Village Idiot
Pokerguy
I doubt you are right.
Bortles will definitely be drafted in the 1st round and probably in the top 8.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Matt Waldman: 75% chance Bridgwater falls due to racism (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter PatsWillWin
- Start date
Bortles will definitely be drafted in the 1st round and probably in the top 8.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
If Bortles tore his ACL TODAY he would still have a shot to go in the first round.
Not saying I agree that he should, but I think he would have a pretty realistic shot.
He will be a 1st rounder this year barring something like that, pretty obvious.
JamesTheScot
Footballguy
Well, Waldman isn't really just "wondering" is he? He's at least 75% confident that it's going on...which is nothing more than his trying to avoid the trap of stating that Bridgewater will go outside the top 10. IF he falls, it's because of racism. But IF he doesn't, then it wasn't. That's essentially the test.
So it boils down to this:
If I think your team should take QB B with that pick, and you take someone else...even another black player...then I can reasonably believe, and essentially accuse in public, that you are a racist (unintentionally mind you, so don't be offended) because you didn't do with your pick what I thought you should do with it.
It's freakin' 2014 and we are debating whether racism still rears it's ugly head in professional sports because Bridgewater may drop 10 spots in the first round. Wow. Is that all it takes to be suspected of racism in 2014? Disagreeing with someone over whether a particular black player is a top 10, top 20 or top 32 prospect?
I guess the Browns were racist in drafting Tim Couch and the Eagles were not for drafting McNabb even though their fans were racist for booing. It can't ever be that reasonable minds differ over talent, which is why the Bengals made the right choice in picking Akili Smith over McNabb...oh, wait...
It's unfair to nitpick black QB's, but by all means lets just assume there's racism going on in something as imprecise and variable as the evaluations preceding the NFL draft.
HellToupee
Footballguy
I honestly can't name one black person in fantasy football content creation on FBG or other sites.
HellToupee
Footballguy
Yes I am. Kind of odd don't you thinkmonk said:Are you really being honest?
GridironMenace
Footballguy
Race hustlers have to hustle. They have to hustler in order to create a faux victim. If there is no faux victim, then there is no outrage. If there is no outrage, then there is no need for the race hustlers. If there is no need for the race hustlers, then there is no money. If there is no money, the race hustlers have to make honest pay. Race hustlers can't make honest pay, therefore they have to hustle. They have to hustle in order to create a faux victim, and on and on and on and on it goes.
Sad cycle of events. The only way we can move on in society is to get rid of the race hustlers. Only way we can do that is for people to take responsibility for themselves instead of playing the "blame whitey" game. Unfortunately, I doubt that will ever happen. Too much money to be made.
Sad cycle of events. The only way we can move on in society is to get rid of the race hustlers. Only way we can do that is for people to take responsibility for themselves instead of playing the "blame whitey" game. Unfortunately, I doubt that will ever happen. Too much money to be made.
squistion
Footballguy
GridironMenace
Footballguy
Did I say that Matt Waldman is a race hustler? Matt Waldman is completely and utterly ignorant for making such a comment. Matt Waldman spoke on a subject that has no business being spoken about in the arena in which he muttered such words. From what I hear, Matt Waldman has an African American wife and one can only surmise that such a viewpoint is spoken within the Waldman household. It is probably spoken within the Waldman household because of the strong belief of his wife. His wife has that strong belief because of the race hustlers. It always comes back to the hustlers.So now Matt Waldman is a race hustler?
I also know that it is my opinion that Matt Waldman is a chump for not responding in this thread to either clarify his statement, take his statement back or double-down and explain his position. If he did respond and I missed it, I apoligize and can someone point me to his response. Otherwise, my opinion stands and Mr. Waldman should make an appearance in this thread instead of having Dr. Bramel do it for him. If Waldman wants to hide behind his cats, perhaps Mr. Dodds wants to make an appearance in this thread and give an explanation of why Mr. Waldman should/shouldn't have spoken about such topics in a fantasy football website. Afterall, Mr. Waldman represents the Footballguys.com, llc.
Last edited by a moderator:
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Waldman really hasn't commented in this thread? Lame.
Jersey Jammer
Footballguy
It's not a valuable use of your time to try and determine someone's motive because you won't know unless they explain it themselves. It's fair to criticize the comments (as I have) as being factually way off base and prejudicial in their own right, but it's purely speculative to try and discern someone's motive. It doesn't advance the dialogue, and takes away from what's mostly in this thread - fact based, objective criticism (and some support) of the comments. It should stay that way.
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
Probably because Waldman has zero facts to back up his story, just threw some crap against the wall to see if it would stick.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Makes it worse to ignore the discussion about his words on the website he's affiliated with, though.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
(Josh) Gordon named two quarterbacks in particular that he thinks might be throwing him passes this year.
“There’s plenty of guys on the list right now,” Gordon said. “Blake Bortles is definitely one of those guys that just may do it for us. Teddy Bridgewater is a great talent. But there’s no telling.”
I wonder if it was Gordon's subconscious racism that caused him to name Bortles first.
“There’s plenty of guys on the list right now,” Gordon said. “Blake Bortles is definitely one of those guys that just may do it for us. Teddy Bridgewater is a great talent. But there’s no telling.”
I wonder if it was Gordon's subconscious racism that caused him to name Bortles first.
Some comments deserve to be mocked.
Jello_Biafra
Footballguy
Laugh all you want but word is that sales of the RSP have gone through the roof since his statements.
Yenrub
Footballguy
Gordon's response was strictly alphabeticalAmused to Death said:(Josh) Gordon named two quarterbacks in particular that he thinks might be throwing him passes this year.
“There’s plenty of guys on the list right now,” Gordon said. “Blake Bortles is definitely one of those guys that just may do it for us. Teddy Bridgewater is a great talent. But there’s no telling.”
I wonder if it was Gordon's subconscious racism that caused him to name Bortles first.
PatsWillWin
Footballguy
Have a good 2 days, guy.Amused to Death said:(Josh) Gordon named two quarterbacks in particular that he thinks might be throwing him passes this year.
“There’s plenty of guys on the list right now,” Gordon said. “Blake Bortles is definitely one of those guys that just may do it for us. Teddy Bridgewater is a great talent. But there’s no telling.”
I wonder if it was Gordon's subconscious racism that caused him to name Bortles first.
Gandalf the Grey
Footballguy
PatsWillWin
Footballguy
I literally posted what he said. There was no context. Bucky Brooks said something about Bridgewater dropping to 26th after his bad pro day. Cecil asked Matt if he was buying or selling that possibility. What I typed was his response. nothing was taken out of context.
The fact that he was responding to a comment made by a black analyst makes it even more random.
Soulfly3
Footballguy
Totally. Awe inspiring even.
This part really got my tear ducts going:
The abuser. Let's focus on that, for even a second.
He starts this wonderful piece of literature by questioning the author as having "well-intentioned ignorance" for saying the character of a story was a "black man" - but feels completely vindicated to mention the mental anguish of the poor ABUSERS during slavery.
The jokes write themselves.
Gandalf the Grey
Footballguy
No clue wth you're talking about here. Not even sure you do. His comment re:"well intentioned ignorance" was to highlight the concept of subtle subconscious racism-where the subject does not intend it, even believes he is communicating a positive message, but it exists regardless-in this case because there was no context present in the article that necessitated disclosure of the young man's race, and the implications present in that disclosure.
His point about the abusers during slavery was simply to point out that the act of abuse has negative effects on the abuser as well as the abused. This is not a concept unique to a discussion of racism.
So what the hell is your point about him feeling "vindicated"? Your point is incomprehensible.
Eta: Trying to navigate your labyrinth of wacky thought.....are you trying to make some inane point that Matt Waldman is somehow an "abuser" because he used the phrase "well intentioned ignorance" , and then excused his hypothetical abuse by later pointing out that abusers suffer as well?
I can't imagine this is what you would be saying here but I got nothing else. If you are saying this then... Well I'll let it speak for itself so I don't get any more posts deleted.
Last edited by a moderator:
cstu
Footballguy
PatsWillWin
Footballguy
Gandalf the Grey
Footballguy
Ok. Didn't really think even you would try to say something like that. Still have no idea what point you were trying to make. With all the sarcasm in your post ("totally", "awe inspiring", "making my tear ducts water", "the jokes write themselves") it appeared you were taking some kind of shot at the article, I just have no idea what it was. Maybe instead of leaving it as "you're a million miles away from the point" you could just explicitly state your point?
GridironMenace
Footballguy
"Slavery was physical, emotional, and spiritual abuse of the worst kind."
Correction. That's called the holocaust. The Jews are the most persecuted people in the history of the world but you don't see them blaming others, asking for special treatment or creating their own separatist ideals (ie. Jewish History Month, Jewish Entertainment Television, Jewish Sirius Radio Station, etc...).
And yes I understand the difference between ethinicity and religion, but the principle still stands.
Correction. That's called the holocaust. The Jews are the most persecuted people in the history of the world but you don't see them blaming others, asking for special treatment or creating their own separatist ideals (ie. Jewish History Month, Jewish Entertainment Television, Jewish Sirius Radio Station, etc...).
And yes I understand the difference between ethinicity and religion, but the principle still stands.
Last edited by a moderator:
cobalt_27
Footballguy
As Waldman's 2012 article and recent comments on the podcast clearly indicate...he really has needs to lay off the amateur social commentary and stick with what he sort of knows, like quarterback rankings. Ranking Tyler Wilson QB1 last year suggests he still has some work to do in that arena, as well.
Last edited by a moderator:
Gandalf the Grey
Footballguy
Yeah, you've already made both of these points already. The first earlier in this thread, the second in the RSP thread, where Matt Waldman responded to you at length.It's clear you have an axe to grind with him since you feel the need to bring up Tyler Wilson again for some reason when he already addressed the idea that it might not be fair to nitpick the ranking of one player after one season, which I agree with. And the idea that there's not a draft analyst-or NFL scout-in the world who doesn't miss in player evaluation (if in fact that is what has happened with Wilson).
Frankly, I'm surprised you would stoop to the level of some of these others here to take your shots at him. I've read many of your posts, including in the Cowboys thread. You're typically not at the level of some of these guys posting in this thread
Note that I'm not commenting in any manner on Matt Waldman's Bridgewater comments, just the responses to them.
Eta it's also a cheap shot to include the 2012 article being discussed as "clearly indicative" of "amateur social commentary", and then neglect to offer a criticism. Very weak.
Last edited by a moderator:
Black
Footballguy
Black
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Soulfly3
Footballguy
Black
Footballguy
I think you have it quoted correctly, but this was a 2 hour podcast. There was a lot leading up to this discussion, and that's what I was meaning by the context.
The comment was a 'charged' comment to be sure. It was sure to start some discussion and argument, which we have here in this thread. What I don't get are the attacks on Matt as a person or an analyst because he has an opinion.
His opinion is based on his experience, not necessarily on undeniable facts. I think it's ok to not agree with his opinion, but I think the attacks or assumption that there is some FBG conspiracy (I'm looking for a job? Really?) is not ok.
Soulfly3
Footballguy
Black, I know Im taking some jabs at you, but I have no problem with you....
But I 110% dont agree with your opinions on the matter.
His experience? as a dude (like us) sitting on his couch and doing research and rankings? Or as a dude in the boardrooms of teams where he's seen with his own eyes the "unconscious" racism that exists behind closed doors?
comfortably numb
Footballguy
Jewish American Heritage Month (JAHM) is an annual recognition and celebration of Jewish American achievements in and contributions to the United States of America. It is observed annually in the U.S. during the month of May.[1]
JAHM was set into law by President George W. Bush in 2006, according to the Jewish American Heritage Month Coalition. This is the achievement of Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA), as well as the Jewish Museum of Florida and the South Florida Jewish Community.[2] A similar month exists in Florida as Florida Jewish History Month but it occurs in January.[3]
List of Jewish Radio stations
http://www.internet-radio.com/stations/jewish/
Jewish TV Chanel
http://tjctv.com/
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
Read the 2012 article, and I don't question the writer’s sincerity for a moment, I am sure he means well and believes what he said. However, imho, the article is a pretty good example of how many progressives view the world and it pretty much validates my interpretation of the original podcast comments.
When he writes “It’s true that this in-your-face, brand of intolerance and rage still exists in the dark corners of every community of our country. That’s not what this is about.”
I can't help but notice that the writer believes that intolerance and rage exists in EVERY community, not many or most communities, but every single one.
I am perplexed by the following statement: “It’s usually white men who are quick to correct my wife that she is not black, but ‘African-American.’ Well-intended, but incredibly ignoranthttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/29/the-term-african-american/.”
I can’t imagine correcting what a woman or a man wants to call themselves. The only setting I can imagine where that might regularly happen would be within the highbrow worlds of academia and progressives. The point being, if you are living in a world where white men are correcting what your wife calls herself, you are living in an elite world that is very different from the one most of us live in.
I am also perplexed by the following statement: “Most black people in this country have an ancestry of people that hailed from a variety of nations and races. While some people will say that the term (African American) was coined by black people (I’ve seen some cite Jesse Jackson) it was white people in America who began using this term as early as the 1850s.”
Is the writer really trying to imply that it was “white people” from the 1850s who were the driving force behind making African American a politically correct term? That is, imho absurd; it was progressives (black & white) in 1970-80s who were the driving force behind the “politically correct” term. In other words, it was likely the very same types of people who correct women on what they want to call themselves.
Paul Simon may have said it best, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. Some see racism everywhere and hang with like-minded people who see racism everywhere. 50 years from now they will still see racism everywhere; it is how they view the world. They long for the day when everyone is color blind and it never dawns on them that they themselves are a very large part of the problem.
There is nothing personal intended here, I enjoy Matts work and value his opinions on football; I just don't agree with some of his opinions on race and wanted to take the opportunity to express my own opinions on the subject. I look at Teddy Bridgewater and I see a young qb who may or may not be successful; others, well intentioned though they may be, can't help but see a black man.
When he writes “It’s true that this in-your-face, brand of intolerance and rage still exists in the dark corners of every community of our country. That’s not what this is about.”
I can't help but notice that the writer believes that intolerance and rage exists in EVERY community, not many or most communities, but every single one.
I am perplexed by the following statement: “It’s usually white men who are quick to correct my wife that she is not black, but ‘African-American.’ Well-intended, but incredibly ignoranthttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/29/the-term-african-american/.”
I can’t imagine correcting what a woman or a man wants to call themselves. The only setting I can imagine where that might regularly happen would be within the highbrow worlds of academia and progressives. The point being, if you are living in a world where white men are correcting what your wife calls herself, you are living in an elite world that is very different from the one most of us live in.
I am also perplexed by the following statement: “Most black people in this country have an ancestry of people that hailed from a variety of nations and races. While some people will say that the term (African American) was coined by black people (I’ve seen some cite Jesse Jackson) it was white people in America who began using this term as early as the 1850s.”
Is the writer really trying to imply that it was “white people” from the 1850s who were the driving force behind making African American a politically correct term? That is, imho absurd; it was progressives (black & white) in 1970-80s who were the driving force behind the “politically correct” term. In other words, it was likely the very same types of people who correct women on what they want to call themselves.
Paul Simon may have said it best, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. Some see racism everywhere and hang with like-minded people who see racism everywhere. 50 years from now they will still see racism everywhere; it is how they view the world. They long for the day when everyone is color blind and it never dawns on them that they themselves are a very large part of the problem.
There is nothing personal intended here, I enjoy Matts work and value his opinions on football; I just don't agree with some of his opinions on race and wanted to take the opportunity to express my own opinions on the subject. I look at Teddy Bridgewater and I see a young qb who may or may not be successful; others, well intentioned though they may be, can't help but see a black man.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kevrunner
Footballguy
I just listened to the most recent DLF Dynasty Football Podcast and they have a guest on this episode who gives a very in-depth analysis of Teddy Bridgewater. I suggest anyone who listens to fantasy football podcast give that a listen and compare it to Matt's comments. I have been a paid subscriber to FBGs for around 7 years and have purchased the RSP a couple of times, not every year and I guarantee you I haven't missed more than a handful of FBGs podcasts over that time, but I honestly can't listen to the FBGs anymore unless Matt at least makes some kind of explanation for his comments and also the "Country Club" comment, when Bloom was talking about A.J. Mcarron earlier in the same podcast before his Bridgewater rant. Bloom is by far my favorite of all the fantasy host on any podcast, but on the must recent "On The Couch", with Matt, I just couldn't enjoy it like I usually do and Matt was given some great analysis and I would have easily bought this year's RSP, with so many talented rookies in this year's draft, I know that the RSP would have been some good reading. Anyway, if you have time to listen the most recent DLF Dynasty Football Podcast, it is worth the time.
Soulfly3
Footballguy
This is my forum. Even the guys Im battling w (gandalf and black) are my homies... This is a community and I dont take this stuff too seriously.
We all have our opinions... and we can battle... tempers may flare at times, and I know right now mine is getting loose due to a death in the family. so excuse me to a certain degree.
Ill always be a FBG...but Waldman really left me scratching my head.
Let's say for a second Bridgewater goes to houston #1... then what? We forget about this thread because he covered his bases, leaving "25%" chance racism wont play a part?
IMO, you gotta go full tilt... say what you mean to say, and say it 100%. If youre toss around such a poignant statement, you cant 75% it. It's a cop-out.
We all have our opinions... and we can battle... tempers may flare at times, and I know right now mine is getting loose due to a death in the family. so excuse me to a certain degree.
Ill always be a FBG...but Waldman really left me scratching my head.
Let's say for a second Bridgewater goes to houston #1... then what? We forget about this thread because he covered his bases, leaving "25%" chance racism wont play a part?
IMO, you gotta go full tilt... say what you mean to say, and say it 100%. If youre toss around such a poignant statement, you cant 75% it. It's a cop-out.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
I question Matt's ability to evaluate prospects. Not just because of the Tyler Wilson or Xavier Omon examples because everyone misses on evaluations. But he seems to have strong social opinions and wants to inject them into this writing, podcasts and his overall evaluations. I have no doubt his inherit biases aren't effecting his evaluations and they aren't just about football and letting the chips fall where they may.Kevrunner said:
Jersey Jammer
Footballguy
Agreed. This quote is particularly offensive: "It’s true that this in-your-face, brand of intolerance and rage still exists in the dark corners of every community of our country". It's another perfect example of what I said earlier in the thread - the hyprocisy of people like Waldman who condemn stereotypes every day yet feel totally comfortable stereotyping everyone else - whether it be racist GMs who won't draft TB high enough or my neighborhood that contains "intolerance and rage". That's outrageous and needs to be condemned.NE_REVIVAL said:
cobalt_27
Footballguy
Completely agree. No doubt he puts together a tight, aesthetically accessible package. But, there is no indication he is stronger at player evaluations that hold any more predictive value beyond others doing similar work. What he offers that's different is a nice, one-stop-shopping package saying 95% of what everyone else says. And he's a coin flip on whatever unique analysis he brings to the other 5%.
Which is all fine, and I sign up more years than not. But, his biases are beginning to seep through the cracks, with this Bridgewater thing being among the more bizarre and out-of-touch of the bunch. It raises questions about what he's actually evaluating and what personal agendas are interfering with fair analysis.
I got banned 24 hrs for posting against Waldman(as did a few others in this thread), so basically no point in replying to this topic anymore, admins are just deleting negative comments, trying to make it appear as if the majority of FBG users think Waldman was in the right when clearly that isn't the case.
Just a bunch of manipulator admins for doing that, watch, this comment gets deleted and I get banned for life. What a joke.
Just a bunch of manipulator admins for doing that, watch, this comment gets deleted and I get banned for life. What a joke.
Last edited by a moderator:
dehaven123
Footballguy
that seems to be the theme with those of members who dissented.
not sure why the staff didn't just delete the original post the to begin with.
letting people pretend to have a conversation by muting the posts of several members exposes a different kind of problem.
its their site though, they can censor who and when they like i suppose.
fatness
Footballguy
Gandalf the Grey
Footballguy
Yeah, 7 page thread, 90% of the posts #####ing about the racism/Bridgewater thing, but they are muting people. LMFAO.
MoveToSkypager
Footballguy
I got dinged too. Was it a long term achievement award? Probably. I was trying to be absurd because I thought it was an absurd subject based on an absurd statement. I realize that doesn't fly here at FBG. I want to apologize to the posters' feathers I ruffled. Sorry I dragged you into my foolishness. An important lesson I learned about this thread is that no one circles the wagons like FBG.
Similar threads
