Another Bills reporter trying to make himself the story

[Chandler#81]

[DFT]

Just now, Chandler#81 said:

#winning

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Poleshifter said:

Good God, you mean because Fromm failed to use the word "equally" you are still going to give him bull$$it for his remarks?

 

eball, you have a weird interpretation of words.

 

 

I don't think he does. 

[Buffalo716]

17 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

I have always said there is ONLY 1 RACE

 

THE HUMAN RACE

[Augie]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think he does. 

 

And there is the key to this entire topic. We are all going to see/feel/believe (or not) differently. The most important thing is to respect the views of others, even when they differ from ours. Obviously keep it peaceful, and nobody wants the views of another shoved upon them. 

 

Too often people will try to use “religion” as a tool to try to gain an advantage in something that has nothing to do with religion. That’s BS. Most people were “born into” a religion. I went thru that whole thing growing up and  over time I’ve come to think I’m much more spiritual than religious. Religions are too often divisive, and that’s not a good thing. I doubt a single person here sees these things exactly the way I do. I won’t shove my beliefs on you, you do the same and we’re all good.  

5 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

I have always said there is ONLY 1 RACE

 

THE HUMAN RACE

 

Well, in that race I’m guessing Lieutenant Dan comes in last! 

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by Augie

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Augie said:

 

And there is the key to this entire topic. We are all going to see/feel/believe (or not) differently. The most important thing is to respect the views of others, even when they differ from ours. Obviously keep it peaceful, and nobody wants the views of another shoved upon them. 

 

Too often people will try to use “religion” as a tool to try to gain an advantage in something that has nothing to do with religion. That’s BS. Most people were “born into” a religion. I went thru that whole thing growing up and with over time I’ve come to think I’m more spiritual than religious. Religions are too often divisive, and that’s not a good thing. I doubt a single person here sees these things exactly the way I do. I won’t shove my beliefs on you, you do the same and we’re all good.  

 

Exactly Augie. 

[muppy]

39 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

I am getting concerned that those who DO share Fromm's worldview (or what they think his worldview is based on his brief comments) cannot admit he copped out and even after he said he wasn't going to answer the question.  They have equated any questioning of his response to an attack on his religion.  If you say anything that can be construed as scripture I guess we all lose our right to criticize lest commit heresy. 

I am a Christian who has debated in this thread. I haven't read anyone say this answer should be construed as completely inclusive of all Fromms thoughts. If you are Christian you would read his reply and immediately relate it to scripture and nod in recognition. The fact it was deemed unacceptable is the rub. Why is that response deemed unacceptable simply because you dont happen to trust scripture or believe Jesus is Lord and Savior and the Bible the word of God? It wasn't a treatise FCOL it was a one line comment. The attacks aren't based on his religion, but rather attack on his personal belief in scripture and what believers trust and believe itself as not being acceptable. If anything it reads as an attack on scripture itself. Just my humble opinion. 

[4merper4mer]

16 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

And there is the key to this entire topic. We are all going to see/feel/believe (or not) differently. The most important thing is to respect the views of others, even when they differ from ours. Obviously keep it peaceful, and nobody wants the views of another shoved upon them. 

 

Too often people will try to use “religion” as a tool to try to gain an advantage in something that has nothing to do with religion. That’s BS. Most people were “born into” a religion. I went thru that whole thing growing up and  over time I’ve come to think I’m much more spiritual than religious. Religions are too often divisive, and that’s not a good thing. I doubt a single person here sees these things exactly the way I do. I won’t shove my beliefs on you, you do the same and we’re all good.  

 

Well, in that race I’m guessing Lieutenant Dan comes in last! 

 

From didn't shove anything on anyone.  The reporter became judge jury and executioner for Fromm's beliefs.

[Jauronimo]

43 minutes ago, MJS said:

If I was in the public spotlight I would certainly deflect any question that has anything to do with race, religion, politics, etc. And I'm sure I would be attacked for that, but oh well. It's not the world's business what my personal opinions are on those things.

So would I.  And people may criticize.  I probably wouldn't make awkward segue into what the flag means to me in the process, however.

[IDBillzFan]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Fine. But then don't expect everyone else to just accept that is the answer. In this context it is a cop out. 

 

Just as I would tell you not to expect everyone else to see it as a cop out.

 

People see what they want to see. The kid made a joke that got away from him. It's not a reason to cut him, and it's CERTAINLY not a reason for a dime-a-dozen sports reporter to stand in judgement of him for all his readers.

[4merper4mer]

59 minutes ago, Dragoon said:

I agree with the radio hosts. I believe bad things are a comin. 

I worry about that but don't think it will come to pass.  Most people are tolerant.  Those who aren't are purposefully loud.

[Jauronimo]

2 minutes ago, Muppy said:

I am a Christian who has debated in this thread. I haven't read anyone say this answer should be construed as completely inclusive of all Fromms thoughts. If you are Christian you would read his reply and immediately relate it to scripture and nod in recognition. The fact it was deemed unacceptable is the rub. Why is that response deemed unacceptable simply because you dont happen to trust scripture or believe Jesus is Lord and Savior and the Bible the word of God? It wasn't a treatise FCOL it was a one line comment. The attacks aren't based on his religion, but rather attack on his personal belief in scripture and what believers trust and believe itself as not being acceptable. If anything it reads as an attack on scripture itself. Just my humble opinion. 

The unacceptable part has already been addressed many times by participants in this thread and the Marcel himself.  The bolded has nothing to do with it.  That's the conclusion you and others jumped to on page 1.

 

I am not countering this strawman again.

[FireChans]

45 minutes ago, Buftex said:

No...I would have figured Hitler out for myself.  I never would have seen the tweet of this "NFL Reporter" if you hadn't posted it...I suspect others wouldn't have either.  No big deal, and sorry, i wasn't trying to criticize you...just in this day and age, it is the re-tweets and shares that cause silly things like this to blow up. It's a lesson I have to remind myself of sometimes too.  

He is the ESPN NFL reporter. He is the new Rodak.

 

He's not Adam Schefter but he has a following.

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, SCBills said:

It’s a shame that BLM, the organization, used that phrase because I believe that we truly need to say “Black Lives Matter”.   The movement is justified.  
 

However, BLM, the organization is a political movement, not a social one - they provide cover to those who want to push back on a lot of what has, justifiably, been brought to light in terms of racial injustice.  
 

It’s a conflation between a movement and a political organization, and it’s unfortunate. 

They basically stole a sentence and redefined it.

[NoHuddleKelly12]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Sure. And I respect and defend his right to have one too. But when he uses it to answer a question like this then he has to acknowledge that people who don't share his world view are going to perceive that as a cop out. 

But it’s good we can engage on this and hear each other out. I hope that in some measure it helps to dig deeper and see where each of us is coming from as a means to create bridges, and not burn them. 

[MJS]

Just now, Jauronimo said:

So would I.  And people may criticize.  I probably wouldn't make awkward segue into what the flag means to me in the process, however.

I think if Fromm didn't want to get into politics he should have left it at that. No need to follow up with his remark about God because that is not consistent with his first remark.

 

However, Brees didn't really do that. He just gave his frank opinion about kneeling and what the flag meant to him. But it was an opinion others did not want to hear.

[NoSaint]

59 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Fromm's answer was a political litmus test. The usual suspects all see it as one way or another.

 

The major problem is MLJ injecting his own opinion in his report.  If Tim Graham pulled this crap, everyone would lose it on him.

yea but I don’t think it’s the litmus test that you think it is. Because it shouldn’t be a terribly controversial take across any political spectrum. Really the only split I see on it is within the conservative circles that believe in freedom of press, freedom of speech and actual meaningful discussion about morality vs the branch that’s a charming mix of scared of and mad at liberals. 
 

the amusing part is I’d probably land more squarely in a true conservative philosophy than most of the people defending Fromm but have been largely abandoned there by nimrods that get worked up about things like this  ?

 

oh, and Timmy went above and beyond earning his reputation here. I don’t really know this reporter but have seen plenty of criticism in this thread and little to no defense of him. 

[Augie]

5 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

From didn't shove anything on anyone.  The reporter became judge jury and executioner for Fromm's beliefs.

 

I didn’t say he did, I was just responding to @GunnerBill. I don’t know what’s truly in Fromm’s heart, and I wasn’t speaking to that. 

[MJS]

8 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

From didn't shove anything on anyone.  The reporter became judge jury and executioner for Fromm's beliefs.

I don't really think the reporter took issue with his statement about God, just that he wanted him to talk about how his views and perceptions have changed and Fromm didn't want to do that, instead saying that he didn't want to get into anything political.

[Dragoon]

8 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I worry about that but don't think it will come to pass.  Most people are tolerant.  Those who aren't are purposefully loud.

Well...I’m ready. 

[Doc]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

You realize he doesn't actually hold that opinion, right? He was joking with a friend. I have made worse jokes than that. I guarantee every person in this thread could lose their job over something they've said in private at one point or another.

 

This is where people have a legitimate gripe with the way media reports things. Everyone reported the story as "Fromm says only white people should have guns." That is total nonsense. In context he was jokingly referring to himself as an elite white guy. I hate that I even have to explain this. I feel bad for Fromm. He didn't do anything wrong. Someone petty decided to try to ruin his career. That is 100 times worse than what he did.

Yeah, Fromm wasn’t talking about guns: he was talking about suppressors, a.k.a. silencers. In a private text to a girl he was probably trying to impress with a bed, miss placed joke.  Somehow that got interpreted to mean that he was talking about black people.  And anyone wonders why he doesn’t want to answer the question?

[muppy]

12 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

The unacceptable part has already been addressed many times by participants in this thread and the Marcel himself.  The bolded has nothing to do with it.  That's the conclusion you and others jumped to on page 1.

 

I am not countering this strawman again.

I understand that folks would have wanted to hear a more extended answer than what he gave. The fact he didnt want to elaborate in a more illustrative fashion to his full thoughts was his choice. He has his reasons for that. Im guessing they involve not wanting to say anything he said to be misconstrued and bring further drama and attention to his past situation.    I'll end this by saying the "unacceptable" verbiage was a poor choice of words and this conversation likely wouldn't be occurring if MLJ hadn't labeled it such. Which also has been stated in this thread. 

Edited August 7, 2020 by Muppy

[Mr. WEO]

The only way out of this for Marcel is to quickly publish a list of the top 5 Safety Tandems with Hyde/Poyer at the top....

 

 

[NoSaint]

1 hour ago, Jauronimo said:

I am getting concerned that those who DO share Fromm's worldview (or what they think his worldview is based on his brief comments) cannot admit he copped out and even after he said he wasn't going to answer the question.  They have equated any questioning of his response to an attack on his religion.  If you say anything that can be construed as scripture I guess we all lose our right to criticize lest commit heresy. 

And if you don’t fall in line you are a liberal, gosh darnit 

[FireChans]

10 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

yea but I don’t think it’s the litmus test that you think it is. Because it shouldn’t be a terribly controversial take across any political spectrum. Really the only split I see on it is within the conservative circles that believe in freedom of press, freedom of speech and actual meaningful discussion about morality vs the branch that’s a charming mix of scared of and mad at liberals. 
 

the amusing part is I’d probably land more squarely in a true conservative philosophy than most of the people defending Fromm but have been largely abandoned there by nimrods that get worked up about things like this  ?

 

oh, and Timmy went above and beyond earning his reputation here. I don’t really know this reporter but have seen plenty of criticism in this thread and little to no defense of him. 

Yeah man, it just the usual "jesus freak" guys, the usual "it's a cop out and i would cop out too but he shouldn't have copped out and here's why" guys, the "his religion is part of his life" guys, and the "I can't believe he said he didn't want to get political after a reporter asked him directly to comment on politics!" guys.

 

I knew what 50% of the posters in this thread were going to say before they said it. And that includes you.

 

Nice of you to provide the only defense of him in other threads though. You are truly unpredictable lol

 

5 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I don’t know about y’all but I wish this guy would keep his opinions to himself and just report that it’s been released. I’m just saying.

Edited August 7, 2020 by FireChans

[4merper4mer]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Because what it essentially said with God 1st, people 2nd was "well God is more important than people anyway". When being asked about issues affecting society to start your answer with that is a defense mechanism. 

 

It might be his religious belief and though I vociferously disagree with it I equally vociferously defend his right to hold that belief. But using it as a means of deflecting that question is a cop out and I don't think it does him any favours. 

1.  This is an American board so kindly keep the u out of favors.

2.  You and others may view it as a deflection.  A different group may not.  Can't a person love God and people?  That is what Fromm said he is trying to do.  Is that a bad approach?  Can't someone who doesn't believe think, "well at least he loves people too"?  You or I might view his approach as ill conceived.  That's fine.  Pronouncing it as "unacceptable" in a written statement, not framed as opinion, is wrong.  

