Cam Gives A Detailed Video Update About Why He is Sidelined (Friday Sept 27th)

[1of10Charnatives]

1 minute ago, SBiii said:

NFL football is an incredibly violent game and "malice towards your opponent" is the goal on every single play.

Here's the deal....

....your expectations are entirely unrealistic and completely out of touch with reality. 

Nice chatting with you.

expecting professional athletes to behave like adults and not get butthurt over a TD dance is "unrealistic and out of touch with reality". Funny, the rest of us have to do it every day at work when we deal with behavior from co workers, customers or others we don't like. But I guess it's okay if I choke slammed somebody tommorrow, because expecting otherwise from me would be "unrealistic and out of touch with reality." It's a professional workplace, they're supposed to act like professionals, not Roman gladiators. 

If you find that an unrealistic expectation, brother I don't know what to tell you.

[1of10Charnatives]

Just now, 1of10Charnatives said:

expecting professional athletes to behave like adults and not get butthurt over a TD dance is "unrealistic and out of touch with reality". Funny, the rest of us have to do it every day at work when we deal with behavior from co workers, customers or others we don't like. But I guess it's okay if I choke slammed somebody tommorrow, because expecting otherwise from me would be "unrealistic and out of touch with reality." It's a professional workplace, they're supposed to act like professionals, not Roman gladiators. 

If you find that an unrealistic expectation, brother I don't know what to tell you.

Yes it's violent, but it's violent within a defined set of rules. Either it's okay to expect professionals to play within the rules and for the rules to be enforced evenly, or it's not. 

[SBiii]

2 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

(i) expecting professional athletes to behave like adults and not get butthurt over a TD dance is "unrealistic and out of touch with reality".

(ii) It's a professional workplace, they're supposed to act like professionals, not Roman gladiators. 

(iii) If you find that an unrealistic expectation, brother I don't know what to tell you.

(i) If you take into consideration mental & physical makeup of the neanderthals that compromise the vast majority of defensive players in the NFL --- yes -- your expectations are unrealistic.

(ii) What happens in the lunch room at your office has zero relevance.  Truth is your "roman gladiators" terminology is incredibly apt --- NFL football is a series of 1-on-1 battles where one player is doing his damnedest to assert physical dominance over the other and the process of doing so is very violent.

(iii)  Your assessment of the situation is completely off base.

[SBiii]

16 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

Yes it's violent, but it's violent within a defined set of rules. Either it's okay to expect professionals to play within the rules and for the rules to be enforced evenly, or it's not. 

Oh it's ok to expect NFL players to play within the rules....

....but it's also incredibly unrealistic --- this is a fact --- they don't always obey the rules. 

Professional athletes in the NBA, NFL and MLB are going to try to take advantage of the rules every chance they get....sometimes they get caught, often they don't.

[1of10Charnatives]

1 minute ago, SBiii said:

(i) If you take into consideration mental & physical makeup of the neanderthals that compromise the vast majority of defensive players in the NFL --- yes -- your expectations are unrealistic.

(ii) What happens in the lunch room at your office has zero relevance.  Truth is your "roman gladiators" terminology is incredibly apt --- NFL football is a series of 1-on-1 battles where one player is doing his damnedest to assert physical dominance over the other and the process of doing so is very violent.

(iii)  Your assessment of the situation is completely off base.

The logical conclusion of your argument because it refuses to draw a line between the violence that is acceptable within the rules and actually enforcing the rules intended to limit the violence is that the neanderthals cannot be controlled and therefore officiating is needless. The refs can all go home and we can let them dismember themselves on a field for our enjoyment. Brilliant.

Drawing parallels to other work environments is perfectly valid unless your premise is the violence is an excuse not to hold professional athletes to ANY standard of conduct in the workplace.

My assesment is fine, the logic of your argument breaks down because it refuses to confront the flaws in where it leads. You have not once in the debate acknowledged that headshots which are clear violations of the rules made in full view of entire officiating crews went uncalled. You've also failed to answer a simple question:

Do you believe the rules should be enforced as evenly as possible or not? It's really that simple. Your position makes clear your answer that is no. This is where we fundamentally disagree, and therefore I regard your position as off base.

[1of10Charnatives]

3 minutes ago, SBiii said:

Oh it's ok to expect NFL players to play within the rules....

....but it's also incredibly unrealistic --- this is a fact --- they don't always obey the rules. 

