Calm down, you're just a bit semantically challenged. I think that what you're trying to say is that you weren't the first to bring sexism into the thread, but nonetheless you did in bring the concept of sexism into the thread, no? It's no biggie, relax, but have you noticed that this isn't the first time that you've changed your tune based upon a technicality? Try not to go all Bill Clinton on us: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0 What is "is", according to you?
Totally agree. Not sure she may feel that way though. That is an awful lot of power though to be a GM - absent Tannenbaum. You would almost have to admit it would be a dream job to not only negotiate contracts but to run a lot of the aspects of the team and write the contracts to.....wow
No. I didn't bring sexism into this thread. This isn't semantics. This is you not understanding the language.
Yes, I am understanding the language. If I wanted to say that you INTRODUCED the concept of sexism into the thread, I would have. As I pointed out, a different poster did that in post #23. You brought YOUR take on sexist elements that you see in the Aponte story, hopefully that clears it up for you because there is obviously a difference there. You brought your flavor of perceived sexism into the discussion, which I believe to be unfounded. Post #23 jumped on perceived sexism in post #22, which if you read it again is unfounded as well. Anyway, you hang your hat on technicalities far too often in an attempt to squirm out of dubious statements that you make, jmo.
This is not a technicality. This was not semantics. This is you realizing you were wrong and instead of admitting it, trying to play games to pass it off. The person that brought sexism into the discussion wasn't offbase or crazy or unfounded or anything of the sort. The reason ONCE AGAIN (will you even deal with this part this time? I doubt it.) is twofold: - None of us actually know the first thing about Aponte, her personality, or how she is in a working environment. Nor do we know how things normally work in an NFL FO. - The words being used to describe her are traditionally used to denigrate women in power. So, when you factor in we don't know about her but are passing judgement on her personality and doing so with sexist language......then it makes perfect sense to question whether or not sexism is the motivation in the negative comments about her.
Good Lord. This pattern of behavior and attempted logic emanates from you far too often. Here's the post #22 in question: "Exactly, she's quietly one of the biggest back-stabbing snakes in the league. She's a cancer in the organization." So your argument is that "back stabbing snakes" and "cancer " are terms used mainly to describe women? And that is your jump off point for you rants about how criticism of Aponte is fundamentally sexist in nature? And that's why you brought into the thread your accusations of sexism as per Aponte? You need help. Of what specific variety I'm not sure of, but you need help.
Says the guy who has no reading comprehension or the sack to admit when they made a mistake. Here you go: Forbes Magazine Article
Grow up? Lol okay BOY. I only used your post as a reference to point out why the poster i was addressing was wrong. Just because you interview for a job and consider taking it doesn't mean you made the decision to take that job, and just because it took her 6 days to make the decision STILL does not mean she made the decision to go to Detroit THEN changed her mind, go look at the definition of consider(ing).. NOWHERE does it say she took the Detroit job, that is the reporter speculating and you believing everything you read evidently. You are speculating A LOT that she took the job when in fact all she did was consider taking the job, thought about it for a few days and decided to stay where she is,,did she leverage Ross for more money? Maybe but who cares, are you that naive to think that doesn't happen in the business world? I can and have interviewed for other jobs, and considered everything involved, and took longer than 6 days to make that decision to stay where i was...the new job was a consideration but so was staying in my current job...Aponte went through the same thing and a reporter reported she was leaving, then it was pointed out by another reporter she wasn't leaving that she only interviewed for the job. WHERE does it say she made the decision to leave for Detroit but changed her mind? Other than the false original report?
Did the starting point of your sexist rant, post #22, mention the word "conniving"? Let's take a look: "Exactly, she's quietly one of the biggest back-stabbing snakes in the league. She's a cancer in the organization." Do you see the word "conniving" in there? Did I miss it? As you maintain my reading comprehension skills must be lacking, so can you find it there for me? Point it out? Or is it maybe your reading comprehension that is in question? Possible? I'm seeing "back stabbing snakes" and "a cancer". Am I wrong? Do you equate "conniving" with "back stabbing snakes" and "a cancer"? Are they one and the same?
... & Ok? You don't care? Really? As for your thoughts on interviewing elsewhere... Sorry, I think you're flat out wrong there. As someone else said, people do it all the time, even if just for networking opportunities etc. etc. It happens ALL THE TIME in the NFL. Look how many coaches interview elsewhere, even if they have no chance at actually getting jobs. It's just what people do to look at other opportunities, see how their job stacks up against other opportunities, income is key etc, etc. Just because she interviewed elsewhere, doesn't mean there's dysfunction, or she's not happy, or the other reasons you're speculating. It's just simply what people do. Especially in the NFL. Especially if they want to advance their careers. Who really wants to just sit in their current role and never advance? I've been with my company 12 years now. I'm very happy. I have a great team that I work with, and that works for me. The business I'm in, is always looking for people to move. I'm fairly young, in an aging industry. I get head hunted alot, as do many others. It's not real different in the NFL. Teams are always looking for fresh blood, new ideas, you bring people in for interviews, even if just to pick their brains (the shanahan interview in Miami is an example of that), and as the worker, you are ALWAYS smart to go and visit. Make a connection, you never know when you may need it. Get an idea for how things work elsewhere, it may surprise you. Get an idea of your value. For example, I went on an interview 5 years ago, arranged by a headhunter at a competing firm. I had no interest in leaving my position, but interviewing doesn't hurt. They wanted me badly. They offered me almost $50k/year more than I was earning first year, just to walk in the door. On average, over 5 years, it would have been about a $25,000 raise in pure salary since it decreased yearly, but I could have easily made up that decrease in sales incentives. It presented me an interesting new perspective on my value. Since I didn't want to leave, of course it made me do alot of thinking. I decided to leave, for the money. When I went to meet with my boss to resign, they threw a curveball at me, and wanted to keep me and match anything they could to get me to stay. Now, they didn't meet it 100% to the opposing offer, but I stayed anyways for various reasons. As for your thoughts on Tannenbaum, and his ability to run the team... time will tell on all of that.
Jesus. They are related. You're the only person that doesn't know back stabbing and conniving are related. Just put me on ignore. We'll both be happier and both enjoy the forum more.
I meant to quote you? You believe that and have the gall to accuse mea of having a lack of reading comprehension? Amazing. Reread the posts and let the obvious sink in that I'm referring to the key post #22 as per the discussion, which you've obviously failed to grasp. Wasting time with Fin D, yet again...
WTF are you talking about? Put down the bottle, you've had enough, I hope you're home and don't have to drive.
please show me where I made anything up? please, i'm not the one saying she took the job when she never did. If Aponte or Detroit comes out and says "yes she accepted the position with Detroit then turned it down" then i will believe it, until then it says she only considered it. wow smh
yes, that fact that you believe she stabbed someone in the back and say it is true because " Quote Originally Posted by Serpico Jones View Post Not on my end. Her bull**** has been written about. in a thread that was linked to a report that was wrong. See the irony? That fact that people are still arguing that she took the job and changed her mind is different.
Really? Reread the thread. In post #22 a statement was made that was claimed to be sexist by post #23. I disagree. That was the genesis of Fin D going off on his extended solo sexism rant. Thank you for playing, Einstein #2. Try reading more carefully next time, at least be better than the other clueless guy.
Jim, go look at your post #129..you quoted me, I have nothing to do with post #22 or #23. you quoted the wrong person (me) lol.....but thank you for the insults
I clicked on the wrong post, my bad, sorry about that. I didn't read your post and the words were intended for Fin D, not you. My apologies.
She's going/she's staying.... ¯\_('^')_/¯ just don't create mega contracts for our non-mega stars (Miller & OV).