Cowherd...

[SunsetBengal]

All I can say about Cowherd is that when you speak with that condescending tone, from your high radio pulpit for so long, sooner or later, it's going to bite you in the ass.  I have passively listened to Cowherd for years, not because I think he's great, but because his show was sometimes interesting.  Actually, mostly for those times when he had to admit "when Colin was wrong".

Cowherd would frequently interject his political view into the sports show, something that I always knew would lead to his undoing.  So, now the many times admitted, social liberal, has put his foot in his mouth, for the same sort of attitude that he purportedly stands against.  Personally, I think it's pretty damned funny, in a dark irony sort of sense.

What say you?  Were his comments mentioning the Dominicans as bad as they're being made out, or has the entire PC movement, with it's "gotcha" type of witch hunt moments, really gone too far?



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2530784-colin-cowherd-espn-part-ways-after-comments-on-dominican-mlb-players?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national

Quote:Cowherd came under fire Thursday when discussing the complexity of the game of baseball. 
"Like I’ve never bought into that, 'Baseball’s just too complex,'" Cowherd said, according to the New York Times' Richard Sandomir. "Really? A third of the sport is from the Dominican Republic."

Then the obligatory retraction..

Quote:I could've made the point without using one country, and there's all sorts of smart people from the Dominican Republic. I could've said a third of baseball's talent is being furnished from countries with economic hardships, therefore educational hurdles. For the record, I used the Dominican Republic because they've furnished baseball with so many great players.

I understand that when you mention a specific country, they get offended. I get it. I do. And for that, I feel bad. I do. But I have four reports in front of me ... where there are discussions of major deficiencies in the education sector at all levels. ... It wasn't a shot at them. It was data. Five, seven years ago I talked about the same subject. Was I clunky? Perhaps. Did people not like my tone? I get it. Sometimes my tone stinks.
I think when you host a radio show, just like Jon Stewart hosts a show, I think sometimes I bring up stuff ... that makes people cringe. I'm not saying there's not intelligent, educated people from the Dominican Republic. I cringe at the data too.

As much as I really don't like Cowherd, I have to say that he doesn't deserve the heat he's catching for making those "remarks".  I say the PC movement needs to be curtailed;  It's now to the point where not a single race, creed, color, Nationality, or culture, can be mentioned without it being someone searching for something to get upset about. 

[*bfine32*]

Cowherd definitely made his bed. Always selling himself as better than his listeners.

[Goalpost]

Not really a fan of Cowherd. Whether he should be forgiven, i guess so. But he kind of stepped into it, and think his apology isn't really a good one either.

[Benton]

Shock personalities dont surprise or concern me too much.

[Rotobeast]

(07-25-2015, 09:39 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: All I can say about Cowherd is that when you speak with that condescending tone, from your high radio pulpit for so long, sooner or later, it's going to bite you in the ass.  I have passively listened to Cowherd for years, not because I think he's great, but because his show was sometimes interesting.  Actually, mostly for those times when he had to admit "when Colin was wrong".

Cowherd would frequently interject his political view into the sports show, something that I always knew would lead to his undoing.  So, now the many times admitted, social liberal, has put his foot in his mouth, for the same sort of attitude that he purportedly stands against.  Personally, I think it's pretty damned funny, in a dark irony sort of sense.

What say you?  Were his comments mentioning the Dominicans as bad as they're being made out, or has the entire PC movement, with it's "gotcha" type of witch hunt moments, really gone too far?



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2530784-colin-cowherd-espn-part-ways-after-comments-on-dominican-mlb-players?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national



Then the obligatory retraction..


As much as I really don't like Cowherd, I have to say that he doesn't deserve the heat he's catching for making those "remarks".  I say the PC movement needs to be curtailed;  It's now to the point where not a single race, creed, color, Nationality, or culture, can be mentioned without it being someone searching for something to get upset about. 

He got exactly what he wanted..... more people to talk about him.
:snark:

[SunsetBengal]

Just came back from a drive to Goldsboro and back, was listening to the 10-noon weekend guy, on ESPN Radio.  He was painting the picture that Cowherd was drawing a correlation between book smart and sport smart, and I don't agree.  The broader point Cowherd was attempting to make is that MLB is not as complicated a game, as it is portrayed to be (maybe it is from a mgr's POV).  He was merely pointing out that many Dominican players are really good, despite growing up in an economically and educationally stricken environment.  Thus making his bigger point that players need not be academically gifted, in order to excel at MLB.

In my opinion, his only real flaw, was mentioning Dominican Republic by name, rather than generally saying 'Latin American players'.

The bigger point that I wanted to make here, is that you can't even have a sports conversation these days, without the PC police butting in.  Enough is enough, as we are all sports fans on this board, let's draw the PC line!

(though I did chuckle when I saw what was happening to Cowherd, who is always touting his self as 'socially liberal')  (I think that ESPN is just throwing him under the bus for leaving them, ala Dan Patrick)

[RoyleRedlegs]

(07-25-2015, 01:22 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Just came back from a drive to Goldsboro and back, was listening to the 10-noon weekend guy, on ESPN Radio.  He was painting the picture that Cowherd was drawing a correlation between book smart and sport smart, and I don't agree.  The broader point Cowherd was attempting to make is that MLB is not as complicated a game, as it is portrayed to be (maybe it is from a mgr's POV).  He was merely pointing out that many Dominican players are really good, despite growing up in an economically and educationally stricken environment.  Thus making his bigger point that players need not be academically gifted, in order to excel at MLB.

In my opinion, his only real flaw, was mentioning Dominican Republic by name, rather than generally saying 'Latin American players'.

The bigger point that I wanted to make here, is that you can't even have a sports conversation these days, without the PC police butting in.  Enough is enough, as we are all sports fans on this board, let's draw the PC line!

(though I did chuckle when I saw what was happening to Cowherd, who is always touting his self as 'socially liberal')  (I think that ESPN is just throwing him under the bus for leaving them, ala Dan Patrick)

He shouldn't have mentioned any race or ethnicity. 
It's idiotic and he has no actual evidence to back it up other than he's a giant toolbag.

It isn't PC to not want to piss off a big segment of your contingency. MLB is huge there. ESPN wants MLB to be on ESPN.
Basic free market ideals. Get rid of the idiot who could do something to damage that 

ESPN isn't throwing him under the bus. He said something stupid and without evidence. He got shitcanned a week before he was anyways. 
Cowherd isn't going to be as successful as Patrick. People liked him. People hate-listen to Cowherd. 

And most importantly one of those dumb baseball players put him in his place, Pedro Martinez on Cowherd:

Quote:“I’m sorry. He needs to get to my level to answer him. I’m in the Hall of Fame.”

[StLucieBengal]

(07-25-2015, 12:07 PM)Benton Wrote: Shock personalities dont surprise or concern me too much.

Agreed. He rode that for a long time. His act must have been wearing thin.... The Harbaugh interview was weird as well. This all played into it i am sure.

Remeber espn fired the "chink in the armour" guy.

[SunsetBengal]

(07-25-2015, 03:05 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: He shouldn't have mentioned any race or ethnicity. 
It's idiotic and he has no actual evidence to back it up other than he's a giant toolbag.

It isn't PC to not want to piss off a big segment of your contingency. MLB is huge there. ESPN wants MLB to be on ESPN.
Basic free market ideals. Get rid of the idiot who could do something to damage that 

ESPN isn't throwing him under the bus. He said something stupid and without evidence. He got shitcanned a week before he was anyways. 
Cowherd isn't going to be as successful as Patrick. People liked him. People hate-listen to Cowherd. 

And most importantly one of those dumb baseball players put him in his place, Pedro Martinez on Cowherd:

Actually, Cowherd claimed to have pages of data that he was making his claims from.  And, to be clear, I'm not defending "him" per se, but the right of people to say what they think.  You know, that whole 1st Amendment thing..

[RoyleRedlegs]

(07-25-2015, 03:08 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Actually, Cowherd claimed to have pages of data that he was making his claims from.  And, to be clear, I'm not defending "him" per se, but the right of people to say what they think.  You know, that whole 1st Amendment thing..

Never once saw where his first amendment was violated. Or where anyone even came close to violating it. 
The first amendment doesn't protect you from getting fired, unless you work for the government I guess....which he didn't.

He's more than allowed to say those things. He's also allowed to be fired and ridiculed for them. 

Has he produced the data? Or as of now is he still talking out of his ass, as per usual with him? 

[SunsetBengal]

(07-25-2015, 03:16 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Never once saw where his first amendment was violated. Or where anyone even came close to violating it. 
The first amendment doesn't protect you from getting fired, unless you work for the government I guess....which he didn't.

He's more than allowed to say those things. He's also allowed to be fired and ridiculed for them. 

Has he produced the data? Or as of now is he still talking out of his ass, as per usual with him? 

True, I forgot that we actually live in the Corporate States of America. 

[Harmening]

Cowherd makes me laugh, either while in agreement or disagreement.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(07-25-2015, 04:05 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: True, I forgot that we actually live in the Corporate States of America. 

So you just don't understand how the first amendment works? 

[SunsetBengal]

(07-25-2015, 05:54 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: So you just don't understand how the first amendment works? 

I understand completely.  Those protections cease to exist, when a person chooses to work for an entity that establishes a company policy barring employees from certain types of speech.

