Warning: Political Takes Watching football!
- Thread starter CGgater
- Start date
- Dec 4, 2016
- 6,063
- 6,875
- Oct 1, 2016
- 851
- 1,205
My initial thought was the same. But I think the indecision of the P5 made it necessary to delay. And with all the talk of liability and just the unknown of everything, I’m sure that played a major part in the decision as well. I actually think it was a good idea in hindsight. You get a chance to survey the landscape and see if playing football is feasible. The NFL will have a 2 week head start and if they’re running smoothly that bodes well for our season reaching a conclusion.
- Apr 26, 2016
- 5,594
- 5,978
I hate to admit it, but under the current political climate what you said makes a lot of sense.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,485
- 110,943
Founding Member
there is no liability for the sniffles.
there is huge liability for shutting down businesses, economic damage, contract losses etc.
- Oct 1, 2016
- 851
- 1,205
There’s whispers of this thing potentially having long lasting affects on the brain.
Personally, I think it’s much ado about nothing. But I understand at least giving it due diligence.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,485
- 110,943
Founding Member
- Sep 24, 2015
- 4,688
- 10,419
- Oct 15, 2014
- 12,185
- 16,976
- Jun 19, 2014
- 9,556
- 15,654
Founding Member
I tried to watch the Memphis/Arky State game last night until the ****ing political commentary started, then I turned it off.
ESPN had better shelve their leftist bull**** while the Gators and SEC are playing. Sports are designed to escape this bull**** for 2 or 3 hours.
ESPN had better shelve their leftist bull**** while the Gators and SEC are playing. Sports are designed to escape this bull**** for 2 or 3 hours.
- Jun 12, 2014
- 5,025
- 8,461
Founding Member
I watched games on ESPN and CBS Sportschannel and there were waaaaaay waaaaay more political commentary and demonstrations during the ESPN games than the others.
I can’t help but think that ESPN encouraged the teams they broadcast to take advantage of the opportunity
- Sep 4, 2014
- 21,378
- 79,909
I remember when Zook stated during the 2004 election that he’d encouraged and made sure each player voted, even though he knew it was for a different candidate than he was voting for. Basically it was nice when it was ok to have differences. It’s funny that it’s suddenly seen as this drastic move to ensure that players can vote. Has there ever been a problem with that, or are we just manufacturing issues again? And what if these players select the other guy?
Also, “legal rights”? Yikes. If we’re just making things up, how about guaranteed ponies at birth like some of us have?
The whole thing is so dumb, and so disingenuous it’s embarrassing.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,485
- 110,943
Founding Member
- Jul 18, 2018
- 5,655
- 8,554
The fact that there needs to be empathy for ppl getting their feelings hurt and need their hand held to vote is pretty telling that supplication is the name of the game...it’s not about rights it’s about votes...and reminiscent of the famous LBJ quote
- Jul 18, 2018
- 5,655
- 8,554
Im not making the connection
- Sep 4, 2014
- 21,378
- 79,909
Oh, I can and do empathize with people in a tough spot, and have shown that with years of volunteer work and in the general way I live my life. What I don’t do is pretend that these situations happened by chance or aren’t completely correctable if people are willing to be honest and have one of those “conversations” that I alway hear about. But there’s nothing that indicates either of those are likely to happen.
But even l still, just making things up is an insult to everyone involved including themselves.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,485
- 110,943
Founding Member