Professional athletes in the NBA, NFL and MLB are going to try to take advantage of the rules every chance they get....sometimes they get caught, often they don't.

And when they violate the rules egregiously in the open field your position as argued makes clear it's okay if the refs ignore or overlook it. Who's being unrealistic?

[1of10Charnatives]

Just now, 1of10Charnatives said:

And when they violate the rules egregiously in the open field your position as argued makes clear it's okay if the refs ignore or overlook it. Who's being unrealistic?

Again you're trying 

 

5 minutes ago, SBiii said:

Oh it's ok to expect NFL players to play within the rules....

....but it's also incredibly unrealistic --- this is a fact --- they don't always obey the rules. 

Professional athletes in the NBA, NFL and MLB are going to try to take advantage of the rules every chance they get....sometimes they get caught, often they don't.

Again, you're talking down to me as if I don't understand that athletes will push boundaries. Of course they will, but there is a material difference between accepting that there will be holding on every play, and making excuses for headshots in the open field. The two are not the same, you just want to pretend they are. NBA players commit fouls. If they clothesline a guy at halfcourt, that ain't the same as an illegal hand check and no reasonable person would regard it that way.

When players push boundaries, it is up to officials and the league to enforce those boundaries as evenly as humanly possible. What is clear is that they have failed to do so, and that puts players at unnecessary levels of risk. I'm really sorry you don't like Cam's touchdown celebrations, but the fact you think that's an excuse for other players to take blatant shots at him that affect his career longevity is disappointing.

[SBiii]

33 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

(i) Drawing parallels to other work environments is perfectly valid unless your premise is the violence is an excuse not to hold professional athletes to ANY standard of conduct in the workplace.

(ii) You have not once in the debate acknowledged that headshots which are clear violations of the rules made in full view of entire officiating crews went uncalled.

(iii) Do you believe the rules should be enforced as evenly as possible or not?

(i) Zero validity in comparing your office lunch room to the NFL.  The NFL game is predicated on violence....there is no place for violence in your lunch room.

(ii) In theory everything that takes place on and NFL field is within "full view" of one of the officials but it's a simple fact that the officials are often looking elsewhere and "penalties" are missed on virtually every NFL play.

(iii)  Of course I think the rules should be enforced evenly.  I'm also realistic enough to know the refs are humans and sometimes they screw up. 

Get over it man.

[SBiii]

45 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

(i) And when they violate the rules egregiously in the open field your position as argued makes clear it's okay if the refs ignore or overlook it.

(ii) Who's being unrealistic?

(i) So what you're really saying here is you believe corrupt officials let the Broncos beat up on Cam and swallowed their whistles because they were part of some larger conspiracy?

(ii)  If so, you are.

[SBiii]

1 hour ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

(i) ....and making excuses for headshots in the open field.

(ii) I'm really sorry you don't like Cam's touchdown celebrations, but the fact you think that's an excuse for other players to take blatant shots at him that affect his career longevity is disappointing.

(i)  I thought Cam's problems were with his shoulder & foot?  Why do you keep fixating on "headshots"?  Are you hinting at mental issues we are unaware of?

(ii)  How any fan feels about Cam's "celebrations" is irrelevant....what is factual is opposing players don't like the histrionics they do give him a little extra because of them....this is a fact.

Thing is Cam knows this....shame on him for acting the fool and inviting the extra pounding from the defense.

[1of10Charnatives]

12 minutes ago, SBiii said:

(i) So what you're really saying here is you believe corrupt officials let the Broncos beat up on Cam and swallowed their whistles because they were part of some larger conspiracy?

(ii)  If so, you are.

 

17 minutes ago, SBiii said:

(i) Zero validity in comparing your office lunch room to the NFL.  The NFL game is predicated on violence....there is no place for violence in your lunch room.

(ii) In theory everything that takes place on and NFL field is within "full view" of one of the officials but it's a simple fact that the officials are often looking elsewhere and "penalties" are missed on virtually every NFL play.

(iii)  Of course I think the rules should be enforced evenly.  I'm also realistic enough to know the refs are humans and sometimes they screw up. 

Get over it man.

Again you continue to conflate normal reasonable human error with missing obvious calls right in front of their faces in the open field. Take those helmet to helmet hits from the Denver game and tell me you honestly believe they would have been called the same way if the player being hit was Brady.

