Just Lost All Respect For Myles Garrett

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman4248

I mean Mason pulled one as well. Let's not act like trying to twist someone's neck isn't complete bullshit either. Myles came out and said he didn't want it to excuse his action and expected confidentiality in that meeting. He kept his mouth shut about it because he specifically didn't want it to be a racial thing.

I think Myles actually realizes more than anyone else here that something like that in the heat of the moment in such a violent sport, something stupid gets said that you don't mean. From what I've gathered reading it was him explaining how the events went and hoping whoever heard the appeal understands that a lot of is just the nature of the beast.

Also how many times in the last 15-16 years have you seen a QB in a fight?

---

Dan, it’s ok to have used racist language (you have)..

It’s ok you’ve had racist thoughts that led to said racist language...

We all (me included) have said/made/thought things that we may or not make today.


Just don’t be a bitch, buddy. (Regardless, please don’t say the C Word again, ok?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman4248

That's interesting because I'm white.

And before the inevitable "self-hating liberal" comment comes, I voted for the republican candidate last ticket.

It really shows who here could survive outside this state. Your heads would explode from
hearing someone have a different take.

---

Now, this is something with which I'll agree, Dan.

You ain't no "self hating liberal". You’re more a DWL... and that's cool, buddy.

Peace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman4248

That's interesting because I'm white.

And before the inevitable "self-hating liberal" comment comes, I voted for the republican candidate last ticket.

It really shows who here could survive outside this state. Your heads would explode from
hearing someone have a different take.

---

I'm gonna guess neither of these are true.

I have read through all of the posts in this thread and still wonder, is Dan ?the man? excusing an undeniable assault with a deadly weapon in front of millions of viewers because it ?may have been? provoked by a previously-untold/heard, racist, comment? And based on pure speculation? We don?t know Rudolph or Garrett. But we do know that he?s a white guy playing a professional sport with a team that has a very diverse roster and a black HC. That same HC trusted him enough to start him in a time of need with players of a different skin tone. That?s factual. The rest of Dan?s assumptions are pure character assassination based on an unfounded comment from the guy guilty of assault unless proven otherwise. Other observation, I remember Pouncy coming to Rudolph’s defense and kicked the crap out of Garrett. Was he ignorant of the facts during the scrum? Wow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg Tired

Just trying it on for size. I could care less about your senseless mumbling about how terrible society is for some who refuse to take ownership for their personal situation. Because it?s always someone else?s fault. Isn?t it?

---

He literally took ownership for his actions and didn't want it to excuse him. I also have said it doesn't excuse him. Hell he didn't want to character assassinate Rudolph. My point was that Mason Rudolph strikes me as the type to say dumbass things in the heat of the moment. A majority of this board have called their wife/gf/etc. a "bitch" or a "****" in a stupid fight and not meant it. It's the same type of dumb comment. It's, again, not an excuse for his actions, but is also totally believable.

My overall other point is that "this is worse than racism" is a shit take. The only way you agree with that is if you say that being called a racist is worse than racism for white people. Because racism against whites (in America) doesn't really affect your day-to-day life because there is no institutionalized racism that we as a country are still working to get away from and improve. Same as being called a racist for any POC doesn't really harm your life but actual racism does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

I'm gonna guess neither of these are true.

---

Why? Because I don't fit the mold of being a white person or someone who voted republican? You divide into two boxes and each side fits one mold, so anyone who acts like what you think one does but says they're the other is lying? Things ain't black and white (pun intended) and shouldn't be when it comes to politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maroonandwhite

I have read through all of the posts in this thread and still wonder, is Dan ?the man? excusing an undeniable assault with a deadly weapon in front of millions of viewers because it ?may have been? provoked by a previously-untold/heard, racist, comment?

---

No you didn't read this because I already said I didn't. So there should be no confusion there.

Dan the man needs to change his name to Dan The NPC. Honk, Honk.

What would be interesting is if Mason called him a "Brown" insert whatever derogatory phrase but he assumed it was because of his skin color when he does play for the Browns. I think like a lot of people are saying, the NFL would probably know exactly what was said because there are mics everywhere on the field including the QBs helmet. I guess it is possible that it wasn't recorded but I would think in today's NFL, that is highly unlikely.

Dan I couldn't care less about politics or choosing left or right. They are all crooks and dgaf about us. Don't even vote. I also don't voice opinions or complain about politics.

I usually don't give this type of thread my time but the only reason I even continued to read this thread once YOU turned it political in your first two posts was to see if your argument ever made any sense. You're completely off the reservation here and it some how gets wors and worse.

