Houstons owner racist comments??

[Swan Ronson]

40 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

 

See, I do not find that action to be respectful.  I consider it to be quite disrespectful, but they do have a right to do it and I do not consider myself to be offended by it.

I fail to see how kneeling is disrespectful, but that is beside the point.

 

You may not personally be offended by it, but you can't deny that a whole lot of people are. It's all part of the outrage culture. Yes, different sides are outraged by different things, but it's a two way street.

[RockThatBlue]

5 hours ago, Chrisaaron1023 said:

That's what I'm saying.. the ultimate way to protest your boss is just quit. Retire. He did you wrong, just leave. Someone else will gladly take your spot

A real protest would be to stop accepting a paycheck. If you think you're owner is racist, why are you still accepting his money? 

 

If I had a job and I thought the boss was racist, or just didn't like him/her for any reason, I would probably quit and find a new job. I wouldn't still be going there every day and willfully accepting their money.

[Freenyfan102]

Its not racist and i use the term too and there multiple terms to its use. Too many chiefs not enough Indians, too many cooks in the kitchen 

[Nadine]

5 minutes ago, Freenyfan102 said:

Its not racist and i use the term too and there multiple terms to its use. Too many chiefs not enough Indians, too many cooks in the kitchen 

The cooks cliche still hold up

[Nadine]

11 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

A real protest would be to stop accepting a paycheck. If you think you're owner is racist, why are you still accepting his money? 

Same argument used against people harassed at work

[crazycolt1]

21 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

A real protest would be to stop accepting a paycheck. If you think you're owner is racist, why are you still accepting his money? 

I brought up that in an earlier comment.

So the backlash of these actions are effecting the NFL. The viewership is down, the advertisers are losing money because of it.

The NFL owners are attempting to protect their businesses and now one is facing negativity because he put his foot in his mouth. Over an ill advised metaphor?  Yes, IMO there are way too many snowflakes who take offense at most anything that can be construed into something.

It's not a perfect world, never was and never will be.

[Superman]

7 minutes ago, Nadine said:

Same argument used against people harassed at work

 

Right.

 

"If you don't like it, you don't have to work here" is not an appropriate response to any of this.

[Cynjin]

54 minutes ago, Nadine said:

I think we need to update our rules. Social media didn't exist when the Civil Rights Act was passed.

Things are getting a little scary thought police wise

 

Possibly, it’s a public debate worth having.  I just stay off social media for the most part, no Facebook, no twitter, no Snapchat, keeps me out trouble from that aspect.

[Cynjin]

52 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm not saying the CRA has to do with freedom of speech. I'm saying it's an example of employee protection.

 

I said a person has the right not to participate in the national anthem, and you said that right doesn't prevent an employer from taking action against you for not participating in the national anthem. I disagree with that statement. An act of patriotism cannot be a condition of a person's employment.

 

I also don't think a company can hide behind the 'public perception' argument. Jemele Hill making comments ESPN deemed inappropriate is one thing. It would be different if ESPN required all their hosts to stand for the national anthem at the beginning of every show, then singled out one person who decided not to stand and said 'we're firing you because you're hurting our public perception.' The NFL chose to make a show of patriotism a part of their programming, but that doesn't mean they can require their employees to participate.

 

That’s only because the NFL collective bargaining agreement doesn’t require the player to stand.  The NBA does require that their players stand.  If standing for the anthem was a condition of employment, although I don’t know why it would be in most companies, then yes the employer could fire that employee.  In most states employers can fire employees for pretty much any reason they want to.

[2006Coltsbestever]

I am not a Mod or anything but I would allow these type of discussions to go on in here as long as they don't  get out of hand, JMO. I think it's good people can speak there mind on stuff like this. I don't have Facebook or Twitter so this is the only place I Post. Regarding what the Texans did, it doesn't surprise me. I am openly against kneeling (because it's our anthem/flag) but they have a right to do so, so it is what it is at this point.

[Cynjin]

4 hours ago, Swan Ronson said:

I fail to see how kneeling is disrespectful, but that is beside the point.

 

You may not personally be offended by it, but you can't deny that a whole lot of people are. It's all part of the outrage culture. Yes, different sides are outraged by different things, but it's a two way street.

 

I do not deny that many, many people are offended by it and I am okay with those people boycotting the NFL.  Which according to some of the data they are boycotting.  I think it is a bad business decision by the players to “offend” a large percentage of their fan base.

 

 It’s funny, I just read an article about some players in New Jersey taking a knee for the national anthem during a high school game. Two of the officials walked off the field, in essence protesting the protesters. The school officials thought it was OK for the high school players to take a knee but weren’t OK with the officials walking off in protest.   Why is it OK for the high school players to protest something but not the officials?   I find it interesting where some people draw the line, the protesters are OK as long as it conforms with their ideology but it’s not OK if it doesn’t. 

[Yehoodi]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I'm not saying the CRA has to do with freedom of speech. I'm saying it's an example of employee protection.

 

I said a person has the right not to participate in the national anthem, and you said that right doesn't prevent an employer from taking action against you for not participating in the national anthem. I disagree with that statement. An act of patriotism cannot be a condition of a person's employment.

 

I also don't think a company can hide behind the 'public perception' argument. Jemele Hill making comments ESPN deemed inappropriate is one thing. It would be different if ESPN required all their hosts to stand for the national anthem at the beginning of every show, then singled out one person who decided not to stand and said 'we're firing you because you're hurting our public perception.' The NFL chose to make a show of patriotism a part of their programming, but that doesn't mean they can require their employees to participate.

 

I think you are going to have to go a long way to try to stuff the CRA into this argument, especially if the NFL prevents kneeling for any reason.  It is one thing to allow folks to kneel for protesting high taxes then fine someone for kneeling for a cause that is predominately related to one race, then one could view it as discrimination as you singling out one on the base of race. 

 

As for job description, one has a job description, and if one does not like the description they are free to find other employment.  

 

Whether the job description requires socks to be up, not writing on eye black or cleats, do not celebrate in the end zone, stand for the anthem, do not tamper with football, etc., it is all the same to me.  He are the rules, you may wish to work at our fine establishment, or move along down the road. 

 

 

[Yehoodi]

15 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am not a Mod or anything but I would allow these type of discussions to go on in here as long as they don't  get out of hand, JMO. I think it's good people can speak there mind on stuff like this. I don't have Facebook or Twitter so this is the only place I Post. Regarding what the Texans did, it doesn't surprise me. I am openly against kneeling (because it's our anthem/flag) but they have a right to do so, so it is what it is at this point.

 

Agreed, although the underlying subject may be political (societal issues regarding inequity), the main issue has to deal with whether or not a employer can or can not regulate a certain aspect of an employee's work day, which is really not political and simply a whether it is right or not. 

 

It would be good to keep this open as long as possible, the good news is the last few threads on this matter did not degrade into any big political issue. 

[Nadine]

18 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am not a Mod or anything but I would allow these type of discussions to go on in here as long as they don't  get out of hand, JMO. I think it's good people can speak there mind on stuff like this. I don't have Facebook or Twitter so this is the only place I Post. Regarding what the Texans did, it doesn't surprise me. I am openly against kneeling (because it's our anthem/flag) but they have a right to do so, so it is what it is at this point.

When a new situation arises, invariably someone creates a thread about it.  This is NFL related and it is political.  Because it is political eventually it will either be closed because it gets out of hand or closed because people have stated their opinions and moderation doesn't have time to watch it anymore.

 

So, short answer is, sometimes we cannot avoid politics but, we still maintain that this is a board primarily for fans to connect with fans about football.

[buccolts]

7 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

It is not that   

 There are certain things you do not say around certain groups 

 

The only sensitive audience here, should have been inmates, and security guards.

[Superman]

38 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

 

That’s only because the NFL collective bargaining agreement doesn’t require the player to stand.  The NBA does require that their players stand.  If standing for the anthem was a condition of employment, although I don’t know why it would be in most companies, then yes the employer could fire that employee.  In most states employers can fire employees for pretty much any reason they want to.

 

I'm pretty sure whether or not the players are 'required' to stand during the national anthem is not a collectively bargained detail, either in the NBA or NFL. What's collectively bargained is the league's authority to impose rules on the players, but that collectively bargained authority does not supersede the rights of the players. I'm of the opinion that the NBA's rule requiring players to stand is a violation of the players' rights, but that's my interpretation of the right a person has to refrain from an act of patriotism.

[buccolts]

4 hours ago, Swan Ronson said:

He didn't say inmates running the asylum, which is a common phrase.

 

He said inmates running the prison. A subtle difference, but an important and sensitive one given the current climate and what the players are protesting.

 

 

 

"I could care less".

THAT is an overwhelmingly miss used phrase.

People don't make the conscience decision to butcher it, and I doubt that took place here. Assuming, of course, that's what you were insinuating.

[CF4L]

Its an expression that I personally don't find racist but I can see why it would be offensive your employer thinks you are an inmate. Who would want to work for someone who thinks of them that way?

 

That being said they are millionaires so good luck getting the average joe to feel bad for them over this.

 

If its so terrible they should just quit many would be glad to take their place. They won't give up that cushy paycheck though which is why their protest is dumb to me.

[buccolts]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Which just makes the point further. The idea is 'if you want to play in our league, you'll do what we say, and you should feel grateful that we give you the chance to do so.' The slavemaster connotations are obvious, and this is a sentiment that has been expressed by lots of professional owners in recent years.

 

That is not exclusive to slavemasters, and it's gone on forever.

It only takes an egomaniac, on a power trip, whom are a plenty.

[buccolts]

3 hours ago, runthepost said:

Racist statement no? Inappropriate yes. If he said slaves running the plantation then I’m sure no one would be on his side.

 

And if he said 'Tale wagging the Dog', PETA calls, and his dog doesn't get his paper.

[jvan1973]

He is an old rich man.    He will be fine.   With social media no one can misspell,   misspeak or have a bad day without the SJW getting upset.    Everyone wants to be the victim of something

[RockThatBlue]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Right.

 

"If you don't like it, you don't have to work here" is not an appropriate response to any of this.

Doesn't make much sense to keep taking money from someone that you think is racist though, either. "Hes racist, but I'll still keep accepting millions from him year after year"

 

If I thought my current boss was racist, I would leave, and I'm sure most people would probably do the same.

[Nadine]

19 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

He is an old rich man.    He will be fine.   With social media no one can misspell,   misspeak or have a bad day without the SJW getting upset.    Everyone wants to be the victim of something

Well, that just sounds like excuses to me.......like Harvey Weinstein and today Kevin Spacey.

 

Granted in his case it's just words but  deplorable is just a word too you know?

[jvan1973]

Just now, Nadine said:

Well, that just sounds like excuses to me.......like Harvey Weinstein and today Kevin Spacey.

 

Granted in his case it's just words but  deplorable is just a word too you know?

If he used the proper saying using asylum and not prison,   people would still be offended.   

 

And this isn't close to sexual assault 

[Nadine]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

If he used the proper saying using asylum and not prison,   people would still be offended.   

 

And this isn't close to sexual assault 

They would because it's still offensive

Agree it's not assault but they're making excuses too

 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, buccolts said:

 

That is not exclusive to slavemasters, and it's gone on forever.

It only takes an egomaniac, on a power trip, whom are a plenty.

 

Doesn't mean the parallel isn't there, especially in a club -- pro sports ownership in the US -- that's dominated by older white men who mostly employ minority players who were raised in lower and middle class households.

 

It's also been driven home by comments from Donald Sterling (who basically said 'my players should love me because I make them rich, they don't care whether I say/do racist stuff') and the reaction from Dan Gilbert when LeBron James left in free agency.

[jvan1973]

10 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

Doesn't make much sense to keep taking money from someone that you think is racist though, either. "Hes racist, but I'll still keep accepting millions from him year after year"

 

If I thought my current boss was racist, I would leave, and I'm sure most people would probably do the same.

These players have contracts,   they can't just leave.     But they can refuse to re sign,   unless the get tagged.   I think it's a bit presumptuous to call a man racist over this. 