[Jauronimo]

10 minutes ago, MJS said:

I think if Fromm didn't want to get into politics he should have left it at that. No need to follow up with his remark about God because that is not consistent with his first remark.

 

However, Brees didn't really do that. He just gave his frank opinion about kneeling and what the flag meant to him. But it was an opinion others did not want to hear.

He gave an opinion that didn't answer the question.     

 

 

Reporter (Paraphrasing):  People are looking at the Kaepernick protests over police brutality, the issue has emerged again, the topic of kneeling during the anthem i being discussed.  How should the NFL respond and what is your responsibility to your teammates as a leader on your team and and leader in the league?

 

Brees:  I will never agree with anybody disrespecting the flag.  [speech about his family's military service, what the anthem means to him, and how it moves him to tears]

 

No one was offended about what the flag means to Brees.  Spinning it that way is dishonest.  People were upset with Brees, notably his teammates and NFL brethren, because he avoided the issue and waved the flag.  

[4merper4mer]

6 minutes ago, MJS said:

I don't really think the reporter took issue with his statement about God, just that he wanted him to talk about how his views and perceptions have changed and Fromm didn't want to do that, instead saying that he didn't want to get into anything political.

And the reporter gets to declare that unacceptable because?

[NoSaint]

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

Yeah, Fromm wasn’t talking about guns: he was talking about suppressors, a.k.a. silencers. In a private text to a girl he was probably trying to impress with a bed, miss placed joke.  Somehow that got interpreted to mean that he was talking about black people.  And anyone wonders why he doesn’t want to answer the question?

what color people do you think he was excluding by including the word white, doc?

 

he made the joke. it had a racial component.

No, I don’t think he keeps a hood in the back of his locker. Yea he probably has some not great stereotypes in the back of his head. No it’s not the end of the world and he’s got a lot of time to learn and grow.

[Jauronimo]

 

4 minutes ago, Muppy said:

I understand that folks would have wanted to hear a more extended answer than what he gave. The fact he didnt want to elaborate in a more illustrative fashion to his full thoughts was his choice. He has his reasons for that. Im guessing they involve not wanting to say anything he said to be misconstrued and bring further drama and attention to his past situation.    I'll end this by saying the "unacceptable" verbiage was a poor choice of words and this conversation likely wouldn't be occurring if MLJ hadn't labeled it such. Which also has been stated in this thread. 

And this is a point I agree on.  Fromm doesn't owe Marcel anymore of an answer than he gave. 

 

Fromm will want to watch Josh Allen and brush up on his media skills if he ever wants to be the guy.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, whatdrought said:

You seem to be assuming that a grown man is responsible for answering a question about the cluster-youknowhat that is the current climate in this country.

 

Well, if you read the article or watch the interview, he did say a bunch about how he had been having discussions and educating himself about different people's experiences and so forth.  I mean yes, he can choose not to answer, but when he makes a public deal out of growing and changing and being exposed to different viewpoints, don't you think it's a fair follow-on to essentially ask what all those discussions he alluded to have meant to him?

 

YMMV, obviously.  I do, and clearly M L-J does.

 

[NoSaint]

3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

And the reporter gets to declare that unacceptable because?

because Fromm moments earlier was saying that he’s grown and has been doing the work and then immediately tripped over the obvious question he should’ve expected coming for months now?

[BillsfaninSB]

Not going to debate the comments of JF and MLJ.  It is pointless.

 

What is pointless is drafting this guy in the first place.  He is probably not going to make the team and the Bills missed out on some good offensive line men available at that time.  Always be drafting o-line.   McBeane got away from that this year. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

 

1 minute ago, NoSaint said:

because Fromm moments earlier was saying that he’s grown and has been doing the work and then immediately tripped over the obvious question he should’ve expected coming for months now?

 

This

 

[NoHuddleKelly12]

32 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

And there is the key to this entire topic. We are all going to see/feel/believe (or not) differently. The most important thing is to respect the views of others, even when they differ from ours. Obviously keep it peaceful, and nobody wants the views of another shoved upon them. 

 

Too often people will try to use “religion” as a tool to try to gain an advantage in something that has nothing to do with religion. That’s BS. Most people were “born into” a religion. I went thru that whole thing growing up and  over time I’ve come to think I’m much more spiritual than religious. Religions are too often divisive, and that’s not a good thing. I doubt a single person here sees these things exactly the way I do. I won’t shove my beliefs on you, you do the same and we’re all good.  

