The Unknown Poster

I would agree. The Dukes of Hazzard thing is utterly stupid. And so is Apple. I wonder if FB will move to ban it? I could sort of see that to a degree. I find it disheartening to see so many people "embracing" it. I prefer under censoring as opposed to over censoring but anything "hateful" is fair game for booting. Using the Battle Flag in innocuous or historic ways should be allowed. If someone wants to proclaim to the world their ignorant or racist views, then let them do so...and suffer the consequences. perspective employers check social media all the time now. If I saw someone draped in the battle flag and proclaiming their southern pride, I'd toss their resume into the trash just for fear of their level of stupidity.

If only there was a profession, say sports reporting, that employed people, lets call them sports reporters, to provide this sort of info. Its not like we're asking them to go out of their way. They are sitting there at the friggen stadium ostensibly watching for crying out loud.

Has it been reported he was unconscious and concussed?

Why do you think thats too much? Consistent goal scorer. Consistent point producer. Advanced stats shows he drives offensive play and makes his linemates better. He hardly misses games. He's in his prime. He has two cups. He's the captain. I think $6m is about fair market value. And if we agree $5.5 is better, you're also buying X amount of years of Free Agency and rewarding him for intangibles of leadership and loyalty. I think there is something to how you treat players. Doesnt mean over-paying (I think we all agree Little would get more on the open market). But if they played hard ball with the Captain, players will remember that. If both sides negotiate in good faith, it means something.

On one hand that seems silly since the games are about the Civil war. On the other hand, if the games want to be accurate, they're using the wrong flag. If they marched to battle under that flag, then it would be the correct flag to use, no? My understanding is the battle flag was used by some regional forces so I suppose its possible they marched under the flag. There were four (I think) official flags of the Confederate armt and the battle flag wasnt any of them. it was used on the canton of the 3rd or 4th incarnation (The Stainless Banner which was white & The Blood Stained Banner which added a red strip to the white flag so it didnt look like the flag of surrender on the field). The original confederate flag was the Stars & Bars which resembled the Stars & Stripes which is why they changed it. The confederate flag of today didnt become a wide spread symbol of the south until the KKK began using it. So in that regard, it was adopted widely as the confederate symbol even though that adoption has its roots in racism. Not to mention the confederacy was born out of racism to begin with so really anyone embracing that as some sort of symbol of Southern Culture and feeling pride at that is off base. I respect people who have a sense of true southern pride in the positive sense that we think about the south. But if someone likes the Battle Flag and is NOT a racist it doesnt mean the flag is not racist. The flag is racist. In any sort of creative endeavor I think it's perfectly fair game. For example, you wouldnt ban American History X because it uses the battle flag and nazi symbols because its doing so in the telling of a story. So I think the video games are fair game. The flip side ofcourse is, Apple makes the rules so they have the right to choose what they want on their platforms.

I agree. Lawless manages to provide informational tweets, talk for two hours on H&L with more discussion, insight and info and still writes column's. You can even catch him on H&L when he's getting hyped up about a topic that he wrote about for the next day and he's trying not to just recite his column. I've heard him say "well, I wrote about this for tomorrow, but..." and he goes off on the topic. because he actually seems to enjoy covering sports. These clowns cant even do ONE of those things well.

Irving isn't even doing things the way he was last year at this point. His level of coverage has dropped off significantly. He was in semi-retirement, wasnt he? He is now in full retirement other then calling the games? I like his calls so thats fine by me. But why would he pretend to be covering practice if he isnt.

Yeah this is what I do on twitter too. because Im at work all day, I mostly come here for news but I like the immediately info of twitter. So I flip through and see nothing (or like I said earlier at least something like Bob commenting on Willy's throws) then so be it. But seeing them basically mock the desire of hardcore fans is a slap in the face. Im sure the reporters and their editors have a good laugh but my boss wouldnt think it was very funny if I tweeted that I was barely working today or nothing to do at work today.

Seems like a reasonable question to me. If you are tweeting that his coverage is terrible then you must know what you'd rather see. Im more along the lines of, if I see no coverage then I assume nothing was worth reporting even though I know thats likely untrue. I was going to start this thread myself as I find their coverage today to be particularly disheartening. Some basic stuff about who's involved in first team, second team etc, how guys are looking. Lots of chatter about Willy, so give us some details. There's often something interesting that happens, a player looking particularly good or bad, a coach losing his cool with sloppy play etc. I strongly suspect that if a reporter spends the day watching practice he has something better than "barely watching" to report. And like i said, as a minimally knowledgeable fan, it bugs me. Those of you who crave the details more would likely be even more bothered by the nonsense. Im sure I'd have more to tweet if I was there then these so-called reporters.

Not MOS's job to do the reporter's jobs for them. They have eyes and can watch practice. They have questions for players. They have sources...or should (though maybe these clowns have no sources).

I think it was Irving that tweeted earlier that Willy was throwing bullets or something. At least thats something. How was twitter coverage of the Jets development camp? I wasnt around much but I assume it was better? There is a way to provide some useful info on twitter as a way of previewing the next day's column. But "Im not even watching" is hardly the way to get anyone to pay to read a column.

Friesen is tweeting at me. Im probably the least knowledgeable football fan here. Please feel free to jump in to the tweet convo. lol

5-6 years at arund $6 seems reasonable. And if they have the salary dropping over time, then you're not looking at a 36 year old making $7m, you're looking at a 36 year old making $3m or whatever. Which is more reasonable. Although at 35 or 36 years old, he might be the type of player a competitive Jets team would be looking to add for a playoff run if they didnt already have him. So I'd say there should still be value in him at that age. But time will tell.

On one hand that seems silly since the games are about the Civil war. On the other hand, if the games want to be accurate, they're using the wrong flag.

I didnt go. Every couple of years Ill go but I went last time. Although i was invited to hang out with Emma and Summer after...if I had been there. doh

I disagree with this. In this new media age, tweeting is part of their job. It should be used to push followers / readers to their columns. It should be to gain trust from and expand their followers base to drive more traffic to their respective papers. Those tweets do nothing to make me want to read tomorrow's column. At least for Bob Irving, he doesn't have a column. Exactly. If they tweeted something like "Willy looking terrific and had lots to say. Read tomorrow's paper for full coverage", then maybe I could see that. Tweeting and newspaper coverage are two different things. Lawless tweets stuff all the time AND talks about it on H&L and still his column on the topic usually adds even more. These clowns could learn to do that. or dont tweet at all. To tweet and say you're barely watching, why on earth would anyone read a column written by someone who barely watched?

Would a concerted twitter shaming accomplish anything? Andrew Shallcross ‏@PCWAndrew 1m1 minute ago Local media coverage of @Wpg_BlueBombers practice is an embarrassment.Must read fan coverage for real info. @BobIrvingCJOB @friesensunmedia

Why do their superiors allow it? I wish I could publicly tweet that I not doing my job and instead sitting outside enjoying the day. My boss would be calling me minutes later...or clocking me out. Its sort of a laughing stock too isnt it? Its an embarrassment really.

To me, "this issue" isn't just about the Confederate flag. It's about the whole concept that because a flag/symbol is basically overnight declared offensive, by someone, that all existence of it suddenly must be wiped out. I don't agree with that. That's just "1984" stuff to me. It's the Tom Sawyer/Huck Finn debate all over again. Do you ban those books because they contain the N word, or do you want people, especially children, to read them, so that they can see how far we've come as a society since those times in terms of treatment of minorities. Especially since the essence of those books is to show how ignorant and stupid the attitudes towards black people were in that era. Im not sure it's fair to say the flag was declared racist overnight. It came to prominence by the KKK many decades ago. It's been a racist symbol forever, really. Its the big issue of the day, certainly, because of a terrible race-fueled attack at a church. Its sort of sad that it wasnt a bigger issue before that. But to be honest Im not really holding anyone responsible for that, it is what it is. But for people to swiftly react and take steps to do the right thing is good, even if it is years too late. About 11 or 12 years ago, back in the MSN messenger days, I made my avatar the battle flag because I was going through a Dukes resurgence (received some Dukes' merch for Christmas) and a friend who happens to be black immediately messaged me and questioned why I did that. I said 'Oh, Dukes of Hazzard' and he said "okay...well you know it's racist right?" And shamefully, I was ignorant to the flag's history. So as of that day, I knew it was considered racist. It's not a secret. Its just one of those things that minorities put up with because they put up with it for so long, white people are blissfully ignorant to and racists pretend it's about "Southern Pride".

Sigh. No. That's not what I am suggesting. I said I don't give a crap about that. What I am suggesting is that people not over-react and just leap on board every single stupid suggestion that suddenly everything is "bad" and must be banned, purely to show how enlightened they are. Banning Dukes is an example of such over-reaction. I can agree with that. Although the larger take-away from this issue shouldnt be that Dukes of Hazzard is playing on TV Land.

@DetroitRedWings: UPDATE: The Detroit #RedWings today signed LW Eric Tangradi to a one-year contract. - http://t.co/xJjqidR6Wghttp://t.co/ZXN6zejdZw

Well, aren't we enlightened, so enlightened that you willingly jump on the Groupthink bandwagon whenever it's decided, somewhere, by someone, that something is offensive. I would hope others aren't just as willing to unquestioningly abandon everything they have seen and heard and believed growing up because someone tells us it is suddenly "bad". Always question authority, especially the authority of people telling you how you should think. Your comment about how we as a society need to learn to change things instead of clinging to traditions seems to be right out of Animal Farm. I agree with TUP that I don't really care about the Confederate flag or what it means to Southerners. I am from Winnipeg, so until someone starts telling me the Bison on our flag is some kind of racist symbol it really doesn't matter to me. What I don't get is the hysterical over-reaction including banning shows like the Dukes of Hazzard from TV, because someone might see the Confederate flag on the General Lee for 4.5 seconds per show. Who cares. It's ridiculous. That's just throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Dukes was a favorite show of an entire generation. I still remember that show being the highlight of my TV week (and that just goes to show what dreck was on in that era). The Dukes taught good morals, and right from wrong. Boss Hogg was the greedy bad guy, and the Dukes always out-smarted him, and made sure justice was served, despite the corrupt and crooked cops they had to deal with. We were taught greed was bad, and good always triumphs over evil. It's not like Uncle Jesse and Roscoe sat around the kitchen table dropping N-bombs and telling racist jokes. Far from it. Here's how I sum up political correctness: Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of fecal matter by the clean end. I think we call agree banning Dukes is silly. Im sure the most hardcore anti-battle flag people would agree with that. But are you also suggesting that the movement to remove the battle flag from officially flying at government buildings is poltiical correctness? or that the "sudden" wave of sentiment that it's a racist symbol is political correctness? Because if so, I'd have to disagree. The flag isnt racist because someone went nuts recently. It's been racist since the wide spread use of the flag in, I believe the 30's by the KKK. The problem, I think, is that people embraced the flag back then as a "white pride" or "anti-black" or "anti-mixing" symbol and then sense that *southern drawl* "We here in the south have our own way of doing things". I have very little belief that people in the early 20th century were flying the battle flag because they felt a sense of pride in a slower way of life, iced tea on a hot Georgia day etc... But as time has passed and beyond the civil rights movements etc, younger generations have kept on embracing the flag and their learned ideals of "Southern Pride" without really knowing what that means. I strongly believe a lot of the people supporting the flag are not racist. They are just ignorant to it's history. I love the US. I dont believe for a second that southern pride is or should be about the brief period they went to war in an effort to keep their slaves. That *should* a national embarrassment, not a point of pride. Im actually shocked government buildings were flying this thing. What a disgrace. If you love America, fly the American flag. The battle flag is a racist symbol.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/judge-upholds-cancellation-of-redskins-trademarks-in-a-legal-and-symbolic-setback-for-team/2015/07/08/5a65424e-1e6e-11e5-aeb9-a411a84c9d55_story.html The Washington Redskins lost their biggest legal and public relations battle yet in the war over its mascot after a federal judge in Northern Virginia on Wednesday ordered the cancellation of the NFL team’s federal trademark registrations, which have been opposed for decades by many Native Americans who feel the moniker disparages their race. The cancellation doesn’t go into effect until the Redskins have exhausted the appeals process in the federal court system. But even if the Redskins ultimately took the case to the Supreme Court and lost, the team can still use “Redskins” and seek trademark protections under state law. The team has argued, however, that a cancellation of its trademarks could taint its brand and remove legal benefits that would protect against copycat entrepreneurs. U.S. District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee’s decision affirmed an earlier ruling by the federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Last year, the appeal board declared in a 2-to-1 vote that the team’s moniker is offensive to Native Americans and therefore ineligible under the Lanham Act for status in the federal trademark registry. The appeal board had been petitioned by five Native American activists, including Amanda Blackhorse, a Navajo Nation member from Arizona who is well-known for leading massive protests against the team outside stadiums wherever it plays. [U.S. patent office cancels Redskins trademark registrations, saying name is disparaging to Native Americans] The Redskins tried to overturn the appeal board’s ruling in August by suing Blackhorse and the four other Native American activists in federal court in Alexandria, Va. The team argued that the Lanham Act conflicted with its First Amendment rights. It also contended that Blackhorse didn’t prove that enough Native Americans opposed the name at the time the team registered its trademarks in 1967, 1974, 1978 and 1990. A Washington Redskins spokesperson said the team is reviewing the decision and considering its legal options. Jesse Witten, one of the attorneys for the Native Americans, celebrated the judge’s ruling.

Burmi-Copp-Armia (Thorburn) would be a darn good 4th line. Im sure this wont play into it but from a business perspective, Petan/Armia etc playing big minutes for the Moose is better for drawing fans then playing 4th line with the Jets. The Moose has the potential to be a darned exciting team.

My perspective on this is interesting as I grew up thinking the "Battle Flag" was a symbol of southern pride and culture due to the Dukes of Hazzard. Firstly, banning the Dukes of Hazzard is idiotic. If we're going to ban every show that uses racial symbols then its the end of creative endeavors in television and film. And Dukes is an interesting look at Hollywood's view of southern culture in the 80's. It's a snapshot in time. And it's use of the flag is rather harmless. The horrible Dukes film actually addressed this pretty well with the Dukes painting the General Lee as in the TV show but when driving through a big city (was it New York), people were calling them racist rednecks and they couldnt understand why. That might have been the only worthy scene in the entire steaming pile of horsecrap. Anyway....here's the problem. After doing a little research it seems the "Battle Flag" as we know it was never used by the Confederate Army, It appeared on the canton of a Confederate Flag (The Stainless Banner and then the Bloodstained Banner) but in its current form was used by local state army's. It didnt come into wide spread use until the KKK began using it. Thus, undoubtedly a symbol of racism. if people truly wanted to wave a flag from the confederacy as a symbol of southern pride, they should use the first flag (The Stars and Bars). But here's the problem with that. If you're proud of your unique southern culture, why on earth would you choose anything from the Confederacy or Civil War as a symbol of that pride? Why would you be proud of an era where your states were willing to go to war with fellow Americans to enslave people? Why is anyone proud of that? The flag belongs in a museum and thats it. When I see people here, white Canadians from Winnipeg talking about their "southern pride"...**** off.