[jvan1973]

Just now, Nadine said:

They would because it's still offensive

Agree it's not assault but they're making excuses too

 

 Why is it offensive?    I've heard that at my job on one form or another many times in my career.   I'm a union railroad worker.   Never once was I offended

[dgambill]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I'm pretty sure whether or not the players are 'required' to stand during the national anthem is not a collectively bargained detail, either in the NBA or NFL. What's collectively bargained is the league's authority to impose rules on the players, but that collectively bargained authority does not supersede the rights of the players. I'm of the opinion that the NBA's rule requiring players to stand is a violation of the players' rights, but that's my interpretation of the right a person has to refrain from an act of patriotism.

What if the player refused to wear the American flag on his uniform if it was a part of the designed uniform? Could employees refuse to wear the set uniform? I don't know what patriotism has to do with an owner mandated rule of employment...like if a private school mandated that teacher state the pledge of allegiance before class every day as a term of employment do they not have the right to enforce it? No one is making you do it...you enter into that agreement willingly...I'm this case the NFL didn't foresee this not have it as part of their code of conduct...thus I don't think they can force the players...and yes the NBA has it and thus their players must stand. People are forced to do things they disagree with all the time in complying with companies terms of smployemnt...I see this no different. Sure you can disobey but the employer has right to take disciplinary action.

[jvan1973]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Doesn't mean the parallel isn't there, especially in a club -- pro sports ownership in the US -- that's dominated by older white men who mostly employ minority players who were raised in lower and middle class households.

 

It's also been driven home by comments from Donald Sterling (who basically said 'my players should love me because I make them rich, they don't care whether I say/do racist stuff') and the reaction from Dan Gilbert when LeBron James left in free agency.

I think it's a bit early to compare mcnair to Sterling

[NFLfan]

6 hours ago, dgambill said:

I think context means a lot. In a normal everyday setting I don't think that it has any racial or social meaning....however the super charged atmosphere that is the NFL landscape using an analogy of players to prisoners (who are criminals) is not the most sensitive and appropriate of comments. I don't think any owner who really values his employees and their opinions would use such language to describe that situation. It was distasteful at the least and I can see where some players might be offended...especially those that just raised over 20 million dollars for your community while promoting your team and another that gave up game checks to low level employees that work in your organization who are going through a tough time during a disaster....it was not well thought out statement...and very disrespectful imo...and goes possibly to the heart of how Mr. Mcnair views his players/employees. I would feel very cheapened if I worked for a boss that felt that way about me. Again like I said about Cam and many others....do I think he is a racist because he made those comments...I don't know and I won't accuse someone of such a strong hateful accusation...but he said something very crude...and came off as an *.

 

I agree. I don't think he is racist but the comment was inappropriate and offensive. I think it was GoPats who wrote that given that the players are trying to raise awareness of police brutality, calling the players "inmates" looks bad and shows that he does not have much empathy for his players. The fact that he changed the word "asylum" to "prison" makes him look even worse. But I don't think he is racist.

 

I will share a story about being careful when speaking. I once told a veterinarian that "I thought I would kill two birds with one stone." (A very popular expression, no?) Well, he was not pleased. You would have thought that I actually killed two birds. If I had been mindful of my words, I would have known not to say that to a veterinarian. Well, I learned my lesson. I no longer use that expression.

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

Doesn't make much sense to keep taking money from someone that you think is racist though, either. "Hes racist, but I'll still keep accepting millions from him year after year"

 

If I thought my current boss was racist, I would leave, and I'm sure most people would probably do the same.

 

You probably don't work in an exclusive industry the way professional athletes do, where there is a limited amount of opportunity for you to do what you've devoted your life to and be paid at the top of your profession. You also probably aren't restricted by a collective bargaining agreement that doesn't allow you to choose which company you'll work for, and you're probably not contractually obligated to whatever company you choose for four-plus years at the beginning of your career.

 

And again, this idea that 'if you don't like it, you can leave' should just dismiss any issues that anyone has with equality and employees' rights is hard to stomach. No one should have to tolerate inappropriate behavior or comments, or be discriminated against or have their rights violated just because they get to make a lot of money playing football, nor should they be silenced or suppressed because they are meant to be entertainment.

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, NFLfan said:

 

I agree. I don't think he is racist but the comment was inappropriate and offensive. I think it was GoPats who wrote that given that the players are trying to raise awareness of police brutality, calling the players "inmates" looks bad and shows that he does not have much empathy for his players. The fact that he changed the word "asylum" to "prison" makes him look even worse. But I don't think he is racist.

 

I will share a story about being careful when speaking. I once told a veterinarian that "I thought I would kill two birds with one stone." (A very popular expression, no?) Well, he was not pleased. You would have thought that I actually killed two birds. If I had been mindful of my words, I would have known not to say that to a veterinarian. Well, I learned my lesson. I no longer use that expression.

So stupid.   That is an metaphor everyone has heard.    He knows you weren't literally going to kill birds.    It goes back to everyone wanting to be a victim or offended.   My goodness. 

[RockThatBlue]

4 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

These players have contracts,   they can't just leave.     But they can refuse to re sign,   unless the get tagged.   I think it's a bit presumptuous to call a man racist over this. 

Yeah, the racist term being thrown around this is dumb, IMO. Maybe he could've worded it better, but that's a saying that has always been used for years. And besides, hes an owner of a team that is majority Aftican American who he pays millions too, if hes racist hes pretty bad at it.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I think it's a bit early to compare mcnair to Sterling

 

I'm not. I don't know if anyone else is -- I don't think so -- but I said I don't think McNair's comments were racist or meant anything regarding racist views toward players. 

 

My issue is that his comments basically mean players should remember their place, don't get out of line, and do what they're told, and I disagree with that viewpoint.

[jvan1973]

Just now, RockThatBlue said:

Yeah, the racist term being thrown around this is dumb, IMO. Maybe he could've worded it better, but that's a saying that has always been used for years. And besides, hes an owner of a team that is majority Aftican American who he pays millions too, if hes racist hes pretty bad at it.

His general manager is also African American 

[Nadine]

@NFLfan I think most of us have likely inadvertently offended someone.  Rather than arguing with them that they had no right to be offended, we just apologize 

[jvan1973]

Just now, Superman said:

 

I'm not. I don't know if anyone else is -- I don't think so -- but I said I don't think McNair's comments were racist or meant anything regarding racist views toward players. 

 

My issue is that his comments basically mean players should remember their place, don't get out of line, and do what they're told, and I disagree with that viewpoint.

The NBA has done similar things with dress code before and after games.   When things on or off the field start affecting the bottom line,   the owners get nervous

[RockThatBlue]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

You probably don't work in an exclusive industry the way professional athletes do, where there is a limited amount of opportunity for you to do what you've devoted your life to and be paid at the top of your profession. You also probably aren't restricted by a collective bargaining agreement that doesn't allow you to choose which company you'll work for, and you're probably not contractually obligated to whatever company you choose for four-plus years at the beginning of your career.

 

And again, this idea that 'if you don't like it, you can leave' should just dismiss any issues that anyone has with equality and employees' rights is hard to stomach. No one should have to tolerate inappropriate behavior or comments, or be discriminated against or have their rights violated just because they get to make a lot of money playing football, nor should they be silenced or suppressed because they are meant to be entertainment.

Fair points Supe, I just disagree.

[dgambill]

3 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

I agree. I don't think he is racist but the comment was inappropriate and offensive. I think it was GoPats who wrote that given that the players are trying to raise awareness of police brutality, calling the players "inmates" looks bad and shows that he does not have much empathy for his players. The fact that he changed the word "asylum" to "prison" makes him look even worse. But I don't think he is racist.

 

I will share a story about being careful when speaking. I once told a veterinarian that "I thought I would kill two birds with one stone." (A very popular expression, no?) Well, he was not pleased. You would have thought that I actually killed two birds. If I had been mindful of my words, I would have known not to say that to a veterinarian. Well, I learned my lesson. I no longer use that expression.

Wow!! That's funny. Yep...words are powerful...and sometimes consequences...and in this cause perhaps unintended consequences. I do think it's a window to his true feelings. I do think he feels superior to his employees and doesn't appreciate what they have gone through and what they feel is important..and that's not a boss I want to work for.