I agree with you. I didn’t take your post as being critical, sorry if it came off that way.I wasnt necessarily being critical of the others. Just saying Slater nailed it.
I agree with you. I didn’t take your post as being critical, sorry if it came off that way.I wasnt necessarily being critical of the others. Just saying Slater nailed it.
I did not view Nick’s reference as limited to people posting here.Even though I suspect we agree on the current subject, and might have an interesting discussion along the lines you started down, this is where I stopped reading. Because anyone choosing to throw that term around to preemptively label those taking another view clearly isn't interested in a serious conversation.
And I mean, who the hell wants social justice, amirite bros?! What a silly thing to want.
Edit: yeah, what BornToRun said, too.
Are you seriously suggesting the NFL doesn’t have a systemic issue with domestic violence? Because that’s impressive when the NFL itself and Roger Goodell have recognized the need to make improvements in this area. 15 players arrested for DV over a two-year period is notable, especially if you believe that fewer than 1% of DV incidents are reported.I did not view Nick’s reference as limited to people posting here.
A women’s advocacy group, UltraViolet, has called for the Pats to “immediately cut” AB. It added, “Time and again, the NFL has failed to address the near epidemic levels of sexual assault and violence within the League ...”
How does one define an epidemic in a League that has about 1700 players on rosters and practice squads? And how does this group’s warrior-like statement contribute in any meaningful way to individual justice? Particularly when there are alternatives short of “immediately cut” that would allow the allegations to be probed and, if appropriate, disciplined?
Why does is group relevant? I haven't heard of them before, but their tweet on AB has 6 likes in 36 hours. It has 9 replies; 6 arguing for some sort of process, 1 pointing out that Kraft doesn't have a Twitter account and 2 generally opposed to their suggestion.A women’s advocacy group, UltraViolet, has called for the Pats to “immediately cut” AB. It added, “Time and again, the NFL has failed to address the near epidemic levels of sexual assault and violence within the League ..."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/09/11/nfl-will-consider-placing-antonio-brown-paid-leave-making-him-ineligible-play/?outputType=ampWhy does is group relevant? I haven't heard of them before, but their tweet on AB has 6 likes in 36 hours. It has 9 replies; 6 arguing for some sort of process, 1 pointing out that Kraft doesn't have a Twitter account and 2 generally opposed to their suggestion.
Rich people get arrested less than non-rich people? No surprise there.“Time and again, the NFL has failed to address the near epidemic levels of sexual assault and violence within the League..."
Well, just curious about that. Are NFL players, as a population, more or less likely to get arrested for various crimes? That's not the same exact question, of course, as what UltraViolet is specifically addressing, but here's a little research on that.
The arrest rate in the general US population, from 1990-2017, has gone from about 5,700 per 100,000 in 1990 down to 3,251 per 100,000 in 2017.
View attachment 25928
And from (https://www.vocativ.com/culture/sport/nfl-arrest-rates/index.html), here are the arrest rates per 100,000 for each of the major sports (the data here is from 2010-2014):
NFL: 2,465.8 per 100,000
NBA: 2,156.6 per 100,000
MLB: 552.8 per 100,000
NHL: 175.0 per 100,000
It would be an interesting study as to why the NFL and NBA arrest rates are SO much higher than MLB and NHL. But that aside, even the NFL, with it's "epidemic" of crime, represents a group that gets arrested at a rate substantially lower than the general US population.
Furthermore, let's tease this out by gender. Look here: https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/ucr.asp?table_in=1&selYrs=2017&rdoGroups=2&rdoData=r
First, males in general have an arrest rate (2017) of 4,800 per 100,000. Females are arrested at a much lower rate (1,726 per 100,000). Moreover, males ages 21-24 are arrested at a rate of 11,476 per 100,000. Males ages 25 and up (so, 25 til however old they get, which obviously represents a huge segment of the population) are arrested at a rate of 4,986 per 100,000. The overall average age of NFL players is just a tick over 26. So looking at these numbers, it would seem that the average NFL player - a male between the ages of 22 and 35 roughly (averaging about 26 years old) - should be arrested at a rate of somewhere near the 10,000 per 100,000 rate.
It's not even CLOSE to that. So the NFL - a collection of young men from disparate backgrounds but largely are minorities (which is a population with higher arrest rates) that participate in a sport that is incredibly violent and testosterone-filled (let's be honest), have a much LOWER arrest rate than a comparative group within the general US population.
So hardly an "epidemic"; it would seem that crime in the NFL is much much much lower than one might expect. And I wonder why that might be. Various thoughts on that but I'll leave them be. Long story short, there isn't an "epidemic" of crime among NFL players. They are, relative to the general population and especially compared to the general population of men in the same age range, quite docile.
I think also their regimented schedules and supervision probably helps keep numbers down. That and not needing to commit crimes to make money compared to those their same age as others have pointed out.I don’t claim to be an expert on crime but think a decent amount is due to lack of means. I would be curious if the general population that make even close to a professional athlete would have similar crime stats. Would the NFL player still be quite docile in comparison?
I doubt that many proponents of "believe women" wish to exclude other victims of sexual violence.Also, the ‘believe women’ slogan bothers me. Not because it basically says that every alleged victim is always telling the truth.. but why exclude men or trans who are victims of domestic or sexual abuse? Are they believed at a greater percentage? It seems like it should be inclusive of all victims.
I would also speculate that domestic/sexual violence is a crime that is minimally enforced. Especially when the alleged perpetrators are wealthy/influential.Rich people get arrested less than non-rich people? No surprise there.
Its fine to question the particular group, and you might be right about this one. But the issue raised in response to the OP's use of the term "social justice warrior" is that it has become a loaded term that seems most often used to describe certain positions because it sounds fancier than "butthurt libs" or "safespace snowflakes." It is, IMO (YMMV) an immediate signal that the user of the term is incapable of a serious discussion of a complicated and nuanced issue. There may be ten million reasons why "just believe all women" is bad policy. But when someone describes someone who thinks its good policy as a "social justice warrior" the conversation is over.I did not view Nick’s reference as limited to people posting here.
A women’s advocacy group, UltraViolet, has called for the Pats to “immediately cut” AB. It added, “Time and again, the NFL has failed to address the near epidemic levels of sexual assault and violence within the League ...”
How does one define an epidemic in a League that has about 1700 players on rosters and practice squads? And how does this group’s warrior-like statement contribute in any meaningful way to individual justice? Particularly when there are alternatives short of “immediately cut” that would allow the allegations to be probed and, if appropriate, disciplined?
I don't know much about the specific advocacy group in question, but these groups do have a noble goal: the reduction and elimination of domestic violence, which in the vast majority of cases targets women. In their view, anything they can do to generate attention to the real problem of domestic violence is (a) how they stay in existence and (b) how they can hope to come anywhere close to achieving their goals.
The NFL can investigate conduct of any of its players. There is, to my knowledge, nothing to stop them from just doing an investigation. All players are bound by NFL rules and bylaws and contract provisions regarding personal conduct, so the NFL does have standing to take action if a player violates those standard, not just the team. That is the way all 4 major professional sports leagues work.I still don't understand how the NFL can investigate a civil case. If someone were suing me at work, the regulatory committee who governs my industry would not be investigating me. Criminal case - yes, but not civil.
Now if the Patriots as his employer wanted to, I can see that - but I just dont understand why the NFL, who by the way almost never gets anything right, sees fit to investigate. Plus isn't it a lose - lose for them? Suspend him and people bash them because it's only because hes a Patriot. Dont suspend and people bash them because it's only because hes a Patriot.
If Mrs. Brady filed for divorce based on allegations that Mr. Brady was beating the shit out of her every Sunday night, the NFL would absolutely investigate, (because its fair for them to not want their playrs to beat the shit out of their wives) even if Mrs. Brady refused to cooperate with police, and thus there could be no criminal case built. How well the NFL does this stuff is obviously a very different question.I still don't understand how the NFL can investigate a civil case. If someone were suing me at work, the regulatory committee who governs my industry would not be investigating me. Criminal case - yes, but not civil.
Now if the Patriots as his employer wanted to, I can see that - but I just dont understand why the NFL, who by the way almost never gets anything right, sees fit to investigate. Plus isn't it a lose - lose for them? Suspend him and people bash them because it's only because hes a Patriot. Dont suspend and people bash them because it's only because hes a Patriot.
It's an interesting hypothetical. Suppose the NFL didn't exist and these players were forced to live "normal" (i.e., non professional athlete's) lives. Would this group be more likely to commit crimes at a higher rate than the general population? In other words, does being a pro athlete actually have a reducing effect on crime? Or is this just statistical coincidence?I don’t claim to be an expert on crime but think a decent amount is due to lack of means. I would be curious if the general population that make even close to a professional athlete would have similar crime stats. Would the NFL player still be quite docile in comparison?
I know it's more than a cliche at this point, but BB will do whatever is in the best interests of the team on the field. If he thinks AB truly isn't up to speed on the playbook/if AB was always going to be a healthy scratch, he won't play, but if the plan had always been to play him I don't think this incident, knowing what we know now, will tip the scales the other way.Assuming the league can't/doesn't put AB on the exempt list before Sunday, but the strong possibility exists they will next week, I wonder if BB just makes him inactive for Sunday. He's certainly got the cover of doing it for football/not quite up to speed on the playbook reasons, and who knows, that may have been the plan before any of this happened. Calm things down, at least a little bit, and let the process breath. Seems as though we'll likely have clarity of what the league's course of action will be(at just to re-state, I don't think the league remotely posses the competence or integrity to handle this properly at all. But unfortunately, they do have the authority) by next week. And, they really don't need AB to win handily on Sunday.
Ironically, I think the pressure to not play him could, and I really mean could, lead BB to play AB against Miami when he otherwise might have given him another red shirt week.Assuming the league can't/doesn't put AB on the exempt list before Sunday, but the strong possibility exists they will next week, I wonder if BB just makes him inactive for Sunday. He's certainly got the cover of doing it for football/not quite up to speed on the playbook reasons, and who knows, that may have been the plan before any of this happened. Calm things down, at least a little bit, and let the process breath. Seems as though we'll likely have clarity of what the league's course of action will be(at just to re-state, I don't think the league remotely posses the competence or integrity to handle this properly at all. But unfortunately, they do have the authority) by next week. And, they really don't need AB to win handily on Sunday.
When Tyreek Hill scores a TD, Chiefs fans go wild.Ironically, I think the pressure to not play him could, and I really mean could, lead BB to play AB against Miami when he otherwise might have given him another red shirt week.
I have no idea what Bill will do. My gut is that the player plays if Bill thinks it helps him win. Period.
But this situation is so unusual that who the hell knows?
For those still reading, I have a question:
Assume AB plays. Will his presence do anything to you? Will it change how you root? Will you go so far as not to watch? Or just hold your nose when AB catches a pass or scores? Conversely, will you root for him like you would any other player?
This strikes me as possibly thread worthy but then again, we already have a bunch of threads on L’Affaire Brown. I guess a Dope can do Dope Magic if it should be one.
I will root for him if he plays but I have to admit that it will be less intense than with respect to the other players on the offense. Which sucks.
But this sucks. I'd have a really, really hard time if the Pats signed Hill or Kareem Hunt, or Ray Rice, I'd have to think long and hard about what that meant about me as a fan, that I'd be willing to overlook the shit they did because I like it when the Patriots win football games. AB isn't quite at that level because there's some level of uncertainty in my mind about what exactly happened. But, the more I think about it, if he plays on Sunday and catches passes or scores a TD I'm going to feel lousy about it.When Tyreek Hill scores a TD, Chiefs fans go wild.
When Ben Roethlisberger throws a TD pass, Steeler fans go wild.
When Peyton Manning threw a TD pass, Colts and then Broncos fans went wild.
I'm pretty sure if/when AB scores a TD, Pats fans will be pretty excited. Especially if it's in a big spot in a game.
But I hear you. From what I've seen, this is a hard guy to root for. But I just have to remind myself I'm rooting for my TEAM, not so much the individual players on the team.
I'll definitely be watching. And I'm sure I'll get caught up in the flow of the game, and likely appreciate/"cheer" about any big plays he makes. And then immediately question myself for doing so. It's an element that I really wish didn't exist when watching/rooting for my favorite team. But here we are. Hardly the first time we've had to navigate these kind of (admittedly very minor, in context of the larger issue here) dilemmas.Ironically, I think the pressure to not play him could, and I really mean could, lead BB to play AB against Miami when he otherwise might have given him another red shirt week.
I have no idea what Bill will do. My gut is that the player plays if Bill thinks it helps him win. Period.
But this situation is so unusual that who the hell knows?
For those still reading, I have a question:
Assume AB plays. Will his presence do anything to you? Will it change how you root? Will you go so far as not to watch? Or just hold your nose when AB catches a pass or scores? Conversely, will you root for him like you would any other player?
This strikes me as possibly thread worthy but then again, we already have a bunch of threads on L’Affaire Brown. I guess a Dope can do Dope Magic if it should be one.
I will root for him if he plays but I have to admit that it will be less intense than with respect to the other players on the offense. Which sucks.
As Bill Parcells always told his players...."The fans aren't rooting for you, they root for the laundry"When Tyreek Hill scores a TD, Chiefs fans go wild.
When Ben Roethlisberger throws a TD pass, Steeler fans go wild.
When Peyton Manning threw a TD pass, Colts and then Broncos fans went wild.
I'm pretty sure if/when AB scores a TD, Pats fans will be pretty excited. Especially if it's in a big spot in a game.
But I hear you. From what I've seen, this is a hard guy to root for. But I just have to remind myself I'm rooting for my TEAM, not so much the individual players on the team.
I think that article throws out numbers in a dramatic way... obviously trying to make a point... but offers little context or explanation re: the numbers. By no means does the Huffington Post or any media of any socio-political slant have a monopoly on this approach... but it's real... and it matters in reality. With respect to the bolded statistic... I think you'd need to do a lot of massaging of that number to get it to something that has any relevance as a point of comparison to NFL players (ex. population of NFL players looks nothing like population of 330 million Americans).I don't know if these numbers are exactly right, but let's just look at sexual assault.
According to this Huffington Post article, there are 321,500 sexual assaults and rapes in the US per year. The US population is roughly 330 million, so that means that there is one sexual assault or rape for every 1,026 people, or a rate of 97 per 100,000.
It's really really hard to find actual data on how many NFL players have committed, or been accused of committing, some form of sexual assault. Pretty much everywhere I look lumps domestic violence in with these things under the broader heading of "violence against women". If we are trying to tease out sexual assaults and rapes from battery and other forms of domestic violence, it's really hard to know exactly what's happening with NFL players. Maybe someone with better research skills than me can dig this up.
Something about the laundry.What's particularly interesting to me is that nobody talked about Marcell Dareus when he faced two separate civil suits (but no criminal charges) for drugging and sexually assaulting women just last year (at least one of the cases was dismissed). Dareus actually has a criminal record for drug possession and was previously suspended by the NFL.
I hear you. I don't like rooting for crappy humans. But here's the crazy thing that's been eating away at me for a while. Sometimes we see athletes who appear to be good people. Likable, good reputation, etc. And then we find out that they have this dark side, this stuff that they've done that is really pretty bad. Does it suddenly make them horrible people? Maybe. I don't know. We are all a mix of good and bad. Hopefully not rapist-level bad, my word. But still...we've ALL done stuff that we are not proud of, that we regret, that we wish we hadn't done. I doubt any of us would like to have our lives under the public microscope. Anyway, my point is simply that we don't really know these people that we root for. Heck, I had a dear friend - a mentor for years - who I discovered was a child molester. Nobody had any idea. We had to worry that maybe our kids were victims. Horrible time for us, to be honest. But then I thought...if I didn't know this about HIM...none of us knows anything, really, about these athletes.But this sucks. I'd have a really, really hard time if the Pats signed Hill or Kareem Hunt, or Ray Rice, I'd have to think long and hard about what that meant about me as a fan, that I'd be willing to overlook the shit they did because I like it when the Patriots win football games. AB isn't quite at that level because there's some level of uncertainty in my mind about what exactly happened. But, the more I think about it, if he plays on Sunday and catches passes or scores a TD I'm going to feel lousy about it.
Yes, I don't much feel like watching Kevin Spacey on screen. I am as big a Louis C.K. fan as there is, but I can't watch his stuff anymore either. I can't listen to Michael Jackson songs. I get that we never really know people and there are assholes everywhere, but I'd rather not have people who we know beat their wives or rape or sexually assault women playing for my favorite teams. Players don't have to be saints or even good people, they can all be raging assholes for all I care, there's just some stuff that's over the line. As I mentioned above I'm not sure what happened with Brown, so it's not quite the same, and there are degrees. But it doesn't feel great.For those that might feel lousy if AB scores---do you avoid Kevin Spacey movies? Anything produced by Weinstein? Woody Allen films? Or would you rather just not know that there's likely some other guys on the Patriots that aren't good dudes. Some on the Sox too. And on and on. These a-holes are EVERYWHERE.
What is the “therefore” to this point? Seriously asking.For those that might feel lousy if AB scores---do you avoid Kevin Spacey movies? Anything produced by Weinstein? Woody Allen films? Or would you rather just not know that there's likely some other guys on the Patriots that aren't good dudes. Some on the Sox too. And on and on. These a-holes are EVERYWHERE.
I don't know. I'm asking if they avoid everyone that's had things like this alleged or proven. I'm not trying to have a "gotcha" moment.What is the “therefore” to this point? Seriously asking.
And rich non-athletes also get arrested less than non-rich non-athletes (often outside of the public eye as well). No surprise there.Rich people get arrested less than non-rich people? No surprise there.
I personally have the Cosby show on power rotation in my house...For those that might feel lousy if AB scores---do you avoid Kevin Spacey movies? Anything produced by Weinstein? Woody Allen films? Or would you rather just not know that there's likely some other guys on the Patriots that aren't good dudes. Some on the Sox too. And on and on. These a-holes are EVERYWHERE.
I think there's a spectrum of bad acts and a spectrum of how confident we feel that the athlete committed them.I don't know. I'm asking if they avoid everyone that's had things like this alleged or proven. I'm not trying to have a "gotcha" moment.
Seriously. Stop asking him / badgering him. He's not going to answer. And the fans don't care about what his answer would be.Little tired of BB's response to some questions asked 5 or 6 times being played or quoted as his response to paint it as if he only cares about football.
I'd argue they are also asking so they can write what a mean, nasty, uncaring, SOB that BB isThey're asking to impress their peers, and generate content for their other platforms. They aren't genuinely trying to clean any information, and sure as hell don't care what the fans are "owed".
Is it wrong to hope there wasn't a rape? I'd rather the girl was lying as opposed to hoping she was raped. To be clear, I am NOT hoping that they can't prove there was, I'm hoping there simply wasn't one.When I find myself rooting that some asshole named incarcerated bob is accurate then I know I've lost my fucking way.
To then author a “they are distracted” story — look at all the questions the players have to answer. They are weasels.I can somewhat understand asking BB, although I agree once they know he's not going to answer I don't get the point of badgering. But why ask the other players? Brady has no control over whether Brown is on the team or not and if he's out there on the field on Sunday like it or not he's got to throw him the ball. What's the point of asking him about the off the field stuff that has nothing to do with him? The press sucks.
I hope it’s not sounding like I’m calling anyone wrong. I don’t think anyone here is good with rape. The rest is more personal opinion about what we get out of sports and how we view athletes and teams.Is it wrong to hope there wasn't a rape?
He sort of did this, but I wish he'd have simply said, "I'm not going to answer any - repeat ANY - questions about Antonio Brown. None. Not one. I know you guys have a job to do, and feel like you need to ask questions about this anyway, but I'm telling you right now if any of you asks me even ONE question about Antonio, we're done here. Am I clear on that?"Seriously. Stop asking him / badgering him. He's not going to answer. And the fans don't care about what his answer would be.