is that many, perhaps most, of the players for whom you root do not think as you do on many issues. The same is true of sportswriters, whose indignation generally reflects that of their class rather than their customers. What Tyree said strikes me as wrongheaded and pretty galling, but as I said yesterday it's a standard hell in a handbasket spiel that would probably have as much, maybe more, currency among those in the locker room who grew up in the South and the Midwest or who went to particular denominations as the sort of opinions that most of us either agree with or find unobjectionable. When a guy involved in a double murder mentors young players it passes without much more than snark, when a guy with a clean record but some anachronistic public pronouncements gets hired to do the same everyone hits the fucking roof.
Who isn't acknowledging that? I don't think Tyree is a bad person the way I think someone like Ray Lewis is. And I think he would make a fantastic mentor for many - however, his comments potentially prohibit him from being a mentor to certain players, which is why I think the hire is odd given the position.
Jay in Toronto: IMO those statements, if made by Tyree or anyone
else, would be a disqualification for employment because not based on any biblical statement, which I assume is the basis for Tyree's beliefs and statements.
There is NO basis in the Bible for ANY anti-semitic or anti-Arab or anti-Muslim statements.
If someone doesn't believe in the Bible or that the Bible does not enjoin homosexual acts or that it's an incorrect interpretation that homosexuality is sinful, I'm OK with that belief. But, I can also understand if Tyree believes that the Bible prohibits homosexual activity. I also have no problem if he publicly professes his belief either as the free exercise of religion or of speech.
RE: The fact that many of you don't want to acknowledge...
is that many, perhaps most, of the players for whom you root do not think as you do on many issues. The same is true of sportswriters, whose indignation generally reflects that of their class rather than their customers. What Tyree said strikes me as wrongheaded and pretty galling, but as I said yesterday it's a standard hell in a handbasket spiel that would probably have as much, maybe more, currency among those in the locker room who grew up in the South and the Midwest or who went to particular denominations as the sort of opinions that most of us either agree with or find unobjectionable. When a guy involved in a double murder mentors young players it passes without much more than snark, when a guy with a clean record but some anachronistic public pronouncements gets hired to do the same everyone hits the fucking roof.
And a staggering number of coaches and players would rather have a player/teammate who was involved in a double murder than be gay. So maybe that's all the more reason to fill positions like these with people who can help break the cycle and help these guys grow out of their old mindsets.
Eh, we're getting pretty far afield from the point of the topic. It's a tone deaf hire at exactly the wrong time.
RE: The fact that many of you don't want to acknowledge...
is that many, perhaps most, of the players for whom you root do not think as you do on many issues.
It's not about all that. It's about whether or not this hire of this guy by this team at this time was a bad move or not.
Quote:
when a guy with a clean record but some anachronistic public pronouncements gets hired to do the same everyone hits the fucking roof.
He actually doesn't have a clean record. In fact, he's kind of a classic case of jailhouse conversion. That notwithstanding, this isn't a thread about Ray Lewis, because most of us aren't big fans of ESPN. (Though I'm sure threads crapping on Ray Lewis are just an archive search away.)
Here. Here. Being considered 3/5 a person should be enough.
Now there's a leap!
Sorry. What's the 'entire agenda', then? Which rights that the rest of us have are you cool with homosexuals being denied? How 'normal' are you comfortable with David Tyree's children thinking gay people are?
Ok vibe, an example. On the thread about Sam and "The Kiss", a number of posters very timidly and almost apologetic, confessed that even though they wish him well and are for gay rights, watching the kiss made them uncomfortable. These posters were vilified as homophobic, scum, etc. Perhaps it would not be unnatural for them to feel a bit put off, no? You have never seen a post from me suggesting witholding of any rights. I have however pointed out the complete intolerance from the so called tolerant and hateful name calling. THAT's what I'm talking about with "the whole agenda".
1953, a NAACP member in Alabama would have feared to speak out publicly in favor school integration not because they would be prosecuted, but because vigilante thugs would have physically attacked or killed them. I'm not saying that the Tyree controversy and this hypothetical aren't close to the same in terms of gravity, but I think they both involve suppression of freedom of speech by non-governmental means. And I bet you agree.
Hence, suppressing freedom of speech is an issue if Tyree's would be denied a position based on his political views.
This is really a semantic point, but I'm tired of reading that freedom of speech can't be a factor if the government isn't involved in the suppression. That's incorrect.
Freedom of speech absolutely does not give you freedom from the consequence of that speech.
Sure, if it's something you support- it sucks that there are negative consequences to what you say (the NAACP example...or your Tyree example). I'm sorry, though- there are consequences and as long as they are not illegal there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. That's kinda how the whole "freedom" thing you're all worried about losing actually works.
Cam - We're going to have to agree to disagree. I believe it is very unhealthy for our political system if espousing political views that were fairly mainstream just a few years ago is a disqualifier for anything like Tyree's new job. Just like we need tolerance for gays, we need tolerance for people who take a strict view of their religious rules.
He's in the private working world. He can and should be accountable for the things he says, even if it means he is fired or certain companies don't hire him.
Ok vibe, an example. On the thread about Sam and "The Kiss", a number of posters very timidly and almost apologetic, confessed that even though they wish him well and are for gay rights, watching the kiss made them uncomfortable. These posters were vilified as homophobic, scum, etc. Perhaps it would not be unnatural for them to feel a bit put off, no? You have never seen a post from me suggesting witholding of any rights. I have however pointed out the complete intolerance from the so called tolerant and hateful name calling. THAT's what I'm talking about with "the whole agenda".
So the 'entire agenda', for you, is mostly about gay people and PDA? You want to be able to hold onto your right to be 'put off'? Without people suggesting you're homophobic? Is that your agenda?
If I've gotten that right, I'm still not clear what the 'gay agenda' is? Beyond wanting the right to be treated equally? Except, of course, where it makes you uncomfortable.
to the extent that people are upset, are you upset at the prospect that he would alienate the next Michael Sam or that you don't like someone who says or thinks what he does working for the team? The latter is fine and understandable, I'm just pointing out that a lot of the guys we cheer for may not say so in as public a manner as Tyree did but plenty of them hold opinions quite different from most of ours. What Tyree said a couple years ago, anachronistic though it might have been, probably has little or nothing to do with his ability to relate to young athletes.
He's in the private working world. He can and should be accountable for the things he says, even if it means he is fired or certain companies don't hire him.
Agreed. And we should be free to be critical of those companies and their policies
Carl in CT: If we delete all this discussion, then we should delete
Why should we care if someones gay or what someone else's thoughts are about homosexuality? It has no bearing on the game.
This isn't about football, and Tyree's job description isn't just about football. He's not being hired to be a position coach. He's being handed the responsibility of being a counselor and advisor to young men and their families.
RE: Carl in CT: If we delete all this discussion, then we should delete
I'm fine with Tyree in another role with the team. This specific role seems odd.
On the contrary, this is about the only role I could see him in. It's not a "public face" type of role (we rarely if ever saw Charles Way), it's a behind the scenes, mentorship role.
to the extent that people are upset, are you upset at the prospect that he would alienate the next Michael Sam or that you don't like someone who says or thinks what he does working for the team? The latter is fine and understandable, I'm just pointing out that a lot of the guys we cheer for may not say so in as public a manner as Tyree did but plenty of them hold opinions quite different from most of ours. What Tyree said a couple years ago, anachronistic though it might have been, probably has little or nothing to do with his ability to relate to young athletes.
I have no problem with Tyree working for the team in general. It's him in this specific role that is troublesome.
I'm fine with Tyree in another role with the team. This specific role seems odd.
On the contrary, this is about the only role I could see him in. It's not a "public face" type of role (we rarely if ever saw Charles Way), it's a behind the scenes, mentorship role.
and you don't view his stance on gays as being troublesome for someone in a mentorship role?
I'd prefer to have my mentors at least have the appearance of having an open mind on all subjects, not come with a strong bias on a particularly hot button current social topic.
I now want Tyree promoted to HC in waiting after this thread.
You can't prevent Tyree from a job because of his views on the same premise you can't discriminate against gays out of some fear their thinking or lifestyle will hinder them from doing a job.
Tyree will be under the microscope now but I wish him well.
This could not be more incorrect.
Wrong. Just because you don't like the truth of it doesn't mean it's incorrect.
Wuphat: Please.
Bobby Epps : 2:00 pm : link : reply
Once Eric allowed Graziano's article to be published on BBI, he should allow reasonable comment on it, whether critical or approval comment.
This has nothing to do with freedom of the press, though.
if there is an instance of a gay player (openly or otherwise) and Tyree can't put his beliefs to the side show him the door, but I just don't buy that because of Michael Sam suddenly someone's ability to relate to gay athletes (within the whole of the NFL openly gay athletes present number 1) becomes central to the job description of a mentor.
Selective libertarianism.
kickerpa16 : 1:50 pm : link : reply
He's in the private working world. He can and should be accountable for the things he says, even if it means he is fired or certain companies don't hire him.
Cam - We're going to have to agree to disagree. I believe it is very unhealthy for our political system if espousing political views that were fairly mainstream just a few years ago is a disqualifier for anything like Tyree's new job. Just like we need tolerance for gays, we need tolerance for people who take a strict view of their religious rules.
Who is disqualifying him for this job? Nobody here can do that. Only the Giants can.
Nobody can make the Giants disqualify him. What part of that do you not understand?
It's nice that he does allow the rule to be bent at times, but no, he's under no obligation to allow dissenting opinion.
Eric could, if he so chose to, allow only comments supporting Tyree to be voiced. It's his website, his rules. Freedom of speech and the press have no bearing here whatsoever.
if there is an instance of a gay player (openly or otherwise) and Tyree can't put his beliefs to the side show him the door, but I just don't buy that because of Michael Sam suddenly someone's ability to relate to gay athletes (within the whole of the NFL openly gay athletes present number 1) becomes central to the job description of a mentor.
He's already said he'd trade his greatest moment in his professional life to prevent gay marriage, but you think he'll put that belief to the side for the sake of this job (that he earned because of said moment)?
Ok vibe, an example. On the thread about Sam and "The Kiss", a number of posters very timidly and almost apologetic, confessed that even though they wish him well and are for gay rights, watching the kiss made them uncomfortable. These posters were vilified as homophobic, scum, etc. Perhaps it would not be unnatural for them to feel a bit put off, no? You have never seen a post from me suggesting witholding of any rights. I have however pointed out the complete intolerance from the so called tolerant and hateful name calling. THAT's what I'm talking about with "the whole agenda".
So the 'entire agenda', for you, is mostly about gay people and PDA? You want to be able to hold onto your right to be 'put off'? Without people suggesting you're homophobic? Is that your agenda?
If I've gotten that right, I'm still not clear what the 'gay agenda' is? Beyond wanting the right to be treated equally? Except, of course, where it makes you uncomfortable.
Well vibe, now you're getting beyond silly. I never mentioned the "gay agenda" ... your words. My words related to the agenda of the extreme views here and elsewhere. When being 100% for gay rights is not enough. When you must apologize for not being comfortable watching a gay kiss, and that's not enough. Sorry, but though I am for gay marriage and other rights, I also try to understand other's views and while I may not agree with them, I don't vilify them and call them hateful names when their views appear ignorant but not hateful. Apparently that is not enough for your agenda, so when it gets this silly there's no point in continuing, I'm done.
"Great meeting today guys. I hope you enjoyed todays lesson about managing your money and to be prepared for people coming out of the woodwork looking for a handout. Tomorrow's lesson is about how it's not right to be a gay and how you shouldn't marry dudes"
Graziano is free to write anything he likes. Eric, of course, can print or delete anything he wants because freedom of speech and press apply to the Government.
BUT, if Eric picks and chooses among newspaper articles covering the Giants, printing some and deleting others, wouldn't that make you uncomfortable?
Eric has the right to pick and choose but I wouldn't like it. When I raised the issue of freedom of the press, it was my short-hand for all of the above.
I now want Tyree promoted to HC in waiting after this thread.
You can't prevent Tyree from a job because of his views on the same premise you can't discriminate against gays out of some fear their thinking or lifestyle will hinder them from doing a job.
Tyree will be under the microscope now but I wish him well.
This could not be more incorrect.
Wrong. Just because you don't like the truth of it doesn't mean it's incorrect.
Its pretty clear you don't know what you are talking about. The premises aren't at all the same, but its pretty clear you won't be able to understand why.
Who isn't acknowledging that? I don't think Tyree is a bad person the way I think someone like Ray Lewis is. And I think he would make a fantastic mentor for many - however, his comments potentially prohibit him from being a mentor to certain players, which is why I think the hire is odd given the position.
There is NO basis in the Bible for ANY anti-semitic or anti-Arab or anti-Muslim statements.
If someone doesn't believe in the Bible or that the Bible does not enjoin homosexual acts or that it's an incorrect interpretation that homosexuality is sinful, I'm OK with that belief. But, I can also understand if Tyree believes that the Bible prohibits homosexual activity. I also have no problem if he publicly professes his belief either as the free exercise of religion or of speech.
And a staggering number of coaches and players would rather have a player/teammate who was involved in a double murder than be gay. So maybe that's all the more reason to fill positions like these with people who can help break the cycle and help these guys grow out of their old mindsets.
Eh, we're getting pretty far afield from the point of the topic. It's a tone deaf hire at exactly the wrong time.
It's not about all that. It's about whether or not this hire of this guy by this team at this time was a bad move or not.
when a guy with a clean record but some anachronistic public pronouncements gets hired to do the same everyone hits the fucking roof.
He actually doesn't have a clean record. In fact, he's kind of a classic case of jailhouse conversion. That notwithstanding, this isn't a thread about Ray Lewis, because most of us aren't big fans of ESPN. (Though I'm sure threads crapping on Ray Lewis are just an archive search away.)
Why should we care if someones gay or what someone else's thoughts are about homosexuality? It has no bearing on the game.
Quote:
In comment 11778143 vibe4giants said:
Quote:
Here. Here. Being considered 3/5 a person should be enough.
Now there's a leap!
Sorry. What's the 'entire agenda', then? Which rights that the rest of us have are you cool with homosexuals being denied? How 'normal' are you comfortable with David Tyree's children thinking gay people are?
Ok vibe, an example. On the thread about Sam and "The Kiss", a number of posters very timidly and almost apologetic, confessed that even though they wish him well and are for gay rights, watching the kiss made them uncomfortable. These posters were vilified as homophobic, scum, etc. Perhaps it would not be unnatural for them to feel a bit put off, no? You have never seen a post from me suggesting witholding of any rights. I have however pointed out the complete intolerance from the so called tolerant and hateful name calling. THAT's what I'm talking about with "the whole agenda".
Quote:
1953, a NAACP member in Alabama would have feared to speak out publicly in favor school integration not because they would be prosecuted, but because vigilante thugs would have physically attacked or killed them. I'm not saying that the Tyree controversy and this hypothetical aren't close to the same in terms of gravity, but I think they both involve suppression of freedom of speech by non-governmental means. And I bet you agree.
Hence, suppressing freedom of speech is an issue if Tyree's would be denied a position based on his political views.
This is really a semantic point, but I'm tired of reading that freedom of speech can't be a factor if the government isn't involved in the suppression. That's incorrect.
Freedom of speech absolutely does not give you freedom from the consequence of that speech.
Sure, if it's something you support- it sucks that there are negative consequences to what you say (the NAACP example...or your Tyree example). I'm sorry, though- there are consequences and as long as they are not illegal there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. That's kinda how the whole "freedom" thing you're all worried about losing actually works.
Cam - We're going to have to agree to disagree. I believe it is very unhealthy for our political system if espousing political views that were fairly mainstream just a few years ago is a disqualifier for anything like Tyree's new job. Just like we need tolerance for gays, we need tolerance for people who take a strict view of their religious rules.
Sorry. What's the 'entire agenda', then?
Ok vibe, an example. On the thread about Sam and "The Kiss", a number of posters very timidly and almost apologetic, confessed that even though they wish him well and are for gay rights, watching the kiss made them uncomfortable. These posters were vilified as homophobic, scum, etc. Perhaps it would not be unnatural for them to feel a bit put off, no? You have never seen a post from me suggesting witholding of any rights. I have however pointed out the complete intolerance from the so called tolerant and hateful name calling. THAT's what I'm talking about with "the whole agenda".
So the 'entire agenda', for you, is mostly about gay people and PDA? You want to be able to hold onto your right to be 'put off'? Without people suggesting you're homophobic? Is that your agenda?
If I've gotten that right, I'm still not clear what the 'gay agenda' is? Beyond wanting the right to be treated equally? Except, of course, where it makes you uncomfortable.
Agreed. And we should be free to be critical of those companies and their policies
Either BBI prints articles like that and allows discussion of it or disallows inclusion of such articles on BBI.
Freedom of the press, anyone?
Why should we care if someones gay or what someone else's thoughts are about homosexuality? It has no bearing on the game.
This isn't about football, and Tyree's job description isn't just about football. He's not being hired to be a position coach. He's being handed the responsibility of being a counselor and advisor to young men and their families.
Either BBI prints articles like that and allows discussion of it or disallows inclusion of such articles on BBI.
Freedom of the press, anyone?
lulz
If Eric chooses to, he's free to on his website.
On the contrary, this is about the only role I could see him in. It's not a "public face" type of role (we rarely if ever saw Charles Way), it's a behind the scenes, mentorship role.
I have no problem with Tyree working for the team in general. It's him in this specific role that is troublesome.
Quote:
I'm fine with Tyree in another role with the team. This specific role seems odd.
On the contrary, this is about the only role I could see him in. It's not a "public face" type of role (we rarely if ever saw Charles Way), it's a behind the scenes, mentorship role.
and you don't view his stance on gays as being troublesome for someone in a mentorship role?
If he's not getting preachy on the job, not, I don't.
Despite what this majority feels,
Who cares what he thinks,
Or if his position stinks,
Can he do the job? Then what's the big deal?
Quote:
I now want Tyree promoted to HC in waiting after this thread.
You can't prevent Tyree from a job because of his views on the same premise you can't discriminate against gays out of some fear their thinking or lifestyle will hinder them from doing a job.
Tyree will be under the microscope now but I wish him well.
This could not be more incorrect.
Wrong. Just because you don't like the truth of it doesn't mean it's incorrect.
Carl in CT : 1:59 pm : link : reply
I hate Fags!
just short of saying that.
A distinction with little difference
Quote:
and you don't view his stance on gays as being troublesome for someone in a mentorship role?
If he's not getting preachy on the job, not, I don't.
Yeah. That happens never.
Bobby Epps : 2:00 pm : link : reply
Once Eric allowed Graziano's article to be published on BBI, he should allow reasonable comment on it, whether critical or approval comment.
This has nothing to do with freedom of the press, though.
That's the part you're not getting.
kickerpa16 : 1:50 pm : link : reply
He's in the private working world. He can and should be accountable for the things he says, even if it means he is fired or certain companies don't hire him.
And if he does, fire him. Problemo solved.
Who is disqualifying him for this job? Nobody here can do that. Only the Giants can.
Nobody can make the Giants disqualify him. What part of that do you not understand?
Eric could, if he so chose to, allow only comments supporting Tyree to be voiced. It's his website, his rules. Freedom of speech and the press have no bearing here whatsoever.
That said, it's not catering to this demographic. It's catering to the ideal of the position.
He's already said he'd trade his greatest moment in his professional life to prevent gay marriage, but you think he'll put that belief to the side for the sake of this job (that he earned because of said moment)?
What's up! I miss hockey. Let's go Rangers. I want the Cup next year.
Quote:
In comment 11778168 vibe4giants said:
Sorry. What's the 'entire agenda', then?
Quote:
Ok vibe, an example. On the thread about Sam and "The Kiss", a number of posters very timidly and almost apologetic, confessed that even though they wish him well and are for gay rights, watching the kiss made them uncomfortable. These posters were vilified as homophobic, scum, etc. Perhaps it would not be unnatural for them to feel a bit put off, no? You have never seen a post from me suggesting witholding of any rights. I have however pointed out the complete intolerance from the so called tolerant and hateful name calling. THAT's what I'm talking about with "the whole agenda".
So the 'entire agenda', for you, is mostly about gay people and PDA? You want to be able to hold onto your right to be 'put off'? Without people suggesting you're homophobic? Is that your agenda?
If I've gotten that right, I'm still not clear what the 'gay agenda' is? Beyond wanting the right to be treated equally? Except, of course, where it makes you uncomfortable.
Well vibe, now you're getting beyond silly. I never mentioned the "gay agenda" ... your words. My words related to the agenda of the extreme views here and elsewhere. When being 100% for gay rights is not enough. When you must apologize for not being comfortable watching a gay kiss, and that's not enough. Sorry, but though I am for gay marriage and other rights, I also try to understand other's views and while I may not agree with them, I don't vilify them and call them hateful names when their views appear ignorant but not hateful. Apparently that is not enough for your agenda, so when it gets this silly there's no point in continuing, I'm done.
"Great meeting today guys. I hope you enjoyed todays lesson about managing your money and to be prepared for people coming out of the woodwork looking for a handout. Tomorrow's lesson is about how it's not right to be a gay and how you shouldn't marry dudes"
BUT, if Eric picks and chooses among newspaper articles covering the Giants, printing some and deleting others, wouldn't that make you uncomfortable?
Eric has the right to pick and choose but I wouldn't like it. When I raised the issue of freedom of the press, it was my short-hand for all of the above.
Quote:
In comment 11778125 Sammo284 said:
Quote:
I now want Tyree promoted to HC in waiting after this thread.
You can't prevent Tyree from a job because of his views on the same premise you can't discriminate against gays out of some fear their thinking or lifestyle will hinder them from doing a job.
Tyree will be under the microscope now but I wish him well.
This could not be more incorrect.
Wrong. Just because you don't like the truth of it doesn't mean it's incorrect.
Its pretty clear you don't know what you are talking about. The premises aren't at all the same, but its pretty clear you won't be able to understand why.