If your answer is yes it’s obvious which one of us is unrealistic.

Its perfectly valid to compare workplaces because it is controlling for the violence. By saying the NFL is predicated on violence your implication is either that that violence has no limits or that officials are incapable of limiting the violence through rule enforcement. 

If you think violence in the workplace is nonexistent you should really read some headlines. The difference to the NFL is that violence in my workplace is not tolerated and there are consequences, whereas violence in the NFL which takes place outside the rules is often overlooked despite its blatant nature (headshots in the open field) because the culture of violence excuses it. This is you rationalizing grown men being unwilling to limit the violence to within rules they all understand perfectly well and give lip service to accepting because they don’t like a coworkers TD dance.

Dance around this all you want but there’s a clear and simple set of questions here:

1. Do you believe the violence in football needs to have clearly defined limits? If no why not.

2. Do you believe it is asking too much of grown men paid handsomely to exhibit enough self control of their emotions to not blatantly and intentionally violate these limits? If so why?

3. Do you believe the people who run the league and officiate the games should be held accountable to do so to a reasonable standard of competence and even handedness? If no why not?

4. When a qb holding the ball takes multiple headshots in full view of officiating crews that are clear violations of those limits, why would you not consider this a failure to meet such a standard?

[raz]

16 hours ago, bigdavis said:

No idea what you do, but you mentioned employees.  So let's say you've got a lawn maintenance company, and one of your key yard men was hurt (limping) and you asked him if he could still do the job.  He says, "sure, boss; I'll man up."  Then your customer calls and complains about the shoddy job that day.  Same employee comes to you and says, "Man, I thought I could handle it, but guess I couldn't.  I'll take a week or two off, and get myself right."

Who you blame then?  Him?  He tried to gut it out, but couldn't, then realized his mistake, and owned it.  You?  You took him at his word that he could.  You to blame?  Who else?

Just an example, and don't bother coming back and telling me you're CEO of a Fortune 500 company.  Same logic applies.  poo happens.  It's what one does next, after admitting their error, that counts.  Feel me?

(and you never did answer me about where you heard Cam was mad we won.  hmmmmm.)

in this thread there is a rivera interview where he describes the situation going into that tampa game, i think its this thread, where he says what i repeated.  i didn't see you asked me that.  it also seems way more than likely that he hid how bad his shoulder was hurting last year - so in your employee story its not the first time, or the 2nd, or the 3rd, and that employee had a fit when i made him go home and rest, and then got mad when one of his crew did a good job.  i think there is blame to go around, don't get me wrong, but a good part of it goes on cam.

[raz]

and charnative dude, yeah cam stunted on everyone in 2015.  rivera let the whole team stunt on people.  it was embarrassing to me, and all those same d's he stunted on gave it back to him when they got a chance.   that happened.  that's what happens in sports for as long as i can remember.   

[1of10Charnatives]

4 minutes ago, Nesbro1 said:

You realize that a lot of people and players think the new rules are ridiculous. That it's not the hitters job to protect the other guy. It's the hittee's.

Name a rule in the playbook that someone doesn’t think should be changed somehow. Regardless of what these people think, do you agree that in light of what we know about brain injury and concussions that we did not know before that it’s imperative rules emphasize eliminating helmet to helmet hits and holding players accountable when they do so?

Proper tackling technique has always been see what you hit. A player using technique has his head up in order to do so and therefore eliminates the risk of helmet to helmet hits. When you lower the helmet you increase risk of brain injury to both players as well as increase the risk of whiffing on the tackle, both bad ideas if you’re the defender. What you do do is give yourself a chance to blow a guy up and create a sports center highlight.

The ultimate problem with this is that a few hundred players play in the NFL, but everyone who follows the sport sees those highlights. The thousands of college players and millions of high school players see these dangerous poor technique hits not as examples of bad play, but as hyped highlights, think they are cool and go out and try to emulate them. Changing behavior at the NFL level as by far the most visible part of the sport is orders of magnitude more important for changing behavior at the levels beneath them.

Does anyone honestly believe that ANY player being hit won’t do everything he can to avoid a helmet to helmet hit at high speed? That simply goes against basic common sense of what we all know about human instinct. It is not the players being hit that are putting themselves at risk 99.9% of the time, but bad technique by the tackler that should not be used in any case which is overwhelmingly the cause.