Another Bills reporter trying to make himself the story

[BillsfaninSB]

20 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I shall contemplate whether or no to honour that request

 

 

 

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

I just don’t think he is beating out Barkley and the Bills only keep 2 QBs.  Best case scenario for Fromm is Practice Squad and someone can scoop him up unless the rules changed this year. 

[ziltoid]

ESPN is the bastion of social justice warrior-ing in sports.  Makes sense.

 

Fromm's career is doomed unless he washes some ESPN feet.

[MJS]

41 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

And the reporter gets to declare that unacceptable because?

Because it's his opinion, I suppose.

[ziltoid]

2 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

He’s Peterman 2.0..... McDermott loves his Jesus freak QBs..... who can’t play QB...

 

Is he noodle armed too?  Dagnabit.  This is where preseason would help.

 

And honestly I've come full circle on the religion thing.  Whatever gets you through the day is fine with me.

[4merper4mer]

34 minutes 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?

He was asked to comment on the goings on in the country.  Is he supposed to have "grown" into someone capable of healing society?  

 

How did he trip on the question?  Answer it properly for him.  What could he have said that would have satisfied you?  Why must we all be satisfied by a football player's answers about political climate?  He did answer the question about himself and the follow up was about political climate.

 

If he used the Bill an Ted ' "be excellent to each other" there would probably be less teeth gnashing.  Bring God into it and people get all defensive.  That is their right.  But to declare that someone's thoughts are unacceptable is a bridge too far.

10 minutes ago, MJS said:

Because it's his opinion, I suppose.

 

Having that opinion is fine.  Expressing it as an opinion is also fine.  Declaring it as a fact is wrong.

 

[vincec]

6 hours ago, nucci said:

what if you don't believe in Jesus?

Then he should have said that he doesn’t think the answer is acceptable because he doesn’t believe in Jesus.

 

i wonder how that would have gone... ??

[whatdrought]

19 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

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. 

 

I don’t mind the question. I haven’t spent a ton of time with those within the movement myself (except for some interactions with some vocal proponents who may be more on the extreme side.) 

 

I personally struggle to support organizations with Marxist roots, and I have some disagreements with their messaging and some of the narratives they push.

 

That being said, I wholeheartedly believe that black lives matter. But it’s hard to say that and not support the organization and movement BLM in today’s world. 

[4merper4mer]

1 minute ago, whatdrought said:

 

I don’t mind the question. I haven’t spent a ton of time with those within the movement myself (except for some interactions with some vocal proponents who may be more on the extreme side.) 

 

I personally struggle to support organizations with Marxist roots, and I have some disagreements with their messaging and some of the narratives they push.

 

That being said, I wholeheartedly believe that black lives matter. But it’s hard to say that and not support the organization and movement BLM in today’s world. 

 

 

If there was an organization named "Ice Cream is Yummy" and they advocated abolishing banks, would it mean that people who supported banks hate ice cream?

[Doc]

1 hour ago, NoSaint said:

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.

I could assume what color people.  But what I was waiting for at the time those private texts were made public was someone, anyone, of color (doesn’t matter which) to come forward and say that Fromm had treated him/her poorly, much less with racist intent. That never happened. For me, actions speak louder than words. 
 

Is he a closet racist?  I couldn’t tell you. If he is hopefully he’s learned something from this.  That’s all anyone can ask.

 

 

[1ManRaid]

7 hours ago, eball said:

Eh, I think Fromm’s response was questionable also. Why not just say we need to love all people equally? He makes it sound as though the only people capable of this have to be Jesus freaks first. 

Even as an atheist, I have no problem with what he said.

[Mike in Horseheads]

The guy sent some stupid tweets when he was a teenager and this thread has turned into a joke. Is it so ***** hard to just move on and hope he gets smarter?

[SCBills]

1 hour ago, NoSaint said:

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. 

I know you weren’t asking me, but ill chime in..
 

I went to a protest in Atlanta with a friend of mine who is black.  I think Black Lives Matter, the movement, is a great thing.  BLM, the organization isn’t exactly something I can get behind. 
 

It’s not so much due to their “What we believe” as I don’t think it’s all that radical, although I’d have to see exactly what they mean by “dismantling the nuclear family”.  I think there’s some validity to the overall concept as many black children grow up without a father, therefore we should encourage “village care”, but fathers involvement in the kids lives should be the goal at the end of the day, not something we just throw our hands up at and “dismantle”. 

Ultimately my issue with BLM, the organization, is due to what prominent leaders have been saying off the cuff, separate from their manifesto.. along with what many of their prominent leaders stand for politically.   

