OT: Reggie Bush Suing St. Louis

Submitted by FauxMo on

I had not seen this posted (please delete if I missed it, MODS), but Reggie Bush is apparently suing the city of St. Louis because of the potentially career-ending knee injury he received playing in the city-owned Edward Jones Dome.

 

I REALLY hope this doesn't turn into a debate about attorneys or tort reform or whatever, but it sure seems to me Bush has a slam-dunk case here. Another player was injured a few weeks earlier, and now the city/stadium is rushing to cover the concrete that caused the injury before the Rams next home game.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/report--reggie-bush-h…

NRK

November 12th, 2015 at 12:25 PM ^

I get it was a joke taking from Its Always Sunny. I got the refrence right away when I read the post. Of course the avatar made it more obvious to me.

 

I still stand by my statement. Framing something as a complment based on a stereotype doesn't make it less offensive.  If you don't like the control examples I gave above there's plenty of others:

  • Jimmy Snyder ("Jimmy the Greek") was fired for a comment that could be considered complimentary to African Americans - saying they are better athletes. People to this day still consider that comment offensive.
  • Stereotypes implying Jewish people are good at saving money - again, could be a "compliment", but still could be offensive.

 

I'm not here to be the PC police -  I just want to point this out: As a general rule if you base a comment on a person's classification in a group rather than on the individual you run the risk of offending someone. Yes, even when making jokes, yes even when enforcing national security, yes when posting on a message board. Framing it as a compliment based on a stereotype, in my opinion, doesn't change that. 

HateSparty

November 9th, 2015 at 11:57 AM ^

I am a caucasian male from the midwest in my mid forties.  I think you are vile and ignorant.  I ask that you consider replacing this with a sincere apology.  There is no place on any site for this type of shit.  And in response to the "Unbunch your panties" crowd.  Fuck off.  It is inappropriate and I believe he should be banned without an apology.  What's next, using a racial epitaph or the "N" word if it is meant to be funny?  Rule of thumb, if your laughter is at others' expense, go back to middle school.

DrMantisToboggan

November 9th, 2015 at 6:48 PM ^

You just perpetuated something that it always so funny to me. So half of my family comes from the south. The other half came to America from the Mediterranean in the 50's (but what?!?! aren't all southerners hick xenophobes? how can this be?!?). It is always the high and mighty Social Justice Warriors that spout things like "The South/people from there is/are prejudiced" without considering that that in itself is prejudiced. Maybe it is because of the type of person I am and the type of people I associate with, but I have met far fewer bigoted people from the South than I have in the North. Obviously "rednecks" exist in both the North and South, but "rednecks" (I am assuming you are referring to rural, working-class folks) are not all bigoted. In my day I have heard and seen much more offensive things from the same people who front as these social justice warriors. 

 

What people need to realize is that the world will be a much better place when we can joke and smile about our differences rather than attacking each other at the drop of a hat. If something is in humor with no ill intent towards the group that is the subject of the joke, then it is not racist or sexist or prejudiced and if you are offended by it, get lost. The ethnic/religious make-up of my friend group is far more diverse than the population of this country and the vast majority of our jokes are based on stereotypes...because they are funny! I enjoy being called a hillbilly or goat-f**ker or Zorba as much as I like making the same type of jokes with my Black, Jewish, Mexican, Indian, etc. friends. The solution to creating a more accepting, global community is not policing internet comments or every word that leaves everyone's mouth (which you do with alarming clumsiness, by the way), but rather letting the collective bug crawl out of our asses and laughing/talking about our differences more.

 

Until then, try not to let a TV Show character meant to satirically comment on those who are actually bigoted ruin your day, kind, middle-aged, midwestern caucasian. 

HateSparty

November 9th, 2015 at 10:00 PM ^

You are correct that I behaved as the ignorant I was looking to address. Redneck is a term that I shouldn't use. I apologize for that. It was short sighted.

As for your defense of anti-Semitic humor as supported through a television program that may or may not be mainstream is shallow. You shouldn't have said, should have recognized you should not have and corrected it. Instead you defend it with arguments akin to I'm rubber you're glue and I can say that because I'm friends with Jewish people, et al. If I don't like it I can go play somewhere else. Instead you should grow a set and correct a wrong. It's okay. I was wrong and modeled the correct behavior. You can maybe next time remember this instead of a television show segment.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

ijohnb

November 9th, 2015 at 10:42 AM ^

Reggie Bush to be a strange victim of a really unsupported media narrative.  I heard the term "washed up" to describe him so many times while he was in Detroit but the last time I saw him in a Lions uniform he was catching a pass and taking it around the corner and to the house against Dallas.  I thought he was effective the entire time he was here and don't understand why people were so dismissive of him.

In reply to by ijohnb

McSomething

November 9th, 2015 at 10:56 AM ^

One thing you have to understand is that I do not watch the NFL. My only view of Bush with the Lions is he looked like yet another overpaid player; the result of that overpayment being that once again they couldn't plug their numerous holes around the roster. Spent far too much on far too few. This is the first I have heard his name since he left the Lions.

ijohnb

November 9th, 2015 at 11:04 AM ^

have been overpaid but he was undervalued at the same time, if that makes sense.  Notice, there is absolutely no explosiveness to the Lions offense right now and really no way to move the ball through screens, etc.  They had a lot of flexibility out of the backfield and a lot of that stuff had to do with him.  They have none of that now.

In reply to by ijohnb

McSomething

November 9th, 2015 at 11:15 AM ^

I'll take your word on all that, again I really don't watch. But from a total outsider perspective that has a passing knowledge of what's going on, that probably has a lot to do with how they spent their money, and that it prevented the team from being able to have amy meaningful depth.

ijohnb

November 9th, 2015 at 11:18 AM ^

really don't watch either, but everytime I turned on the TV the last few years while the Lions were playing I saw Reggie Bush doing something good and then every time I turned on the radio I heard how ineffective he was.  It was kind of weird. 

In reply to by ijohnb

McSomething

November 9th, 2015 at 11:23 AM ^

Maybe it had something to do with his contributions in comparison to his salary? I don't know, I try to avoid sports talk radio. 97.1 is all I'm really aware of available where I'm at, and I refuse almost on general principle.

Pepto Bismol

November 9th, 2015 at 11:25 AM ^

Constantly hurt - even with the slightest contact.  Don't mean to sound crass, but in sports parlance, he was a pu**y.  I hate putting it like that, but football players have to play to contact and battle through nagging injuries.  Bush doesn't.

He'd break a nice play now and then, and could definitely catch, and was dangerous on the edge.  But despite appearance and reputation, had no "juke", made nobody miss and never broke tackles. 

If he could stay on the field, I would consider him overrated but effective.  But he was always on the sideline.  He's only played 2 full seasons in his 10 year career.  He has missed more than 20% of his career games. 

That would be one thing if he was breaking collar bones or tearing ligaments.  That wasn't the case.  It was an endless barrage of "Questionable".  Here are the injuries he was listed with on the injury report in just 2 seasons with the Lions:  thumb/groin, knee, leg, knee, hamstring, calf, knee, ankle, ankle/back.  He was on the injury report in 18 of the 32 games he played in Detroit. 

Sorry.  I'm getting carried away.  Just a sore spot.  Reggie Bush is a waste.  Has milked injuries his entire career, putting his pristine condition ahead of team success.  I am not surprised that he's carrying this St. Louis injury to the litigation phase.  That's him in a nutshell.  Parlaying bench time into paychecks since 2005.

 

In reply to by ijohnb

Pepto Bismol

November 9th, 2015 at 11:37 AM ^

Yeah, I know.  And I'll take the downvotes.  But seriously, just ask any diehard of any of the fan bases he's played for (N.O., Miami, Det, S.F.).  It's not just me. 

 

 

 

FreddieMercuryHayes

November 9th, 2015 at 10:38 AM ^

I'm just more pissed that the city of St. Louis and their taxpayers may end up paying and not the St. Louis Rams.  Once again, publically funded stadiums are terrible.  Team ownership gets all the profit and the city is stuck with everything that costs money.

sadeto

November 9th, 2015 at 10:54 AM ^

I don't think it's an issue of legislation, the cities make the decisions to fund stadiums so that teams don't leave. St. Louis has obviously seen teams leave before and decided they didn't want that to happen again, so they took on the responsibility for funding and managing the stadium. 

Tuebor

November 9th, 2015 at 11:05 AM ^

That and the Rams don't own the stadium so the City can utilize it however they want on the 357 days of the year when the Rams aren't playing home games.  I'm sure there is plenty of revenue to be made from Concerts, Monster Truck Rallies, Conventions, trade shows, college sporting events, etc.

GoBlueInNYC

November 9th, 2015 at 11:09 AM ^

Time and time again every single study ever to look at publicly funding stadiums have demonstrated that they are massive money-losing endeavours for cities. The idea of using them for other events always comes up, but that extra revenue never comes close to paying for it. Tax payers take it on the chin and municipalities always lose money on these things. Always.

Public funds for stadiums is a huge scam by the league to get away with not having to pay for their own facilities. And it is absolutely ridiculous that it keeps happening.

sadeto

November 9th, 2015 at 2:08 PM ^

The Giants and Jets paid for MetLife stadium in the most expensive construction market in the country. But...they in turn got all of the parking and concessions on dozens of acres of state-owned land, plus development rights for more state-owned land for proposed shopping, etc. 

Every way you try to spin it, sports teams manage to screw state and local authorities. The state of New Jersey gets exactly $6.3 million in rent for all of that. They were absolutely no match for 3 NFL owners. 

BomTrady

November 9th, 2015 at 11:03 AM ^

Laws don't need to change. Constituents need to stop voting for politicians who approve of and promote this sort of action. Time and time again, the constituents of cities have proven willing to be bent over a barrel by team owners threatening to leave in exchange for sweetheart stadium deals their children will be paying off decades later. Look at Miami!



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Mr Miggle

November 9th, 2015 at 11:12 AM ^

I understand the need to name the owner of the stadium in the lawsuit, but don't the Rams and the NFL have the primary responsibility to determine the standard for safe playing conditions? And to determine whether that standard is met? They're supposed to be the experts here. It's not like a railing collapsed and a fan fell.

 

DreisbachToHayes

November 9th, 2015 at 10:39 AM ^

Someone at one point likely made the decision to leave it as exposed concrete probably to save money, as opposed to going wall-to-wall with field turf or rubberizing it.  How much money is that decision saving now?