Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!


NFLPA Smith want to look closer into hiring practices


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Call Me James said:

Each team is their own organization. If one organization isn't living up to the terms of the CBA then their is potentially a cause for grievance. 

Whether or not another team engages in that same behavior is a red herring sir.

He's was already an all pro punter when he was released and was still a top punter in the league. 

King was released in Denver due to injury, not because of this unrelated anecdotal story you're telling. 

Y'all need to seek help. 

A top all-pro punter would still be playing/or punting(lol) if he was .......if he was..... empl.....oy.....abl



A mirror would do wonders in solving this....if only there was narcissistic person around, they seem to have many mirrors in their homes! I may have solved this and many other issues around the world!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, CPcavedweller said:

Well, rhey called Gruden a racist for disagreeing with kneeling during the National Anthem. As the dude on ESPN said (former player), "I don't think Gruden was a racist. It doesn't seem like he liked anyone very much."

So this is more about Grudens disdain of people in general than any specific characteristic of an intersectional class of people. He just happens to be white so anything said negatively about any minority is taken as if it has racial bias involved when in reality he treated everyone the same regardless of skin color.

They also called him a homophobe for calling out Jeff Fisher for drafting Michael Sam because of the public perception of Sam being the first openly gay player. Yet Sam fizzled out in quick order so Grudens judgment on Sam's talent as it relates to the NFL was actually spot on.

With the Raiders, he has the NFL first openly game starter and he has developed into one of of NFL best pass rushers. But neither the end to the Sam saga or his signing of this defensive end matter because they don't fit the context within which the story is being pushed. 

I could write the same type of article as the New York Times explaining why Gruden is not a homophobe using the logic above and it would be far more relevant contextually to the end result than anything they wrote, but people don't care. 

Gruden was removed from the Bucs Ring of Honor while OJ Simpson remains on the Bills, I believe. There is a boatload of hypocrisy going on right now and I'm not the least bit surprised. Did Gruden say nasty things using outdated terms with negative connotations that now make people shudder? Absolutely. Should he have been punished? Yes. Should he have been fired? No.

If Greg Hardy and OJ Simpson get a pass for their transgressions, how can Gruden be dumped as if he literally murdered someone? He was dropped from everything faster than than Pats dropped Aaron Hernandez. This isn't about the truth. It's about building a narrative to fit the end goal. 

I'm all for personal accountability for things people say and do, but I feel as not enough critical thinking over the context is done here. People have trigger words now that automatically label a person and make them a pariah without further explanation or exploration. 

Gruden should have likely been suspended, but none of this happened while an employee of an NFL franchise. The punishment does not fit the crime. I see people on TV feigning anger but deep down you can see the effort to present their emotions through words but their physical reaction does not line up with their words which suggests to me they don't believe what they themselves are saying; and who is driving this story?

I can agree with some of this. Not all of it. Though I disagree and believe he should be fired and held accountable. That’s important. What’s just as important is the message and the consistency. There are a lot of players still playing whose actions, not words, are more concerning to me than emails. But the NFL isn’t consistent and doesn’t really have a message. Then there is this:

Now we can debate the standards of players vs coaches vs performers but by doing so the message also needs to be clarified. Because the message wanting to be sent is contradictory in these regards. Where is the explanation why the standards are different and why the behavior is acceptable for other people, and why specifically does this constitute whether the message is no longer applicable or is relevant? Because clearly, it does.

Seems to me if you have a message to send and are not consistent…what’s the point?

Edited by onmyown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...