 

Edited August 8, 2020 by SCBills

[NoSaint]

7 minutes ago, SCBills said:

I know you weren’t asking me, but ill chime in..
 

I went to a protest in Atlanta with a friend of mine who is black.  I think Black Lives Matter, the movement, is a great thing.  BLM, the organization isn’t exactly something I can get behind. 
 

It’s not so much due to their “What we believe” as I don’t think it’s all that radical, although I’d have to see exactly what they mean by “dismantling the nuclear family”.  I think there’s some validity to the overall concept as many black children grow up without a father, therefore we should encourage “village care”, but fathers involvement in the kids lives should be the goal at the end of the day, not something we just throw our hands up at and “dismantle”. 

Ultimately my issue with BLM, the organization, is due to what prominent leaders have been saying off the cuff, separate from their manifesto.. along with what many of their prominent leaders stand for politically.   

 

I’d clarify for those less familiar that the full quote is: We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

 

 

I think that’s far different than dismantling the nuclear family and instead is saying they are building stronger communities where success is less dependent on having the standard family and can be achieved with or without.

 

ill agree I’m not 110% all in for every value or comment but also think some is a bit misrepresented too

Edited August 8, 2020 by NoSaint

[GoBills808]

7 minutes ago, SCBills said:

I know you weren’t asking me, but ill chime in..
 

I went to a protest in Atlanta with a friend of mine who is black.  I think Black Lives Matter, the movement, is a great thing.  BLM, the organization isn’t exactly something I can get behind. 
 

It’s not so much due to their “What we believe” as I don’t think it’s all that radical, although I’d have to see exactly what they mean by “dismantling the nuclear family”.  I think there’s some validity to the overall concept as many black children grow up without a father, therefore we should encourage “village care”, but fathers involvement in the kids lives should be the goal at the end of the day, not something we just throw our hands up at and “dismantle”. 

Ultimately my issue with BLM, the organization, is due to what prominent leaders have been saying off the cuff, separate from their manifesto.. along with what many of their prominent leaders stand for politically.   

 

Maybe you should read it again.

2 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I’d clarify for those less familiar that the full quote is: We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

 

 

I think that’s far different than dismantling the nuclear family and instead is saying they are building stronger communities where success is less dependent on having the standard family and can be achieved with or without.

 

ill agree I’m not 110% all in for every value or comment but also think some is a bit misrepresented too

It's misrepresented a little too often.

[whatdrought]

48 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

 

 

If there was an organization named "Ice Cream is Yummy" and they advocated abolishing banks, would it mean that people who supported banks hate ice cream?

Im not sure I understand your point? 

[JoPoy88]

I’m sure someone else has already raised this question, but if not: Would you rather have Rodak back? 
 

I think we all know and share the same answer to that one.

[LeviF]

3 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:

I’m sure someone else has already raised this question, but if not: Would you rather have Rodak back? 
 

I think we all know and share the same answer to that one.

lol no Marcel still far superior in every way

[SCBills]

17 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I’d clarify for those less familiar that the full quote is: We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

 

 

I think that’s far different than dismantling the nuclear family and instead is saying they are building stronger communities where success is less dependent on having the standard family and can be achieved with or without.

 

ill agree I’m not 110% all in for every value or comment but also think some is a bit misrepresented too

I don’t think I misrepresented it.. I know exactly what it says but paraphrased.  I still feel the exact same way.  The fact “fathers” doesn’t even appear in the statement isn’t what I’m here for.  It’s clearly intentionally worded.. they didn’t just forget to add that. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

At least he’s not Rodak. 
 

[4merper4mer]

37 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

Im not sure I understand your point? 

"Black lives matter" is a truthful statement but the organization with that name is full of bad ideas.  An organization with the name "Ice cream is yummy" could also have bad ideas.  

[NoSaint]

25 minutes ago, SCBills said:

I don’t think I misrepresented it.. I know exactly what it says but paraphrased.  I still feel the exact same way.  The fact “fathers” doesn’t even appear in the statement isn’t what I’m here for.  It’s clearly intentionally worded.. they didn’t just forget to add that. 

If you read what it says and summarize it as “dismantling the nuclear family” I’m going to go ahead and opt out of further discussion. I’ve got better things to do with my time then to argue online with someone that is so willfully mischaracterizing a statement.

[SCBills]

5 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

If you read what it says and summarize it as “dismantling the nuclear family” I’m going to go ahead and opt out of further discussion. I’ve got better things to do with my time then to argue online with someone that is so willfully mischaracterizing a statement.

You’re way too sensitive about semantics to be open to discussion, or so it seems.  I’ll acquiesce for exactly how it’s written, as you linked, and reiterated my issue with wanting to see what that part, (the whole paragraph) specifically, means.  I answered you as thoughtfully as possible while stating I partially understand where they’re coming from on village care and you’re fixated on a paraphrase.  The term “fathers” was left out intentionally and I have a problem with just giving up on the idea of promoting fatherhood (and mother/father units) in black communities. 
 

 

Edited August 8, 2020 by SCBills

[JoPoy88]

17 minutes ago, Gene1973 said:

 

We'll see, think this reporter just showed some real ugliness.

More or less “ugly” than Fromm’s tweet in question? Let me guess, to you that was “no big deal.” But enlighten me new guy

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

31 minutes ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

At least he’s not Rodak. 
 

haha— I was going to post the exact same thing.  

Anyone in the world > Rodak.

[Sig1Hunter]

23 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:

More or less “ugly” than Fromm’s tweet in question? Let me guess, to you that was “no big deal.” But enlighten me new guy

It wasn’t a tweet. It was a private text message sent to someone else. Presumably it was a joke and in poor taste. Are your text messages squeaky clean? Or can you understand guys make stupid jokes in private that have a different luster when exposed to the public at large?

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

46 minutes ago, Gene1973 said:

 

We'll see, think this reporter just showed some real ugliness.

have you looked out the window?  
 

the world is ugly.  
 

The subject was broached. 
 

much has changed since the last time it was spoken of

Edited August 8, 2020 by SlimShady'sSpaceForce

[JohnNord]

I really like Marcel - he seems like a real good guy.  But you could tell that he was extremely offended. by Fromm’s comments in the text messages back in June.  
 

In terms of Fromm, he might be correct that his answer could have directly addressed some of the concerns that critics like Marcel said about his text messages.  I’m guessing that Fromm didn’t want to to go anywhere near making a public comment on the topic of racism for fear of saying the wrong thing.

Edited August 8, 2020 by JohnNord

[4merper4mer]

8 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:

More or less “ugly” than Fromm’s tweet in question? Let me guess, to you that was “no big deal.” But enlighten me new guy

I agree the anti-gun left wing opinions expressed by Fromm were bad.  I also didn't like that he dismissed people based on race and economics.  Even if he was joking, which he probably was, it was a bad joke IMO.  

 

I guess I'll cut him a little slack....not much...on the race stuff because he was young.  I'll cut him more slack on the left wing junk because kids tend to be ignorant about that kind of stuff.

[GoBills808]

Just now, 4merper4mer said:

I agree the anti-gun left wing opinions expressed by Fromm were bad.  I also didn't like that he dismissed people based on race and economics.  Even if he was joking, which he probably was, it was a bad joke IMO.  

 

I guess I'll cut him a little slack....not much...on the race stuff because he was young.  I'll cut him more slack on the left wing junk because kids tend to be ignorant about that kind of stuff.

Yup Fromm and the NRA, just a bunch of left wing anti-gunners.

[JohnNord]

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

 

This

 

I think he was trying to avoid the topic all together 

[4merper4mer]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

Yup Fromm and the NRA, just a bunch of left wing anti-gunners.

Huh?  Fromm's text pretty much implied he was a gun control advocate.

[Sig1Hunter]

2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Yup Fromm and the NRA, just a bunch of left wing anti-gunners.

Well, Fromms statement in the text message aligns more with a leftist POV  than the NRAs.

[GoBills808]

Just now, 4merper4mer said:

Huh?  Fromm's text pretty much implied he was a gun control advocate.

Oh, you weren't aware that the NRA also favors race-based gun control legislation?

[JoPoy88]

Just now, Sig1Hunter said:

It wasn’t a tweet. It was a private text message sent to someone else. Presumably it was a joke and in poor taste. Are your text messages squeaky clean? Or can you understand guys make stupid jokes in private that have a different luster when exposed to the public at large?

yes a text not a tweet, my mistake. My question to the other poster still stands, but you can answer it too if you like. 
 

and yes, I get that stupid jokes get made in private and that’s unlikely to change. No problem with that. But private comments (jokingly or not) invariably are more honest than public statements. So I think what MLJ and other reporters were trying to tease out of Fromm were the reasons why he thinks like that, jokes like that, and what exactly he’s learned since someone in that private conversation decided to dime him in and leak his “joke.” Fromm’s answer was a simple, vague, platitudinous non-answer about god and “loving each other.” Which is what we’ve all come to expect from pro athletes, but still.

 

All that said, the correct response from MLJ would have been to press Fromm and rephrase his question to give Fromm a chance to elaborate. Instead, MLJ went and sniped him on twitter after the fact. That isn’t cool either, but I wouldn’t characterize it as “ugly.”

[GoBills808]

3 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Well, Fromms statement in the text message aligns more with a leftist POV  than the NRAs.

It actually reads like the Mulford Act

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agree. He isn't. Playing the religion card however is a cop out. 

I’ve seen this posted a few times here.  
 

Would you be willing to share what you mean by this?   What, exactly is he copping out from?  Did he not want to share his stories of  personal growth because it was just that-intensely personal and private?  Or, are you of the mind he experienced no personal growth at all, and thus had nothing to share and chose not to be honest?  
 

I suppose I’m struck by the fact that a young man who nearly decapitated his career before it began would ever speak to any reporter, ever.  There is very little upside for him.  

[4merper4mer]

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

Oh, you weren't aware that the NRA also favors race-based gun control legislation?

My recollection was that Fromm implied nobody should have guns...then joked....well maybe elite white people.  I took that to mean most whites would also be excluded.  Elite is definitely a qualifying word.

 

And that NRA comment begs for proof but this is probably the wrong thread.

[Sig1Hunter]

12 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:

yes a text not a tweet, my mistake. My question to the other poster still stands, but you can answer it too if you like. 
 

and yes, I get that stupid jokes get made in private and that’s unlikely to change. No problem with that. But private comments (jokingly or not) invariably are more honest than public statements. So I think what MLJ and other reporters were trying to tease out of Fromm were the reasons why he thinks like that, jokes like that, and what exactly he’s learned since someone in that private conversation decided to dime him in and leak his “joke.” Fromm’s answer was a simple, vague, platitudinous non-answer about god and “loving each other.” Which is what we’ve all come to expect from pro athletes, but still.

 

All that said, the correct response from MLJ would have been to press Fromm and rephrase his question to give Fromm a chance to elaborate. Instead, MLJ went and sniped him on twitter after the fact. That isn’t cool either, but I wouldn’t characterize it as “ugly.”

I don’t disagree with your post, in general. I don’t have an issue with the question from the reporter, and i don’t have an issue with the answer by Fromm. I only have an issue with the reporter making the judgement on what is and what is not acceptable. 
 

I do think private text messages should be viewed as such. In this case, the woman exposed the text exchange because she felt that Fromm’s career was built on the backs of black people (ummmm what?) and he was not being vocal on the BLM movement. So, because she believes these things (and he doesn’t?), she felt it right to expose him as a racist. The text does no such thing. It only exposes her as a card carrying member of the thought police. Ironically, her identity has remained confidential. I mean, she even laughed at his joke. Wouldn’t that make her a racist too?

Edited August 8, 2020 by Sig1Hunter

[Mike in Horseheads]

20 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

My recollection was that Fromm implied nobody should have guns...then joked....well maybe elite white people.  I took that to mean most whites would also be excluded.  Elite is definitely a qualifying word.

 

And that NRA comment begs for proof but this is probably the wrong thread.

Why is it the wrong thread? Everything else but the kitchen sink has been in here?

[JoPoy88]

10 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

I don’t disagree with your post, in general. I don’t have an issue with the question from the reporter, and i don’t have an issue with the answer by Fromm. I only have an issue with the reporter making the judgement on what is and what is not acceptable. 
 

I do think private text messages should be viewed as such. In this case, the woman exposed the text exchange because she felt that Fromm’s career was built on the backs of black people (ummmm what?) and he was not being vocal on the BLM movement. So, because she believes these things (and he doesn’t?), she felt it right to expose him as a racist. The text does no such thing. It only exposes her as a card carrying member of the thought police. Ironically, her identity has remained confidential. I mean, she even laughed at his joke. Wouldn’t that make her a racist too?

i agree with all of this to a certain extent. MLJ would have served himself better if he would have explained why he thought Fromm’s answer was unacceptable instead of just stating it as if it was self-evident. (MLJ did elaborate a bit later on in a response to Jason Whitlock on twitter, fwiw.) But again, part of the reason athletes get away with non-answers like Fromm’s ALL THE TIME is because reporters do not press these guys ever for fear of public rebuke, lost access, or whatever else and MLJ seems guilty of that today.

 

as to the leaker and her motivations, I don’t know them for certain, but I doubt they were noble.