Jump to content
Stallions

A comment about Lamar gets a 49er's announcer suspended

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Here, here. Was proud of how "on the rails" the thread was kept last night. And when I logged in this morning, my butthole puckered at the "8 notifications" indicated as I prepared myself for the worst.... But VERY PROUD of everyone here as the notifications were mostly for innocuous reactions and no quoted posts with flaming replies.

 

Good job, all. No matter what your viewpoint is. If the rest of the country could function like our bunch of dolts here, we'd be making some real progress.

 

That's it. Our reputation is getting trashed. Time to take this thread to the depths we all know it's capable of reaching!!!!! Someone say something political or racist *****! 

 

 

 

 

;)

  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes me sick that stating something that probably is true somehow is taken in a completely different way in which there was no possible way for a person to take the remark out of context. They created their own context that didn't exist.

 

This country is becoming just ridiculous with their over the top "offensiveness" to things that really have no way of being interpreted as offensive.

 

Maybe leopards, zebras and tigers should get upset when National Geographic talks about their spots and stripes acting as camouflage.

 

I am even more upset this guy apologized for literally saying nothing offensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

It makes me sick that stating something that probably is true somehow is taken in a completely different way in which there was no possible way for a person to take the remark out of context. They created their own context that didn't exist.

 

This country is becoming just ridiculous with their over the top "offensiveness" to things that really have no way of being interpreted as offensive.

 

Maybe leopards, zebras and tigers should get upset when National Geographic talks about their spots and stripes acting as camouflage.

 

I am even more upset this guy apologized for literally saying nothing offensive.

 

You're more upset and triggered about this than anyone who thought it was offensive (hint: not many, but corporate has to CYA). No one created a false context. He was addressed for exactly what he said, in a very lenient manner. Take a breath, you arent oppressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

You're more upset and triggered about this than anyone who thought it was offensive (hint: not many, but corporate has to CYA). No one created a false context. He was addressed for exactly what he said, in a very lenient manner. Take a breath, you arent oppressed.

 

Yeah I am offended by people who are easily offended...especially when they make up context to be offended by.

 

How is stating a fact that having skin color that is close to the color of the football and that it helps camouflage the ball offensive? If it's true it's true.

 

I mean baseball bans pitchers from wearing white sleeves because it camouflages the baseball. Don't see anyone getting up in arma and demanding the commissioner step down for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

 

Yeah I am offended by people who are easily offended...especially when they make up context to be offended by.

 

How is stating a fact that having skin color that is close to the color of the football and that it helps camouflage the ball offensive? If it's true it's true.

 

I mean baseball bans pitchers from wearing white sleeves because it camouflages the baseball. Don't see anyone getting up in arma and demanding the commissioner step down for that.

 

Read the thread. Im not rehashing all the good points just for you.

 

No one is up in arms, or making angry calls into the station, or threatening boycotts, or staging protests. His employer's HR department gave him a 1-day vacation, called him a great guy in the news, and said they just hope he thinks about using better words next time.

 

Stop being so easily offended.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Read the thread. Im not rehashing all the good points just for you.

 

No one is up in arms, or making angry calls into the station, or threatening boycotts, or staging protests. His employer's HR department gave him a 1-day vacation, called him a great guy in the news, and said they just hope he thinks about using better words next time.

 

Stop being so easily offended.

 

That is the whole problem! He did nothing wrong. Use better words for what? 

Edited by matter2003
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, whatdrought said:

 

It isn't a good look because it's not necessary, and it's opening the door to a conversation thread that isn't beneficial- obviously. 

It can be taken as offensive, as it was. It shouldn't be, and I'm not personally upset he said that, but his job did suffer, and he did get backlash. So for the sake of his career, it would have been wise to leave it off.

 

 

How can it be taken as offensive?

Does it refer to slavery?

Does it imply some kind of inferiority?

Where is the offense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rocky Landing said:

I will say this: San Francisco did fall for the play fake over, and over again, as did I, watching the game.

 

That play was the 9ers "inside zone left"

I just pray we can make some adjustments at need.

 

4 minutes ago, 32ABBA said:

How can it be taken as offensive?

Does it refer to slavery?

Does it imply some kind of inferiority?

Where is the offense?

 

Dude, all these points have been discussed in several points up thread.  Please read the thread and then come back.

 

Here, I'll blow my own horn:

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 32ABBA said:

 

How can it be taken as offensive?

Does it refer to slavery?

Does it imply some kind of inferiority?

Where is the offense?

 

Dude, don't step to me like I'm condemning this guy or saying he needs to be punished. I am as against the PC bs that this has prompted as anyone here- Go look at what I said, read with your eyes. Get someone to read it to you if you don't know how, and deal with yourself. 

  • Skeptical 1
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I just pray we can make some adjustments at need.

Great, now you’re dragging a belief system, implied deity, and probably organized religion into this.  Where’s the Complaint Department?  😁

 

EDIT:  I have it on good authority that the Complaint Department is run by a Ms. Helen Waite.  I was told if I had a complaint, I need to go to Helen Waite.

Edited by Ridgewaycynic2013
  • Haha (+1) 4
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said:

Great, now you’re dragging a belief system, implied deity, and probably organized religion into this.  Where’s the Complaint Department?  😁

 

Alert my employer here, perhaps I should be suspended for 1 day.  Sunday afternoon through Monday would be nice.

  • Meh 1
  • Haha (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

I doubt a majority actually found the statement "offensive". But I understand the root of what could make this annoying more than anything for people of color. 

 

People have been trying to chip away at Lamar since Day 1 and still continue to try. Whether it was that he should switch to WR or RB or that he just wasn't an NFL player to now where they're trying to say he's purely just a product of a gimmick offense to little things like this about the football meshing with his skin color. He doesn't fit the conditioned perception of a franchise QB. The intelligent, confident, leadership-exuding white guy. That's just the truth. It's in the same vein of how every time we draft a mid-round white offensive lineman, he gets labeled as a "hard-working, blue collar, lunch pail" player or the way a white utility player so often gets called "gritty" or a "grinder". These are pre-concieved biases that 100% exist. 

 

So no, I don't think this guy is a racist and I wouldn't have suspended him. But I can totally understand when not only black people but any fan of Lamar would hear that and roll their eyes and say "here we go again", as they see another attempt at him being chipped away at, whether that was a direct intention or not. 

 

He may not fit the perception people have of what a franchise QB should be; however, I don't believe any of the talk of him switching to WR, being a product of a gimmick system, or any of the "chipping away at Lamar," as you put it, has anything to do with race. There were some that had question marks about Jackson's ability to translate his ability as a passer to the NFL level. Regardless of how much success he had in college, it is still ok for someone to question his abilities without it being tied to race, just as it is to question whether his style of QB play is sustainable at the NFL level. 

 

I didn't / don't hear anyone asking those types of questions about Russell Wilson, Deshaun Watson, Dak Prescott, Patrick Mahomes, Kyler Murray, Jacoby Brissett, Cam Newton, Teddy Bridgewater, Jameis Winston, and Dwayne Haskins. 

 

As I said in a previous post, because something CAN be interpreted to be insensitive or even racist, that doesn't necessarily mean it is the only, or most important, factor to consider in the evaluation of someone's actions or words. 

 

There are plenty of examples every day of overt racism in this country. I believe in picking and choosing your battles. When we make everything a crisis, then everything becomes a crisis. When we are quick to indict people on words or behaviors that are nothing more than mistakes with no intent to be insensitive, derogatory, demeaning, or racist, even when they can be interpreted as such, then we begin to diminish the legitimacy of real racist behaviors.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a pretty solid nail in the coffin of this controversy: 

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/12/05/richard-sherman-no-reason-for-outrage-over-tim-ryans-comments/

 

Quote

“I know Tim personally and I listened to the dialogue and saw it written, and honestly I wasn’t as outraged as everybody else,” Sherman said. “I understand how it can be taken under a certain context and be offensive to some, but if you’re saying, this is a brown ball, they’re wearing dark colors, and he has a brown arm, honestly, sometimes we were having trouble seeing it on film. He’s making a play fake and sometimes he’s swinging his arm real fast and you’re like, Does he have the ball? And you look up and [Mark] Ingram is running it. So it was technically a valid point, but you can always phrase things better.” ... “It 100 percent is an issue,” Sherman said. “That’s why it wasn’t that offensive, because what he was saying was a great point. . . . He could have used better words, but it was made bigger than it really was.” - Richard Sherman

 

Quote

“I told him, ‘I got your back,'” Ford said of a conversation he had with Ryan after Ryan was suspended by the team. “The words kind of got taken out of context. I think he knows now he could have used better judgment with his words, but we’ve got his back. I knew what he was trying to say. This era we live in, it’s just what it is.” Dee Ford

 

Edited by whatdrought
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, GG said:

I'm guessing this kind of play analysis using vertically challenged players will be verboten too?

 

 

 

Ahhhh!   That's priceless!...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...FWIW, Sherman came out and said, "...no harm...no foul....I'm not offended.....and Ryan is not a racist".......

  • Awesome! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Binghamton Beast said:

If the ball was light colored, and it was Josh Allen he was talking about while he is wearing a white jersey would anyone be mad?


Why not say it? Lamar Jackson has dark skin. Is that a racist observation? Especially in the context he used that observation?

 

Hell no.

I thought it was perfectly reasonable in the context used.

 Nothing negative inferred.

 

 and to be honest i was thinking something similar during the game. Ravens are amazing at fooling defenses with that RO. wow!

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, whatdrought said:

I think this is a pretty solid nail in the coffin of this controversy: 

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/12/05/richard-sherman-no-reason-for-outrage-over-tim-ryans-comments/


Richard Sherman and Dee Ford both stated they weren’t offended and that he had a valid point; however, he could have phrased it better. Honest question: What other way could he have phrased the point that Jackson has dark skin? Sherman phrased it, “ he has a brown arm.” Is that really any different?

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, MJS said:

Harmless statement. Still dumb to say.

I agree. It's harmless and while I think there is some merit to the statement you simply cant say these things in a public forum in this day and age, because anything related to the color of a person's skin causes an instant ***** storm. 

20 hours ago, SirAndrew said:

People going to turn this all political on both sides, ignoring the simple fact that the comment is just plain dumb. By this logic no one should have ever seen a baseball coming out of my hands to hit the fastball. 

How often did you hand it off before you pitched it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, GG said:

He made an observation about the color similarities between the skin tone, uniform and the football.  The picture on the previous page kind of supports his point.  Are we at a point where it's wrong to say that a player has dark skin?

 

 

Yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Lurker said:

 

It's all PC and things right now, but the league might want to look into those black color rush unis during night games in the rain...

 

Image result for san francisco baltimore ravens game qb

We should order Football colored gloves for all of our ball carriers.  And football colored arm tape too.  It will be like 11 footballs out there handing off each other to one another.  The defense will not know what to do. Tackle all the footballs that are carrying other footballs! Joking aside, I agree with the point that dark uniforms might provide an advantage when it comes to watching the mesh point of an RPO or RO at night in the rain.  Or when compared to when the RB wears white gloves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Alert my employer here, perhaps I should be suspended for 1 day.  Sunday afternoon through Monday would be nice.

after the game or before the game ?
 Just trying to help Hap

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It's really difficult to respond to this without broadening the terms of the discussion to society at large, which doesn't belong here.

 

I think the point is, in this instance, Lamar, as a star, Heisman-winning QB, faced a lot of pre-draft criticism and suggestions to change position that many black players and media members felt were spurred in part by racial bias in perceptions.  In that context, comments which appear to attribute his stunning success in part to skin color rather than his skill can seem like more of the same. 

 

The valid point that maybe the lack of contrast made the ball even harder for the 49ers to see could have been made (and perhaps more effectively) without it.

 

Of course all of that, just like the pre draft perceptions of McCaffrey were also rooted in racism.  

 

That really has nothing to do with my comments though. 

5 hours ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

 

But there ARE certain types of people that have an advantage. There's a reason why the workforce looks the way it does. Whether it's in sports or any business, why do you think the percentage of minorities and females in C-Suite/executive roles is still so low?

 

It's almost crazy and incredibly dismissive based on cold hard facts to say certain people in society haven't been given an advantage. That's not to take away the hard work of white males, but the same hard work could have been put in by minorities and women that just haven't been shown the same opportunities. 

 

Even keeping it purely in sports...look at the way males have been coaching in the WNBA or other female sports, but no women have been hired as head coaches in any of the big pro leagues. Becky Hammon has been an assistant for Greg Popovich for years and has gotten all kinds of accolades...but nobody wants to be that first time that tries this "experiment" of having the first female coach. There are also a few high-ranking female executives in sports that have continuously gotten turned down for GM roles. Meanwhile we see the same recycled failed coaches and GM's that are males get hired over and over and over again. It took a while for minority males to even join that club.

 

You or other people may not want to hear that there are people of advantage in this country and life, but it's simply not true. 

 

I think it's largely because even when society and corporations make room for those opportunities - it's not enough and no matter the amount there's no diminishing the anger.  So it's kind of like - what's the point. 

 

My mom is 74 and her generation had very little opportunity for females.  My wife is 42 and has had way more opportunity.  Yet the women in their 40's are way more angry than the one's in their 70's.  And it isn't because they're woke.

 

 

Edited by White Linen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Binghamton Beast said:

 

When was Manuel ever a master at the read option like Jackson is?

 

Think before you post.

 

I also don't recall anyone making such a racially insensitive remark about Donovan McNabb when he was playing for the Eagles, who wore dark green jerseys either. As I recall he was a fairly decent running QB at that time too!

 

PS. You might consider taking your own F'd up advice!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

I don't think that term means what you think it means - and if it does and you're still using it, well ... that's too bad.

 

I don't think any rational person is trying to say the this comment about skin tone was a racist comment.  I think most rational people will agree that it was not meant to be offensive or demeaning in any way, shape or form.

 

I also don't think it's terribly difficult to understand why it simply not a good idea - as someone with a mic in front of him paid to speak to thousands of listeners - to "go there."  In a position like his, he'd be wise to stay away from politics, race, color and/or sexual orientation.  Even if a comment is harmless, if it falls into one of those categories, it's just inviting some radical idiot to make life miserable for the organization.

 

He should have known better and that's why he was suspended.  That's all it boils down to.

You might be right...but to me it seems like  this is a story about a white person being discriminated against (in this case, suspended) for saying something that a black person would not be criticized for saying. 
Maybe it’s just hypocrisy ... Not reverse racism. 

I see black people RAILING on the whiteness of people all day on TV, and none seem to get punished. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

 

But there ARE certain types of people that have an advantage. There's a reason why the workforce looks the way it does. Whether it's in sports or any business, why do you think the percentage of minorities and females in C-Suite/executive roles is still so low?

 

Because in big companies you don't reach the 'C-Suite' until you're 30 years into your career, and 30 years ago women/minorities didn't have the same opportunities they have today and in recent years.  As a result the portion of C-Suite roles held by women is continually increasing.  Has that really escaped your notice are you just being obtuse to make a point?

 

Here's a link from Pew Research showing a bunch of charts of women participation in various govt/corp leadership roles.  As the father of 3 young daughters, I'm thrilled to see all the lines all going from the bottom left to the upper right with most accelerating even more rapidly in the last few years.   This evidence belies the bullsh-- political narrative that we're still living in the 1940s.

 

https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/fact-sheet/the-data-on-women-leaders/

Edited by KD in CA
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...