Josh Gordon suspended for 1-year


Herbert77060 said:
It does appear that those with baggage always want to pile on. It is a wonder Barkley is not in jail for all the crap he did. Stephen just recently had his hat handed to him by ESPN and Carter...well, his problems with drugs/alcohol have been aired in public.

I do not know Josh Gordon and I hope what he wrote is true and I hope he wrote it and not some PR person.
Click to expand...

Yep, he had his hat handled by ESPN so much, they gave him a new contract just last week. IJS.
 
Dr. Phreeze said:
Stephen A made a rebuttal of the letter yesterday evening and of course he went on and talked about daring someone to debate him over his thoughts about Josh Gordon.
Click to expand...

He has since indicated that he's had time to think about his comments and is willing to reach out to help Gordon instead of piling on.
 



After he acquiesced and recanted (I forget which issue he addressed) when he was crying on the air. They put him in his place and he was rewarded for acknowledging his place.....IJS


Kenn Rashad said:
Yep, he had his hat handled by ESPN so much, they gave him a new contract just last week. IJS.
Click to expand...
 
This I can applaud.

My point is we (Black folk) seem to feel if we do not pile on another Black person when they screw up then we will fall out of favor with white folk.
It seems if those linked to the majority media don't pile on they will not be perceived as good Black folk.




Kenn Rashad said:
He has since indicated that he's had time to think about his comments and is willing to reach out to help Gordon instead of piling on.
Click to expand...
 
Herbert77060 said:
After he acquiesced and recanted (I forget which issue he addressed) when he was crying on the air. They put him in his place and he was rewarded for acknowledging his place.....IJS
Click to expand...

Actually he did NOT acquiesced, nor did he recant on his comments related to domestic violence. He simply addressed those, who either ignorantly or intentionally, took issue with the comment he made that a one could be provoked into hitting another and turned it into something else.
 
Herbert77060 said:
This I can applaud.

My point is we (Black folk) seem to feel if we do not pile on another Black person when they screw up then we will fall out of favor with white folk.
It seems if those linked to the majority media don't pile on they will not be perceived as good Black folk.
Click to expand...

With the understanding that this is a message board, your opinions are certainly welcomed and appreciated. But allow me to RESPECTFULLY say, that the comment above is an insult to all black folks. It's unfortunate that some (of us) seem to think that whenever a brother (with a national platform) is critical of another brother, it is done with the intent to appease white folk. That thought process is not a poor reflection of the accused, but it is a terribly naive reflection of the accuser or anyone else who has the same belief.

To comment on a public figure, who manages to beat the odds of making a NFL roster and make millions in the process, only to have it come to screeching halt because he can't stay away from the weed, is out of bounds simply because he is black? Really? And because one, who is black, takes a moment to comment on the situation, is only doing it to appease white folks? Really?
 
Kenn Rashad said:
With the understanding that this is a message board, your opinions are certainly welcomed and appreciated. But allow me to RESPECTFULLY say, that the comment above is an insult to all black folks. It's unfortunate that some (of us) seem to think that whenever a brother (with a national platform) is critical of another brother, it is done with the intent to appease white folk. That thought process is not a poor reflection of the accused, but it is a terribly naive reflection of the accuser or anyone else who has the same belief.

To comment on a public figure, who manages to beat the odds of making a NFL roster and make millions in the process, only to have it come to screeching halt because he can't stay away from the weed, is out of bounds simply because he is black? Really? And because one, who is black, takes a moment to comment on the situation, is only doing it to appease white folks? Really?
Click to expand...

Alcohol. He wouldn't fail an NFL drug (weed) test today if he presented the exact same samples he did last year.
 
This Kenn, is acquiescing and recanting. And even AFTER doing this he was still suspended. I get it it. The man has to eat and provide for his family and he does what he feels is necessary. I also understood what he meant in his initial "diatribe" as he calls it. Those who went after him did not misunderstand. They have (and had) an agenda and ulterior motives. The link below will take you to it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/stephen-a-smith-apology_n_5626832.html



Kenn Rashad said:
Actually he did NOT acquiesced, nor did he recant on his comments related to domestic violence. He simply addressed those, who either ignorantly or intentionally, took issue with the comment he made that a one could be provoked into hitting another and turned it into something else.
Click to expand...
 
Addressing the incident is to be expected. They are reporters...kinda sorta. But to use some of the verbiage they use (not just in this case) to discuss the individual's issue and without ALL of the facts is sensationalism.

Just sit back and watch how like incidents are handled when the offender's Black as opposed to others.



Kenn Rashad said:
With the understanding that this is a message board, your opinions are certainly welcomed and appreciated. But allow me to RESPECTFULLY say, that the comment above is an insult to all black folks. It's unfortunate that some (of us) seem to think that whenever a brother (with a national platform) is critical of another brother, it is done with the intent to appease white folk. That thought process is not a poor reflection of the accused, but it is a terribly naive reflection of the accuser or anyone else who has the same belief.

To comment on a public figure, who manages to beat the odds of making a NFL roster and make millions in the process, only to have it come to screeching halt because he can't stay away from the weed, is out of bounds simply because he is black? Really? And because one, who is black, takes a moment to comment on the situation, is only doing it to appease white folks? Really?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Herbert77060 said:
This Kenn, is acquiescing and recanting. And even AFTER doing this he was still suspended. I get it it. The man has to eat and provide for his family and he does what he feels is necessary. I also understood what he meant in his initial "diatribe" as he calls it. Those who went after him did not misunderstand. They have (and had) an agenda and ulterior motives. The link below will take you to it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/stephen-a-smith-apology_n_5626832.html
Click to expand...

Yep, point made and taken. But, I vividly recall him making it clear that this particular topic (domestic abuse) is one that society is, quite frankly, not ready to have an honest discussion about.

But to the larger point, everything isn't about appeasing white folks. That is a mindset that I view as a inferior thought process.
 
Herbert77060 said:
Addressing the incident is to be expected. They are reporters...kinda sorta. But to use some of the verbiage they use (not just in this case) to discuss the individual's issue and without ALL of the facts is sensationalism.

Just sit back and watch how like incidents are handled when the offenders Black as opposed to others.
Click to expand...

I think with all cases one has to consider the source. I know some on here are no fans of SAS, but I don't have a problem with him. I believe he does give a dayum about "his people" and realizes the responsibility/perception that comes with his current status...which is more than I can say for a hand full of black folks on the national stage. But that is another subject.
 
Herbert77060 said:
Addressing the incident is to be expected. They are reporters...kinda sorta. But to use some of the verbiage they use (not just in this case) to discuss the individual's issue and without ALL of the facts is sensationalism.

Just sit back and watch how like incidents are handled when the offenders Black as opposed to others.
Click to expand...

They're not reporters (at least not on FT) Their job is to give opinions on issues, events and news that happens in sport. They're paid, in part, to be sensationalistic because the show is centered around creating and advancing debate on even the most mundane of topics.
 
We are cool. Things are slow today and I have more time than I know what to do with.

Gimme some dap!



Kenn Rashad said:
I think with all cases one has to consider the source. I know some on here are no fans of SAS, but I don't have a problem with him. I believe he does give a dayum about "his people" and realizes the responsibility/perception that comes with his current status...which is more than I can say for a hand full of black folks on the national stage. But that is another subject.
Click to expand...
 



You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top