No point in responding to me about this because I'm not arguing for one side or the other or even care. I'm just saying I can't even hear your side out and make sense of it and feel dumber for attempting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe

What would be interesting is if Mason called him a "Brown" insert whatever derogatory phrase but he assumed it was because of his skin color when he does play for the Browns. I think like a lot of people are saying, the NFL would probably know exactly what was said because there are mics everywhere on the field including the QBs helmet. I guess it is possible that it wasn't recorded but I would think in today's NFL, that is highly unlikely.

---

The NFL said there was no audio. I imagine in 6 months TMZ will leal the audio. Amazing though how you "found no such evidence" when there was no audio. No shit NFL, really?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman4248

If he was asked to be the leader, yes poor judgment. It can also be brave. You could even call Mason's brave as well. Poor and brave are not mutually exclusive.

---

So your stance in this thread is that doing something brave, taking a stand for what you see as right even in the face of opposition, can be seen as poor judgment. Good to know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman4248

No. You're being willfully ignorant about how society works. It's sad because you even laid out my reasoning for me. There's plenty of people who fall for that "red herring." How many of them fit the criteria of people who can't win a debate on policy do you think play for the Steelers? Seems like football and understanding politics don't have a ton of overlap. So with that, why would you open the door for those idiots to cause unrest in the lockerroom and create a divide much like what's going on in America. Seems like it makes your job as the leader of the team harder. Seems like... a poor judgment.

What's ridiculous is all the people here trying to make this about politics when my only point on him is that it's stupid to bring politics to the table as a leader who needs people to like and respect him when you don't have to.

Well my other point is that this isn't worse than racism. Not by a long shot.

---

No no, your initial point was that Rudolph is definitely the type to let the N-word slip. That is obviously an accusation of some sort of sympathy with racist thought. Yet you are the one who used the freaking term 'colored' in this thread.

I agree with you that Rudolph acted like an idiot to Garrett and should have been suspended at least a game himself. I agree that being accused of racism isn't worse than actual racism, certainly not as some kind of across the board statement.

But here's the thing - your whole approach assumes that what Garrett claimed in his appeal actually happened. Because you say he took ownership of his actions and didn't want to assassinate Rudolph's character. But if what he said is untrue - and he simply added it into his appeal as a shot in the dark and didn't want it public because he knows it isn't true - then what he did is reprehensible and he's actually not taking full ownership of his actions and is indeed attempting to assassinate Rudolph's character, even if in private. And if that is true, then I could certainly argue that lying to brand someone else a racist as a way of getting out of the consequences of your own actions is worse than if Rudolph had said it to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman4248

The NFL said there was no audio. I imagine in 6 months TMZ will leal the audio. Amazing though how you "found no such evidence" when there was no audio. No shit NFL, really?

---

Well crap man how could they have possibly find no evidence if there is no audio...hmm I don’t know. Maybe interview everyone on the field (players on both sides, refs) at the time and nobody else heard it either. Check what audio they do have from the mics outside of the helmet. That’s not very hard to do and would be 100% truthful. There is nothing to leak because there is nothing recorded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

I agree with you that Rudolph acted like an idiot to Garrett and should have been suspended at least a game himself. I agree that being accused of racism isn't worse than actual racism, certainly not as some kind of across the board statement.

But here's the thing - your whole approach assumes that what Garrett claimed in his appeal actually happened. Because you say he took ownership of his actions and didn't want to assassinate Rudolph's character. But if what he said is untrue - and he simply added it into his appeal as a shot in the dark and didn't want it public because he knows it isn't true - then what he did is reprehensible and he's actually not taking full ownership of his actions and is indeed attempting to assassinate Rudolph's character, even if in private. And if that is true, then I could certainly argue that lying to brand someone else a racist as a way of getting out of the consequences of your own actions is worse than if Rudolph had said it to begin with.

---

Thank you for actually seeing both sides to it. Yea, Garrett could totally be lying about it. At this point we're at a 50/50 deadlock that one of them HAS to be lying now. I don't know what actually happened but honestly both sides of this story have merit.

And I can agree with your last statement. I don't agree with "Racism is bad. This is worse."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

Well crap man how could they have possibly find no evidence if there is no audio...hmm I don’t know. Maybe interview everyone on the field (players on both sides, refs) at the time and nobody else heard it either. Check what audio they do have from the mics outside of the helmet. That’s not very hard to do and would be 100% truthful. There is nothing to leak because there is nothing recorded.

---

Everyone on BOTH sides expected audio to clear this up. There's no way the NFL didn't have it, right?

my point was how can you frame it the way the NFL did (wording it in a way to lead the public to believe that Rudolph didn't say it) when you have no audio at all to review? Should have just said we have no audio of the incident and can not confirm or deny the allegations so the ruling on the field stands. And as for not believing the NFL, it hides video/audio for players all the time. Remember Ray Rice?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman4248

my point was how can you frame it the way the NFL did (wording it in a way to lead the public to believe that Rudolph didn't say it) when you have no audio at all to review? Should have just said we have no audio of the incident and can not confirm or deny the allegations so the ruling on the field stands. And as for not believing the NFL, it hides video/audio for players all the time. Remember Ray Rice?

---

What I read is that the NFL's statement was that they found 'no such evidence' of Rudolph using the slur...which is the right way to word it. They haven't said, 'No, he did not say that.' They've just said they found no such evidence and upheld the suspension.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman4248

Thank you for actually seeing both sides to it. Yea, Garrett could totally be lying about it. At this point we're at a 50/50 deadlock that one of them HAS to be lying now. I don't know what actually happened but honestly both sides of this story have merit.

And I can agree with your last statement. I don't agree with "Racism is bad. This is worse."



Everyone on BOTH sides expected audio to clear this up. There's no way the NFL didn't have it, right?

my point was how can you frame it the way the NFL did (wording it in a way to lead the public to believe that Rudolph didn't say it) when you have no audio at all to review? Should have just said we have no audio of the incident and can not confirm or deny the allegations so the ruling on the field stands. And as for not believing the NFL, it hides video/audio for players all the time. Remember Ray Rice?

---

Ray Rice video was outside of the playing field. And they didn’t hide the video, why you making that up? The allegation against the NFL was that they didn’t look at the video in the Rice assault. They deny ever having a copy of the video. Not that they or the Ravens covered it up. Stuck their head in the sand and believed what they wanted? I believe that’s correct and wrong of them but that video was from an outside source.

It is very easy to frame and word your statement when nobody on the field backs up Garretts assertion. An assertion he never made until the proceedings. Sorry but the simplest explanation is the correct one most of the time. If it had occurred he would not have kept it quite that long, it would have come out that night, not days later. As soon as Rudolph heard what happened his attorney vehemently denied the accusation. He didn’t even tell Kitchens and the club that he was going to go this route. Just he was going to say something unfavorable to Rudolph to hopefully help his case.

ETA. The Steeler players are defending Rudolph and his OL who were in the middle of pulling off Garrett stated publicly he didn’t say anything much less racial slur. A bunch of his teammates are defending him in the media after they heard what Garrett asserted. Heyward the defensive captain also publicly questioned the timing of it being told 7 days later and using it in his appeal was “stupid”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

What I read is that the NFL's statement was that they found 'no such evidence' of Rudolph using the slur...which is the right way to word it. They haven't said, 'No, he did not say that.' They've just said they found no such evidence and upheld the suspension.

---

Another thing to consider, even if he used a racial slur, does that ok trying to inflict extreme damage. If he hits Rudolph just right with that helmet, it could have killed him. In today's society, it is NOT ok to use racist language but I would think the response is Nowhere close to acceptable. Now if he punched him in the face, you maybe say that he had it coming but even then it is physical violence for saying a word. If Garrett calls him out on it then Rudolph might be blackballed and has to look for another job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe

Another thing to consider, even if he used a racial slur, does that ok trying to inflict extreme damage. If he hits Rudolph just right with that helmet, it could have killed him. In today's society, it is NOT ok to use racist language but I would think the response is Nowhere close to acceptable. Now if he punched him in the face, you maybe say that he had it coming but even then it is physical violence for saying a word. If Garrett calls him out on it then Rudolph might be blackballed and has to look for another job.

---

No, it wouldn't.

IMO, it is very hard to figure out exactly how to approach this word in particular. It is the word you cannot say, and rightfully so. It is an awful word with an awful history and is used basically only to belittle others, provoke, or to reveal stupid, awful beliefs (I'm not talking about its use within the hip hop community and the black community itself; that's something different entirely). It should be condemned and not used. However, by making it the one word you cannot utter, we seem to have actually increased its power, to the point that I think there are some who believe violence in response to its use is justified. We have elevated its status, and it now arguably has more power to hurt than it did 150 years ago, even though 150 years ago it was obviously used more widely and in a more openly hateful and racist way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

No, it wouldn't.

IMO, it is very hard to figure out exactly how to approach this word in particular. It is the word you cannot say, and rightfully so. It is an awful word with an awful history and is used basically only to belittle others, provoke, or to reveal stupid, awful beliefs (I'm not talking about its use within the hip hop community and the black community itself; that's something different entirely). It should be condemned and not used. However, by making it the one word you cannot utter, we seem to have actually increased its power, to the point that I think there are some who believe violence in response to its use is justified. We have elevated its status, and it now arguably has more power to hurt than it did 150 years ago, even though 150 years ago it was obviously used more widely and in a more openly hateful and racist way.

---

This is a terrific post. The word has definitely been appropriated and weaponized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

Well this obviously a pretty racist statement. Complete bullshit

When it comes to race relations & you're blaming white people just make sure you do the thumb & finger thingy that Joe says he does

---

You either know Dantheman, or are assuming he is white.

Which is it?