin Music.  2nd pitch - Down and away.  3rd pitch - tight on the hands.  Then throw one he has to chase"

That's what my pitching coach said when he walked out to the mound.  

Edited August 7, 2020 by freddyjj

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Jauronimo said:

I have no problem with him tossing his faith into his lack of response. I have an issue with everyone who cannot admit that he dodged the question, which is painfully clear, and instead want to argue about the profundity of "i think the world can be a better place if we can love god first and then love people".  He may as well have said  the world can be a better place if we recycle.  Both statements are true, as deep as a bumper sticker, and only tangentially related to the question.

 

Oh he definitely dodged the question and he hid behind his faith to do it.

[Jauronimo]

Just now, freddyjj said:

LOL my friend - some levity required here.

 

"1st pitch - Chin Music.  2nd pitch - Down and away.  3rd pitch - tight on the hands.  Then throw one he has to chase"

That's what the pitching coach said when he walked out to the mound.  

LOL.  Add it to the TBDisms thread. 

 

You'll never guess who slept through Sunday school?

[GaryPinC]

27 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Because what it essentially said with God 1st, people 2nd was "well God is more important than people anyway". When being asked about issues affecting society to start your answer with that is a defense mechanism. 

 

It might be his religious belief and though I vociferously disagree with it I equally vociferously defend his right to hold that belief. But using it as a means of deflecting that question is a cop out and I don't think it does him any favours. 

This is what he was quoted as saying:

 

"There’s a lot of things going on and the last thing I want to do is get political in any sort of way, but I think the world would be a better place if we can love God first and then love people."

 

So he immediately says that he's not really going to answer the question and simply says for him love God first and then people.  For Christians of faith this is how it's taught to be, it doesn't mean he's saying "well God is more important than people anyway".  Also, one of the biggest lessons of Christ was to love all people equally.  I think it's his way of pointing back to that.

 

As far as him deflecting, why shouldn't he?  His texts were not a good look and now a certain subset of people will find bad in whatever he says.  It's already happening on this thread, including yourself. 

At this point he needs to prove who he is through his actions and that takes time.

[C.Biscuit97]

47 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If I was an American citizen I would spoil my ballot if presented with that choice. 

It’s so embarrassing.  Nfl owners weren’t going to approve trump to be an owner if he had the money to buy the Bills (he didn’t) because he was they thought he was a joke.  (It’s also why he tries to bash the nfl any chance he can.  He’s a bitter dude)
 

and people think Biden is losing his mind but might win because he’s not Trump.  Good times!

[whatdrought]

21 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

you act like asking the guy that made a racist tweet what he thinks about this civil rights movement going on is some insurmountable perfect trap of nefarious intent.
 

yea, as a rule of thumb lots of good comes from people loving each other but without saying what that looks like - it amounts to saying thoughts and prayers. 
 

there are plenty of better ways to navigate that question, and what marcel thinks of the answer means little to me.

 

and no, Fromm isn’t obligated to answer anything but he is accountable to the response he gives. In this case a minor flub that had minor pushback.

Those two things have nothing to do with each other is the problem. The part of the conversation regarding his texts and the lesson he learned was over and now Marcel was asking him about this secondary issue which is highly inflammatory. 
 

Jake says he’s not going to get into that, but that in that and all things- his goal is to act in the ways outlined by his religion. 
 

What is wrong with that? What’s missing? You don’t know Jake Fromm and you don’t know what he does or doesn’t do to love people- not answering a political question isn’t a cop out, it’s wise.

 

 

Marcels answer and what he thinks about it is what this entire thread is about. I agree it doesn’t matter too much, but here we are. ? 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, GaryPinC said:

This is what he was quoted as saying:

 

"There’s a lot of things going on and the last thing I want to do is get political in any sort of way, but I think the world would be a better place if we can love God first and then love people."

 

So he immediately says that he's not really going to answer the question and simply says for him love God first and then people.  For Christians of faith this is how it's taught to be, it doesn't mean he's saying "well God is more important than people anyway".  Also, one of the biggest lessons of Christ was to love all people equally.  I think it's his way of pointing back to that.

 

As far as him deflecting, why shouldn't he?  His texts were not a good look and now a certain subset of people will find bad in whatever he says.  It's already happening on this thread, including yourself. 

At this point he needs to prove who he is through his actions and that takes time.

 

Yea. That reads to me as people are less important than God anyway. I don't care what his faith says. That is his business. When he decides to throw it into this conversation.... then it is fair for people to question him hiding behind it. 

[PromoTheRobot]

I did think Fromm's answer was a little weird, but nothing to get worked up over.

[SCBills]

9 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

He literally said only elite whites should be able to buy guns and there has been a whole social movement going on.  If he didn’t say that, he won’t be asked. 
 

again, read what Allen said about black lives matter.  It was a very good response.  

Yes, “you feel” it was a very good response.  
 

That’s subjective, not fact.  
 

I agree that Josh had a good response, as that’s also my opinion.  
 

I’m also fine with Fromm’s response.  Again, my opinion.  
 

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by SCBills

[NoHuddleKelly12]

13 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If he had made statement without throwing God into the first sentence I would have zero issue. 

 

It is not everyone else's responsibility to interpret what Jake Fromm means from scripture. It really isn't. That is him imposing his belief system on me. That is why he should not have made his first comment on the situation about God. 

 

To be fair, he was first put on the spot by a reporter. And you could arguably say the same thing about any athlete who voices any thoughts/opinions as to issues outside of their professions--and I'm not saying that's a bad thing mind you, just that when he prefaced what he said with, "I think..." it immediately becomes clear that's an opinion coming. In his case yes, faith-based according to what he said. A free society must be able to engage itself with opinions of all kinds. I respect your right to have one, as much as I know that you do for anyone else posting here.        

[freddyjj]

8 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

He may as well have said  the world can be a better place if we recycle.  Both statements are true, as deep as a bumper sticker, and only tangentially related to the question.

Sounds like a beauty pageant contestant answer - maybe Jake got it from his mama..she looks like she may have been in a pageant or two!

 

[C.Biscuit97]

1 minute ago, SCBills said:

Yes, “you feel” it was a very good response.  
 

That’s subjective, not fact.  
 

I agree that Josh had a good response, as that’s also my opinion.  
 

I’m also fine with Fromm’s response.  Again, my opinion.  
 

 

Yeah, that’s fair.  But it comes across as using religion as crutch and he had a chance to really demonstrate that he truly grew.  

[GaryPinC]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea. That reads to me as people are less important than God anyway. I don't care what his faith says. That is his business. When he decides to throw it into this conversation.... then it is fair for people to question him hiding behind it. 

Actually people are, but by a very small amount, not the wide margin you imagine.  A big part of your relationship with God is how you express it through your love of people.

 

He's also mentioned he's started to see things in a new light with all the conversations he's had and perhaps he'd like to do more listening and gathering of information instead of  opinionating.  What's wrong with that? 

[C.Biscuit97]

2 minutes ago, freddyjj said:

Sounds like a beauty pageant contestant answer - maybe Jake got it from his mama..she looks like she may have been in a pageant or two!

 

Plastic surgeons are awesome.  

[freddyjj]

17 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

If he had made statement without throwing God into the first sentence I would have zero issue. 

 

This is the new normal.  If I am in a crowded room I just mention the G-word and voila.... lots of personal space.

[Doc]

13 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

He literally said only elite whites should be able to buy guns and there has been a whole social movement going on.  If he didn’t say that, he won’t be asked. 
 

again, read what Allen said about black lives matter.  It was a very good response.  

 

 

He did?

[C.Biscuit97]

4 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I did think Fromm's answer was a little weird, but nothing to get worked up over.

This is about as civil of a thread about a subject like this as I have seen on this board.  I don’t think anyone is really that worked up about but rather just debating it.

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Yeah, that’s fair.  But it comes across as using religion as crutch and he had a chance to really demonstrate that he truly grew.  

You’re presuming that his pursuit of his religion and growth are mutually exclusive. It seems to me that he’s showing how he’s grown and the result is that he plans on better practicing his religion.