Moderator: Moderators
Would your opinion change if someone in the room was gay and what Priefer is alleged to have said is true? I've stated I would have preferred Kluwe use other methods, but the alleged action is harmful and not just if the hypothetical scenario I painted is accurate.thatguy wrote:Sure, what Priefer allegedly said was horrible, but really, it didn't "harm" anyone that was there.
Who's to say that none of the banter or talk from Kluwe didn't offend Priefer at some point? I think that what Priefer said is disgusting in any environment (and punishable in a professional environment just by the nature of the comments), but no, my opinion wouldn't have changed had there been a gay person in the room. People say terrible things to/about each other all the time. Doesn't make it right...but it doesn't mean you can't say it (unless of course it's libelous/slanderous).CalVike wrote: Would your opinion change if someone in the room was gay and what Priefer is alleged to have said is true? I've stated I would have preferred Kluwe use other methods, but the alleged action is harmful and not just if the hypothetical scenario I painted is accurate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BGM wrote:Can we please put to bed the idea that Kluwe was no longer productive enough to remain in the NFL? His stats disprove the contention that his production had diminished. The Vikings allegedly released him to save money.
I only recall two games when people complained about Kluwe - the Chicago game when he punted to Hester, and the Tampa Bay game. Otherwise, the overwhelming majority of negativity aimed at him here was regarding his outspoken approach. Even then, he was criticized as being an attention seeker. Was there any negative impact on the team resulting from his "mouth"? I do not recall any.
Has there been a history of Kluwe being petty or vengeful?
Listen, if you simply do not like Kluwe, fine. But writing this off as a stunt makes little to no sense. What he has alleged leaves him open to a serious slander or libel lawsuit if it is proven to be false. There is nothing for him to gain personally in making these allegations. And if this is an attempt to change the culture of the NFL, a lie would only succeed in undermining his purpose.
I thought he was great up until that last season. Sure, the numbers were about the same as previous season, but you could tell that he was having a harder time directing the ball - and even then, people asked if his off the field attention was distracting him from doing his job (to which he said "no."). I remember that season and thinking that maybe it was time to move on, especially since punters are pretty easy to come by. Say what you want about Locke and "oh wow, the Vikings picked up a punter that performed worse than Kluwe, so that proves Kluwe's story," but you can never expect the outcome of a rookie and at the end of the day, he's pretty comparable, and he's cheaper.PurpleMustReign wrote:
I tought Kluwe was an extremely average at best punter. He couldn't directional kick to save his soul, and he couldn't down the ball inside the 20 if he kicked into a field of wet cement. I got so sick of touchbacks on every punt. He also outkicked his coverage on a regular basis.
Demi wrote:Extremely average, with a big mouth.
Locke is extremely average, without the mouth.
Less hassle similar production.
As far as Michelle Pfeiiffer. Strikes me as a hard #### jock jerk. Probably just thought he was making a funny joke. har har. Pfeifer's an #### and Kluwe is sensitive. Welcome to Martin's world. Don't think you're cut out for the NFL son...
Shoot them all and let Pete Rozelle sort them out.
Well played!You don't think it was the 100-150K Persian soldiers?The Breeze wrote:
I can't help but think of that movie "The 300" and how the Spartans refusal to incorporate the hunchback into their ranks ultimately led to their own demise.
Thats bullcrap. You have no idea what went on and Kluwe is bitter POS and will say anything to get attention.maembe wrote:It was fairly obvious that he got fired for his speaking out, which was completely bogus.
Mike Priefer is an awful person and hopefully he never gets a chance to coach in NFL and I hope he is not with the team next year.
Q: The issue here seems to be, for all stuff you've done to try to serve what you perceive as the greater good, this seems to be all about Chris Kluwe.
A: I don't think that's a fair assessment to make, because essentially, what I'm saying is here's my story, this is what I experienced – but this happens all over the country every day. One of my goals in doing this is that we as a society have to confront this. We have to look at who we are and what we do and understand that until we make those changes, until we understand that people are human beings – people deserve the right to have their own opinions here, no matter what those opinions might be, they deserve the right to speak those opinions as long as they're not harming other people. That's the basis of a free-speech society. To this day and age, we still don't have that yet. We still have problems with discrimination and people getting fired from their jobs for speaking out on social issues. Well, what does that say about us as a society?
Q: The counterpoint there is anyone with a job is subject to a different set of rules, because by extension, you're representing the company with your public statements. You can't conduct yourself the same way as Chris Kluwe, Vikings punter and Chris Kluwe, Average Citizen.
A: Right, and I understand that. And I think the thing is the content of my message has always been 'treat other people the way you'd like to be treated.' And frankly, if that's something that gets me in trouble, well, I'm more than happy to get in trouble for that.
Q: Here's the thing that bothers me here. You wrote the reason you published these allegations is because you never want Mike Priefer to coach in the NFL or anywhere else ever again. To me, that comes across as petty. It comes across as you're trying to ruin somebody's life.
A: I would phrase that in the form of a question: Who's no longer punting in the NFL?
Q: That's you.
A: Yes. That's correct. So, whose life was already ruined by the actions of one person?
Q: Well, your career is ruined. With Mike, it is his life. Now he's forever painted as a homophobe …
A: Because he is a homophobe. That's the whole point: Actions have consequences. If I was allowed to do my job, if I was allowed to finish out my contract – I had punted well for the Vikings for eight years. I only had one year left on my deal. How hard is it to just be like, 'OK, yeah, Kluwe said some stuff, but he can still punt the football? Let him finish out his deal and be like, no, we're not renewing your contract.' Fine. Whatever. I can respect that. But no, it had to be, we're getting rid of Chris. We don't want Chris anymore. And again, with the whole Priefer thing, the fact that I don't want him to coach in the NFL is because coaches in the NFL are role models. This is a guy that people are talking about potentially being a head coach, and frankly, from what I experienced with him, I don't want someone like that being a role model for children. I don't want someone like that being a role model for grown adults, because he doesn't teach the right lesson.
Nobody is being called a bigot for belonging to any particular religious group. Hating gay people and wanting to discriminate against them makes one a bigot, not being religious.fiestavike wrote: Right here on this board people who are Christian (or jewish or muslim for that matter) are being called bigots. I'm sure that might be offensive and hurtful to them, but somehow they manage to man up and deal with it.
Free speech is exactly what it's always been. The right to say, believe, and think what you want. It never has included freedom of consequences. Doing and saying stupid things can get you fired, especially for people in leadership positions and especially for public figures. This case involves both.fiestavike wrote: What is free speech if offending someone else is enough to preclude the right to say something? I support the right of people to say stupid and hurtful things, if that is because they don't like gays, blacks or gypsies or because they don't like christians, jews, muslims, they are afraid of gays or afraid of God, or because they are too self-centered and narcissistic to see anything from another persons perspective than their own, and thus everything is black and white, and I'm morally superior, and history is on my side, etc. Such demagoguery is really unimpressive and reflects poorly on those who resort to it.
Take a shot at a guy when he can't defend himself? Why can't he?Valhalla wrote:Harrison Smith discusses the situation.
His main goal was to expose this guy and get people talking. Agree or disagree: mission accomplished. And most of you complaining about his reasoning behind doing what he did and his "need for attention" can't seem to figure out you're giving him exactly what he wanted: discussion. Hello.
Since Walsh is one of the players most likely to have been in the meetings Kluwe mentioned, this is a pretty strong statement in stark contrast to Kluwe's claims. After all, Walsh wasn't required to say anything at all and instead, he has come out strong in defense of Priefer.I have been a member of the Minnesota Vikings for 2 years. I want to start off by saying I have the utmost respect for Rick Spielman, Leslie Frazier and Mike Priefer. All three, are good men.
I have had countless conversations and interactions with Coach Priefer, and I personally can attest to his integrity and character. His professionalism in the workplace is exemplary, and I firmly believe that my teammates would whole-heartedly agree. The allegations made today are reprehensible and totally not compatible with what Mike Priefer stands for.
As we all know, in the NFL you must perform at the highest level and meet the performance expectations of your coaches, management, and ownership. If these expectations, based upon past performance AND future potential for excellence, are not met, your NFL career with that team, is over. I believe this was the case with Chris, and it is unfair to think that his release was anything other than football related.
In my time here at Minnesota, Rick Spielman and Leslie Frazier have exemplified true leadership. Contrary to Chris’ statements, they have promoted a workplace environment that was conducive for success. At no time did I ever feel suppressed or that I could not be myself.
I firmly stand behind Rick Spielman, Leslie Frazier, and Mike Priefer.
Blair Walsh
Very nice assessment. I'm not sure, though, whether Kluwe does have anyone lined up who would testify. Maybe he's just assuming that anyone present at the nuke-the-homos meeting would testify truthfully if called into court.S197 wrote:I don't think it's surprising that players are coming out in support for Priefer, the same happened with Incognito.
It all seems pretty simple to me, if you're Priefer and you're innocent, sue Kluwe for defamation (in this case libel). Kluwe will be forced to back up his claims by calling in his witnesses, which I'm pretty sure he lined up before writing the story (otherwise he's an idiot). He obviously knows the ramifications of his article and he seems prepared to defend his position.
What's most likely to happen is Priefer will be let go by the Vikings as they're cleaning house anyway and it will be up to the next team to decide if they want Priefer or not. I don't see this ever going to court as I believe Kluwe is probably telling the truth and therefore neither party wants to get other players involved and Priefer knows Kluwe will show his hand if needed. If I was a betting man, I'd say Priefer's statement is the first and last thing he says on the matter.
Yeah, the NFL is almost like one of those strange brother hoods or cult like groups where as long as you're in the cult, you never say anything bad about anyone else in the cult. Every single player stuck up for Incognito and how great a guy he was and how good of character he had when we all know he's a big piece of ####. When you're playing an extremely team based sport like football I think that's kind of how it HAS to be, "die for your brother" mentality. You can't play well or have good team chemistry when half the team thinks something different from the other half of the team, especially not when extremely high paying jobs these guys have no chance of having outside of football, are on the line.S197 wrote:I don't think it's surprising that players are coming out in support for Priefer, the same happened with Incognito.
It all seems pretty simple to me, if you're Priefer and you're innocent, sue Kluwe for defamation (in this case libel). Kluwe will be forced to back up his claims by calling in his witnesses, which I'm pretty sure he lined up before writing the story (otherwise he's an idiot). He obviously knows the ramifications of his article and he seems prepared to defend his position.
What's most likely to happen is Priefer will be let go by the Vikings as they're cleaning house anyway and it will be up to the next team to decide if they want Priefer or not. I don't see this ever going to court as I believe Kluwe is probably telling the truth and therefore neither party wants to get other players involved and Priefer knows Kluwe will show his hand if needed. If I was a betting man, I'd say Priefer's statement is the first and last thing he says on the matter.
