Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

What top 100 players will not be drafted AT ALL?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DraftHobbyist


Joined: 17 Aug 2014
Posts: 349
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CalhounLambeau wrote:
DraftHobbyist wrote:
Some people will understand this is sexism.

Society made a collective choice you don't like. We're so sorry.

DraftHobbyist wrote:
How dare people like me stand up against the inequalities against men, right? smh True civil rights issues are often mocked and ridiculed. In fact, the less people recognize a group as in need of rights the bigger a civil rights issue it is. Mixon is the latest victim of a culture is that all too willing to dispose of men.

Make a sign and go protest somewhere. Thanks.


I'm not protesting here. Other people brought up the fact that I am a Men's Rights Activist. My posts are about Mixon. What is yours about? I see nothing in your post here about Mixon or any football player for that matter. But you know, I have a different opinion so ignore all of the other people who are making political statements and attacking me while not talking football, and then make something up about how I'm protesting, and tell me to leave. That's an effective way to get someone with a different opinion about character issues of football players off the board, right? Some people will never be happy until their spaces are turned into echo-chambers. I, however, am telling nobody to leave. I find your comment about taking a protest especially humorous since you put it in with a political comment yourself. Check your double standards, dude.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Qwarp


Joined: 10 Apr 2016
Posts: 66
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DraftHobbyist wrote:
Mixon is the latest victim of a culture is that all too willing to dispose of men.


I support Mixon and would love for my team to draft him, but can we maybe not refer to him as a victim?

He did what he did, faced the consequences, and is trying to move on.

If he falls in the draft, it won't be because the NFL is disposing of men. Last I checked there are a lot of men in the NFL.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
goldfishwars


Joined: 27 Mar 2011
Posts: 11931
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DraftHobbyist wrote:
Mixon is the latest victim of a culture is that all too willing to dispose of men.


Well when you put it like that, I guess the 6'1 athlete punching a woman and giving her life altering injuries after harassing her was the victim all along. Top five pick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 4791
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I mean, if society starts treating men as disposable, that's another step towards achieving equality of the sexes, since society has treated women as disposable for pretty much all of history. I mean absolutely no one here seems to care about the woman Mixon punched, right?

It's not exactly the sort of equality I was hoping for, but it's equality of a sort.

Always funny how MRAs are always about "why can't a man punch a woman" and not, you know, actual problems that men suffer from.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 68408
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DraftHobbyist wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
Are you a men's rights activist? You seem like a men's rights activist. Laughing


Yes, I am. Is that a problem? That's part of the reason I'm so informed on the issue. Wink


Is it a problem? That's a tough one to answer. On one hand, it's more illuminating than anything. It tells everyone here that you're not going to be reasoned with on this issue. You're like a flat-earther. There's no real point in trying to debate something that almost everybody in society accepts but you still reject.

On the other hand, it is a problem because your views are ignorant, but you aren't going to open your mind. I'll just leave it at this: You're not informed on this issue. You've spouted inaccurate statement after inaccurate statement in this thread. When called on it, you doubled down or backtracked and tried to change the argument.

The good news is that now that I know this, I know to ignore any posts you make on subjects like this.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CalhounLambeau


Joined: 05 May 2011
Posts: 11530
Location: WI
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DraftHobbyist wrote:
I'm not protesting here. Other people brought up the fact that I am a Men's Rights Activist. My posts are about Mixon. What is yours about? I see nothing in your post here about Mixon or any football player for that matter. But you know, I have a different opinion so ignore all of the other people who are making political statements and attacking me while not talking football, and then make something up about how I'm protesting, and tell me to leave. That's an effective way to get someone with a different opinion about character issues of football players off the board, right? Some people will never be happy until their spaces are turned into echo-chambers. I, however, am telling nobody to leave. I find your comment about taking a protest especially humorous since you put it in with a political comment yourself. Check your double standards, dude.

You made this whole discussion so difficult when you didn't have to. You could have just said Joe Mixon was within his legal right to defend himself after she hit him first and feel the issue is overblown because he's been a good citizen for years. I could see that point. I get that. But you ventured into completely mindlessness even in the beginning by speculating the table caused most of her injuries, that she was a violent attacker who posed a serious threat to him, that she hit him in the head and he hit her in the head like it was tit for tat, details about the trial nobody gives a damn about, workplace discrimination, and posting videos about boys and girls fighting, a ghetto trans woman beating up some dude in a video, etc. You incessantly ramble and ramble and ramble. Your posts are so uselessly long. You just create a giant web of nonsense and get caught in it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DraftHobbyist


Joined: 17 Aug 2014
Posts: 349
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
DraftHobbyist wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
Are you a men's rights activist? You seem like a men's rights activist. Laughing


Yes, I am. Is that a problem? That's part of the reason I'm so informed on the issue. Wink


Is it a problem? That's a tough one to answer. On one hand, it's more illuminating than anything. It tells everyone here that you're not going to be reasoned with on this issue. You're like a flat-earther. There's no real point in trying to debate something that almost everybody in society accepts but you still reject.

On the other hand, it is a problem because your views are ignorant, but you aren't going to open your mind. I'll just leave it at this: You're not informed on this issue. You've spouted inaccurate statement after inaccurate statement in this thread. When called on it, you doubled down or backtracked and tried to change the argument.

The good news is that now that I know this, I know to ignore any posts you make on subjects like this.


To say that MRA's are not to be reasoned with is nothing more than character assassination. The fact that I'm willing to defend Mixon shows that I am absolutely a reasonable person, and I'm willing to set aside emotionalism for what is right. Men have a right to self-defense, that's what happened here with Mixon, I've pointed you to the article that proves it, there is no obligation to walk away when one is attacked in Oklahoma, and you have had very little to say about the article I posted. People like Calhoun started to say they don't care about the law and moved on, and I think that's a good sign that your side of this issue simply does not have a counter-argument here. I've said many times and will continue to say this: Mixon could have walked away, but I'm not going to consider him undraftable simply because he chose a different route which was legal. Remember, Mixon was found not guilty after pleading and going through his probation period. To say MRA's are equivalent to flat-earthers is just ignorant, and you're attacking credibility rather than arguments for a reason: You've run out of good counter-arguments.

Qwarp wrote:
I support Mixon and would love for my team to draft him, but can we maybe not refer to him as a victim?

He did what he did, faced the consequences, and is trying to move on.

If he falls in the draft, it won't be because the NFL is disposing of men. Last I checked there are a lot of men in the NFL.


You are free to not call Mixon a victim. We can agree on some things and disagree on other things. I believe Mixon is a victim, and therefore, I cannot pretend that I believe he isn't a victim. That would be dishonest of me. A man who is not being threatening and is physically attacked is a victim. If we pause this situation and say that he walked away after being attacked, would you honestly say he wasn't a victim of any attack? His response does not change the original attack, and so I think it's obvious he was a victim, even if you think she was also a victim.

Also, your male disaposability argument doesn't address any argument I made, but to say that the NFL does not dispose of men is an absolute joke. They hid concussions for years, which lead to the suicide of many NFL men. These men that play often end up with bad knees, brain damage/memory loss, bad backs, etc.

goldfishwars wrote:
Well when you put it like that, I guess the 6'1 athlete punching a woman and giving her life altering injuries after harassing her was the victim all along. Top five pick.


Mixon isn't a Top 5 talent.

PossibleCabbage wrote:
I mean, if society starts treating men as disposable, that's another step towards achieving equality of the sexes, since society has treated women as disposable for pretty much all of history. I mean absolutely no one here seems to care about the woman Mixon punched, right?

It's not exactly the sort of equality I was hoping for, but it's equality of a sort.

Always funny how MRAs are always about "why can't a man punch a woman" and not, you know, actual problems that men suffer from.


Society has never found women as disposable. Biologically, people are more protective of females than males. That's a scientific fact.

What do you mean by nobody here cares about the woman? Everybody here cares about her. Most people have taken her side while those who haven't like me still feel bad for her as a human being. Nobody wants someone else to break bones in their face. But this is about the NFL Draft, and Mixon is a prospect for the 2017 NFL Draft, she is not. We can feel bad for, think that she was at fault for creating this physical confrontation, and yet talk about how this should impact Mixon all at the same time.

As for MRA's, we tend to be for the ability of men to defend themselves, and we think the idea that men can never defend themselves from a woman is harmful to men. We also tend to think that men are better off walking away because if it's determined it wasn't self-defense then a man can go to jail, harming his quality of life. Make no mistake, we talk about many other issues that harm men, and in fact, this self-defense issue isn't even that high on the list. In terms of a major issue that would impact the NFL, suicide is a huge issue. Some players are negatively impacted by the unfairness in family courts as well. I could go on and on, but that's not what this forum is for. It's unfortunate that you are so willing to attack my belief system without even knowing what my belief system consists of. MRA's are used to character assassination, though.

CalhounLambeau wrote:
You made this whole discussion so difficult when you didn't have to. You could have just said Joe Mixon was within his legal right to defend himself after she hit him first and feel the issue is overblown because he's been a good citizen for years. I could see that point. I get that. But you ventured into completely mindlessness even in the beginning by speculating the table caused most of her injuries, that she was a violent attacker who posed a serious threat to him, that she hit him in the head and he hit her in the head like it was tit for tat, details about the trial nobody gives a damn about, workplace discrimination, and posting videos about boys and girls fighting, a ghetto trans woman beating up some dude in a video, etc. You incessantly ramble and ramble and ramble. Your posts are so uselessly long. You just create a giant web of nonsense and get caught in it.


Funny you mention the bold, because I made those arguments. But yes, I'm willing to go further than just those arguments because I'm not here to say the minimum possible, I'm here to say what I believe as true. That's fine that you disagree with how far I go, but I'm glad you have come around on the core arguments to agree with me about Mixon.
_________________


Last edited by DraftHobbyist on Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:28 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 68408
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DraftHobbyist wrote:
I've pointed you to the article that proves it, there is no obligation to walk away when one is attacked in Oklahoma, and you have had very little to say about the article I posted. People like Calhoun started to say they don't care about the law and moved on, and I think that's a good sign that your side of this issue simply does not have a counter-argument here. I've said many times and will continue to say this: Mixon could have walked away, but I'm not going to consider him undraftable simply because he chose a different route which was legal. To say MRA's are equivalent to flat-earthers is just ignorant, and you're attacking credibility rather than arguments for a reason: You've run out of good counter-arguments.


I stopped responding because you don't understand the law, and you ignore what I tell you when I try to explain it to you.
1. You cited the stand your ground law. That isn't the most applicable law to this case. This is the text from Oklahoma's stand your ground law:
"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

That's not applicable to this situation. If you tried to use that statute to argue Mixon's innocence in court, you would lose.

The applicable statute is:
"To use or to attempt to offer to use force or violence upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:
3. When committed either by the person about to be injured, or by any other person in such person's aid or defense, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against such person, or any trespass or other unlawful interference with real or personal property in such person's lawful possession; provided the force or violence used is not more than sufficient to prevent such offense"

In case you missed it, Mixon's force must be proportional. Here's what you said about Mixon's use of force:
DraftHobbyist wrote:
Now did he use proportional force? That's up for debate and very gray, but when you break down the situation, it's much easier to see why a man defending himself from a violent attacker would accidentally use more force than he should.


Considering that nobody else will go anywhere near as far as you in defending Mixon, the fact that even you can't claim the force he used was proportional speaks to how poor his chances of convincing a jury were.

That's exactly why Mixon wasn't willing to take this to court. He'd have to convince a jury that just saw the video that knocking the girl out was proportional force.

I've never said that Mixon is undraftable. What I've taken issue with is your ridiculous version of events (Mixon is the real victim) and your misstatements of the law.

Quote:
Remember, Mixon was found not guilty after pleading and going through his probation period.


Here's another misstatement of the law. Wrong. Mixon plead guilty. His plea deal dismissed the chargers if he met all the requirements. That is not being found not guilty. It is not even remotely similar to that.

That is a common deal for young first-time offenders charged with a misdemeanor. A conviction on your record can ruin your chances of getting a job. By offering them a dismissal at the end of the plea deal, you give a young first-time offender a chance at life without a conviction weighing them down. It's an attempt to reduce recidivism. It is not at all being found not guilty.

Stop misstating the law.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CalhounLambeau


Joined: 05 May 2011
Posts: 11530
Location: WI
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DraftHobbyist wrote:
Funny you mention the bold, because I made those arguments.

I know you did.

DraftHobbyist wrote:
But yes, I'm willing to go further than just those arguments because I'm not here to say the minimum possible, I'm here to say what I believe as true.

Pointlessly derailing someone's thread discussing things against forum rules which you know would cause an uproar. I don't get it. I only joined in late after the thread was beyond repair thinking it would be locked quickly. Kind of a turd move.

DraftHobbyist wrote:
I'm glad you have come around on the core arguments to agree with me about Mixon.

I never came around on anything. I believe in the rule of law and second chances.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jlash


Joined: 17 Oct 2016
Posts: 1927
Location: NJ
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CalhounLambeau wrote:

You made this whole discussion so difficult when you didn't have to. You could have just said Joe Mixon was within his legal right to defend himself after she hit him first and feel the issue is overblown because he's been a good citizen for years. I could see that point. I get that. But you ventured into completely mindlessness even in the beginning by speculating the table caused most of her injuries, that she was a violent attacker who posed a serious threat to him, that she hit him in the head and he hit her in the head like it was tit for tat, details about the trial nobody gives a damn about, workplace discrimination, and posting videos about boys and girls fighting, a ghetto trans woman beating up some dude in a video, etc. You incessantly ramble and ramble and ramble. Your posts are so uselessly long. You just create a giant web of nonsense and get caught in it.


I'm looking for a 'like' button for this post. Then we can close the thread.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The LBC


Global Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 34857
Location: Where We Can't Have Nice Things
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
That is a common deal for young first-time offenders charged with a misdemeanor. A conviction on your record can ruin your chances of getting a job. By offering them a dismissal at the end of the plea deal, you give a young first-time offender a chance at life without a conviction weighing them down. It's an attempt to reduce recidivism. It is not at all being found not guilty.

Stop misstating the law.


_________________

MathMan wrote:
I think I'm obfuscating all over the place!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ragnarok


Joined: 17 Oct 2016
Posts: 851
Location: Washington, DC
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like rum.

Anyone else like rum?
_________________
Come join BDL!

Seriously, we're awesome. We all may or may not have mild-at-best psychological issues, but we are damn fun.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jlash


Joined: 17 Oct 2016
Posts: 1927
Location: NJ
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ragnarok wrote:
I like rum.

Anyone else like rum?



This is ya booooooooi
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CalhounLambeau


Joined: 05 May 2011
Posts: 11530
Location: WI
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DraftHobbyist wrote:
I'm not protesting here.

I never said you were.

DraftHobbyist wrote:
My posts are about Mixon.

You bring him up from time to time between posting videos of ghetto trans women beating up men and school-yard fights, sure.

DraftHobbyist wrote:
What is yours about?

I'm assuming you've read them.

DraftHobbyist wrote:
I see nothing in your post here about Mixon or any football player for that matter.

I wouldn't worry about it.

DraftHobbyist wrote:
Then make something up about how I'm protesting.

I never told you that you were protesting. I said you should.

DraftHobbyist wrote:
I find your comment about taking a protest especially humorous since you put it in with a political comment yourself.

You're railing against commonly held societal beliefs that should change. That's something someone would protest about. Me making a political comment doesn't constitute a double standard. It doesn't make any sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CalhounLambeau


Joined: 05 May 2011
Posts: 11530
Location: WI
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LBC literally just posted in here and left. The thread is still open. What's happened here? Not complaining. Just a little confused. Is this thread a parallel universe?

Last edited by CalhounLambeau on Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:34 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 8 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group