Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby JT99 » 28 Nov 2017, 13:14

mister bacon wrote:
mj3528 wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
ctz31 wrote:Why the fuck would a coach, whose career and livelihood is directly linked to the quarterback he has playing for his team bench him because he's black, if he thought the black guy would give him a better chance to win?



here's what I'm trying to say 31.

tyrod wouldn't have been benched if he were white, because white men are more likely to give other white men the benefit of the doubt. so it's not McDermott choosing Peterman because he's white, it's that McDermott saw the two of them play and was more likely to see more the faults in tyrod's game (like most bills fans) and overlook the signs Peterman sucked. there's been enough workplace studies done to prove this over and over again. "who gets the benefit of the doubt" type racism is much more difficult (and painful) to spot than overt Donald Sterling racism, but it's the type that has more of an effect on the day to day lives of people. i think after watching Peterman play there is no one on earth who could look at the two guys and think Peterman gave the bills a better chance to win.

tyrod got a shorter leash than Peterman did. Peterman threw more pics in one half of football than tyrod has this entire year. after Peterman threw pic number 3 that should have been obvious. that's what everyday racism looks like. broad deference for some, broad skepticism for others. it's subtle.


Here is what I think. McDermott did not think he could win consistently with Tyrod. So he thought it was better to try with someone else. He was unquestionably wrong that Peterman was that someone else. Also, we don't know how Tyrod interacts with the coaching staff and preparation. That could be a factor. Again, you and I do not know.

It is not like there is not precedent for this type of thinking. We can go back to when Alex Smith lost his job, which started with injury, but Harbaugh went with Kaep and the 49ers went to the Super Bowl. Many people thought that Smith was better at the time and was the safe choice, but Kaep had a higher upside. It was a risk that Harbaugh took that was correct in hindsight.


I see your point of view here but after the 3rd int no one on earth could possibly think Peterman gave them the best chance to win or even compete in that game. that's what I racism is, the ability to go out there and throw two more INTs after throwing three, and then people making excuses for your coaching staff letting you go out there to do it.


If anyone on earth gives a reason for Peterman to have been left in there, that person is committing a racist act.
BigJohnStudd wrote:The original Annie movie from the 80s has a lot of panty shots for a PG rated kids film.


BostonSucksMyBalls wrote:26 Jan 2017 10:53: need the D
User avatar
JT99
Between Bannings
 
Posts: 10113
Joined: 08 Apr 2012, 22:58
Location: Bluesville

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby mister bacon » 28 Nov 2017, 15:24

JT99 wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
mj3528 wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
ctz31 wrote:Why the fuck would a coach, whose career and livelihood is directly linked to the quarterback he has playing for his team bench him because he's black, if he thought the black guy would give him a better chance to win?



here's what I'm trying to say 31.

tyrod wouldn't have been benched if he were white, because white men are more likely to give other white men the benefit of the doubt. so it's not McDermott choosing Peterman because he's white, it's that McDermott saw the two of them play and was more likely to see more the faults in tyrod's game (like most bills fans) and overlook the signs Peterman sucked. there's been enough workplace studies done to prove this over and over again. "who gets the benefit of the doubt" type racism is much more difficult (and painful) to spot than overt Donald Sterling racism, but it's the type that has more of an effect on the day to day lives of people. i think after watching Peterman play there is no one on earth who could look at the two guys and think Peterman gave the bills a better chance to win.

tyrod got a shorter leash than Peterman did. Peterman threw more pics in one half of football than tyrod has this entire year. after Peterman threw pic number 3 that should have been obvious. that's what everyday racism looks like. broad deference for some, broad skepticism for others. it's subtle.


Here is what I think. McDermott did not think he could win consistently with Tyrod. So he thought it was better to try with someone else. He was unquestionably wrong that Peterman was that someone else. Also, we don't know how Tyrod interacts with the coaching staff and preparation. That could be a factor. Again, you and I do not know.

It is not like there is not precedent for this type of thinking. We can go back to when Alex Smith lost his job, which started with injury, but Harbaugh went with Kaep and the 49ers went to the Super Bowl. Many people thought that Smith was better at the time and was the safe choice, but Kaep had a higher upside. It was a risk that Harbaugh took that was correct in hindsight.


I see your point of view here but after the 3rd int no one on earth could possibly think Peterman gave them the best chance to win or even compete in that game. that's what I racism is, the ability to go out there and throw two more INTs after throwing three, and then people making excuses for your coaching staff letting you go out there to do it.


If anyone on earth gives a reason for Peterman to have been left in there, that person is committing a racist act.



i'm curious for you to give your real opinion as our big time coach in residence. do you think my opinion is bonkers? do you think black qbs get less leeway for mistake than white qbs in the nfl?
2006 SOTSG ESPN March Madness Tourney Challenge Champion
2010 SOTSG NFL Pick 'Em Champion

mj3528 wrote: I hate panhandlers with dogs. I feel so bad for the dog.

ctz31 - Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:30 pm: I'm gonna win a chip w romo. I'm done w blacks. No offense
User avatar
mister bacon
Black on Both Sides
 
Posts: 26852
Joined: 10 Dec 2004, 17:06
Location: "The Real Racist" - Greg's Kite

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby JT99 » 28 Nov 2017, 21:12

mister bacon wrote:
JT99 wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
mj3528 wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
ctz31 wrote:Why the fuck would a coach, whose career and livelihood is directly linked to the quarterback he has playing for his team bench him because he's black, if he thought the black guy would give him a better chance to win?



here's what I'm trying to say 31.

tyrod wouldn't have been benched if he were white, because white men are more likely to give other white men the benefit of the doubt. so it's not McDermott choosing Peterman because he's white, it's that McDermott saw the two of them play and was more likely to see more the faults in tyrod's game (like most bills fans) and overlook the signs Peterman sucked. there's been enough workplace studies done to prove this over and over again. "who gets the benefit of the doubt" type racism is much more difficult (and painful) to spot than overt Donald Sterling racism, but it's the type that has more of an effect on the day to day lives of people. i think after watching Peterman play there is no one on earth who could look at the two guys and think Peterman gave the bills a better chance to win.

tyrod got a shorter leash than Peterman did. Peterman threw more pics in one half of football than tyrod has this entire year. after Peterman threw pic number 3 that should have been obvious. that's what everyday racism looks like. broad deference for some, broad skepticism for others. it's subtle.


Here is what I think. McDermott did not think he could win consistently with Tyrod. So he thought it was better to try with someone else. He was unquestionably wrong that Peterman was that someone else. Also, we don't know how Tyrod interacts with the coaching staff and preparation. That could be a factor. Again, you and I do not know.

It is not like there is not precedent for this type of thinking. We can go back to when Alex Smith lost his job, which started with injury, but Harbaugh went with Kaep and the 49ers went to the Super Bowl. Many people thought that Smith was better at the time and was the safe choice, but Kaep had a higher upside. It was a risk that Harbaugh took that was correct in hindsight.


I see your point of view here but after the 3rd int no one on earth could possibly think Peterman gave them the best chance to win or even compete in that game. that's what I racism is, the ability to go out there and throw two more INTs after throwing three, and then people making excuses for your coaching staff letting you go out there to do it.


If anyone on earth gives a reason for Peterman to have been left in there, that person is committing a racist act.



i'm curious for you to give your real opinion as our big time coach in residence. do you think my opinion is bonkers? do you think black qbs get less leeway for mistake than white qbs in the nfl?


Your opinion is right on. The sentences you attached to it are bonkers.

Blacks for sure get less leeway than whites, that's not even arguable, imo.
BigJohnStudd wrote:The original Annie movie from the 80s has a lot of panty shots for a PG rated kids film.


BostonSucksMyBalls wrote:26 Jan 2017 10:53: need the D
User avatar
JT99
Between Bannings
 
Posts: 10113
Joined: 08 Apr 2012, 22:58
Location: Bluesville

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby TheWolf » 28 Nov 2017, 21:30

JT99 wrote:Your opinion is right on. The sentences you attached to it are bonkers.


That's my beef with Bacon''s argument here. I don't think any rational person would disagree that as a general rule, whites get more leeway than blacks, whether it's intentional or not. It just feels like he's trying way too hard to fit this specific scenario into that generality.

Tyrod has been OK, not terrible and not great, but OK, for 2 and a half seasons. You don't have to agree with the decision to bench him, but the dude got a pretty fair shake before someone (coach, GM, whoever) decided he wasn't their long term answer. They tried something new, and it failed spectacularly. But I think it's an insane stretch to say he was allowed to finish the first half instead of getting pulled after the first 3 picks because of some inherent "white guys get the benefit of the doubt" bias. Pulling him any faster than that wasn't making a damn bit of difference in the game, so the coach stuck to his guns and gave the kid a shot to bounce back. It didn't happen by halftime, so he made the change.

I'm not saying subtle racism doesn't exist, but I think it's really hard to see race as any factor whatsoever in this situation.
"our kayaking guy sucked and came last"
- SGSW
User avatar
TheWolf
Hand-Holder
 
Posts: 19425
Joined: 16 Nov 2004, 08:17
Location: Dead

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby Gregs Kite » 11 Dec 2017, 09:42

Apr 22, 2015 3:49 pm Clayton Bigsby i enjoy sports

Magnum - Thu Aug 17, 2017 3:36 pm: perhaps my reaction was built up greg hatred finally coming through. fuck that guy.

Frank the Tank wrote:If I die I leave my red font to Kite.
User avatar
Gregs Kite
Friend of Friends
 
Posts: 24465
Joined: 20 Jan 2007, 15:59
Location: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby SouthernYokel » 11 Dec 2017, 09:45

i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.
BostonSucksMyBalls - Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:12 pm: I hope Jax wins next week. If the eagles lose to New England, I’m killing myself on Facebook Live
User avatar
SouthernYokel
Hank the Hangover Turtle
 
Posts: 30401
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 08:09

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby mister bacon » 11 Dec 2017, 11:22

SouthernYokel wrote:i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.



there are more cameras with better angles available than ever before. i think that's the difference.
2006 SOTSG ESPN March Madness Tourney Challenge Champion
2010 SOTSG NFL Pick 'Em Champion

mj3528 wrote: I hate panhandlers with dogs. I feel so bad for the dog.

ctz31 - Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:30 pm: I'm gonna win a chip w romo. I'm done w blacks. No offense
User avatar
mister bacon
Black on Both Sides
 
Posts: 26852
Joined: 10 Dec 2004, 17:06
Location: "The Real Racist" - Greg's Kite

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby mister bacon » 11 Dec 2017, 11:23

SouthernYokel wrote:i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.



there are more cameras with better angles available than ever before. i think that's the difference.
2006 SOTSG ESPN March Madness Tourney Challenge Champion
2010 SOTSG NFL Pick 'Em Champion

mj3528 wrote: I hate panhandlers with dogs. I feel so bad for the dog.

ctz31 - Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:30 pm: I'm gonna win a chip w romo. I'm done w blacks. No offense
User avatar
mister bacon
Black on Both Sides
 
Posts: 26852
Joined: 10 Dec 2004, 17:06
Location: "The Real Racist" - Greg's Kite

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby SouthernYokel » 11 Dec 2017, 14:42

mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.



there are more cameras with better angles available than ever before. i think that's the difference.


we've had these angles for at least 5 years though. i think there's been a more recent change in the way the networks think about the injuries and whether they're protecting the player's privacy by not showing it or protecting the player's health by showing it (and forcing the correct protocol to be followed, which they still didn't do for Savage because he's so important to Houston's success...wait what, why did they put him back in there again?). i don't want to open the racial can of worms but i will anyway it kind of reminds me of video of police violence in a lower stakes kind of way.
BostonSucksMyBalls - Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:12 pm: I hope Jax wins next week. If the eagles lose to New England, I’m killing myself on Facebook Live
User avatar
SouthernYokel
Hank the Hangover Turtle
 
Posts: 30401
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 08:09

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby mister bacon » 11 Dec 2017, 16:00

SouthernYokel wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.



there are more cameras with better angles available than ever before. i think that's the difference.


we've had these angles for at least 5 years though. i think there's been a more recent change in the way the networks think about the injuries and whether they're protecting the player's privacy by not showing it or protecting the player's health by showing it (and forcing the correct protocol to be followed, which they still didn't do for Savage because he's so important to Houston's success...wait what, why did they put him back in there again?). i don't want to open the racial can of worms but i will anyway it kind of reminds me of video of police violence in a lower stakes kind of way.



please unpack this a bit for me. I'm curious. /nnf
2006 SOTSG ESPN March Madness Tourney Challenge Champion
2010 SOTSG NFL Pick 'Em Champion

mj3528 wrote: I hate panhandlers with dogs. I feel so bad for the dog.

ctz31 - Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:30 pm: I'm gonna win a chip w romo. I'm done w blacks. No offense
User avatar
mister bacon
Black on Both Sides
 
Posts: 26852
Joined: 10 Dec 2004, 17:06
Location: "The Real Racist" - Greg's Kite

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby TheWolf » 11 Dec 2017, 16:04

mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.



there are more cameras with better angles available than ever before. i think that's the difference.


we've had these angles for at least 5 years though. i think there's been a more recent change in the way the networks think about the injuries and whether they're protecting the player's privacy by not showing it or protecting the player's health by showing it (and forcing the correct protocol to be followed, which they still didn't do for Savage because he's so important to Houston's success...wait what, why did they put him back in there again?). i don't want to open the racial can of worms but i will anyway it kind of reminds me of video of police violence in a lower stakes kind of way.



please unpack this a bit for me. I'm curious. /nnf


Yoke, I don't know if I understand your initial question/point. Are you saying you don't think these violent hits and serious injuries are more prevalent now, but they're focusing on showing them more to make us think it's a much bigger issue than it really is? Like police violence.
"our kayaking guy sucked and came last"
- SGSW
User avatar
TheWolf
Hand-Holder
 
Posts: 19425
Joined: 16 Nov 2004, 08:17
Location: Dead

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby Jew Jitsu » 11 Dec 2017, 17:44

SouthernYokel wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.



there are more cameras with better angles available than ever before. i think that's the difference.


we've had these angles for at least 5 years though. i think there's been a more recent change in the way the networks think about the injuries and whether they're protecting the player's privacy by not showing it or protecting the player's health by showing it (and forcing the correct protocol to be followed, which they still didn't do for Savage because he's so important to Houston's success...wait what, why did they put him back in there again?). i don't want to open the racial can of worms but i will anyway it kind of reminds me of video of police violence in a lower stakes kind of way.

