The Everything NFL Punter Thread - 2014/2015 Season

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tell that to the 40% of the NFL fanbase that is female that is currently up in arms. 2 games sends the wrong message.
You can't seriously think that 40% of NFL fans are female. If you want to say that 40% of attendees at football games are females, then that is fine. However, it is highly unlikely that all of them give a shit about what's going on or care about any of it.

Don't even attempt to back this argument up with "Super Bowl viewership" either, because we both know that doesn't mean shit either.

Here is a fun thought to consider:

If you asked everybody at the hall of fame game "Who is Ray Rice?", what percentage of males would know him? What percentage of females would know him?

I'm just going to matter of factly state that there would be a large discrepancy in the percentages here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^ Well put it this way: the male half would know him as a pretty solid RB, the female half would know him as a wife beater.

Not that I disagree, estimating 40% of fans as being female is pretty high. Attendance, sure, but actual fans? Nah. But overall, there have been far more odd and disagreeable punishments handed out over domestic violence.
 

Mr.E

unban me from Discord
is a Two-Time Past SPL Champion
Are you saying that public figures get treated more harshly by the justice system?
No, they get punished by their employers or constituents. Pay attention. ;[ If Bob from accounting hits his wife, lays some dude out at the bar or breaks into his neighbor's house, do you think H&R Block gives a shit? They don't. But if Johnny McSuperstar does those things, he's getting his pay docked for "poorly representing Sports League." Even if he didn't actually do those things and was merely in the vicinity of the crime being committed or falsely accused by some asshole dead-set on tarnishing his reputation, he's getting his pay docked for poorly representing Sports League.

It's not fair to them. (And yeah, it might be difficult to garner sympathy for the rich ones, for all their other advantages, but not every public figure is loaded.) I also think the problem is self-correcting, so there's no need for extralegal punishments. Rice doesn't really need punished at all (by the NFL) for his actions. He may, however, still suffer the consequences if it tarnished his reputation to the degree that people stopped coming to Baltimore Ravens games and buying their merch. If not, it shouldn't bother them.

And yeah, you could say it's costing the NFL money and as such, Rice should be punished... But that's only because society expected him to be punished. I just wish the culture was different, perhaps amend my previous statement to "the NFL should not be the fucking morality police." They shouldn't have to be. Is it not enough that he was legally punished and socially earned the ire of many an NFL fan? It hasn't affected his ability to do his job, so his employer shouldn't also be expected to punish him. Unfortunately, it is and it did. But let's say he want to jail instead of rehab and started missing practice? They would be well within their right to punish him!

The legal system doesn't care for your fame anyway, only your fortune.
Tell that to the 40% of the NFL fanbase that is female that is currently up in arms. 2 games sends the wrong message.
I'll tell them the same thing I would tell any anti-Redskins (the team name) bandwagoner. Get the fuck over yourselves.

That's a bad analogy. The Redskins haters are so much worse since the origin of the term is arguably not even derogatory (depending on which sources you want to believe) and even a majority of Native Americans don't give a shit. At least there's a good reason for people to dislike Ray Rice but yeah, shouldn't be the NFL's problem. *shrug* It's a social and legal problem, where he's already received his due.
 
Last edited:
The Redskins haters are so much worse since the origin of the term is arguably not even derogatory (depending on which sources you want to believe) and even a majority of Native Americans don't give a shit.
Well, that's just 100% wrong.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/lindseyadler/native-americans-offended-by-racial-slur

Also, the 2004 poll where "90% of Native Americans didn't find it offensive" used this question to get the results:

"The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive or doesn’t it bother you?"

That doesn't even make any sense. How the fuck do you reply to a question like that?
 
Last edited:

akaFila

butterscotch love
As much as I'd like to be optimistic about this upcoming season, the Cowboys defense is simply terribad. Any hope there has been is slowly disappearing with the flood of injuries. Inb4 the vast majority of the schedule has their way with this D any which way they please.

On a positive note, this Dallas offense is a shoe in for claiming a top 5 spot this season. Top 3, or even #1, is a very real possibility.
Inb4 #1 Offense and #32 Defense.
 
Broncos D stepping up. Broncos O could get something going on against #1 Hawks DEF. First Seachickens loss after 9 games of invincibility (curious fact - last loss was to Tebow's Broncos).
 
So...why did the Niners trade a 6th round pick for Gabbert again? They'd have been just as well off spending it on a developmental QB. Hyde looked decent though.
 
Because look at what happened to weeden. Since he left a bad team he looks great. Gabbert had a chance to turn it around. And to think the jags could have drafted jj watt over plain gabbert.
 

DM

Ce soir, on va danser.
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnus
Yeah, Justin already addressed the Washington team name arguments, but really... anyone arguing FOR the team name is actively ignoring both historical and present days facts.

You can't seriously think that 40% of NFL fans are female. If you want to say that 40% of attendees at football games are females, then that is fine. However, it is highly unlikely that all of them give a shit about what's going on or care about any of it.
That's the number that the NFL itself uses. They could very well be making that up, but I'm using it because they do.

Don't even attempt to back this argument up with "Super Bowl viewership" either, because we both know that doesn't mean shit either.
Man, even I don't watch the Super Bowl.

Here is a fun thought to consider:

If you asked everybody at the hall of fame game "Who is Ray Rice?", what percentage of males would know him? What percentage of females would know him?

I'm just going to matter of factly state that there would be a large discrepancy in the percentages here.
Like Shinryu said, everyone knows him NOW. But two months ago, yes, I'm sure you'd be right about who knows him more. But why should that matter?

Because look at what happened to weeden. Since he left a bad team he looks great.
What? Weeden was the REASON that team was bad.
 

Mr.E

unban me from Discord
is a Two-Time Past SPL Champion
Well, that's just 100% wrong.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/lindseyadler/native-americans-offended-by-racial-slur

Also, the 2004 poll where "90% of Native Americans didn't find it offensive" used this question to get the results: "The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive or doesn’t it bother you?" That doesn't even make any sense. How the fuck do you reply to a question like that?
"Yes" I find that name offensive, "yes" it bothers me. The question is badly worded but it doesn't seem to be ambiguous if you think it through.

The majority of sources (but not all) believe that the term "redskin" wasn't coined as an offensive term. But I feel like as this crap keeps popping up in the news about how oh-so-offensive it is and how Snyder needs to change the name of the team, the average neutral or indifferent person (i.e. almost everyone) eventually starts deciding to get offended about it too. I forget the term for that phenomenon but that whole "you keep hearing something and eventually you start to accept it as truth, even if it's false" thing.

Of course, things change. "Negro" used to be politically correct and "black" was offensive, these days it's mostly the other way around. But I don't anyone calling for the United Negro College Fund to change their name, which incidentally is less old than the Washington Redskins. In this context, I don't see how anyone can argue the term is offensive. Even if society has evolved to the point of considering it offensive as a generality in the last few years, the team name is over 80 years old. It was never meant to be offensive and nobody considered it offensive for 60-70 years. It didn't suddenly become offensive, people just decided to start being offended by it. Big difference.
 
Last edited:

DM

Ce soir, on va danser.
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnus
The majority of sources (but not all) believe that the term "redskin" wasn't coined as an offensive term.
I'm willing to bet most of those sources are white people. To the victors go the spoils, including getting to write the histories.

But I feel like as this crap keeps popping up in the news about how oh-so-offensive it is and how Snyder needs to change the name of the team, the average neutral or indifferent person (i.e. almost everyone) eventually starts deciding to get offended about it too. I forget the term for that phenomenon but that whole "you keep hearing something and eventually you start to accept it as truth, even if it's false" thing.

In this context
, I don't see how anyone can argue the term is offensive. Even if society has evolved to the point of considering it offensive as a generality in the last few years, the team name is over 80 years old. It was never meant to be offensive and nobody considered it offensive for 60-70 years. It didn't suddenly become offensive, people just decided to start being offended by it. Big difference.
Wrong, on every single count. The team's founder, George Preston Marshall, was a notorious bigot, and is remembered for steadfastly refusing to allow blacks to play for his team.

Again, I will refer back to my original point: the white people got to write the history books. To steal a line from George Carlin (albeit about a different subject, but still entirely applicable): "Have you tried asking a Native American how they feel about this? I'm betting no, because we've made them pretty hard to find these days." You don't get to tell them what they want to be called; and using a bogus survey doesn't change the fact that the Indians have never really had a political voice. Now, they are making a push for themselves, for their pride, and for their culture, and I for one am not going to sit here, as a WHITE AMERICAN, and tell them to "grow up and take it, we mean no disrespect."

Here's an idea: next time you see an Indian in person (doubtful for most), call him a Redskin to his face and see what happens. If you you have enough unbroken bones to type, let me know that I was wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sam

Mr.E

unban me from Discord
is a Two-Time Past SPL Champion
I wouldn't call a Native a redskin to their face unless they asked me to do so or we were buddy-buddy and I knew it was cool. I wouldn't walk up to a random black guy I don't know either and say sup nigga. Context. I'd also hope not to end up with any broken bones. That's a person who deserves to be insulted for being a stupid brute regardless of their racial/ethnic background.

If you choose to believe the minority of sources because hurr white people aren't qualified to write about non-white people, that's your prerogative. *shrug* (And let's face it, the sources stating otherwise are probably white people too anyway.) At any rate, I'm certainly receptive to not directly calling people by names and terms which offend them. I don't want a group of Mexicans pointing and laughing at this dumb gringo either. I wouldn't give a shit if Washington changed their team nickname to the Gringos, though. The only offense I might take is making us look bad when they suck.
 
Last edited:
Indian in person (doubtful for most), call him a Redskin to his face and see what happens. If you you have enough unbroken bones to type, let me know that I was wrong.
I'm sure his reply would be something to the tune of, "What do you mean redskin??? I'm a brownskin." I'm still confused why people still refer to Native Americans as Indians since there are actually tons of Indians around here. It gets really confusing.
 

Texas Cloverleaf

This user has a custom title
is a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
See that's the problem man, everybody's mixing. One day we're going to to wake up and we'll all just be some shade of beige.
 
What? Weeden was the REASON that team was bad.
Not really. The Cowboys have better coaching. The Browns were mediocre to the core and dragged weeden with them. It happens all the time. Look at Trent and how much he struggled with them.
 
I don't want a group of Mexicans pointing and laughing at this dumb gringo either. I wouldn't give a shit if Washington changed their team nickname to the Gringos, though. The only offense I might take is making us look bad when they suck.
gringo isn't necessarily a derogatory term, it depends on the context.

 

WaterBomb

Two kids no brane
is a Forum Moderatoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Moderator
Not really. The Cowboys have better coaching. The Browns were mediocre to the core and dragged weeden with them. It happens all the time. Look at Trent and how much he struggled with them.
Exactly! Look at how awesome Trent turned out after he was traded ^_^
 

DM

Ce soir, on va danser.
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnus
Well your post literally said "next time you see an Indian person" which literally refers to people of India. That is 100% confusing if you are trying to refer to a Native American rather than a person from the nation of India...

Anyway, football. Go Panthers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top