In defense of money

OK

quote:

---

Inevitably, for sure.

I can remember the great boycott of 2006 that occurred after Robert Reynolds of the Titans assaulted his estranged wife, and the great backlash of 2006 that occurred when Jammal Brown of the Saints assault his wife. And who could forget the Michael Pittman boycott of Tampa Bay in 2003? For ramming his car into another car that happened to have his wife and kid in it! And the boycott that ensued against Tampa Bay almost killed the team! In fact barely any of the present day Tampa Bay fans were fans that the time of this incident - they lost almost the entire fan base over it.

---

You're missing the point. It's not about the actions of the players. It's about the NFL's rules against those actions, and how they're perceived.

Harsh penalties for the players who abuse/hurt others is both good business and the right thing to do. They are not separate, as some have been saying.

quote:

---

Why are you listening to Mike and Mike? It's discourse on the level of 5th graders. Do you not know how to read?

---

Hey, at 6:30 in the morning it's the only real sports show on. Hard to read while driving to work Zach!

But I do love them lecturing about greedy NFL pigs, then in the same breath checking in with the "Subway fresh take hotline"

quote:

---

Harsh penalties for the players who abuse/hurt others is both good business and the right thing to do. They are not separate, as some have been saying.

---

I have no problem with the NFL handing down harsh penalties but only AFTER the accused has had their day in court and found guilty.

Until then I support the concept that the right of the accused to have their day in court before they are punished supersedes the right of the NFL to protect its profits.

I am now going to boycott all Budweiser products and any other businesses that threaten to withdraw their support of the NFL simply because they are being pressured to do so by people who want to punish Rice and Peterson before they have their day in court.

If the NFL was about ANYTHING other than money they wouldn't have made RG3 change his shirt.

quote:

---

I mean, I'm with you in an idealistic sense. But what about those cases where you have admission of guilt, photo/video evidence, etc? You'd be in favor of Ray Rice playing even after the full video surfaced?

---

Ray Rice had to admit guilt because after the first video was shown and certainly after the two videos were shown on TV the lynch mob mentality started to pressure the team and the NFL to kick Rice off of the time.

Rice was enticed into admitting guilt before he had his day in court because he hoped as a result the NFL would give him a few games suspension and not suspend him indefinitely.

Why do you think Rice is now appealing the NFL's decision to suspend him indefinitely?

quote:

---

Or for that matter, you'd allow O.J. Simpson to coach if a crazy owner decided to do it as a publicity stunt?

---

What someone wants to do regarding hiring OJ after the verdict is their business.

When someone wants to do regarding hiring Rice after his day in court is another thing altogether.

There is still a trial to be conducted and evidence to be presented in that trial including more security video showing what took place before they got into the elevator and testimony from Rice and his wife.

What if she testifies that she was the one who caused the incident because she was drunk and started the argument over something stupid then hit him first in the hallway and when they were inside the elevator continued the argument and after he backed away from her she rushed towards him with the intent to physically harm him?