The Bengals are OK with guys like Mixon and his KO of a girl on video. That gets you drafted in round 2 in 2017.
Reid goes there and the Bengals owner has a problem and won't sign him because of his protests.
The entire NFL is full of shit. And the NFLPA isn't doing shit about it either.
Where is the outrage with the treatment of Reid?
Kapernick? You could blame it on his struggles as a passer, not fitting the scheme, and game plan issues as a backup.
Reid? He's in his prime. He can play on any team and help you win right now. There are no excuses with this player. There is no reason a 26 year old S/LB of his skill doesn't have plenty of action right now.
Why aren't teams signing him? Why aren't the Giants signing him? Who is asking this question to the NYG? I want to hear the answer from them.
Reid could play with Collins. He could move up to LB. Play S. And give us a lot of flexibility. Why aren't the Giants bringing him in? Because he took a knee during the anthem? This guy's livelihood is being ripped from him because of it while the NFL has no problem signing guys like Hardy, Mixon, etc.
"Why aren't you bringing in Eric Reid?"
I want this question answered clearly by the NYG. He can help the team and he can be signed at a bargain because of this BS. But they still don't even bring him in? Why?
A tad. Nevermind the million other reasons why folks stopped watching. The majority of whom were African-Americans in solidarity with Kaepernick.
Here is a guy who made up a bullshit story about the police, was indicted for felony assault of an elderly woman, and made headlines for saying teams need more "thugs" like Latrell Sprewell who notoriously attacked and strangled his own head coach.
Sure... because sometimes even bad guys get put on a pedestal that they perhaps shouldn't be put on.
You know... like some cops.
Anything else?
I don't recall that being the case but again, I may be not remembering that correctly.
I actually don't watch corrupt corporate media. I cut the cord two years ago.
Actually... if I remember correctly... he opted out of his contract no? He didn't have to and (again, I may be remembering this wrong) was in no danger of being cut. He left the Niners... not the other way around.
I'm sorry, this is going to be my last post. See, here is a guy that makes a dumbass comment about another poster who is also the owner of this site about what news channel he watches, because Eric has the logical viewpoint that NFL viewership is down because of the player protests.
All you have to do is a simple google search to find poll after poll of those that have stopped watching football are doing so BECAUSE OF THE PROTESTS. Has nothing to do with any cable news organization. And even if we didn't have the polls to back it up, the mere fact that this has been a hot-button issue with national coverage and non-stop dialogue in our country since Kaepernick started doing this in 2016 and oh yeah, the decline in viewership just so happened to coincide with the rise of the player kneelings across the league...for a reasonable person whose synapses are firing and can do elementary school math, they can deduce the two events are related.
This is not masters' level detective work needed here. But since you obviously haven't gotten that far in figuring it out, let me help you out:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/poll-kaepernicks-anthem-protests-biggest-reason-nfl-viewers-stopped-watching/
Would also love to add an "unarmed" filter to that data set and see how that shakes out...
In 2017, there were 68 unarmed people shot and killed by police. 30 white, 20 black, 13 Hispanic, 3 other, 2 unknown.
Overall, 987 people killed by police in 2017. 457 white, 223 black, 179 Hispanic, 44 other, 84 unknown.
2018: 304 people killed by police. 126 white, 61 black, 38 Hispanic, 10 other, 69 unknown. 16 unarmed people, of whom 9 were white, 6 were black, 1 Hispanic.
Washington Post police shooting database - ( New Window )
And yet it is the owners who have enabled the protests. So if those who support them are turning off the games, then they are hurting their own cause.
I can only tell you I know many people who will not watch the NFL because of the kneeling. So if viewership is down, I can easily see the kneeling as a reason.
It does not affect me one iota. I didn't like it because it was a mixed message, but again if you want to protest, have at it.
Eric Reid is too good a player to not be signed, so he will be signed when his contract demands come down.
Quote:
Actually... if I remember correctly... he opted out of his contract no? He didn't have to and (again, I may be remembering this wrong) was in no danger of being cut. He left the Niners... not the other way around.
If you ever wanted the "victim mentality" defined: he opted out, he left the team, but he's not allowed to participate in his occupation of choice. He might not be playing victim, but plenty of others are doing it for him/them.
I don't understand your point.
And I'm bowing out of this conversation because, as Eric said, I'm teetering on making this political and I'll be damned if I get banned just a few weeks before the most important New York Giants draft since I've been following the team and football is about to happen.
and another:
http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-nfl-anthem-20170810-story.html
And I also believe firmly that there is inherent skew in polling due to the fact that I believe a significant number of those with conservatively held political beliefs, who are more likely to take exception to protests during the anthem, do not participate in telephone surveys. Which is why election polling has often leaned more Democratic Party than the actual results.
This is not intended to be a political post, btw, just benign facts about who tend to respond to online and phone surveys.
But even the surveys, at face value, give the anthem protests as the #1 reason why they are tuning out of watching games.
And yet it is the owners who have enabled the protests. So if those who support them are turning off the games, then they are hurting their own cause.
Yes, and I actually mentioned this in I think my initial post...that the owners are in a no win situation...however, if they took the hard line early and were consistent with it, they would've faced less customer backlash and we'd probably already be on the other side of this as a country. The stance would've been to keep the politics out of the sport, no exceptions.
And then follow up with more posts and links?
It is pretty simple.. it just says that one issue is more important to one person than another which is fine. You have a lot of PETA protesters out there too who could be accused of caring more about animals than humans because those sample people are not protesting everything else.
You don't HAVE TO care about any of it. I personally would love to change a few things in the world but I am not going to go protest or write letters. I would rather spend more time with my kids before I leave this earth and spend a few thousand more days on the water vs getting all wrapped up in all kinds of other shit.
So, I would say it is unfair to indicate that a person is bad because he/she does not take all causes seriously.
And then follow up with more posts and links?
Yes, I made myself a liar. I can't help myself. I'm just incorrigible.
Perhaps the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back? If people were on the border of not watching anymore, the protests may have been that straw. (Just a guess)
But people have a right to protest and the people that stopped watching are also exercising their right to protest, too.
You cant compare your job to others because domestic abusers and people who cheat (peds) in your line of work arent allowed to work there.
And I also believe firmly that there is inherent skew in polling due to the fact that I believe a significant number of those with conservatively held political beliefs, who are more likely to take exception to protests during the anthem, do not participate in telephone surveys. Which is why election polling has often leaned more Democratic Party than the actual results.
Where did you get this info from? This is actually the reverse of what is true, particularly if it's a land-line survey.
I'll just leave with saying I have a hard time accepting that Mara and Tisch are a part of a conspiracy to not sign protestors when their words and actions to date suggest the opposite. Same with almost the entire League.
Quote:
If I used my job or position within my employer as sounding board for my political or social views, I would be fired on the spot. Not because of my views, but because I used my employment/employer as the sounding board, which in turn is perceived to be the position of the company I work for. And in many cases, when employees do this it hurts the company brand; which can hurt the company's bottom line. Eric Reid's actions on NFL time (as with others) have hurt the NFL brand.
You cant compare your job to others because domestic abusers and people who cheat (peds) in your line of work arent allowed to work there.
And you know this how?
Bottom line for me is we have an excellent player in his prime saying he will take the same deal as his rookie deal. And maybe less.
It's a guaranteed opportunity for NYG (and any NFL team) to improve the team.
And they aren't doing it.
Eventually, I'd bet on Reid landing somewhere in the next few weeks. I'd bet on that being a steal for the team that finally signs him
If it happens... that thread sure will be special. My earlier comments were accurate as it relates to the business side AND also with regards to what John Mara said back then. Things change...
Quote:
If you don't think the decline in viewership had something to do with kneeling, you don't know many conservative white people. Not even ultra right wing conservatives either. It bothers a lot of people, so much so that they will stop watching the games.
bothers them even more than unarmed people getting shot, apparently.
It’s a complete joke that people can think that backlash from fake ass patriots who are busy taking a leak while the anthem plays would be worse than the backlash if the NFL “shut it down.” The vast majority of the NFL is black. You would have a league wide boycott of games.
How's that????
Bottom line for me is we have an excellent player in his prime saying he will take the same deal as his rookie deal. And maybe less.
It's a guaranteed opportunity for NYG (and any NFL team) to improve the team.
And they aren't doing it.
Eventually, I'd bet on Reid landing somewhere in the next few weeks. I'd bet on that being a steal for the team that finally signs him
Reid said he would re-sign with the 9ers for 1 year IF they matched his pay from last season which was 7 million. He did not say that he would accept a multiyear deal at that rate. The Giants not going after Reid is simple IMO. They have to extend Collins this year and he will surely be the highest paid safety in the league. They can't afford to pay Reid $7 million plus on top of that. That doesn't include the monster new deal for Beckham.
I think people are jumping to conclusions.
These people won’t go buy even Starbucks when the cups aren’t red. It’s the victim mentality.
Quote:
If I used my job or position within my employer as sounding board for my political or social views, I would be fired on the spot. Not because of my views, but because I used my employment/employer as the sounding board, which in turn is perceived to be the position of the company I work for. And in many cases, when employees do this it hurts the company brand; which can hurt the company's bottom line. Eric Reid's actions on NFL time (as with others) have hurt the NFL brand.
You cant compare your job to others because domestic abusers and people who cheat (peds) in your line of work arent allowed to work there.
Pretty much.
They're entitled to their opinion, but not entitled to make up their own facts. So sure, the opinion can be "unarmed minorities being killed at a higher rate than non-minorities is less important to me than someone kneeling for the anthem". And they can have the opinion that "unarmed minorities getting shot at a higher % than non minorities isn't a problem".
What they CAN'T have an "opinion" about is whether unarmed minorities being shot at a higher % than non-minorities is factual or not.
Quote:
Yes, because the narrative is not believed by at least half the population. It absolutely is political.
It’s not reality at all you’re full of shit
It's not a "narrative," it's reality.
Quote:
And I also believe firmly that there is inherent skew in polling due to the fact that I believe a significant number of those with conservatively held political beliefs, who are more likely to take exception to protests during the anthem, do not participate in telephone surveys. Which is why election polling has often leaned more Democratic Party than the actual results.
Where did you get this info from? This is actually the reverse of what is true, particularly if it's a land-line survey.
Allstarjim is correct. Most Republicans, and especially conservatives, stay away from all things like this. The reason is that the media is so overwhelmingly liberal that it's not worth the effort for them. I can tell you I never answer any polling or study requests. It just aggravates me actually.
Look at BBI for example. You read every pseudo political thread and BBI comes over as 75% or more liberal leaning. I doubt that is the case, and I would wager that the conservatives just don't bother. It's not worth getting into the inevitable internet argument.
Those who support the protestors should be thrilled with how the NFL has bent over backwards to accommodate this issue. But if this thread is any evidence, the contrary appears to be the case.
Stunning.
People love being upset.
And I say this as someone who is not at all bothered by the protests. But I talk to plenty of people who think it is an important societal issue, but kneeling during the anthem is not the appropriate way to go about making the point.
If you really do believe in people's rights to their own opinions, that means accepting that people who disagree with you are not all reactionary monsters.
The Giants traded JPP and kept Olivier Vernon.
Your argument that the Giants (and many other teams) are discriminating doesn't hold water.
But this is the victim mentality.
The Bucs came to the Giants about JPP. Had they come for Vernon, I suspect he would have been traded. Giants were looking to dump salary.
I think other teams are looking at it from the standpoint what are the pluses and minuses to signing players. There's no conspiracy.
Michael Thomas is a decent player, an under the radar type. More a special teams guy I believe. He's not carrying the torch, so to speak, for the protest.
Reid is.
I don't even follow the 49ers but know who Reid is, because of his play, and his outspokenness on the issue.
I think it's huge in why he isn't signed.
He wants a long term deal like they all do but said he would sign a one year deal.
The S position is not “devalued” when you can play several positions like Reid.
It’s about talent, scheme fit, etc like it can be said about Kapernick.
It’s not an age thing since he’s only 26.
But he hasn’t had a contract offer.
That isn’t playing victim. I’d like to know why our team is passing on this opportunity to improve the team.
Probably because we have a better player at the same position and no cap space left is the real answer
And this is why he won't be signed. All the attention.
Kap is really the perfect backup to the Seattle offense.
Conspiracy? No...Seattle is making a business decision. They feel the return on investment is not worth it.
Now, if a starting QB was available, you might see another team react differently.
Falls along the same lines of Eric Reid IMO.
And I say this as someone who is not at all bothered by the protests. But I talk to plenty of people who think it is an important societal issue, but kneeling during the anthem is not the appropriate way to go about making the point.
If you really do believe in people's rights to their own opinions, that means accepting that people who disagree with you are not all reactionary monsters.
I don't really think kneeling during the anthem might be the best way to protest, but hey, it got attention, and that's pretty much the point of protests.
Additionally, my broader point was to delineate between what can be an "opinion" and what really cannot be. Facts can't be opinions, despite what the current climate might suggest. Opinions about facts can be opinions (duh) - but underlying facts are not.
Today you need a S who can play LB too. Reid can do that.
And I say this as someone who is not at all bothered by the protests. But I talk to plenty of people who think it is an important societal issue, but kneeling during the anthem is not the appropriate way to go about making the point.
If you really do believe in people's rights to their own opinions, that means accepting that people who disagree with you are not all reactionary monsters.
+1. I agree. Personally I am sickened by what I see with these police shootings. However I don't like using the national anthem as a protest forum for anything. This is my opinion, yet every day on social media people would label this position as a terrible thing. It's a mentality of either you accept 100% or you are the enemy. It sets a lot of people off.