 

Well, in that race I’m guessing Lieutenant Dan comes in last! 

 

Not for nothing, it was Jesus who took issue with the “religious” know it all hypocrites during His earthly ministry, likening those Pharisee religious leaders who insisted on loud public spectacles with their liturgical prayers and emphasis on appearances, to bleached bones or empty vessels—so this is not exactly a new problem. Or those seeking to turn the temple into a financial center that he had to remove. Those were all the same folks who fought Jesus’ message of grace & redemption from our fallen condition the most, FWIW. 
 

Point being—religious label is worth nada by just itself. 

[buffaloboyinATL]

6 hours ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

If you think silence=violence, you will think Fromm's response is unacceptable. 

He didn't remain silent. He said God is the answer. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

15 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

1.  This is an American board so kindly keep the u out of favors.

 

I shall contemplate whether or no to honour that request

 

 

8 minutes ago, BillsfaninSB said:

Not going to debate the comments of JF and MLJ.  It is pointless.

 

What is pointless is drafting this guy in the first place.  He is probably not going to make the team and the Bills missed out on some good offensive line men available at that time.  Always be drafting o-line.   McBeane got away from that this year. 

 

Eh, there's a school of thought that says one should draft a QB every 2 years.  If nothing else, we're going to have tight cap coming up and Barkley's contract is up after this season.  It only makes sense to look for a cheaper replacement.

 

McBeane appears to have gone shopping in FA for the OL

[HOUSE]

See what happens when pre season is cancelled? 

 

Bedlam 

[whatdrought]

25 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Well, if you read the article or watch the interview, he did say a bunch about how he had been having discussions and educating himself about different people's experiences and so forth.  I mean yes, he can choose not to answer, but when he makes a public deal out of growing and changing and being exposed to different viewpoints, don't you think it's a fair follow-on to essentially ask what all those discussions he alluded to have meant to him?

 

YMMV, obviously.  I do, and clearly M L-J does.

 

What he’s learned in his personal journey is not the same as what is being played out in the world at large right now. It doesn’t have to be related.
 

Fromm is on thin ice, obviously. So to come out and answer a loaded question without any whole hearted support for what is going on would be suicide from a PR point of view. I don’t know that he does or doesn’t agree, but he obviously would rather not get into it. There is a wide faction that would say if you don’t support the BLM movement (not the idea, but the tangible org./movement) that you’re a racist. 

 

There’s no middle ground allowed right now, and there’s no room for disagreement with the “movement” as people such as Drew Brees have learned. 
 

The error of Marcel in this as I see it (and I haven’t seen the video or the article as I’ve been in and out all day- so this is going solely on the tweet and may be lacking context) is assuming that because he’s grown and matured he necessarily has to have an opinion on deep social issues and be willing and ready to voice them. 

 

7 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

I couldn’t care less about Jake Fromm

This is the most overlooked and important part of this. 

Edited August 7, 2020 by whatdrought

[NoSaint]

4 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

What he’s learned in his personal journey is not the same as what is being played out in the world at large right now. It doesn’t have to be related.
 

Fromm is on thin ice, obviously. So to come out and answer a loaded question without any whole hearted support for what is going on would be suicide from a PR point of view. I don’t know that he does or doesn’t agree, but he obviously would rather not get into it. There is a wide faction that would say if you don’t support the BLM movement (not the idea, but the tangible org./movement) that you’re a racist. 

 

There’s no middle ground allowed right now, and there’s no room for disagreement with the “movement” as people such as Drew Brees have learned. 
 

The error of Marcel in this as I see it (and I haven’t seen the video or the article as I’ve been in and out all day- so this is going solely on the tweet and may be lacking context) is assuming that because he’s grown and matured he necessarily has to have an opinion on deep social issues and be willing and ready to voice them. 

 

This is the most overlooked and important part of this. 

dare i ask: how much time have you spent in real life with folks associated with BLM or around protests etc... 
 

or is most of your experience with this online?

 

i won’t generalize across you, and am genuinely curious. What I’ve tended to see is the further distanced people are from it on a human level the more extreme they tend to think it is. There’s obviously militant factions but generally find in person that if you come of pure heart the ice isn’t all that thin.