Just as in public, one is not allowed to willfully induce panic or riot, thus the old "you can't yell fire, in a crowded movie theater" if there is really no fire.  Or even tell someone that you're going to 'kill them' and expect to be protected by free speech.

Also, a lot of what is considered "Freedom of speech and expression" is subject to interpretation, by whomever happens to be in charge, at that moment in time.

[fredtoast]

(07-25-2015, 06:12 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I understand completely.  Those protections cease to exist, when a person chooses to work for an entity that establishes a company policy barring employees from certain types of speech.

Just as in public, one is not allowed to willfully induce panic or riot, thus the old "you can't yell fire, in a crowded movie theater" if there is really no fire.  Or even tell someone that you're going to 'kill them' and expect to be protected by free speech.

Also, a lot of what is considered "Freedom of speech and expression" is subject to interpretation, by whomever happens to be in charge, at that moment in time.

No the protection never ceases to exist.  The First Amendment just protrects you against the gpvernment.  It has never protected you against your employer.

Basically you are wanting to give the government a lot MORE control over private enterprise by letting the government decide who gets fired for making insulting comments.  The decision to fire Cowherd was a financial decision.  He made an ass of himself on the air so he got fired.  Why should the government be allowed to tell a private company that they can not fire an employee who embarrasses them?

[RoyleRedlegs]

(07-25-2015, 06:12 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I understand completely.  Those protections cease to exist, when a person chooses to work for an entity that establishes a company policy barring employees from certain types of speech.

Just as in public, one is not allowed to willfully induce panic or riot, thus the old "you can't yell fire, in a crowded movie theater" if there is really no fire.  Or even tell someone that you're going to 'kill them' and expect to be protected by free speech.

Also, a lot of what is considered "Freedom of speech and expression" is subject to interpretation, by whomever happens to be in charge, at that moment in time.

You're making me agree with fred. Stop this immediately 

[SunsetBengal]

(07-25-2015, 10:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No the protection never ceases to exist.  The First Amendment just protrects you against the gpvernment.  It has never protected you against your employer.

Basically you are wanting to give the government a lot MORE control over private enterprise by letting the government decide who gets fired for making insulting comments.  The decision to fire Cowherd was a financial decision.  He made an ass of himself on the air so he got fired.  Why should the government be allowed to tell a private company that they can not fire an employee who embarrasses them?

Here's an example of government interpretation:  Flag Burning

We have laws prohibiting desecration of the flag, yet people who burn the flag, make videos of themselves wiping their asses with it, are protected by the 1st Amendment?

[RoyleRedlegs]

(07-26-2015, 09:44 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Here's an example of government interpretation:  Flag Burning

We have laws prohibiting desecration of the flag, yet people who burn the flag, make videos of themselves wiping their asses with it, are protected by the 1st Amendment?

Yes. In 1989 the Supreme Court ruled that it is protected under the 1st Amendment and laws preventing it are unconstitutional 

[GMDino]

(07-25-2015, 09:39 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: All I can say about Cowherd is that when you speak with that condescending tone, from your high radio pulpit for so long, sooner or later, it's going to bite you in the ass.  I have passively listened to Cowherd for years, not because I think he's great, but because his show was sometimes interesting.  Actually, mostly for those times when he had to admit "when Colin was wrong".

Cowherd would frequently interject his political view into the sports show, something that I always knew would lead to his undoing.  So, now the many times admitted, social liberal, has put his foot in his mouth, for the same sort of attitude that he purportedly stands against.  Personally, I think it's pretty damned funny, in a dark irony sort of sense.

What say you?  Were his comments mentioning the Dominicans as bad as they're being made out, or has the entire PC movement, with it's "gotcha" type of witch hunt moments, really gone too far?



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2530784-colin-cowherd-espn-part-ways-after-comments-on-dominican-mlb-players?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national



Then the obligatory retraction..


As much as I really don't like Cowherd, I have to say that he doesn't deserve the heat he's catching for making those "remarks".  I say the PC movement needs to be curtailed;  It's now to the point where not a single race, creed, color, Nationality, or culture, can be mentioned without it being someone searching for something to get upset about. 

I was so confused on why a sports guy was being mentioned in PnR!  LOL!

But I haven't listened to him in years.Our local ESPN has a local guy on during his time usually.  The few times I accidentally caught his show it was generally awful and he does have that "better than you" attitude.

[fredtoast]

(07-26-2015, 09:44 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Here's an example of government interpretation:  Flag Burning

We have laws prohibiting desecration of the flag, yet people who burn the flag, make videos of themselves wiping their asses with it, are protected by the 1st Amendment?

You are still completely missing the point.

Cowherd has not been charged with any crime, and your employer has every right to fire you if you burn a flag on company time.