You're insane if you think the networks show the hits/injuries to protect the players health by showing it.
CourtesyFlush - Wed May 31, 2017 7:52 am: I stopped taking creep shots when I found out a dude who used to work on my floor got arrested for that at a walgreens in uptown charlotte.
User avatar
Jew Jitsu
Never Forgotten
 
Posts: 8932
Joined: 05 Jan 2007, 15:12
Location: Sunset Blvd., North Pole

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby SouthernYokel » 11 Dec 2017, 21:11

TheWolf wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.



there are more cameras with better angles available than ever before. i think that's the difference.


we've had these angles for at least 5 years though. i think there's been a more recent change in the way the networks think about the injuries and whether they're protecting the player's privacy by not showing it or protecting the player's health by showing it (and forcing the correct protocol to be followed, which they still didn't do for Savage because he's so important to Houston's success...wait what, why did they put him back in there again?). i don't want to open the racial can of worms but i will anyway it kind of reminds me of video of police violence in a lower stakes kind of way.



please unpack this a bit for me. I'm curious. /nnf


Yoke, I don't know if I understand your initial question/point. Are you saying you don't think these violent hits and serious injuries are more prevalent now, but they're focusing on showing them more to make us think it's a much bigger issue than it really is? Like police violence.


Yeah see I was trying to avoid that part of the comparison because if you believe excessive police violence is a media creation the analogy does not work.

I think maybe ESPN and CBS feel like it's their duty to report and show these injuries live moreso than they used to. Wasn't that long ago that you would be surprised to hear on Tuesday that a player suffered a concussion on Sunday (source: anonymous guy who is not me who always used his waiver spot to get a defense with a good matchup only to find his #1 wr is out for some bullshit). Now you rarely even have to wait for the post game presser.
BostonSucksMyBalls - Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:12 pm: I hope Jax wins next week. If the eagles lose to New England, I’m killing myself on Facebook Live
User avatar
SouthernYokel
Hank the Hangover Turtle
 
Posts: 30401
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 08:09

Re: Playoff-Bound in '12: The Houston Texans Thread

Postby TheWolf » 11 Dec 2017, 22:05

SouthernYokel wrote:
TheWolf wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:
mister bacon wrote:
SouthernYokel wrote:i have a question about these hits. do we think the tv networks are getting more aggressive in showing this stuff live? i feel like this year the number of violent injuries is through the roof but i also don't think there's anything really different about the way they play the game, if anything they are playing more carefully because of the penalties.



there are more cameras with better angles available than ever before. i think that's the difference.


we've had these angles for at least 5 years though. i think there's been a more recent change in the way the networks think about the injuries and whether they're protecting the player's privacy by not showing it or protecting the player's health by showing it (and forcing the correct protocol to be followed, which they still didn't do for Savage because he's so important to Houston's success...wait what, why did they put him back in there again?). i don't want to open the racial can of worms but i will anyway it kind of reminds me of video of police violence in a lower stakes kind of way.



please unpack this a bit for me. I'm curious. /nnf


Yoke, I don't know if I understand your initial question/point. Are you saying you don't think these violent hits and serious injuries are more prevalent now, but they're focusing on showing them more to make us think it's a much bigger issue than it really is? Like police violence.


Yeah see I was trying to avoid that part of the comparison because if you believe excessive police violence is a media creation the analogy does not work.

I think maybe ESPN and CBS feel like it's their duty to report and show these injuries live moreso than they used to. Wasn't that long ago that you would be surprised to hear on Tuesday that a player suffered a concussion on Sunday (source: anonymous guy who is not me who always used his waiver spot to get a defense with a good matchup only to find his #1 wr is out for some bullshit). Now you rarely even have to wait for the post game presser.


I see where you're going. There might be something to it. Not sure exactly where on the spectrum between "let's raise awareness to these health concerns" and "let's take advantage of these horrific injuries to pique people's morbid curiosity and boost ratings" their motivation lies (although I suspect it's closer to the latter). But it does seem like they're making a concerted effort to focus on this stuff as it happens and give us instant information about it. Or maybe it's just a product of the time we live in, where everyone knows everything about everything 1.9 seconds after it happens, so it's basically nothing more than a coincidence.
"our kayaking guy sucked and came last"
- SGSW
User avatar
TheWolf
Hand-Holder
 
Posts: 19425
Joined: 16 Nov 2004, 08:17
Location: Dead

Previous

Return to NFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dthefritz, JT99 and 1 guest