Chandler#81 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 That article was terrible. A little too close to home?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmyjack88 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Good point. But aren't we enabling these thugs by taking them out of the gangs and giving them a pile of cash. It has to be put to a stop somewhere along the line. The guy shot someone in the face in that drug and gang infested city of Miami. Oh lets pay him $40 Million. Thats logical to me. He did this as a Patriot. Solution: DON'T DRAFT THIS GARBAGE. DON'T RECRUIT THE GANG TRASH.Irregardless of their talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Great logic And why is all this being connected to his college career? I realize he had some incidents during college, but wasn't it Law Enforcement that dropped the ball (gee, how many students (and professors!) smoked some weed today, half-a-million?) This has nothing to do with college (or even pro) football. Murders happen all the time, it's just that these (apparently) involve a player. It's not like crime rates are going to fall if the measures you mentioned are implemented. He is a violent psychopath, regardless of whether he plays football or not. He doesn't appear to be very smart, but I don't know if he had serious academic problems, and plenty of smart guys are killers (and idiots law abiding). +1. And why shouldn't a college give a 2nd chance to a felon to get his act together. Why punish 100s of reformed people for the sake of dealing with a few that continue to behave in their old ways. There is an old saying: I would rather free the bad person then wrongly punish the good person. That is one of the strong reasons for not having death penalty in many states in the US and in many countries across the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmyjack88 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 I was refering to the NCAA death penalty. My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eme123 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Good point. But aren't we enabling these thugs by taking them out of the gangs and giving them a pile of cash. It has to be put to a stop somewhere along the line. The guy shot someone in the face in that drug and gang infested city of Miami. Oh lets pay him $40 Million. Thats logical to me. He did this as a Patriot. Solution: DON'T DRAFT THIS GARBAGE. DON'T RECRUIT THE GANG TRASH.Irregardless of their talent. Exactly! As a football fan I never would have noticed if Aaron Hernandez or other 2% players weren't ever in the league. If you have a criminal record your out. Plain & Simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph W. Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 (edited) Exactly! As a football fan I never would have noticed if Aaron Hernandez or other 2% players weren't ever in the league. If you have a criminal record your out. Plain & Simple Everyone deserves a second chance. This is all the Pats fault, if they never gave him that extension he would have been still playing under his rookie contract and we would never really be talking about him or his money. I believe in second chances, what if Da'Rick turns out to be good for us? Edited July 2, 2013 by Ralph W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Everyone deserves a second chance. This is all the Pats fault, if they never gave him that extension he would have been still playing under his rookie contract and we would never really be talking about him or his money. I believe in second chances, what if Da'Rick turns out to be good for us? So, everyone deserves a second chance, but the pats* are at fault because they rewarded their player? I hesitate to ask you what the !@#$ you mean because I'll get some BS answer, but, what the !@#$ do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 How so? Thanks for reading it............Good article by Gabriel, too. Interesting how he was such a bad character and yet the Pats picked him..........And, who knew about the gangs of Connecticut?? I think the media right now is pretty aggressively ignoring things like Deion branch coming out strongly for him, and the fact that urban Meyer did daily bible study with him and as a close associate of BB likely gave him a good endorsement. I don't doubt they suspected he'd be a handful but murderer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 I love this article by Jason Whitlock: http://msn.foxsports...-society-070113 It's crap. It's another Whitlock regurgitation form his "sports writing" vomitorium. In fact he alerts us to this right away, in case we don't know what's coming: "Let me explain. For nearly two decades, I’ve been writing columns detailing the impact on the sports world of popular culture’s glamorization of prison/gangster/hip-hop culture." There was really no need to write the rest of this particular column. Very little of is about Hernandez, actually. He drops in that Matt Light " could easily see Hernandez’s character flaws" and that "a dozen" teams took him off their draft boards, etc. Real deep stuff that has never been reported, Jason. The majority of the piece spent with his usual "I'm a black man railing against popular (black) culture" stuff--full of hackneyed pop references. My favorite: Tony Soprano is "America's most celebrated and revered icon". And the guy he replaced was.....Joe Montana?? Look, you should read Whitlock for laughs, because he's a clown. He's a caricature of the "sports writer" who writes the same story all the others write on the same topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 So, everyone deserves a second chance, but the pats* are at fault because they rewarded their player? I hesitate to ask you what the !@#$ you mean because I'll get some BS answer, but, what the !@#$ do you mean? My guess is he means he's a ****-stirrer, what with 3 warnings in less than 500 posts. But, what do I know?.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 I don't enjoy Whitlock's stuff so I won't comment on his article, but something that seems to be lost in all of this is that the Pats* have pretty much failed at nearly every "reclamation" project they've attempted since winning their last Super Bowl almost a decade ago. The only success story that immediately pops into mind is Randy Moss -- and he was never a criminal, it's just his work ethic that was questioned. Belichick has been grasping at straws for years, and this time it really bit him in the ass. Anyone who believes the Pats* were "unaware" of Hernandez' proclivities prior to them extending him a year ago is completely naive. Matt Light, a team leader, is the only player who thought the guy was a douche? And if the Pats* really didn't have reservations about Hernandez, why not publicly support him until the criminal process plays out? No, instead the public relations machine is spinning overtime to completely divorce the organization from a player to whom they just 12 months ago made a long term commitment. The "Patriot Way" is a joke. That team is about Tom Brady and Bill Belichick, plain and simple. They haven't "straightened anyone out" or made bad guys into great players. They just happen to have a future HOFer at the two most important positions -- QB and HC. Belichick is a fantastic coach and strategist, but his efforts to add questionable characters to complete his deficient roster have not paid off. Yes, I thoroughly enjoy the schadenfreude aspect of watching the Pats* take their hits, particularly in the context of the "Patriot Way" nonsense. I'll continue to say it -- they're one hit to Brady's knee away from being an average football team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 The Patriot Way was and has been Spygate and special treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 The Whitlock article makes a point, to an extent. Popular culture does admire the bad guy these days. The specific call outs though read like blame, and that's a bit hamfisted. These people wouldn't be popular if society wasn't a fan of them. We can throw Captain America in front of people all we want, but if people ignore him for the Walter Whites, Dexters and Sopranos, then it really doesn't matter much. The media can mold society, but only to a certain extent. It's impossible to completely remove a person's past, especially by force. Teams are put in a tight spot with some of these kids... Hernandez is a damned good player, so you either pass him up, or take a chance... that maybe he'll get away from things once his life gets better. A lot of these guys do, a lot don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 (edited) I think the media right now is pretty aggressively ignoring things like Deion branch coming out strongly for him, and the fact that urban Meyer did daily bible study with him and as a close associate of BB likely gave him a good endorsement. I don't doubt they suspected he'd be a handful but murderer? I'm not going to give Urban Myer a free pass on the way he handled his program. Of course he had no inkling that the player he had bible study classes with would end being a cold blooded killer. He couldin't forsee that. But what he did know was that AH failed a number of drug tests as a player. Was he held accountable? I don't know what AH's academic standing was. But if I had to guess odds are that he didn't attend classes on a regular basis. It's been reported that off the field AH had some questionable associations with some tough street characters. You don't think that Urban Meyers, the HC of a very prominent program in a college town, would find out about it? Urban Meyer recruited a very good football player from a tough neighborhood. He knew what he was getting because he recruited a number of good players from similar backgrounds. As long as these type of kids are producing for the team and the coach wide accommodations are made to keep them playing. As soon as they are no longer useful to them they will be dispatched back to the streets. The starting qb at Nortre Dame is ineligible. That type of academic accountability rarely happens in the SEC, and especially for the marquis players. The relationship between the schools and the major football programs is twisted, especially in the SEC. The football programs and the alumni are driving the bus and the school is at the back of the bus having little influence as to the direction it is going. I have no problem recruiting athletes who to put it mildly marginally qualify for these football schools. The problem I have is that once they are in the programs there is little accountability for behavior and academic effort. A lot of these coaches who are put on a pedestal are nothing but pimps using up the whores and then discarding them once they are no longer useful. Then they go on to the next batch of fresh whores and continue the short cycle of pimping. What makes it even more outrageous is that these pimps who are widely esteemed conduct bible classes. Edited July 2, 2013 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 (edited) I don't enjoy Whitlock's stuff so I won't comment on his article, but something that seems to be lost in all of this is that the Pats* have pretty much failed at nearly every "reclamation" project they've attempted since winning their last Super Bowl almost a decade ago. The only success story that immediately pops into mind is Randy Moss -- and he was never a criminal, it's just his work ethic that was questioned. Belichick has been grasping at straws for years, and this time it really bit him in the ass. Anyone who believes the Pats* were "unaware" of Hernandez' proclivities prior to them extending him a year ago is completely naive. Matt Light, a team leader, is the only player who thought the guy was a douche? And if the Pats* really didn't have reservations about Hernandez, why not publicly support him until the criminal process plays out? No, instead the public relations machine is spinning overtime to completely divorce the organization from a player to whom they just 12 months ago made a long term commitment. The "Patriot Way" is a joke. That team is about Tom Brady and Bill Belichick, plain and simple. They haven't "straightened anyone out" or made bad guys into great players. They just happen to have a future HOFer at the two most important positions -- QB and HC. Belichick is a fantastic coach and strategist, but his efforts to add questionable characters to complete his deficient roster have not paid off. Yes, I thoroughly enjoy the schadenfreude aspect of watching the Pats* take their hits, particularly in the context of the "Patriot Way" nonsense. I'll continue to say it -- they're one hit to Brady's knee away from being an average football team. I'm a bit ignorant on this... but what is "The Patriot Way"? I've basically only heard it attached to on the field effort/fundamentals.. is it supposed to be some sort of overall character thing? Edited July 2, 2013 by Dorkington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 The Patriot Way was and has been Spygate and special treatment. Besides what you wrote above, "The Patriot Way" also includes a veil of secrecy and the understanding that members of the organization do not talk to the media more than the bare minimum. Also, I agree wholeheartedly with eball's take on the Cheatriots***. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 I'm a bit ignorant on this... but what is "The Patriot Way"? I've basically only heard it attached to on the field effort/fundamentals.. is it supposed to be some sort of overall character thing? It is a perception -- perpetuated by ESPN and their ilk -- that because the Pats* organization is so strong, each and every player who comes into the fold immediately must conform to the strict culture that has been established. No media circuses, no discipline problems, etc., etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 It is a perception -- perpetuated by ESPN and their ilk -- that because the Pats* organization is so strong, each and every player who comes into the fold immediately must conform to the strict culture that has been established. No media circuses, no discipline problems, etc., etc. Oh. Well that explains my ignorance. I haven't had cable in years. And basically only read the Lakers blog on there during NBA season outside of seeing scores. Isn't ESPN based in Pats territory? Do they have white collar connections of some sort? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 I don't understand the criticism of Whitlock's article. I know he's a polarizing figure and I think that colors some of the opinions of his work here. I'm not a big Whitlock fan either and I think he states the obvious and isn't a very good writer but nothing he writes here seems inaccurate to me excepting the issue that Dorkington brings up which has been debated for decades: Is the violence in society a reaction or a reflection of our media? Does our love of movies like Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Good Fellas, etc have an effect in making some individuals more violent? Personally I don't think there's any question of that. It hasn't made me more violent but I'm not every person in society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 I don't understand the criticism of Whitlock's article. I know he's a polarizing figure and I think that colors some of the opinions of his work here. I'm not a big Whitlock fan either and I think he states the obvious and isn't a very good writer but nothing he writes here seems inaccurate to me excepting the issue that Dorkington brings up which has been debated for decades: Is the violence in society a reaction or a reflection of our media? Does our love of movies like Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Good Fellas, etc have an effect in making some individuals more violent? Personally I don't think there's any question of that. It hasn't made me more violent but I'm not every person in society. Chicken vs Egg, probably. Media puts it out there (its not like we didn't have violent media throughout the years), and when something becomes popular, it puts more of it out there? At least that's how it's looked over my short time on this earth. We've had superhero movies for years, but now there's boat loads of them, why? Is sci fi suddenly more popular than before? Is media jamming it down our throats and we are accepting it? Now we have more costumed vigilantes out there too, is that related? (seriously, they are actually out there, its kind of funny) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts