|
Post by Defcord on Aug 11, 2018 16:40:37 GMT -6
I will be the biggest loser in the world before I treat people like garbage to win.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Aug 11, 2018 13:00:22 GMT -6
wiscoach You say you would let anyone come out late who "wasn't a cancer." How do you define that? Do your kids who have been around all summer and for Pre-Season practice accept them? I am not the HC just so you know, but essentially we have welcomed anyone who wasn't undermining players or coaches, and would give good effort in practice and do what we asked of them. Last year we had one come out day one after not playing football before and not attending a single workout, and he ended up being a 2 way all conference player. The kids all really looked up to him. I think for the most part 80 percent of our team will welcome a late-comer. Just out of curiosity after having the great season did he carry that momentum into the offseason? It’s great to see kids come out and have success. I hope most would build on that success the following off season. I would worry that some would take an approach that they had a ton of success without an off-season and want to miss again. Curious to see how your kid played out.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Aug 10, 2018 8:46:45 GMT -6
If the kid is a basketball kid, is he going to stay motivated as a team member late in a playoff run when it’s cold out side, practice is hard, and their is a nice warm gym within walking distance?
I think it’s worth giving him a shot. But I think it’s worth giving all kids a shot. There are some potential negative outcomes to allowing him to come out but it’s probably not the end of the world if they surface. Just something you would have to deal with and refocus your group afterward.
These situations are always interesting. One school I was at our head coach had kicked a pretty popular kid off for missing three practices in camp but then allowed a couple kids to come out after the school year started. It never sat right with the kids because in their mind they late kids had missed more practices than the one who missed the three. The head coach said it was different because the late comers hadn’t made a commitment yet. I see both perspectives.
The best thing you can do is make the decision you think helps the team fulfill your goals. There’s no right answer here and that’s what makes coaching so interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Aug 9, 2018 8:29:13 GMT -6
People feel they have a license to speak to people this way now because no one get smacked in the mouth anymore. It pretty much comes down to general human decency ... if you feel that you need to speak to another man this way on the regular either fire him because he’s not getting it done for you or look at yourself in the mirror because there is something seriously wrong with you. If you are an assistant and tolerate it then I have no sympathy for you . Obviously you can’t just go around smacking everyone who gets lippy with you but if you have a pair there is only so much a man can take until he starts wearing dresses and using the women’s room at target. Okay, you took a weird turn there at the end. But I do wonder as an assistant where the line is that you have the right to defend yourself without it being seen defiant to the program goals. Being on the same page definitely doesn’t mean taking unwarranted verbal abuse so the hc can relieve his frustration and anger.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Aug 5, 2018 11:24:18 GMT -6
I would have to imagine that someone within the OSU empire knew that this story was in the pipeline. I can't believe that someone from the PR department didn't give Meyer a head's up..."Hey Coach, you might get asked a question about Zach Smith's history of domestic abuse. If you get asked that question, you need to direct all comments to the athletic department." I think the bigger question is, why would Meyer (or ANY highly successful coach) want to have someone like this on his staff? Smith was a wide receiver coach or something? And followed Meyer to tOSU from Florida? There are tens of thousands of good coaches who don't beat their wives who would jump at the chance to work for Meyer. Why would a successful head coach want to drag around a relatively insignificant guy who has so much bad history? I get that Smith was something of tOSU royalty but did Meyer really need that, coming in? I don't think so. That's the part that doesn't make sense to me. From a purely selfish viewpoint, what upsides were there to Meyer keeping Smith on staff all these years that cancelled out all of Smith's considerable downsides? I think maybe it comes down to the personal relation and the built in biases. You want to trust and believe in the people that you love. It’s hard to separate from those in our closest circles. Also there might be an intentional ignorance to the harm to protect the innocent in the organization. On top of this there might be trying to protect the self from accepting that you have made a decision to hire a person that has harmed others so at the very least it seems to reflect on you and indirectly be your responsibility. So it becomes: A) I want to believe this stuff never happened B) if this stuff did happen, I don’t want the other coaches and their families, the players and the university to suffer from one persons mustakes C) I don’t want people to think I allowed this D) I can’t believe I allowed this to happen and people are hurt as a result of my action
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Aug 5, 2018 8:36:34 GMT -6
I know the focus isn’t supposed to be on the individual coach so I will say this. It’s amazing how detailed and calculated and well thought ahead some coaches are. It’s what makes them successful. It is interesting that some of these finely detailed coaches when off script and in situations they can’t control. It’s becoming an on-the-record world so I imagine coaches at all levels will need start planning for non-football related issues in the same way they approach the game. As the op suggested “no comment” on a question that hasn’t been prepared for may be the optimal answer. I wonder if some coaches have something in them at instinctually feels they have to have an answer so they respond without realizing the damage the weight of their words. When they are on the spot in a game it is rare that they are surprised but their responses are swift and protects them and the same reactionary approach with situations outside of the game has an opposite effect.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Aug 5, 2018 7:01:48 GMT -6
I don't know. Defensive coaches have been know to say, "Don't worry. They won't run that chit". Maybe when some dingleberry Lincoln Riley wanna be dials up a quadruple reverse pass when we are playing a DW team. Generally I like to think defensive guys have more sense than the visor fairies Especially when said dingleberry also relives his glory days by being the scout team qb so he can pitch the ball and wheel out the backfield to be on the receiving end of the td pass that reboosts his ego for weeks to come.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Aug 5, 2018 6:56:19 GMT -6
I like to script because I want to ensure that we are scripting in some "bad calls" by me so the kids get some reps at that and have to manage the play. And maybe this next part is my d-bag ego but I make sure to explain to some guys after those plays that we scripted a bad scenario for us there. I think this is important and I want to script in formations that we have automatic checks to so I know our kids are going to to see it and be able to do it in the game.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Aug 1, 2018 5:45:23 GMT -6
Damn, thats disturbing. I am not trying to make light of the #MeToo movement, but there seem to be some similarities in stories and approach. The scary part is the kid said that he was tempted to commit. That’s a prettt big life decision and definitely one you want to sleep on. Hard to blame Fleck though if it works since recruiting is a big part of his job. Doesn’t make him any more likable still.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 29, 2018 8:44:06 GMT -6
I wish I hadn't read this thread. We have the best offensive line I have ever been part of this year. We aren't deep but our top 6 are legit. Now, I am worried about how quickly things can change!
I know how hard it is to find 5 linemen without the mess you are dealing with. Good Luck Coach!
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 28, 2018 12:45:50 GMT -6
In honor of the Last Chance You thread about the hc yelling at assistants what are some of the best ear beatings you have been part of.
I had described one the whole defensive staff and I took in that thread where we almost got fired after blowing a huge halftime and fourth quarter lead.
One I gave and feel bad about now:
We are in the first round of the playoffs. In a tight game. We are winning 14-0 but there’s virtually no offense from either side. The team we were playing was pretty good. Their qb had set the state record earlier in the year for TD passes in a game and they had a receiver that could play.
I didn’t feel like they were ever really out of it because they had some big play potential. Our defense is shutting them down though. Flying to the football. I am still wishing we can get some cushion but we are struggling to get it across the goal line.
Late in the third we have their offense 4th and short. They run a counter play. Our backers fly to the direction of the counter steps and can’t get back to their run fits. Their back cuts it back and takes it to the house to cut or lead to 14-7.
One of our assistants (he’s the guy that is a part timer and suggests plays without having watched any film) is standing behind me with another assistant. I hear him say to the other guy, “Damn, nice effing counter!”
I don’t like the guy already, I am not really happy about what happened and I am an immature 29-year-old head coach. The perfect recipe for a flip-out.
I turn around and look at him...try to take a deep breath...try to just walk away...AND rage.
“Nice counter? Nice effing counter!? If you want to root for those guys, sit in their effing stands. Other wise trying coaching someone or shut the eff up!”
Two coaches separated us before we could prolong the dialogue. We held strong after that and won the game. We ended up giving up less that 100 yards of total offense. The other team didn’t complete a pass. We had five interceptions.
Half of their offense came on that counter play...probably was a nice effing counter after all.
I have grown up a little since then. I have tried to completely eliminate yelling from my coaching arsenal. Last year I yelled only three times all year and it was comical to our kids. I understand there are some motivational purposes for it but it’s just not who I want to be anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 19:31:43 GMT -6
I get your point about taking the opinion of this board as an informed opinion. I just think it’s a slippery slope to rally against information that one had not experienced. Like I said as a matter of taste it’s really not a big deal, but as a matter of policy it’s a little more serious in my opinion. I would agree with you had I been actually contacting the AFCA. But saying that I think they should based on what I have read is a few degrees different. I do understand your position, but not sure how you in anyway connected that to the Fedora thread. There really probably was no link to Fedora. I just wondered if making strong claims about the show without seeing it was different than making strong claims about concussions without supporting the claims. I respect your voice on the board and when I first asked I really was curious to know how you felt those two things differed. I did have an uneasiness with the idea of having the AFCA act based on something you hadn’t seen, but the fact you pointed out that you hadn’t seen it gave credence to your and opinion in general.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 19:22:09 GMT -6
I get your point about taking the opinion of this board as an informed opinion. I just think it’s a slippery slope to rally against information that one had not experienced. Like I said as a matter of taste it’s really not a big deal, but as a matter of policy it’s a little more serious in my opinion. I would agree with you had I been actually contacting the AFCA. But saying that I think they should based on what I have read is a few degrees different. I do understand your position, but not sure how you in anyway connected that to the Fedora thread. I didn’t see this before I just posted. You are right that the mention of the AFCA and actually contacting them are different degrees. I did not even think of that.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 19:19:59 GMT -6
But how do you know those shows contain anything to ask that the AFCA makes statements in regards to those shows? I just stated the comments I have read describing such actions. Now, if your argument is that "No, you have to actually watch the program and see a coach instruct a player to aim at another kids helmet to knock him out, or you have to watch the program to see a coach ban his athletes from getting water etc" as opposed to read about them on a comment board in order to feel that the AFCA should make a statement condemning those actions as not representative of quality coaching, we will have to disagree. The second point is the issue that I wonder about. When I first responded, I tried to be deliberate in how I worded my post. I wondered how not watching the shows and trying to influence a powerful organization to rally against them was different than making claims against CTE without presenting evidence to support those claims. My initial thoughts were that both are similar. For CTE the science shows risk and we as coaches need to understand the science to protect our profession and more importantly our children. As far as the shows I worry that when a person condemns something based on information they have only heard about then I think there is the possibility to lose context and perspective and the more channels the information is shifted through the more the opportunity for it to be inaccurately applied. I agree with you fully that there are inappropriate behaviors by coaches in shows and in our communities that needs to be addressed and improved. I guess for me I would address those issues with information I had processed in a more direct manner. I think we differ in that if I wanted to address coaching behavior with the AFCA and I hadn’t seen these shows I just wouldn’t bring them up at all. I would support my opposition the inappropriate behaviors with personal anecdotes and the science.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 19:02:08 GMT -6
That’s not the point. The point is perspective. The 12 people that tell you to jump of a bridge could be jumping of because they want to end it all. Or, they could be jumping off cause they are thrill seekers and know that there is safe landing in the calm and deep waters below them. I am not sure how many people have told me that broccoli tastes bad. But I have heard many people tell me that they think ghosts are real or that they have seen ghosts. Does that make it true? Or I have heard dozens of people tell me that George Jones’s music isn’t any good and I know that’s not true from my perspective. Who were these people who told you George Jones’ music isn’t any good? Music critics? Musicians? People in the music industry? You have an entire thread (in fact numerous threads about these shows), made up of football coaches, who have virtually nothing positive to say about how these shows depict football players and coaches. That is called an informed opinion and carries far more weight than these legions of anti-George Jones zealots who are besieging you. I get your point about taking the opinion of this board as an informed opinion. I just think it’s a slippery slope to rally against information that one had not experienced. Like I said as a matter of taste it’s really not a big deal, but as a matter of policy it’s a little more serious in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 15:28:19 GMT -6
To condemn that activities you don't. However, to condemn the shows as an examples of those activities you should, in my opinion. Maybe that's where the disconnect in our discussion is rooted. Fair enough. Although you are splitting hairs a bit, because editing process likely is used to highlight those activities. Regardless, I would amend my statement to say that I would like to see the AFCA make a statement that condemns the poor coaching practices represented and that those shows do not portray what the AFCA considers quality coaching, or actions that a quality coach would use. But how do you know those shows contain anything to ask that the AFCA makes statements in regards to those shows?
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 15:20:36 GMT -6
I agree with your statement. I said if he personally chose to ignore the show that is understandable and . If you have heard {censored} sandwiches taste bad, don’t eat them but in my opinion if you want go a step further and tell others not to eat shitt sandwiches then you probably should have taken a bite. Shitt sandwiches are an exaggerated example. As people read shitt sandwiches the thought is “yeah I am not eating a {censored} sandwich.” What if a dozen people told you not to eat brocolli because it tasted bad? Or on the flip side what if a dozen people told you to jump of a bridge, as the old anecdote goes. Have you had over a dozen people tell you that broccoli tastes bad? I haven’t. And if twelve people can convince you to jump off a cliff, then you are a retard and are probably doing the gene pool a favor. That’s not the point. The point is perspective. The 12 people that tell you to jump of a bridge could be jumping of because they want to end it all. Or, they could be jumping off cause they are thrill seekers and know that there is safe landing in the calm and deep waters below them. I am not sure how many people have told me that broccoli tastes bad. But I have heard many people tell me that they think ghosts are real or that they have seen ghosts. Does that make it true? Or I have heard dozens of people tell me that George Jones’s music isn’t any good and I know that’s not true from my perspective.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 13:48:35 GMT -6
I don’t think you have to watch the show to see the activities described. I think though that to condemn the activities in reference to the show viewing is important to get full context. I have seen (in another thread I believe) activities such as "team runs laps, first 5 get water..next group runs another lap with no water" "Coach telling players how to hit an opponent in the head so that he will have to be removed from the game", numerous accounts of technique and coaching cues involving leading with the head etc. Why must I watch these activities to condemn them? To condemn that activities you don't. However, to condemn the shows as an examples of those activities you should, in my opinion. Maybe that's where the disconnect in our discussion is rooted.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 13:28:06 GMT -6
I agree with your statement. I said if he personally chose to ignore the show that is understandable and . If you have heard {censored} sandwiches taste bad, don’t eat them but in my opinion if you want go a step further and tell others not to eat shitt sandwiches then you probably should have taken a bite. Shitt sandwiches are an exaggerated example. As people read shitt sandwiches the thought is “yeah I am not eating a {censored} sandwich.” What if a dozen people told you not to eat brocolli because it tasted bad? Or on the flip side what if a dozen people told you to jump of a bridge, as the old anecdote goes. The difference being coach, that I did not make my statement based on opinions (this show is bad, the coaches on little tykes are bad etc) but on the description of activities. To your point above, why does one need to watch a program to see an activity that was described? I don’t think you have to watch the show to see the activities described. I think though that to condemn the activities in reference to the show viewing is important to get full context.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 13:16:33 GMT -6
Isn’t this is a similar mindset to the one you have been battling with grad17 over. To make claims of opposition without interaction or evidence is a slippery slope. To ignore the show on a personal level is valid but to insinuate the lobby of the AFCA should condemn creativity and free will of those involved with the show without actually having participated, at least minimally as a viewer, doesn’t seem fair to anyone involved. You are a smart and logical poster. From your perspective how does making a such a strong claim ( the AFCA comment) about the show without full context differ from making claims about concussions without evidence? I was speaking more in regards to Friday Night Tykes than the show about the JC. But I would argue that I don't need to watch a show and see excessive vulgarity, player degradation, and poor coaching practices that makes other coaches mock or cringe when I can read about it here. I am sorry but I don't see the connection between thinking a coaching organization should condemn poor coaching practices that are made public for a drama filled TV show/ shows and arguing against someone who thinks the best tactic for coaches/the football community is to cry "fake news" and dismiss the growing body of evidence that suggests unseen injuries (brain) stemming from repeated jarring blows involving the head may hold a larger risk than we once thought. I am 100% on board with speaking up against poor practices in coaching. I am more worried about using examples from shows you haven’t watched as a means to do that.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 13:09:51 GMT -6
Isn’t this is a similar mindset to the one you have been battling with grad17 over. To make claims of opposition without interaction or evidence is a slippery slope. To ignore the show on a personal level is valid but to insinuate the lobby of the AFCA should condemn creativity and free will of those involved with the show without actually having participated, at least minimally as a viewer, doesn’t seem fair to anyone involved. You are a smart and logical poster. From your perspective how does making a such a strong claim ( the AFCA comment) about the show without full context differ from making claims about concussions without evidence? I disagree. If a dozen people have told me that $hit sandwich tastes bad, I shouldn't have to take a bite to see for myself. I agree with your statement. I said if he personally chose to ignore the show that is understandable and . If you have heard {censored} sandwiches taste bad, don’t eat them but in my opinion if you want go a step further and tell others not to eat shitt sandwiches then you probably should have taken a bite. Shitt sandwiches are an exaggerated example. As people read shitt sandwiches the thought is “yeah I am not eating a {censored} sandwich.” What if a dozen people told you not to eat brocolli because it tasted bad? Or on the flip side what if a dozen people told you to jump of a bridge, as the old anecdote goes.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 12:21:59 GMT -6
2 episodes into All or Nothing Michigan football and haven't seen anything like this crap. Watched all of the Florida State and Navy shows on showtime and saw none of this crap. Do you hear the f word, yes, but you don't see anything like this. So the "how much film is on the floor" that dog just wont hunt....this isn't editing, this I how the guy is. I do think part of that is its a different show, with different producers, trying to produce a show staring a bunch of nobodies at a nowhere location. Caveat- I haven't watched the show, and I won't based on principal. I really think (from what I have read here) that the AFCA should be making strong statements against such behavior. Isn’t this is a similar mindset to the one you have been battling with grad17 over. To make claims of opposition without interaction or evidence is a slippery slope. To ignore the show on a personal level is valid but to insinuate the lobby of the AFCA should condemn creativity and free will of those involved with the show without actually having participated, at least minimally as a viewer, doesn’t seem fair to anyone involved. You are a smart and logical poster. From your perspective how does making a such a strong claim ( the AFCA comment) about the show without full context differ from making claims about concussions without evidence?
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 9:23:35 GMT -6
Or, put another way, "university staff member strikes student." It’s definitely assault. And that kid can’t do anything about it because if you press the issue you are losing major connections and maybe sabotaging your career. You don’t want to be the grad assistant that did or said something stupid and then gets whapped and then makes a big deal of it. Then again after getting smacked you probably aren’t getting fired so it may give you leverage in some weird way. What if the kid claims he has a concussion after that. Then the university has two major news stories. Beyond the faculty strikes student issue the story is magnified with the CTE component. Truly hypothetical but not out of the realm of possibility. Even so, if I were the kid I would not want to get Tubbs fired I would have wanted to kick his ass. Here's Tuberville's description of the events, according to Bleacher Report: bleacherreport.com/articles/1404049-texas-tech-tommy-tuberville-slaps-assistant-coach-over-miscommunication) "He (graduate assistant Kevin Oliver) was on the field, and I reached to grab him and pull him off. When I pulled, I missed his shirt and I grabbed his (headset) and his microphone ripped off his head. I was trying to get him off the field. "He's out on the field, and we're trying to get him off. I missed his shoulder, and grabbed his ... . It wasn't anything to it." I have watched multiple videos now. There is no way I am seeing Tuberville's perspective here. I don't remember any of this even occurring. Definitely puts perspective on the original topic on Jason Brown lighting his assistants up.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 26, 2018 5:27:52 GMT -6
IIRC, the guy Tuberville smacked was a grad assistant. Or, put another way, "university staff member strikes student." It’s definitely assault. And that kid can’t do anything about it because if you press the issue you are losing major connections and maybe sabotaging your career. You don’t want to be the grad assistant that did or said something stupid and then gets whapped and then makes a big deal of it. Then again after getting smacked you probably aren’t getting fired so it may give you leverage in some weird way. What if the kid claims he has a concussion after that. Then the university has two major news stories. Beyond the faculty strikes student issue the story is magnified with the CTE component. Truly hypothetical but not out of the realm of possibility. Even so, if I were the kid I would not want to get Tubbs fired I would have wanted to kick his ass.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 24, 2018 15:31:45 GMT -6
. How common is this at the upper levels of football? really depends on if you need help with your headsets not sure what its like "today" but it isn't uncommon to be fired several times on the sideline during a season Good thing that wasn’t Craig James’s son...
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 24, 2018 5:01:15 GMT -6
Who would everyone rather have their son play for Buddy Stephens or Jason Brown?
Who would everyone rather coach for Buddy Stephens or Jason Brown?
I would go for Jason Brown. He seemed more genuine to me.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 23, 2018 18:15:50 GMT -6
I think if I were a Brown supporter I would worry he is just part of the building process. If an administrator got to thinking, it’s nice that we are at a new level, but maybe a new coach could takes us to another level and represent the school in a little more positive light.
It wouldn’t take much to justify firing him.
On the contrary there’s a lot of people goodgling Jason Brown and ICC right now.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 23, 2018 15:09:20 GMT -6
I think what everyone is trying to say in this thread...is that we are all ready for the season to start!
As an offensive line coach and former offensive lineman I love the cut block. I think it equalizes the line of scrimmage and keeps fat kids (I can say that because I am one and have one) part of the game. As defensive coordinators put more and more speed on the field many linemen are losing an edge. Maybe that's fair to balance the rules that favor the offense. But to me and many of the guys I coached being able to cut has made the game more about more than physical attributes. Cutting is a tool in the tool box. The cut block is the offensive line's version of a change up. A well timed cut block can really keep a defensive line off balance. Without the cut block increased speed may become a requirement for the position and slow guys like me will be forced to find a new endeavor.
That being said I don't have the answer to clips and chop blocks or consistency in officiating the aggregation of low blocks. I am interested to hear the proposals that all of you guys suggest.
And hopefully get a nice pen soon too!
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 22, 2018 17:01:35 GMT -6
There’s some disturbing aspects of the show. The cussing in general really doesn’t bother me. It’s just a tool in his delivery system. It’s not how I communicate but it does seem genuine. I feel like he would talk the same way to his mother or pastor or anyone. That being said here are some issues I had with the show: First: Yelling about how he’s “not going to suck their d’s.” Any the current climate any communication with sexual link probably isn’t smart. Second: When he talks about choking out the Garden City coach and kind of bragging about it to his team seems inappropriate. And more disturbing with that experience telling a player that he is going to choke him out seems a little dangerous. Third: This is about the show in general. I really didn’t like all of the times they air behind closed door conversation. I am sure the producers have a contract that allows them to play anything but if you are going to have real relationships as a team then then there has to be a boundary somewhere. I think the craziest thing is Brown and some of the players have goals to move onto the next level, but how does someone take a shot on them with this on their resume? The hot tub scenes are hilarious though...maybe the hardest I have laughed watching anything on television literally in years. it would be an issue if I did it. My HC can say things I don't think about saying.. But people are terrified of the race card. I am not sure what you are alluding to specifically.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Jul 22, 2018 16:59:33 GMT -6
There’s some disturbing aspects of the show. The cussing in general really doesn’t bother me. It’s just a tool in his delivery system. It’s not how I communicate but it does seem genuine. I feel like he would talk the same way to his mother or pastor or anyone. That being said here are some issues I had with the show: First: Yelling about how he’s “not going to suck their d’s.” Any the current climate any communication with sexual link probably isn’t smart. Second: When he talks about choking out the Garden City coach and kind of bragging about it to his team seems inappropriate. And more disturbing with that experience telling a player that he is going to choke him out seems a little dangerous. Third: This is about the show in general. I really didn’t like all of the times they air behind closed door conversation. I am sure the producers have a contract that allows them to play anything but if you are going to have real relationships as a team then then there has to be a boundary somewhere. I think the craziest thing is Brown and some of the players have goals to move onto the next level, but how does someone take a shot on them with this on their resume? The hot tub scenes are hilarious though...maybe the hardest I have laughed watching anything on television literally in years. The sucking d!ck thing to me falls under just his language and how he conducts himself. The threat of violence is really the only issue I had with Brown. Other than him turning everything into something about himself. I am not offended by it. But I could easily see it being far more frowned upon than the F-bombs. Agreed on your sentiment about him drawing attention on himself. It takes a certain kind of person to want the camera on them so it’s not that surprising. These shows make JUCOs out to be a circus and you can’t have a good circus without a few clowns.
|
|