Toggle sidebar

OT: 2024 Washington Commanders thread: change we can believe in!

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
  • Like
Reactions: CapitalsCupReality
ynotcaps said:
The only reason I'm laughing is because it's funny when bad things happen to bad people.
Click to expand...
The plot may be thickening….

Heard on the Howard Stern show (take it for what it’s worth) this couple was allegedly online asking for donations and that they were going to go into the game and purposely start conflicts…..now this dumbass bought into it hook line and sinker and probably showed his true colors, but if true…..
 
CapitalsCupReality said:
The plot may be thickening….

Heard on the Howard Stern show (take it for what it’s worth) this couple was allegedly online asking for donations and that they were going to go into the game and purposely start conflicts…..now this dumbass bought into it hook line and sinker and probably showed his true colors, but if true…..
Click to expand...
Barstool had an article out about them pretty much confirming all of this
 
  • Like
Reactions: CapitalsCupReality
It doesn't reflect well on the couple either.

As for the other guy... play stupid games, win stupid prizes. No matter what went on beforehand, everyone is responsible for their own actions, or in this instance, the words that come out of your mouth. Perhaps he'll learn something while trying to find a new job.
 
Would probably not want that guy at a SB party and don't condone what he did, but don't like this societal trend toward firing people for language at a sporting event just because there are cameras all over the place and someone decided to put you on public trial in a way that forces the employer to stave off organized pressure campaigns.

You never see the provocations in these incidents. The mere accusation is a conviction without any mitigating evidence being shown. And companies are not going to issue statements defending something like this while people with agendas go out of their way to seek out the employers and try to ruin them. So the employer has no choice.

Even if the couple said something to him that was equally terrible to elicit this response it won't matter. He can't go back to his boss and present that circumstance unless they want to be dragged into a PR debacle, if they believe him at all. The easiest thing to do is fire someone and say "here's your justice, leave our business alone".

But in the real world every person does or says things that would look bad if the entire world were judging based on a snippet of their worst moment. Should you lose your job because of it?

I get that in this case his company's business focus is at odds with his language, but again something like this is just another indication of the squeeze put to people by corporate leverage over the worker. Maybe this one guy deserves to be fired for sucking, but overall I don't like this trend.

The message is you'd better not open your mouth in a way that can be used against you unless you want a ride to the poorhouse, so just shut up. Your employer controls your behavior at all times. To me that creates a society that is less about freedom and adult responsibility (not the same as consequences) and more about the assumption that namecalling is the same as physical assault.

Guy who goes on a rampage and beats up rando people outside a Ravens game should definitely be fired because he's a violent thug who was recorded committing serious crimes. People saying things in public that are dodgy, but maybe common in other areas or settings...a bit questionable.

We've all said some wacky shit here at times, in the heat of a GDT. Maybe not the same slur but there's been some colorful comments over the course of years of rambling musings. Would we like our bosses to have mobs handing those comments over to them, demanding we be fired because we jokingly called for some player to get injured or some coach to drive off a cliff or whatever?

Point being the medium (social media) and the pressure campaign seem more like the deciding factor here than anything else, or anything truly noble or altruistic.

Alternately, he's an Iggles fan so tough shit.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: ynotcaps, RedRocking, CapitalsCupReality and 2 others
g00n said:
Would probably not want that guy at a SB party and don't condone what he did, but don't like this societal trend toward firing people for language at a sporting event just because there are cameras all over the place and someone decided to put you on public trial in a way that forces the employer to stave off organized pressure campaigns.

You never see the provocations in these incidents. The mere accusation is a conviction without any mitigating evidence being shown. And companies are not going to issue statements defending something like this while people with agendas go out of their way to seek out the employers and try to ruin them. So the employer has no choice.

Even if the couple said something to him that was equally terrible to elicit this response it won't matter. He can't go back to his boss and present that circumstance unless they want to be dragged into a PR debacle, if they believe him at all. The easiest thing to do is fire someone and say "here's your justice, leave our business alone".

But in the real world every person does or says things that would look bad if the entire world were judging based on a snippet of their worst moment. Should you lose your job because of it?

I get that in this case his company's business focus is at odds with his language, but again something like this is just another indication of the squeeze put to people by corporate leverage over the worker. Maybe this one guy deserves to be fired for sucking, but overall I don't like this trend.

