Ray Lewis on Ray Rice

[Runscott]

Nice to know where Ray Lewis draws the line on violence.

Surprised ESPN didn't interview Bobby Cox.

[clydepepper]

What amazes me about this mess is that the woman decided to marry him AFTER it happened. Did he make more promises than the normal groom based on his actions? Probably. Will she hold this as something she would always be able to use against him? Probably. Hard to see a healthy relationship there. I predict it will not end good.

The shame is that it perpetuates the habit of women staying with men who mistreat them...sometimes with fatal results (i.e. OJ and several others)

I maybe alone because I was always a gentleman, but I can live with that.

[HRBAKER]

Interesting comments from someone who would be better served keeping his mouth shut on this one.

[packs]

The whole situation is totally confusing to me. I keep reading comments like "the video changed things" but in all honesty, what did the video change? Everyone already knew this "man" knocked his wife out. Everyone saw her laid out on the ground and him trying to figure out what to do now.

So now we've seen him knock her out. What did anyone think happened in that elevator before the video was released? Did the Ravens and the NFL think that maybe Ray Rice just sneezed and elbowed his wife by accident? This is exactly what should have happened in the first place. The NFL and Ravens are disgusting. They make this move only when the public forces them to, and its in the name of PR rather than taking the stance that the NFL will not accept this behavior.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by packs

The whole situation is totally confusing to me. I keep reading comments like "the video changed things" but in all honesty, what did the video change? Everyone already knew this "man" knocked his wife out. Everyone saw her laid out on the ground and him trying to figure out what to do now.

So now we've seen him knock her out. What did anyone think happened in that elevator before the video was released? Did the Ravens and the NFL think that maybe Ray Rice just sneezed and elbowed his wife by accident? This is exactly what should have happened in the first place. The NFL and Ravens are disgusting. They make this move only when the public forces them to, and its in the name of PR rather than shining a light on an animal and taking the stance that the NFL will not accept this behavior.

+1. The video added nothing but confirmation of what was already known, and what Rice already admitted doing. He accepted full responsibility and offered no excuses. That of course doesn't make it right, but the video only titillates the masses. It might have been different had it shown him crowding her immediately upon entering the elevator and then wailing like a boxer. However, it was a simple one punch, as he had admitted. She came at him, he has no where to go, should have just taken it---I'm offering no excuses but again, this video did not change a damn thing.

Now of course there's the rush to see who can be the most outraged, and the hunt for those who don't express enough of it--they must be insensitive at best and part of the problem at worst. Further affirmation of our society today- extreme reactions only please, all others need not apply.

[Section103]

I don't disagree with anyone above that the video should not have changed things, but I will take a slightly different view and at least explain a bit of "why" things have changed. Most importantly, I had an inherent misplaced belief that the justice system was not failing so catastrophically. I knew something bad really happened, but I also didn't know all that happened. I knew that BOTH (yes BOTH) parties were charged with assault. Combine those two things with the belief that the justice system was working remotely appropriately, and Im inclined to at least not rush to judgment and outrage. I acknowledge nothing she could have done could have made Rice's actions justifiable. I have never even begun to justify or support Rice in any way. Both the fact that both parties were charged and not knowing "what really happened" is a completely different position from where I am today.

The biggest travesty in all of this is that the criminal system had all of this information all along and merely sent Rice to class. Its a travesty of justice. I don't really give a crap about the NFL or whether Rice plays again (I hope he doesn't). Most importantly, I find the actions of the legal system absolutely chilling.

[Runscott]

Only thing new in this video was how clearly it showed him accidentally kicking his unconscious fiancé... twice. You think you'd be more careful with an unconscious body lying out in public view.

This isn't going to change anything. Overpaid athletes feel entitled to act out on their emotions at a level that the rest of society says is clearly inappropriate. Always been that way - always will be. Ask Ray Lewis.

