Reminds me of a situation I was once in myself...
Back in 2008 I was volunteering for the Ron Paul campaign. We had set up banners, were handing out flyers, etc. Needless to say, not everyone was on board with us and politics tends to make some people behave rudely...
A guy drives by, flips us off, and yells "fuck you" (it happens) and we just smile politely and wave, because we know how much that irritates them. But then a minute later...
This lady walks up to me and is very angry. Says she can't believe we would behave that way in public. At first I wasn't following, but I soon realized that she thought *we* were insulting random passing motorists rather than the other way around. And no matter how hard I tried to explain that not only was it not us, it would literally make no sense for us to do such a thing... she was having none of it. "I know what I heard".
Sometimes people "know what they heard", and it's just plain wrong. That happens too.
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Article by SI.com legal analyst concludes it is more likely no defamation lawsuit will be brought
Although it isn’t their call, neither the NFL nor the NFLPA want Rudolph to sue....
As to the NFLPA, it doesn’t want to see two members of its bargaining unit become the plaintiff and defendant in a lawsuit. Likewise, the NFLPA knows that teammates of Rudolph and Garrett would rather not have to testify, especially if what they say under oath undermines their teammate.
Chances are we won’t see a lawsuit. The dispute will probably end with both men publicly contradicting each other. Rudolph can try to restore his reputation by hinting at a lawsuit but not actually going forward with it. Rudolph wants to signal to the football community—and the companies that might one day want to sign him to endorsement deals—that he is a good person. Garrett, meanwhile, wants to signal that he is telling the truth. Both can accomplish their goals without facing off in court.
https://www.si.com/nfl/2020/02/15/mason-rudolph-myles-garrett-possible-lawsuit-steelers-browns
yep but she was very adamant from the very beginning not changing her statement a week later. This is a natural way of reacting to someone who thinks they were called something derogatory. Not issuing an apology then changing your tune after you had time to think it over.
It *is* slander... but not a legal battle Rudolph can win.
- - - Updated - - -
Yeah, not defending Garrett or claiming that this is what did happen, just saying that this does happen. I personally lean towards your interpretation; Garrett is a lying, cowardly piece of shit.
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
FWIW, I think this attempt to absolve himself of blame by lying about someone else will blow up in his face. I think his intention was to get leniency for his next infraction by convincing people to not hold this one against him. Unfortunately for him, he attempted to throw the NFL under the bus too. I think they'll throw the book at him next time he steps out of line just because of that.
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Maybe he said it, maybe he didn't Maybe Garret heard what he thought he heard, mabe he didn't. It's time to drop it and get on with football. One is a great player, one might become one.
This back and forth does neither player any good at this point. I know Garrett started it up again. Dumb move on his part. I'm just saying.
I would like to see a lawsuit to send a message that this kind of stuff will not be tolerated. Right now we got a whole class of people who pull the racecard to get attention, get sympathy, and deflect blame for their own actions and sometimes it crosses the line of slandering others, destroying people's reputations, and sometimes even breaking the law. They do this and can get away with it scot free if it didn't happen. Hell Jussie Smollets fabricates a hate crime and the DA let of Cook County let him get away with it. I think a message needs to be sent that using the race card for the purposes of slander and destroying reputations will not be tolerated
Well if I accuse you of sodomizing barnyard animals with zero corroborating evidence and you deny it, then I give an interview on national television in which I reiterate that you sodomize barnyard animals and for good measure say the farmer is holding back evidence to support my claim, what would you do? Would you go with maybe I did f**k the goat, maybe I didn’t?
Rudolph was assaulted then accused of being a racist but when he does not remain silent it is “back and forth” that does not do him any good?
If he did not respond you can bet Team Garrett and Garrett’s amen corner on ESPN would portray Rudolph’s silence as an admission he did say it.
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Losing also encourages more of the same. Why not take a stand that you can actually win?
"You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland
Not one player heard it, nor did NFL audio. Also if Rudolph did say it, Garrett would have reacted much sooner. He's a liar.
Garret should be slapped with a defamation suit, as this just isn't something anyone should lie about.
It's a PR battle and at least one juror probably will figure Rudolph did not carry his burden of proof if Garrett says it happened - Rudolph's attorney made a point of saying the latest defamatory statement was made in California as a shot that he can avoid bringing the case in Cleveland, but filing in California is no sure thing either.
Plus Rudolph gets deposed pretrial and is asked under oath if he has ever used that word or any other sexist, racist or homophobic terms
I still say if Rudolph does not want to stand down he takes a polygraph exam (even though "lie detector" tests have their own reliability issues) and, assuming he passes it, challenges Garrett to do the same
But as far as what is new on the PR front, Tomlin is hacked off about this enough to go on First Take to chat with Stephen A. this morning, where he tore into both Garrett and ESPN.
“I took offense to it to be quite honest with you,” Tomlin said. ” When it first transpired during the season, we don’t have a lot of time to pause and fight battles of that nature. We said our piece, we were completely cooperative with all parties involved, the Cleveland Browns and the National Football League office. Then, we had to move on, we had another game awaiting us. But when these allegations returned this past weekend, I thought it was appropriate that Mason is properly defended.” ...
“To be quite honest with you, we were hacked off at what we saw this weekend. Not specifically for Myles Garrett, he’s been in the lane that he is in, but what was displayed by ESPN in that panel, the way that the situation was presented, I don’t think was fair to Mason Rudolph, and that is why I am here today.”
https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020...on-first-take/
As a Black Man if i was called that, everyone would know in the moment, not days later. Garrett can 't do this BS...it takes away from actual victims of the word when someone cries wolf like this to justify bad behavior.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...yQIpThD3kq2_x0
Mike Tomlin “hacked off” by ESPN’s handling of Myles Garrett interview
In that statement, Tomlin said he had “received no indication of anything racial or anything of that nature in those interactions” and he repeated that during an appearance on ESPN Monday. Tomlin told Stephen A. Smith that he thought that it was best for everyone to “shut up and move on,” but he chose to take a different path because he was “hacked off” about the way ESPN handled the Garrett interview.
Tomlin said he thought a panel discussion following the interview presented it as a “he-said, he-said” situation without referencing the NFL’s investigation into Garrett’s allegation coming back with no evidence supporting the claim. Tomlin felt that the “way it was presented wasn’t fair to Mason Rudolph.”
Truth. Well said.
Nobody should ever be called that word by anyone. Any black man would and should immediately go off on any person belittling them that way. Garrett only bringing it up well after the fact to try to cover his ass for his own despicable actions is an act of cowardice. Any occurrence of racism should be treated extremely seriously, and these instances where people lie about it hurts the efforts to bring us all together.
The first Steelers-Browns game next season is going to be lit
Glad Coach T is stepping up to defend Rudolph. Rudolph got far too much flak and hate for what Garrett started, escalated, and continued to escalate. I bet that if the exact same situation played out between Garrett and the media's new golden boy Lamar Jackson (the fight, not the ensuing race controversy) NO ONE would have defended Garrett or said it was Jackson's fault and he wouldn't have been fined at all.
Domican Suh, Vontez Burfect and now Garrett.
The Media needs to stop trying to sell us on what a good person Garrett is, he's NOT.
When I listened to the discussion with Chris Simms he says it. He also says "If Mason said it screw him" at least 2ce during the discussion, but he never says that about Garrett. Don't get me wrong he says he doesn't believe Garrett, but why is it so easy to say screw him when talking about Rudolph, but not Garrett.
Yes it will happen again because of the way the Media and the NFL handle it.
Hell even Silver and Black made it seem like it was no big deal. Is this how the rest of the NFL fans feel about dirt bags like these. As long as they are great players let's not rock the boat.
I am not unforgiving but the person needs to show some remorse and none of those mentioned have ever had an ounce of it.
The fact that Garrett doubled down so quickly after he was re-instated shows me he will do it again. He doesn't give a rats ass what the NFL says.
Jussie Garrett, the new Vontaze. Also says a lot about what a loser franchise Cleveland is that they stick by him. Also funny how this is the most headlines this "rivalry" has grabbed since Cleveland re-entered the league, and it's grabbing headlines only because of the thuggery followed by slander of one player, not for anything the Browns as a team have done on the field (which would be nothing). Same goes for Cincinnati, it seems the only time the "rivalry" makes headlines is when their players talk trash or intentionally injure steeler players. I hate the Ravens and John Harbaugh but at least they are a worthy rival, at least they are a rival based mainly on on-the-field stuff.
This is a fallacy. Just because one person or several people or even most people would do it one way doesn't prove that something did or did not happen. Do I believe it happened? No. I don't believe it because I do not think being a part of the Steelers and "supporting your guy" means more to black men on this football team than the decades and centuries of racism that sit behind the use of that single word. Yet, no one came forward and said a word. I do not believe the NFL and the Steelers, who has a black coach and is the organization and ownership responsible for pushing the hiring of minorities in the NFL, would sweep this under the carpet. Finally, Goodell and the NFL has been on the wrong side of many decisions. However, it would have been a bonanza of bonus points from the BLM movement and company had the NFL identified such use and moved swiftly against it. They did not.
For all those reasons, I do not think anything was said. But, just because he didn't come forward immediately does not mean it didn't happen, and just because others would have doesn't negate whether it did or did not happen. I simply don't believe it for all the other reasons listed.
Simple common sense tells you all you need to know. Who would apologize to someone immediately following the game if they had slandered you like that and your emotions are still raw? - Nobody ever would do such a thing.This is a guy who immediately after he is re-instated doubles down on that statement and you want me to believe he would hold this in for a week...an entire week? I may agree with you in principle but not with the way the facts of this incident have played out.
Last edited by Butch; 02-18-2020 at 01:10 PM.
ESPN’s response to Mike Tomlin ripping them... is to try to remove the full video from as many outlets as possible. If you’re wondering why they aired it in the first place, the probably didn’t understand all of the “big words” that Tomlin was using.
“Joe... Joe!!!... what does ‘defamation’ mean???”