The message is you'd better not open your mouth in a way that can be used against you unless you want a ride to the poorhouse, so just shut up. Your employer controls your behavior at all times. To me that creates a society that is less about freedom and adult responsibility (not the same as consequences) and more about the assumption that namecalling is the same as physical assault.

Guy who goes on a rampage and beats up rando people outside a Ravens game should definitely be fired because he's a violent thug who was recorded committing serious crimes. People saying things in public that are dodgy, but maybe common in other areas or settings...a bit questionable.

We've all said some wacky shit here at times, in the heat of a GDT. Maybe not the same slur but there's been some colorful comments over the course of years of rambling musings. Would we like our bosses to have mobs handing those comments over to them, demanding we be fired because we jokingly called for some player to get injured or some coach to drive off a cliff or whatever?

Point being the medium (social media) and the pressure campaign seem more like the deciding factor here than anything else, or anything truly noble or altruistic.

Alternately, he's an Iggles fan so tough shit.
Click to expand...

The court of public opinion is swift, draconian, and at best wrong half the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: g00n
Imagine his company founder seeing this video and announcing "well, the other couple, although we didn't see anything, probably did something to deserve it, and hey everyone makes mistakes, so we're just going to do nothing here".... Good grief the idea that the Eagles fan here is somehow being treated unfairly is absurd.

No one has a "right" to a specific job, and employers do have a right to only hire, retain, and pay people who they see as being worthy of their continued employment. Don't like it? Don't be a complete asshole.
 
Last edited:
kicksavedave said:
No one has a "right" to a specific job, and employers have a right to only hire, retain, and pay people who they see as being worthy of their continued employment. Don't like it? Don't be a complete asshole.
Click to expand...

Sure, for this particular incident, but that's not the point g00n is making. He was pretty clear that, yeah, this guy is a total nitwit, but overall this trend where we immediately condemn people without context and sometimes without proof is something he doesn't like.

And look, if you've never been in a situation where, in reaction to something, you behaved in a way that others would find objectionable if your reaction was all they saw, then you're either very lucky or extremely levelheaded. I think most people have been there at least a time or two.

Many years ago, I found myself at a stop light holding a guy up against his car by his lapels pretty violently. The people right there with us saw what he did and that he did it deliberately, so there was understanding coming from them. But others further behind us in traffic that only saw my reaction? They probably thought I was nuts. And if that's all my employers saw, devoid of any context, they might fire me. And yet if the same thing happened tomorrow, dashcams and cell phones be damned, I don't think I'd react any differently.

To put it a different way, that same year I got attacked by a squirrel. Long story short, my reaction to getting attacked by a squirrel was extremely loud and animated, and this happened out in the open where someone in the distance saw it. And I quickly realized that he couldn't see the squirrel. He just saw me yelling and flailing around like a psychopath.

Same thing. All he saw was the outcome, not the cause that at least somewhat justified it. If he were called the following day to give testimony on my sanity, I'd be shacked up at the wacko basket.

TL;DR: Can't cancel or fire folks without real context and proof. They might have been attacked by a squirrel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neil Racki, RedRocking and g00n
Jags said:
TL;DR: Can't cancel or fire folks without real context and proof. They might have been attacked by a squirrel.
Click to expand...

Sure, don't disagree that consequences should be doled out based on the full picture. In many cases, that is exactly what happens. In some it probably isn't. It really doesn't apply to this particular situation, but to other, non specific cases, I agree that context matters and the full detail is important.

I would hope your employer would ask for the full context and detail had they only seen a partial view of your situation. But I don't think speculation like Barstool sports is engaged in that this couple premeditatedly planned this and intentionally provoked this guy to make his response is valid either. I read the social media posts and Barstools article, its clickbait speculation at its worst. I believe you when you say the guy you needed to grab by your car deserved it, but my post above was purely about Mr Caldwell and his specific situation. He's not being treated unfairly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jags
Ridley Simon said:
Except going 3/5 didn’t *improve* their 4th down proficiency. It made it worse. Adding 60% to whatever, to get 82% doesn’t improve shit.

Come on Orlovsky. Be better. English is a first language for many of us
Click to expand...

Definitely poor wording…they improved in terms of adding to their successful conversions count overall and improved their point totals from those conversions, but adding the 82% confuses all that because they were at 86% prior to that game.

At least he gets it right in the last two sentences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ridley Simon
CapitalsCupReality said:
Definitely poor wording…they improved in terms of adding to their successful conversions count overall and improved their point totals from those conversions, but adding the 82% confuses all that because they were at 86% prior to that game.

At least he gets it right in the last two sentences.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and there's no context. This team had no reason to have any faith in their kickers all year. Seibert started to feel automatic, but only from close.

So when you're trying to build a winning culture, which you can't do without winning, and you believe in your rookie QB more and more each week, and more and more in your O-Line, and less and less in your kicker... Are you really "The Best 4th Down Team Ever!" or are you just a team that made the most out of feeling like you had to go for it a lot?

It's a little of both, impressive nonetheless, but let's not go overboard, Dan.

(I meant Dan Orlovsky, but now that I think about it, maybe also Dan Quinn should take the points sometimes. Fuggit, I'm on board either way.) ;)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ovechkins Wodka
CapitalsCupReality said:
The plot may be thickening….

Heard on the Howard Stern show (take it for what it’s worth) this couple was allegedly online asking for donations and that they were going to go into the game and purposely start conflicts…..now this dumbass bought into it hook line and sinker and probably showed his true colors, but if true…..
Click to expand...
If that's true, then they deserved the bad things that happened to them at the game, too. But that guy could have handled it without calling a woman "an ugly ****ing c-word."

Another real-world incident that begs the age-old question:
Who do you root for in a death match between gonorrhea and chlamydia?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CapitalsCupReality
Ridley Simon said:
I think he blew it 2x not taking FG’s against the Bucs. Made the game harder and far more stressful than it needed to be.
Click to expand...
I felt the same at the time, but I've seen some discussions where the following point made me reconsider:

Of the 4 instances where we went for it and we were in FG range, we succeeded twice and failed twice. The 2 times we succeeded, we ultimately scored TD's, giving us 14 points. If we went for FGs instead, the best we could have gotten -- with an inconsistent kicker -- is 12 points.

In a perfect (read: FANTASY) world, our coach magically knows which times we'll get the 1st and which times he should take the 3, but that's ridiculous.

So the real context for this team is, do you want to tie your fate to your all-time great rookie QB who is a licensed assassin and has proven he can meet every single moment, or the 5th kicker this season, who was available when we needed a 5th kicker late in the season for a reason?

Looking at it from that perspective, I will be far less critical of giving up the shot at 3 in favor of asking Jayden to make a clutch play.

Neil Racki said:
I fought the police butt naked with a broom stick

I am soooo f***ing happy my college years came before smart phones
Click to expand...
OMG, that was YOU?
 
  • Love
Reactions: kicksavedave
ynotcaps said:
I felt the same at the time, but I've seen some discussions where the following point made me reconsider:

Of the 4 instances where we went for it and we were in FG range, we succeeded twice and failed twice. The 2 times we succeeded, we ultimately scored TD's, giving us 14 points. If we went for FGs instead, the best we could have gotten -- with an inconsistent kicker -- is 12 points.

In a perfect (read: FANTASY) world, our coach magically knows which times we'll get the 1st and which times he should take the 3, but that's ridiculous.

So the real context for this team is, do you want to tie your fate to your all-time great rookie QB who is a licensed assassin and has proven he can meet every single moment, or the 5th kicker this season, who was available when we needed a 5th kicker late in the season for a reason?

Looking at it from that perspective, I will be far less critical of giving up the shot at 3 in favor of asking Jayden to make a clutch play.
Click to expand...

Plus, the Skins FO is a big fan of analytics, so I'm willing to bet these aren't just hunch moves by DQ. Someone is running the numbers and showing exactly the odds you just posted - Go 50/50 on TDs vs go 4/4 on FGs. Or the specific play success % for each individual call. They have to know that going for it on 4th and 2 is probably the higher percentage than kicking a 49 yard FG with the guy who can't stop fussing with his own hair. (no offense to people with OCD intended). Point is, your post saying "what's the better odds"? is exactly what they are doing, and at this point I'm not second guessing anything they are doing, they are all f***ing magic!

He's likely also taking into consideration that a missed FG is huge loss of momentum that actually gives the team the ball at the spot, whereas a missed 4th down gives them the ball at the LOS (incomplete pass) or farther from the other teams end zone on the case of a run/pass just short of the 1st down yard line. Making a 4th down conversion is a huge boost to our momentum, which is sometimes also worth the risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom