metzelaars_lives Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 (edited) Why is race even brought into this conversation? In my opinion, it is overplayed. But it's not even relevant to the point of this thread: the way I see it, the question is whether a story implicating PM in a one-sided narrative should erase 20+ yrs of QB play without knowing how the trial played out (where is the trial transcript or the jury verdict?). If it was a response to warranted criticism of Cam's on-field play (didn't jump on fumble, post game moping, etc), then the article goes beyond athletic criticism and has one goal: hurt PM with old allegations which have never been substantiated. How is race not pertinent to this conversation? It's the subject of the article that this thread is about. Manning walked off the field after a Super Bowl loss without shaking anyone's hand and everyone said it was because he cared so much. Newton walked out of an interview after a Super Bowl loss and everyone said it was because he was a punk. Is race a factor in peoples' reactions to each situation? Could be. Certainly not a stretch. Edited February 15, 2016 by metzelaars_lives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 15, 2016 Author Share Posted February 15, 2016 NYDN suggests redacted portion of Manning document will be released http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/14/daily-news-suggests-redacted-portion-of-manning-document-will-be-released/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passepartout Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 It seems that the author is trying to make a name for himself to smear PM's image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple haze Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 (edited) It ceased to be an "abstract issue" when the motives for this "story" were based on race. It invalidates the entire piece to know that the intent is reprehensible. It doesn't invalidate anything. The point of the piece is that people don't truly know Manning, that he is dirty and not what he appears to be, but because he is who he is, including racially, he is getting somewhat of a pass compared to his contemporary, Cam Newton. Whether one wants to deal with that interpretation or not, the question remains: is the story true? And did he/his father intentionally lie about the situation and about the woman bringing the lawsuit? Remember, the Manning's have been called "the first family of football." Peyton, et al. have cultivated the down home image that is portrayed in the media. That type of PR better be true because bad habits have a way of finding the light. But for those who think race is overplayed, from the article, based on the official documents: Before she left, though, two staff members of the school, according to the documents, asked Naughright if she would consider blaming the entire incident not on Manning, but on another athlete — a black one. According to Naughright, the staff members (named as Mr. Wyant and Mr. Rollo), went so far as to actually name a specific black athlete she could blame it on. Of course, she refused (see pages 18-19). Yeah, race is overplayed... Edited February 15, 2016 by purple haze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 So, as a reminder, Cam Newton's shady past, to where he had NO KNOWLEDGE of pay for play. Tit for tat game, I say. The no substantiation game goes both ways, so sit down, Mr. King. "Now the bizarre part: The NCAA did determine that the pay-for-play allegations against Newton's father, Cecil, are accurate and amount to a violation of Association bylaws. Its investigation found that "the student-athlete’s father and an owner of a scouting service worked together to actively market the student-athlete as a part of a pay-for-play scenario in return for Newton’s commitment to attend college and play football." This is exactly the story that emerged in the press last month. As a result, Auburn has "limited the access" of Cecil Newton to the program, and Mississippi State has formally "disassociated" ex-Bulldog Kenny Rogers, the alleged (and confessed) middleman in the elder Newton's attempt to solicit a low six-figure cash payment from Mississippi State during his son's recruitment out of junior college last year. The investigation into all relevant parties and schools remains ongoing, per the NCAA's release: "Reinstatement decisions are independent of the NCAA enforcement process and typically are made once the facts of the student-athlete’s involvement are determined. The reinstatement process is likely to conclude prior to the close of an investigation." What the NCAA apparently did not find, though, is that Cam Newton actually accepted any improper benefits or, as far as it can uncover, had any knowledge of his father's scheme. Neither, apparently, did Auburn. If evidence to the contrary ever emerges, the story may be rewritten yet again." http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/NCAA-finds-pay-for-play-but-Cam-Newton-is-in-th?urn=ncaaf-290855 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 I'am starting to feel sorry for Roger. He really earns the big money he gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Just to be clear, Beerball, and not intending to weigh in on other comments, there were two settlements with confidentiality agreements: 1) when Naughright left Tennessee in 1997, settlement by university for $300,000 to which Manning was a party (signed confidentiality agreement 2) settlement to lawsuit Naughright filed 2 years after Manning published his book, after Florida University dismissed her and she apparently cound not find other employment, amount not to my knowledge disclosed (2003) Now apparently there is a new lawsuit against UT alleging a hostile environment that violates Title IX. The plaintiffs say that UT’s administrative hearing process, which is utilized by public universities across the state, is unfair because it provides students accused of sexual assault the right to attorneys and to confront their accusers through cross-examination and an evidentiary hearing in front of an administrative