[packs]

Meanwhile Josh Gordon is suspended for an entire season for smoking weed and hurting no one and Aldon Smith receives a 9 game suspension for multiple DUIs and weapons charges.

And oh yeah, Greg Hardy was convicted of two counts of domestic violence and received no suspension at all. Think that happened a while ago? He was found guilty on July 16th. He also played on Sunday.

[Runscott]

Yeah, I don't think most people realize what 'domestic violence' actually is: it generally consists of clocking a woman, exactly (or worse) than Ray Rice did.

[packs]

The NFL is like some dated father who hates weed smoking hippies and thinks boys will boys every now and then.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

The NFL is like some dated father who hates weed smoking hippies and thinks boys will boys every now and then.

The NFL is a business, pure and simple. They will do whatever they can to make money, modifying their image according to what they perceive the public to desire. If wife-beating by their players gave them an image of being tougher and cooler, and as a result people bought more Ray Rice shirts, the NFL would be working on a smear campaign against Rice's wife.

[HRBAKER]

All the video did was make a bad PR situation much worse.

[clydepepper]

The League's stance that it did not see the video until today is evidence of either a colossal lie or a colossal blunder, most likely both.

There is no doubt the League has the 'reach' and the 'where-with-all' to have seen the tape almost immediately, but they may have been so arrogant to believe that they could make it disappear by ignoring it. And it's obvious they did not want to see it.

This kind of slanted justice is all-so familiar. Money talks.

Meanwhile, the owner of the Atlanta Hawks felt undue guilt and pressure and decides to sell his interest in the team because he stated facts by using stereotypes. Well, stereotypes that are true should be allowed...and doing so in no way, shape, or form makes the usewr a racist.- just someone who, in this age of extreme political correctness, has the backbone and integrity to speak the truth.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

This kind of slanted justice is all-so familiar. Money talks.

Meanwhile, the owner of the Atlanta Hawks felt undue guilt and pressure and decides to sell his interest in the team because he stated facts by using stereotypes. Well, stereotypes that are true should be allowed...and doing so in no way, shape, or form makes the usewr a racist.- just someone who, in this age of extreme political correctness, has the backbone and integrity to speak the truth.

I have to agree with you, but more telling - my girlfriend, who is so far left she's somewhere out in the Pacific Ocean, also agrees with you.

To fill the house, he needed to change race relations in Atlanta. Not gonna happen anytime soon, and certainly not by the owner of a basketball team.

[packs]

His observations on race relations were valid, but he expressed himself very poorly. And as noted by the press, the way he expressed himself made it seem as though he valued one race of fans over another, which is clearly not a viewpoint the NBA supports.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by packs

His observations on race relations were valid, but he expressed himself very poorly. And as noted by the press, the way he expressed himself made it seem as though he valued one race of fans over another, which is clearly not a viewpoint the NBA supports.

The big money is in group ticket sales and that usually means Corporations and that usually means white. His intention was neither black nor white, but green.

[packs]

Sure, but like I said he expressed himself very poorly.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

His observations on race relations were valid, but he expressed himself very poorly. And as noted by the press, the way he expressed himself made it seem as though he valued one race of fans over another, which is clearly not a viewpoint the NBA supports.

I disagree. He stated that there wasn't a big enough fan base among blacks to support the team completely by themselves. He wanted both black and white, and expressed his frustration that that probably wasn't a business option in Atlanta, which seems to me to be less racist than wanting to have a team of predominantly black fans.

Switch 'black' and 'white' in his email, and tell me it still sounds racist.

[drcy]

If he had instead emailed that there were too many men attending the basketball games and he wanted to increase the percentage of women who attend, there would not only be no controversy but the effort would likely be applauded.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by drcy

If he had instead emailed that there were too many men attending the basketball games and he wanted to increase the percentage of women who attend, there would not only be no controversy but the effort would likely be applauded.

Or if he said that he didn't like white basketball fans as much, and he was thinking of implementing a program to get rid of them and increase black attendance....NBA Owner of the Year.

[packs]

I don't know guys. You're talking about marginalized African Americans and women and somehow equating their experience to that of white men in America. Doesn't seem to match up.

You posted a general summary of what he said. Not what he actually said. Which was that he believed African Americans don't have money, scare white people, the cheerleading team is too black, and even the kiss cam is too black. That's not a good way of expressing your views on racial divide in your city.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't know guys. You're talking about marginalized African Americans and women and somehow equating their experience to that of white men in America. Doesn't seem to match up.

You posted a general summary of what he said. Not what he actually said. Which was that he believed African Americans don't have money, scare white people, the cheerleading team is too black, and even the kiss cam is too black. That's not a good way of expressing your views on racial divide in your city.

You also have posted your interpretations of his words, with some spin, and not what he said.

I have no idea whether or not the blacks in questioned are 'marginalized'. I do now that, having lived in the Atlanta area for 12 years, and Seattle for 8, that the race dynamics thing is hugely different between the two areas, and it has to do mainly with specific attitudes in the two geographies. Questions as to what race fans are would never come up in Seattle, whereas it is obviously somewhat important in Atlanta. There are reasons for that, and fault lies on both sides. I'm telling you this from experience, not from theory.

I'm not going to go dig up the email, but I don't believe he said that African Americans don't have money, only that there weren't enough of them interested in spending it on basketball, and that's key - he was running a business, which required that he get more attendance. The 'primarily black' formula wasn't/isn't working. Your comment that he said "the cheerleading team is too black" is also a bit misleading - he wanted some white cheerleaders so it didn't look like his team was designed only for black fans. What is wrong with that?

Nothing either of us have said has or will change the facts in Atlanta.

I think the owner used the 'LA Clippers debacle' to get out of being an owner of the Hawks. He knew that if he published that email and volunteered to sell, he'd be allowed off the hook quickly and painlessly. Bye bye bad business situation.

[packs]

Here's where he implied that he believes African Americans don't have money:

"And many of our black fans don’t have the spendable income which explains why our f&b and merchandise sales are so low. At all white thrasher games sales were nearly triple what they are at hawks games (the extra intermission explains some of that but not all)."

This statement is not based in fact or studies, just his impression that the reason they aren't selling more merchandise is because African Americans don't have any money. It says nothing about not wanting to spend money on the Hawks. It just assumes there's no money to be spent. But of course all the white people have tons of money to throw around.

All I'm trying to point out is that even if he had some valid points, they were all overshadowed by the language he used to express them.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Beat your fiancée, get banned from the NFL.

Get drunk and kill someone (Josh Brent), serve 180 days in jail and welcome back to the NFL.

Domestic violence > manslaughter, only in the NFL.

Not trying to minimize what Ray Rice did in any way, but I hope he sues the H3LL out of the NFL.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't know guys. You're talking about marginalized African Americans and women and somehow equating their experience to that of white men in America. Doesn't seem to match up.

You posted a general summary of what he said. Not what he actually said. Which was that he believed African Americans don't have money, scare white people, the cheerleading team is too black, and even the kiss cam is too black. That's not a good way of expressing your views on racial divide in your city.

Here is, at least, a portion of what he said:

Bruce Levenson, the managing partner of the Atlanta Hawks, became the second NBA owner in the past five months on Sunday to surrender his franchise over racially insensitive remarks.

In a statement, Levenson announced his intent to sell his controlling stake in the team and apologized for a 2012 e-mail regarding the Hawks’ attendance problems and inability to attract suburban whites that included “inappropriate and offensive” comments.

“My theory is that the black crowd scared away the whites and there are simply not enough affluent black fans to build a significant season ticket base,” Levenson wrote in the e-mail, which also claimed that the Hawks were attracting an “overwhelming black audience” and noted that “there are few fathers and sons at the games.”

No one I know, black or white, is comfortable being the 'overwhelming' racial minority in any social situation. Most of us are more comfortable when the crowd racial makeup has us in the majority or at least about even. That's a natural feeling and there is nothing is wrong with it. Anyone who thinks that is racism has problems of their own in that area.

[packs]

I just don't see how you can dismiss the stereotyping going on in his statements. Look at how he assumed there are few fathers and sons at games because of the African American audience. That is not based in any kind of fact. It is an extension of the long held stereotype that African Americans are dead beat dads. That statement alone is so problematic I don't see how you could get past it without rolling your eyes.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

Here's where he implied that he believes African Americans don't have money:

"And many of our black fans don’t have the spendable income which explains why our f&b and merchandise sales are so low. At all white thrasher games sales were nearly triple what they are at hawks games (the extra intermission explains some of that but not all)."

This statement is not based in fact or studies, just his impression that the reason they aren't selling more merchandise is because African Americans don't have any money. It says nothing about not wanting to spend money on the Hawks. It just assumes there's no money to be spent. But of course all the white people have tons of money to throw around.

All I'm trying to point out is that even if he had some valid points, they were all overshadowed by the language he used to express them.

Got you - missed that part of spending on merchandise.

My experience of watching people at sports events, is that yes, they do have tons of money to throw around - I haven't spent any time looking at the skin-color of purchasers, so I have no insight into that. But if the fans at Hawks games don't spend money except to get in the door, regardless of their race, then yes, that should be a business concern. I guess his formula, like anyone's, would be 'get more fans with more money'. He apparently thinks affluent whites are the way to go and he wants to attract more of them. I agree that re-wording the email could help. Something like: "we need to sell more tickets to affluent people while continuing to attract our current fan-base, which apparently is dead-ass broke."

When I used to go to games at the Astrodome, I sat in the outfield cheap seats, and I did notice that there was a large percentage of Hispanic fans. Didn't matter, but it was a fact. Ticket prices were never a factor in my decision to go to games, as I could get in for practically nothing. Now that I am self-employed, I do have to consider ticket price, and as a result have only been to one Mariners game all year. If I still had a cheap-seat outfield option, I'd be at the game all the time. I wonder if the higher ticket prices at the new stadiums is driving other lower-income folks away from games? (I rhetorically wonder). Maybe the Hawks need to build a more expensive arena, driving away anyone with financial concerns, and turning the seats over to corporations, which seems to be the present trend.

Also, I would love to see your politically-correct re-write of his email. If I get really bored, maybe I'll come up with one

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

No one I know, black or white, is comfortable being the 'overwhelming' racial minority in any social situation. Most of us are more comfortable when the crowd racial makeup has us in the majority or at least about even. That's a natural feeling and there is nothing is wrong with it. Anyone who thinks that is racism has problems of their own in that area.

It's that way in a lot of geographical areas, but not everywhere. Lots of factors to consider. Quite frankly, I'm surprised (if it's even true) that whites in the Atlanta area are "afraid" to go to Hawks games. But I have had situations in downtown Atlanta where I walked in the wrong direction after a game, trying to find our car or train, and it was downright dangerous. I actually once told my teenage son that we needed to begin moving very quickly, and I hate scaring my kids. I can't imagine such a situation in Seattle near any of the venues. There are some cultural issues in the Atlanta area that can't be completely ignored if you have any survival instinct.

Originally Posted by packs

I just don't see how you can dismiss the stereotyping going on in his statements. Look at how he assumed there are few fathers and sons at games because of the African American audience. That is not based in any kind of fact. It is an extension of the long held stereotype that African Americans are dead beat dads. That statement alone is so problematic I don't see how you could get past it without rolling your eyes.

How did you decide he had "assumed" something based on stereotypes? It sounds like you have a stereotype of how wealthy white guys think. You don't think he ever goes to games and actually uses first-hand data? If you see lots of couples or groups of men, and few men with children, then you pretty much CAN draw a valid conclusion about the make-up of the attendees.

[packs]

Here is what he said:

then i start looking around our arena during games and notice the following:

-- it's 70 pct black
-- the cheerleaders are black
-- the music is hip hop
-- at the bars it's 90 pct black
-- there are few fathers and sons at the games


There is a direct correlation between his opinion that there are fewer fathers and sons at games because there are mostly African American fans there.

I'm content with being a minority of one that thinks this guy's comments are way off base and out of touch.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

Here is what he said:

then i start looking around our arena during games and notice the following:

-- it's 70 pct black
-- the cheerleaders are black
-- the music is hip hop
-- at the bars it's 90 pct black
-- there are few fathers and sons at the games


Ok, so here is a direct correlation between his opinion that there are fewer fathers and sons at games because there are mostly African American fans there.

I'm content with being a minority of one that thinks this guy's comments are way off base and out of touch.

Packs, you need a lesson in logic. You might as well make the assumption that because the bars are 90% black and all men, that none of the men have sons.

[packs]

Well here's a question for you. How come there are no variables in any of his observations? He makes no distinctions between day games and night games. Weekday games and weekend games. Ages of fans. Etc.

Also, how is that an accurate assumption? Do you know if someone has a son by looking at them? Wouldn't it be equally as reasonable to assume there are less people with children attending the games? Why lump that point in with three or four other points that all reference race, if you don't think race is the driving factor?

[Runscott]

They do all mention race but are also observable occurrences, so you cannot state that he made assumtions. You have no idea what he observed and what he assumed.

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

[Runscott]

Also, your point about variables is irrelevant to my previous comments. Obviously you could carry it to even more ludicrous extremes and ask why he didnt append a statistical analysis to his email.

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

[packs]

His comments directly echo multiple stereotypes perpetuated about African Americans. So my assumptions that they were motivated by general and totally non-specific views (i.e. stereotypes) about race are valid in my mind, especially in the absence of any other variables. For example, there is no discussion about the quality / selection of the food and beverage options and merchandise available at Hawks games. But he does assume that African American fans are definitely not buying them because they don't have any money. And he's positive that white fans, solely because they're white, do have money (three times as much according to his Thrashers quote).


Putting that aside, what is there to defend about his comments? The direct quotes I've posted don't bother you at all?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

His comments directly echo multiple stereotypes perpetuated about African Americans. So my assumptions that they were motivated by general and totally non-specific views (i.e. stereotypes) about race are valid in my mind, especially in the absence of any other variables. For example, there is no discussion about the quality / selection of the food and beverage options and merchandise available at Hawks games. But he does assume that African American fans are definitely not buying them because they don't have any money. And he's positive that white fans, solely because they're white, do have money (three times as much according to his Thrashers quote).


Putting that aside, what is there to defend about his comments? The direct quotes I've posted don't bother you at all?

That's a good question. It is certainly possible that he's offering up items that whites would be more interested in purchasing, and same for food selection. So what food items would you suggest he offer?

Meanwhile, since you have ignored my rebuttal that the Hawks' owner could very well have physically observed the fact that there are not very many black fathers attending games with their sons, I'll move on to some other discussions. Making assumptions about the man doesn't do anyone any good.

[packs]

Hey, we just have different opinions. No big deal. I think he chose a poor way of expressing himself.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

Hey, we just have different opinions. No big deal. I think he chose a poor way of expressing himself.

True, it's no big deal.

I wonder if anyone else thinks he was just using the old email to get out of owning the team.

[2dueces]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Beat your fiancée, get banned from the NFL.

Get drunk and kill someone (Josh Brent), serve 180 days in jail and welcome back to the NFL.

Domestic violence > manslaughter, only in the NFL.

Not trying to minimize what Ray Rice did in any way, but I hope he sues the H3LL out of the NFL.

Don't forget about smoking pot and getting banned for a year.
But there are two current players with domestic violence charges playing Sunday and 1 was just sentenced in July. Without a video, I guess it didn't happen.

[clydepepper]

Talk about someone who remains employable in spite of everything:

Donté Stallworth Timeline

On March 1, 2008, Stallworth signed a seven-year, $35 million deal with the Cleveland Browns.[5] However, he had just 17 catches for 170 yards and one touchdown for the Browns in 2008 and then missed the entire 2009 season after being suspended by the NFL following his conviction on manslaughter charges. On February 8, 2010, after being reinstated by the NFL, the Browns terminated Stallworth's contract.[6]

On February 16, 2010, Stallworth signed a one-year, $900,000 deal with the Baltimore Ravens.[7]On August 28, 2010, Stallworth broke his foot in a preseason game against the New York Giants. Head Coach John Harbaugh stated that this injury was not season-ending and Stallworth would be back after the Ravens' bye week. Stallworth made his return to the active Ravens roster in October, but his highlight of the season came during a game against the Carolina Panthers where he made his first catch as a wide receiver for the franchise during a regular season game.[8]

On December 23, 2010, Stallworth was voted by his teammates and awarded the Ed Block Courage Award for 2010. But his stats were grim. He had just two receptions for 82 yards, and seven rushes for 45 yards.[9]

[B]Stallworth signed a one-year deal [/B]with the Washington Redskins on July 29, 2011. On November 8, 2011, Stallworth was released by the Washington Redskins and put on waivers.[10] On November 15, 2011, he re-signed with the Redskins after wide receiver, Leonard Hankerson, and defensive end, Kedric Golston, were put on injured reserve.[11] After his return to the team, Stallworth would catch a touchdown pass in the endzone in Week 11 against the Dallas Cowboys allowing the Redskins to go into overtime.[12] At the end of 2011 season, Stallworth recorded 22 receptions, 309 receiving yards, and two touchdowns.[13]

On March 19, 2012, Stallworth signed with the New England Patriots.[14] On August 27, 2012, Stallworth was released by Patriots.[15] On December 3, 2012, Stallworth re-signed with the Patriots because of a broken right foot suffered by wide receiver Julian Edelman and lack of depth at the wide receiver position.[16] On December 11, it was reported that Stallworth was placed on injured reserve with an ankle injury after only playing in one game during his brief return and making a 63 yard reception for a touchdown.[17]

Stallworth re-signed with the Redskins on June 12, 2013.[18][19] On August 26, 2013, Stallworth was waived by the Redskins again.[20]

So some of the political pundits are all over former New England Patriots receiver Donte Stallworth, who was just named a politics fellow at The Huffington Post, where he will cover national security, because he once publicly stated that Osama bin Laden wasn’t responsible for the 9/11 attacks. But if the 
politicos think that’s odd, wait till they hear about Donte’s Martian alter ego, Nicco!

Ray Rice may be the best thing that ever happened to Donte Stallworth.

As Casey used to say, "AMAZIN'!"

[vintagetoppsguy]

I'm surprised Aaron Hernandez isn't out while awaiting trial and playing for the Patriots.

[itjclarke]

If I remember correctly, there were some really really odd circumstances surrounding the Dante Stallworth manslaughter. I'll google it later, but think there was a guy wandering on a 4-5 lane freeway at like 2am and he walked in front of Stallworth's car. I think it was maybe even suspected as a possible suicide... however, pretty sure Stallworth had been drinking.

CLARIFICATION- according to Wiki, the accident actually happened at 7:15am and was the morning following a night of drinking for Stallworth. The victim was walking on a the roadway of a causway, not the sidewalk. Stallworth apparently tried to warn him by flashing his lights, but some how still ended up hitting him. According to lawyers, he probably could have fought the case successfully, but chose not to and accepted the charges.

Leonard Little still owns the DUI category. Early in his career while driving drunk, he kills a young mother and gets suspended 8 games (very weak). Afterward he apologizes, says all the right things, proclaims he is a new man... then goes out and gets another DUI.

Re- current Rice situation, the one positive is seeing Goodell squirm. He's clearly felt untouchable/invincible throughout his reign but I think it's now setting in- his $44M/year dream job may no longer be a lifetime position.

Re- the video, I agree with an earlier post 100%- the tape didn't change the facts, yet it is amazing how much public perception and NFL/team reaction (wholly based on public outcry) changed with its public release. What had they thought happened???? These things are terrible whether there's video or not.

That said, I 100% believe the NFL had this video and whether Goodell saw it or not, he's dug himself a huge hole by stating that to his knowledge no one in the NFL saw it. Either he's lying, or is grossly negligent for not knowing this tape, which apparently was the difference between a 2 game vs an indefinite suspension, was in his NFL office.

I also don't think "law enforcement" liked being thrown under the bus for allegedly not supplying Goodell with this tape. In his CBS interview, Goodell says he requested it several times, but was denied, and that he relied on "law enforcement" to get him needed evidence. Less than 24 hrs after these comments, a "law enforcement" official notified the press that the NFL had been given this tape 5 mths ago and even presented a VM from an NFL employee saying "thanks" for the tape and saying how "bad" the new footage looked.

[HRBAKER]

It all has an oddly Nixonian smell to it.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

That said, I 100% believe the NFL had this video and whether Goodell saw it or not, he's dug himself a huge hole by stating that to his knowledge no one in the NFL saw it. Either he's lying, or is grossly negligent...

Probably both - he is, after all, an NFL executive.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I'm surprised Aaron Hernandez isn't out while awaiting trial and playing for the Patriots.

He wouldn't be playing for them. He was released roughly 90 minutes after being taken into custody, before the charges were even made public. And he'd been banned from the stadium 6 days before that.

He was subject to waivers and went unclaimed.
Then Goodell said he wouldn't approve any contract until his case was settled.

A cynical person might say that the Pats cut him because it voided his 015-018 salaries around 19.3 million and let them withhold a 3.25 million signing bonus payment. (They're also trying to recoup the already paid portion of his signing bonus. ) But then, they also take the salary cap hit sooner by cutting him.

From everything that I've seen I'll be very surprised if he's available for football anytime soon.

Steve B

[clydepepper]

Condalisa Rice, NFL Commissioner?


We could do a lot worse.

[Davino]

Originally Posted by Runscott

The NFL is a business, pure and simple. They will do whatever they can to make money, modifying their image according to what they perceive the public to desire. If wife-beating by their players gave them an image of being tougher and cooler, and as a result people bought more Ray Rice shirts, the NFL would be working on a smear campaign against Rice's wife.

You nailed the reality of the NFL! They are so sick with greed that decency falls by the wayside...

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Nice to know where Ray Lewis draws the line on violence.

Ray Lewis is sharp as a knife. Some of his commentary can be very cutting.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

Ray Lewis is sharp as a knife. Some of his commentary can be very cutting.

Bad boys with abusive or felonious histories are chosen as sportscasters for a reason - there has to be a large number of NFL viewers who are attracted to these guys. From what I remember, it started with Michael Irvin. I was stunned that he was even allowed to be seen on t.v., much less give his opinion on anything. Now you have Ray Lewis. Fortunately for the more discriminating NFL fans, Ray Rice is not anywhere near 'eloquent', so we will be spared getting to see him as a sportscaster some day (if he survives this). Same for Mike Vick - I'm sure the pit bull NFL crowd would love to listen to his opinion on Sundays.

[howard38]

Speaking of NFL scum....I read today that Rae Carruth is expected to be released from prison in just four years. Thankfully he's too old to resume his career but that will add up to only about twenty years for about as heinous a crime as you can imagine.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by howard38

Speaking of NFL scum....I read today that Rae Carruth is expected to be released from prison in just four years. Thankfully he's too old to resume his career but that will add up to only about twenty years for about as heinous a crime as you can imagine.

Oh, I'm sure some team will welcome him back to the NFL as a receiver coach, offensive coordinator or something.