GG Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 14 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said: https://www.newyorkupstate.com/buffalo-bills/2016/10/rex_ryan_doesnt_think_his_support_of_donald_trump_is_dividing_bills_locker_room.html fact is there are a lot posters who love to bash Kaepernick and Reid who would love it they had pro Trump Cleats or something like that. Personally, I’m fine with all of it. And absolutely blows my mind that people whine they way they do about a guy silently protesting yet are fine supporting women beaters and other scumbags. Seems a little backwards to me but to each their own I guess. I also find it odd that people get upset about speaking about social issues that are affecting others. What happen to empathy? And like it or not, athletes have huge platforms more than most human beings to make social changes. When a topic hits an emotional nerve it derails into a tangent. The bottom line with Kaepernick's protest was that he broke his employer's rules of conduct. The underlying cause is irrelevant. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 24 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: In GG's defense, I'd say RICHIE is the one who doesnt understand the concept of union membership. But he is completely free to campaign and vote against his best interests. Most union voters did in the last election anyways. Of course he's free to do it. I never suggested otherwise. But just because you have the right to do something, doesn't mean I'm not going to rightly call you an ####### for doing it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said: Your claim about their competition as being in it's infancy, for 30 years, was clearly wrong. I didn't to include CONCACAF, because.... why bother?--it doesn't include any teams from South America or Europe (where the best non-US teams hail from) or Asia. Only the US and Canada are ranked top 20 in the world. But I can see why you limited your response to that. It's a poor dodge. In 25 years, USMNT has only beaten Panama 5 times in 10 games, by the way. As for losing to "high school teams" these aren't high schools they were US Soccer Academy teams and they weren't games but essentially scrimmages. This should help you understand better: But this article went on to describe the event as part of a structured practice undertaken primarily for the benefit and development of the boys’ team: https://www.90min.com/posts/4833646-some-people-think-it-s-funny-that-the-usa-women-s-national-team-were-apparently-beaten-by-u15-boys Of course, this match against the academy team was very informal and should not be a major cause for alarm. The U.S. surely wasn’t going all out, with the main goal being to get some minutes on the pitch, build chemistry when it comes to moving the ball around, improve defensive shape and get ready for Russia. The game will, however, serve as a great anecdote for the kids on the FC Dallas squad to tell their grandchildren about one day. It also speaks highly of the level of academy development MLS teams are doing these days. Got an explanation for this one? Mens U-17 Team smoked the USWNT 8-2. Want to claim its a scrimmage again and they weren't "trying"? There are several more recorded instances of the USWNT playing high-school aged boys teams and everytime I have looked at the results they have lost and usually lost badly. Clearly at some point they should have won regardless of how hard they were trying? Your argument that there is as good competition in Women's soccer as there is in Men's is just ridiculous and so far from the realm of reality you must be talking about some alternate universe where this holds true. Anyone who follows soccer even a little bit knows that Women's soccer while having an increase in talent around the world, still pales in comparison to Men's soccer...precisely because many of these countries don't or didn't even have Women's sports until recently and/or don't bother funding them. Edited March 31, 2020 by matter2003 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turk71 Posted March 31, 2020 Author Share Posted March 31, 2020 5 hours ago, Turk71 said: I get that. Football players are only supposed to play football, not stand up (or kneel down) for social causes. Hilarious. He's right to stand up for the disabled players. 4 hours ago, GG said: The discussion may have eluded you in the past, but the point is that the players were pushing their personal social causes on their employer's time and using their employer's platform to send a message. Then they got indignant when the employer asked them to stop. The players are perfectly free to pursue their causes on their own time, using their own resources. Seeing as how I no longer live in a cave at 8000 feet in Utah like I used to, it would be pretty hard to elude that discussion. Life was so simple living in the cave. Ski in and ski out in the wintertime, mountain biking all summer, no television, internet, bills to pay, I didn't even have a phone. Were cell phones even a thing in 1987? I can't remember, I know I didn't have one. No mail either, unlike Bugs Bunny I had no mailbox outside the cave. No overload of information to cloud my mind. The good old days. The term 'personal social causes' was considered an oxymoron back then I think, and I'm pretty sure 'social justice warrior' was not yet a pejorative term. I can't remember though, so long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 44 minutes ago, matter2003 said: Got an explanation for this one? Mens U-17 Team smoked the USWNT 8-2. Want to claim its a scrimmage again and they weren't "trying"? There are several more recorded instances of the USWNT playing high-school aged boys teams and everytime I have looked at the results they have lost and usually lost badly. Clearly at some point they should have won regardless of how hard they were trying? Your argument that there is as good competition in Women's soccer as there is in Men's is just ridiculous and so far from the realm of reality you must be talking about some alternate universe where this holds true. Anyone who follows soccer even a little bit knows that Women's soccer while having an increase in talent around the world, still pales in comparison to Men's soccer...precisely because many of these countries don't or didn't even have Women's sports until recently and/or don't bother funding them. Dude, the women brought in about $1M more in revenue in 2018 than the Mens team. They are also at the top of their field internationally. There isn’t a special NGB for the men and another for the women. It all goes into the same pot and is managed by the same board of directors. Your point about losing to a HS team is dumb. It’s a Junior National Team camp/squad. There are dozens of sports where these camps would put together a team of HS kids that would be ranked in the top 20 in the NCAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 47 minutes ago, matter2003 said: Got an explanation for this one? Mens U-17 Team smoked the USWNT 8-2. Want to claim its a scrimmage again and they weren't "trying"? There are several more recorded instances of the USWNT playing high-school aged boys teams and everytime I have looked at the results they have lost and usually lost badly. Clearly at some point they should have won regardless of how hard they were trying? Your argument that there is as good competition in Women's soccer as there is in Men's is just ridiculous and so far from the realm of reality you must be talking about some alternate universe where this holds true. Anyone who follows soccer even a little bit knows that Women's soccer while having an increase in talent around the world, still pales in comparison to Men's soccer...precisely because many of these countries don't or didn't even have Women's sports until recently and/or don't bother funding them. Boys are better at sports than girls in head to head competition. No duh. Even the Williams sisters said they would get beaten by the lowest ranked man. Does that mean they arent good at tennis? What are you even arguing in this CBA thread? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 (edited) 52 minutes ago, matter2003 said: Got an explanation for this one? Mens U-17 Team smoked the USWNT 8-2. Want to claim its a scrimmage again and they weren't "trying"? There are several more recorded instances of the USWNT playing high-school aged boys teams and everytime I have looked at the results they have lost and usually lost badly. Clearly at some point they should have won regardless of how hard they were trying? Your argument that there is as good competition in Women's soccer as there is in Men's is just ridiculous and so far from the realm of reality you must be talking about some alternate universe where this holds true. Anyone who follows soccer even a little bit knows that Women's soccer while having an increase in talent around the world, still pales in comparison to Men's soccer...precisely because many of these countries don't or didn't even have Women's sports until recently and/or don't bother funding them. Men's international soccer is loaded with far more dogs than exist in women's. And I wasn't claiming it's a scrimmage, the US Soccer rep was saying it was. Go read it again, but this time, step closer to your Gateway. I've said your claim that the USWNT has dominated for decades due to the poor competition (which is due to all of those countries being new to soccer and ?sports in general ) is total BS and proven so. They have taken on the best in the world for decades and routinely beaten them in the 2 biggest tournaments (WC and Olympics). Go look at the top 20 countries for women's soccer---how many "didn't have women's sports until recently"? If you "follow soccer even a little bit", you wouldn't watch the top women's teams in the world and conclude "Man, none of these teams can play soccer very well"... You fail to understand that it doesn't matter how more teams the men let into the WC tournament, the bottom half are insignificant. And think of how hard it must be to get past Timor-Leste, Mongolia, Libya, Armenia, Congo, Russia, Kyrgyz Republic... I bet the U-17 men's team would take at least 1 "real" game off the USMNT out of 5. I'm certain that a McDonald's All-American Basketball team could, after practicing together for a few weeks, beat any UConn women's team that has ever played, and probably some WNBA teams. It's women against grown men. So what? Anyway, the point is that the top competition for the women has been well established for many years and they have dominated nonetheless, whereas the men cannot compete against the top men's teams. Nothing can be more clear. Edited March 31, 2020 by Mr. WEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardhatharry Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 Think it's time for him to just retire then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 Just now, Hardhatharry said: Think it's time for him to just retire then. Profound assessment of the treatment of retired and disabled players. Well done. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 7 hours ago, Richard Noggin said: Don't rile them up. Social justice as a valid and important subset of American civic life triggers some people who don't wish to hear complaints from historically marginalized peoples. Let's just stick to the NFL. I find it very odd that when Kaepernick does it, they say he's a millionaire and a football player, but when Trump whines like a B word about everything, the millionaire spoiled rich kid gets heaped praise like slop to a pig. 3 hours ago, GG said: When a topic hits an emotional nerve it derails into a tangent. The bottom line with Kaepernick's protest was that he broke his employer's rules of conduct. The underlying cause is irrelevant. Irrelevant if you're white. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sig1Hunter Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 Is it possible to keep this thread on there main board, or are certain people dead set on injecting their political views into it? Just curious.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB3 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 I love these threads. An awesome study in emotion vs logic. Thanks all. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 37 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said: Is it possible to keep this thread on there main board, or are certain people dead set on injecting their political views into it? Just curious.. The first two words in the title are "Eric Reid". It's no surprise TBD would immediately turn it into a ***** show. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 20% of the NFLPA members didn't think the new CBA was important enough to bother voting on it. So why give them another bite at the apple? They won't care about this small detail. Where was Reid's outrage after the vote numbers were announced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 hour ago, EasternOHBillsFan said: Irrelevant if you're white. Irrelevant if you are employed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted April 1, 2020 Share Posted April 1, 2020 40 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: 20% of the NFLPA members didn't think the new CBA was important enough to bother voting on it. So why give them another bite at the apple? They won't care about this small detail. Where was Reid's outrage after the vote numbers were announced? I would guess that 80% membership accounted for is pretty good tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 1, 2020 Share Posted April 1, 2020 9 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: I would guess that 80% membership accounted for is pretty good tbh It's pretty bad. This is a rank and file vote on the financial future of every player that will be in force for 10 years. If 500 of 2500 total players who were eligible to vote specifically chose not to, that's poor solidarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meatloaf63 Posted April 1, 2020 Share Posted April 1, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Mr. WEO said: Men's international soccer is loaded with far more dogs than exist in women's. And I wasn't claiming it's a scrimmage, the US Soccer rep was saying it was. Go read it again, but this time, step closer to your Gateway. I've said your claim that the USWNT has dominated for decades due to the poor competition (which is due to all of those countries being new to soccer and ?sports in general ) is total BS and proven so. They have taken on the best in the world for decades and routinely beaten them in the 2 biggest tournaments (WC and Olympics). Go look at the top 20 countries for women's soccer---how many "didn't have women's sports until recently"? If you "follow soccer even a little bit", you wouldn't watch the top women's teams in the world and conclude "Man, none of these teams can play soccer very well"... You fail to understand that it doesn't matter how more teams the men let into the WC tournament, the bottom half are insignificant. And think of how hard it must be to get past Timor-Leste, Mongolia, Libya, Armenia, Congo, Russia, Kyrgyz Republic... I bet the U-17 men's team would take at least 1 "real" game off the USMNT out of 5. I'm certain that a McDonald's All-American Basketball team could, after practicing together for a few weeks, beat any UConn women's team that has ever played, and probably some WNBA teams. It's women against grown men. So what? Anyway, the point is that the top competition for the women has been well established for many years and they have dominated nonetheless, whereas the men cannot compete against the top men's teams. Nothing can be more clear. Nothing could be further from the truth. “As recently as the 1980s, four of the twenty-four countries involved in the 2019 World Cup had imposed outright bans on women’s soccer. In general, many of the countries involved are still trying to recover from the myopia of past regimes and the sexism of current federations in order to field competitive teams on the pitch, which is part of the reason we see nations who embraced women’s soccer early and invest time and effort into fielding world-class teams succeed at this tournament. Decades of foolishness are still impeding four countries with recent bans on women’s soccer, to varying degrees.” Not many countries have supported their woman’s teams as much as the US has until recently. The only thing clear is that you are wrong... Edited April 1, 2020 by Meatloaf63 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted April 1, 2020 Share Posted April 1, 2020 1 hour ago, Sig1Hunter said: Is it possible to keep this thread on there main board, or are certain people dead set on injecting their political views into it? Just curious.. A Kaepernick thread? How it's made it to 5 pages without being shipped off to PPP is a miracle! p.s. Reid is douchebag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted April 1, 2020 Share Posted April 1, 2020 5 minutes ago, KD in CA said: A Kaepernick thread? How it's made it to 5 pages without being shipped off to PPP is a miracle! p.s. Reid is douchebag. How dare he fight for old, disabled players, right? What a dbag... 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts