SwampD Posted February 8, 2016 Report Posted February 8, 2016 If you're thinking of the one I am, he's as much a "Philly Cop" as the officer in Hammondsport, NY is a "Buffalo Cop". Ah, gottit. Quote
JJFIVEOH Posted February 8, 2016 Report Posted February 8, 2016 Yeah let's pretend the NFL isn't 70% black. It seems you're the one obsessed with race. Playing the race card all while being the one wanting others to be the racists is a desperate attempt at getting the point across. Quote
musichunch Posted February 8, 2016 Report Posted February 8, 2016 It seems you're the one obsessed with race. Playing the race card all while being the one wanting others to be the racists is a desperate attempt at getting the point across. You did the NFL vs NHL analogy. I assumed that meant black vs white. I think that's a fair conclusion to make. Where is all this race card/desperate attempt stuff coming from? Quote
JJFIVEOH Posted February 8, 2016 Report Posted February 8, 2016 (edited) You did the NFL vs NHL analogy. I assumed that meant black vs white. I think that's a fair conclusion to make. Where is all this race card/desperate attempt stuff coming from? You don't go assuming you think you know what somebody implied, and then go on to play the race card based on your assumptions. That's desperation. This happens more often in football than hockey, it's undeniable. Using your logic, anybody that addresses that fact is making it a racial issue. You can come to your own conclusions, but don't make my conclusion and then play the race card. I said 'football players', you made it racial. I know the race of exactly ONE person involved in this situation. Those that defend race are usually the first to play the race card. Edited February 8, 2016 by JJFIVEOH Quote
Hoss Posted February 8, 2016 Report Posted February 8, 2016 (edited) All this fighting about implication has me wondering: why can't people just say exactly what they mean? Edited February 8, 2016 by Hoss Quote
K-9 Posted February 8, 2016 Report Posted February 8, 2016 All this fighting about implication has me wondering: why can't people just say exactly what they mean? What do you mean? Quote
WildCard Posted February 8, 2016 Report Posted February 8, 2016 All this fighting about implication has me wondering: why can't people just say exactly what they mean? You don't go assuming you think you know what somebody implied, and then go on to play the race card based on your assumptions. That's desperation. This happens more often in football than hockey, it's undeniable. Using your logic, anybody that addresses that fact is making it a racial issue. You can come to your own conclusions, but don't make my conclusion and then play the race card. I said 'football players', you made it racial. I know the race of exactly ONE person involved in this situation. Those that defend race are usually the first to play the race card. I feel like I just went back to the Montreal thread Quote
Hoss Posted February 9, 2016 Report Posted February 9, 2016 Arrest warrant is expected to be issued for LeSean McCoy by mid-week at which point he is expected to turn himself in. https://twitter.com/MikeGarafolo/status/696858352895143941 If you follow the link in the tweet you can see video but it's really poorly hosted. Quote
SwampD Posted February 9, 2016 Report Posted February 9, 2016 Arrest warrant is expected to be issued for LeSean McCoy by mid-week at which point he is expected to turn himself in. https://twitter.com/MikeGarafolo/status/696858352895143941 If you follow the link in the tweet you can see video but it's really poorly hosted. So the first story say "arrest warrants that may include McCoy", then the guy who retweets it changes it to "expect a warrant". I love the "media". Quote
Hoss Posted February 9, 2016 Report Posted February 9, 2016 So the first story say "arrest warrants that may include McCoy", then the guy who retweets it changes it to "expect a warrant". I love the "media". I think this is a case of laziness more than anything. I think he's reporting his own information but retweeting the link for the video. Quote
ubkev Posted February 9, 2016 Report Posted February 9, 2016 This one got a chuckle out of me. Report: Browns lied about Manziel concussion after he showed up to practice drunk http://www.thescore.com/news/956135 (via http://thesco.re/theScore_app ) Quote
woods-racer Posted February 9, 2016 Report Posted February 9, 2016 This one got a chuckle out of me. Report: Browns lied about Manziel concussion after he showed up to practice drunk http://www.thescore.com/news/956135 (via http://thesco.re/theScore_app ) Rex Ryan can rehabilitate him. Sign HIM! Quote
spndnchz Posted February 9, 2016 Report Posted February 9, 2016 I don't see how he gets anything really. He didn't do much at all. Quote
nfreeman Posted February 9, 2016 Report Posted February 9, 2016 Gotta make sure we immediately shift the blame to the black football players. As if the other parties being LEO's gives them benefit of the doubt. No way some off-duty cops could ever be giant a**holes. IMHO this is unjustified and unnecessary race-baiting. It has nothing to do with race, professional athletes often have serious entitlement issues and believe they are above everyone, including the law. There's just as many cases of white athletes as black athletes acting like ###### and it being reported. Not a damn thing to do if they were black or not. Exactly. Unless they're sliding down a rail at RWS, in which case the employer must be named by The Buffalo News to ensure that the guy loses his job. To be fair, f*ck that guy. Never did anything stupid before? Plenty of times (speaking for myself, of course, although I'm comfortable that the same is true for everyone here). But that guy could easily have killed someone. Also -- it wasn't TBN that fired him -- it was his employer. Quote
Taro T Posted February 9, 2016 Author Report Posted February 9, 2016 IMHO this is unjustified and unnecessary race-baiting. Exactly. Plenty of times (speaking for myself, of course, although I'm comfortable that the same is true for everyone here). But that guy could easily have killed someone. Also -- it wasn't TBN that fired him -- it was his employer. What are the odds he gets canned w/out the Snooze's input? Quote
That Aud Smell Posted February 9, 2016 Report Posted February 9, 2016 Hey, how about a Buffalo Bills 2016 thread? We could move everything post SB 50 over there. Quote
kishoph Posted February 10, 2016 Report Posted February 10, 2016 I blame Rex Ryan...... Works for me. Quote
Eleven Posted February 10, 2016 Report Posted February 10, 2016 What are the odds he gets canned w/out the Snooze's input? Exactly zero. His boss told me that he was forced to fire him because the company was named. Quote
nfreeman Posted February 10, 2016 Report Posted February 10, 2016 What are the odds he gets canned w/out the Snooze's input? Exactly zero. His boss told me that he was forced to fire him because the company was named. I don't doubt this, but at the same time, I think it was the employer's decision and the employer is accountable for any blame (or credit) relating to this decision. Quote
Eleven Posted February 10, 2016 Report Posted February 10, 2016 (edited) I don't doubt this, but at the same time, I think it was the employer's decision and the employer is accountable for any blame (or credit) relating to this decision. I understand who made the ultimate decision. EMA (the employer) has numerous relationships with The Buffalo News. It is the biggest PR agency in the area, so it has to. One of its partners is a former News editor. This had to be deliberate. I should add that the boss in question (who is not the former editor) also felt that it was deliberate. He was pretty pissed to have had his hand forced. Edited February 10, 2016 by Eleven Quote
Taro T Posted February 10, 2016 Author Report Posted February 10, 2016 I don't doubt this, but at the same time, I think it was the employer's decision and the employer is accountable for any blame (or credit) relating to this decision. It was and they mostly are. But that doesn't make the Snooze's decision any less prickish. Playing the "let's #### this guy over because we can" game is pretty petty. And let's face it, putting where he worked out there is playing that game. Quote
That Aud Smell Posted February 10, 2016 Report Posted February 10, 2016 Best I can tell, there was no good reason to publish the name of the guy's employer. There were reasons to do so but they were dishonorable. And I say that as someone who has just about zero sympathy for that guy. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.