law judge. The administrative law judge who hears the case is appointed by Cheek, the lawsuit says. http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2016/02/09/sweeping-sexual-assault-suit-filed-against-ut/79966450/ Somehow I doubt that lawsuit is going anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 (edited) How is race not pertinent to this conversation? It's the subject of the article that this thread is about. Manning walked off the field after a Super Bowl loss without shaking anyone's hand and everyone said it was because he cared so much. Newton walked out of an interview after a Super Bowl loss and everyone said it was because he was a punk. Is race a factor in peoples' reactions to each situation? Could be. Certainly not a stretch. Agreed - but "racial" and "racism" are two different things. I don't think most people (media included) even understand what racism means. Everyone, or nearly everyone (perhaps not blind people) take race into account when perceiving the world. It's part of our mental classification system that allows us to make quick and reliable decisions. Race is one of many, many factors that go into how we view the world. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Racism is different. Racism is advocating for the denial of benefits and privileges based upon race, and/or advocating for superior treatment of a selected class based upon race. Viewing a situation through a racial lens, or considering race as a factor when deconstructing the context of a situation, does not necessarily equate to racism - it can't, because nearly everyone does it, black and white alike, and because it isn't necessarily a political viewpoint (i.e., it's not advocating one race over another). I hate the term "racism" - it's one of many terms that the mass media and general public use without understanding its meaning. "Terrorism" is another one... Edited February 15, 2016 by Coach Tuesday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 @SInow New details surrounding Manning's sexual assault allegations revealed (by @McCannSportsLaw) http://on.si.com/1Tijqfv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 How is race not pertinent to this conversation? It's the subject of the article that this thread is about. Manning walked off the field after a Super Bowl loss without shaking anyone's hand and everyone said it was because he cared so much. Newton walked out of an interview after a Super Bowl loss and everyone said it was because he was a punk. Is race a factor in peoples' reactions to each situation? Could be. Certainly not a stretch. So you're saying that if Newton was white and acted exactly as he does now everyone would love him? Is there a shred of evidence to suggest this? Because the argument seems to be that the only difference between the loudmouth showboat who does celebration dances after first downs and the guy who has demonstrated class and humility consistently for 20 years is race. I guess the reason everyone hates Brady is because he's black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2016/02/09/sweeping-sexual-assault-suit-filed-against-ut/79966450/ Somehow I doubt that lawsuit is going anywhere. You doubt this because? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 (edited) It doesn't invalidate anything. The point of the piece is that people don't truly know Manning, that he is dirty and not what he appears to be, but because he is who he is, including racially, he is getting somewhat of a pass compared to his contemporary, Cam Newton. Whether one wants to deal with that interpretation or not, the question remains: is the story true? And did he/his father intentionally lie about the situation and about the woman bringing the lawsuit? Remember, the Manning's have been called "the first family of football." Peyton, et al. have cultivated the down home image that is portrayed in the media. That type of PR better be true because bad habits have a way of finding the light. But for those who think race is overplayed, from the article, based on the official documents: Before she left, though, two staff members of the school, according to the documents, asked Naughright if she would consider blaming the entire incident not on Manning, but on another athlete a black one. According to Naughright, the staff members (named as Mr. Wyant and Mr. Rollo), went so far as to actually name a specific black athlete she could blame it on. Of course, she refused (see pages 18-19). Yeah, race is overplayed... Attributing race to Newton/Manning perceptions is an idiotic point because it's wholly unsupported. If it compared Manning to a black guy who showed class but was villified for a few old or little known transgressions he'd have a reasonable argument. If he compared a white hotshot who was loved to Cam Newton he might have an argument. Instead he looks at two guys with polar opposite public demeanor and attributes the difference in perception to race. It's lazy writing. It's !@#$ing stupid. It only appears relevant to simple minds that are inclined to attribute everything to racism. Those people are pathetic and so is this article and author. Edited February 15, 2016 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/15/whitlock-calls-out-shaun-king-not-the-quarterback/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 So you're saying that if Newton was white and acted exactly as he does now everyone would love him? Is there a shred of evidence to suggest this? Because the argument seems to be that the only difference between the loudmouth showboat who does celebration dances after first downs and the guy who has demonstrated class and humility consistently for 20 years is race. I guess the reason everyone hates Brady is because he's black. Everyone hates Brady because of his unmatched success. Because the patriots cheat. Because hes a pretty boy. Because hes married to a super model. Because they are envious of all of the above. Its hard to find a qb similar to Cam in terms of personality on the field. One qb that comes to mind is Philip Rivers. Very vocal. Can definitely rub opposing fans the wrong way bc of his antics on the field. Has been successful in the league. But yet nowhere near as polarizing as Cam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 (edited) I'm confused. Is Cam Newton being lambasted about something that happened in college? Everything I've been reading is about how he has been a douchenozzle this season. Comparing an awful event from the 90s before the age of the smartphone not getting enough attention to this doesn't make sense to me. Edited February 15, 2016 by jeremy2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Bryant: Noise surrounding Peyton Manning, Cam Newton is not harmlessWhy has Cam Newton being upset he lost received more attention than Peyton Manning being named in a lawsuit against Tennessee alleging the school fostered a hostile work environment for women? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 So you're saying that if Newton was white and acted exactly as he does now everyone would love him? Is there a shred of evidence to suggest this? Because the argument seems to be that the only difference between the loudmouth showboat who does celebration dances after first downs and the guy who has demonstrated class and humility consistently for 20 years is race. I guess the reason everyone hates Brady is because he's black. I think it's possible that he might face less criticism, but we'll never know. The more appropriate comparator seems to me to be Johnny Manziel. He faced a pretty fierce media firestorm of criticism for being a showboat even before all the "drunken Johnny woman-beater" publicity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Title IX lawsuit: Peyton Manning among Tennessee athletes who created 'hostile environment' An incident involving Peyton Manning and an athletic trainer at the University of Tennessee was cited in a lawsuit against the university's athletic department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metzelaars_lives Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Attributing race to Newton/Manning perceptions is an idiotic point because it's wholly unsupported. If it compared Manning to a black guy who showed class but was villified for a few old or little known transgressions he'd have a reasonable argument. If he compared a white hotshot who was loved to Cam Newton he might have an argument. Instead he looks at two guys with polar opposite public demeanor and attributes the difference in perception to race. It's lazy writing. It's !@#$ing stupid. It only appears relevant to simple minds that are inclined to attribute everything to racism. Those people are pathetic and so is this article and author. All I'll say is this: when Newton walked out of that press conference, the FIRST thing I thought- before all the talking heads chimed in the next day- was, hey at least the guy cares. In 2016, we think that all these athletes only care about the money but it was evident that the guy really wanted to win that football game. Which is, according to this article (and substantiated by the fact that no one even remembers it) EXACTLY what people said about Manning when he acted like a baby after the loss against the Saints- at which point, he was a lot older than Newton is now, mind you. Has anyone ever called Manning a punk? Did they call him a punk when he used to act like a baby on the sidelines and in front of the media by always yelling at his linemen and throwing them under the bus? Nope. He was always viewed as the consummate professional. Attributing race to Newton/Manning perceptions is an idiotic point because it's wholly unsupported. If it compared Manning to a black guy who showed class but was villified for a few old or little known transgressions he'd have a reasonable argument. If he compared a white hotshot who was loved to Cam Newton he might have an argument. Instead he looks at two guys with polar opposite public demeanor and attributes the difference in perception to race. It's lazy writing. It's !@#$ing stupid. It only appears relevant to simple minds that are inclined to attribute everything to racism. Those people are pathetic and so is this article and author. And I have already stated in this thread that I think the race card is wildly overused in America in 2016. I think there's a case for it here though. When the lady wrote the article about what should she tell her daughter after seeing the guy dance in the endzone, that was way over the top. And that was not, as an earlier poster suggested, "one lady's opinion" or whatever, that was a widespread sentiment. Is his dancing immature? Sure. But it's utterly harmless. And I can assure you that if a white guy danced like a goofball after TD's, everyone would jokingly make fun of his dance moves but it would all be viewed in good fun. I'm confused. Is Cam Newton being lambasted about something that happened in college? Everything I've been reading is about how he has been a douchenozzle this season. Comparing an awful event from the 90s before the age of the smartphone not getting enough attention to this doesn't make sense to me. Why was he a "douchenozzle" this season?? He is, by all accounts, a terrific teammate, he gives balls to young children, which makes their year, he got nearly choked up when asked about his relationship with Greg Olsen during media week, I thought he handled the real douchenozzle, Jerry Sullivan's, barrage of questioning very professionally. So the guy does some silly dance when he scores? That's it. You know that prior to this season when Kubiak stepped in, Peyton Manning wouldn't even let Brock Osweiler get any reps in practice? He was never interested in helping to groom the kid, never talks to him on the sidelines or anything, he was always paranoid that he might perform well and threaten his job. But he's so charming in those Nationwide commercials, isn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 15, 2016 Author Share Posted February 15, 2016 @dandcshow I was just told by a current ESPN anchor that all ESPN employees were told not to report or discuss the Daily News story on Peyton Manning. Interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts