OT: Bengals Draft Joe Mixon

[Jon(-24)]

Just imagine that woman he hit was your daughter... Now, realize what a shitty mother or father you'd be that you raised a kid that thought it's acceptable to start a fight like that AND a kid with such low logic skills that she started shit with someone that absolutely jacked.

Bengals broke my heart when they passed on Bud Dupree. As for Joe Mixon, I'm happy to have him and it's not gonna shake who I pull for on sundays. If he had followed her to the ground and kept going it would be one thing, but he didn't. I wouldn't be cheering for him if he wasn't a bengal, but I also wouldn't be pulling against him. Unless he was a Steeler.

I'd take a thousand guys like Mixon over 1 like Suh or Vontaze. Pulling for Burfict has been way more challenging than pulling for Mixon will me.

 

[Cawood86]

Pretty lonely, thanks for the concern, lol.

Ain't surprised

 

[JBHolmesfan]

How would you feel if the Bengals signed Ray Rice? Would you cheer for him as well?

It'd be the exact same thing. I'd think what Ray Rice did was awful and root for the Bengals to win. Rooting for the Bengals isn't the same as condoning what Mixon did, or what Rice did if they signed him. The Bengals drafting him doesn't mean they condone it either. This isn't the Baylor situation here. I don't think Mixon should have to pay at every step of his life for the mistake he made at 18.

If you're so upset with the Bengals taking Mixon, do you think the Steelers are bad for having Big Ben on the team? What about the Ravens with Ray Lewis? What about Kobe Bryant? If your basis of rooting for a team is that they can't have guys with troubled pasts, you're not going to have a team to root for.

 

[Cawood86]

It'd be the exact same thing. I'd think what Ray Rice did was awful and root for the Bengals to win. Rooting for the Bengals isn't the same as condoning what Mixon did, or what Rice did if they signed him. The Bengals drafting him doesn't mean they condone it either. This isn't the Baylor situation here. I don't think Mixon should have to pay at every step of his life for the mistake he made at 18.

If you're so upset with the Bengals taking Mixon, do you think the Steelers are bad for having Big Ben on the team? What about the Ravens with Ray Lewis? What about Kobe Bryant? If your basis of rooting for a team is that they can't have guys with troubled pasts, you're not going to have a team to root for.

I think it's just another excuse some folks use to bash the Bengals. Mixon mad a very bad decision at 18. I'm sure nobody on here EVER did that.

 

[JBHolmesfan]

How would you feel if the Bengals signed Ray Rice? Would you cheer for him as well?

Additional questions for you. Looking back, do you wish UK wouldn't have won the 1996 championship because Rick Pitino is an adulterous, abortion paying, scumbag? Are you glad we lost to Duke in 1992 because Rex Chapman isn't a great guy? My guess is that the answer to both of those questions is no.

 

[JBHolmesfan]

I think it's just another excuse some folks use to bash the Bengals. Mixon mad a very bad decision at 18. I'm sure nobody on here EVER did that.

It's exactly what it is. How many people have researched every team's players to conclude the Bengals are the only team in all of sports to be doing this? I'll bring this up again, where is the outrage that Ben Roethlisberger is still in the NFL? He's been accused of rape twice, and settled out of court once. To me, raping someone is far worse than punching them. Kobe Bryan had his sexual assault case. Should he not be allowed in the Hall of Fame? Peyton Manning put his nuts on a female trainer's face. Don't see anyone upset about his career. Why are they different? Some might say it's because Mixon has video of him doing that, and that's fair, but if these people were so righteous, morally sound and vehement that athletes that do bad things to women shouldn't play, I'd think they'd be just as upset as 3 out of court settlements and fail to believe Manning's claim that he was mooning another athlete, which that athlete denies him doing.

No one says the Steelers are a trash organization that accepts trash people. Why? I argue part of it's because they've been successful. If you win, no one cares about those other things. The Bengals haven't been successful, so it's easy to bash on them. How many people that hate Burfict have a Ray Lewis jersey, or would say they loved to watch him play? If the Bengals are successful, no one will care about the off field issues.

 

[jauk11]

Ain't surprised

Well I am one that campaigned against hiring BP on here, and I am happy with the way that turned out, even if we lose to them again this year. What a slimy program jurich runs.

Now is the appropriate time to insert "just win, baby". But I am against the ridiculous standards that our athletic department holds our teams to, a huge disadvantage when you are competing every year against teams like Transfer U and Thug U, that are getting away with murder in some cases. Losing a very good prospect that wasn't even indicted to a kangaroo court and what our coaches called our best DB in a long time in Caffey to TWO mj violations (when Thug U allows six and none are reported at Transfer U) are two examples IMO.

 

[Cawood86]

Well I am one that campaigned against hiring BP on here, and I am happy with the way that turned out, even if we lose to them again this year. What a slimy program jurich runs.

Now is the appropriate time to insert "just win, baby". But I am against the ridiculous standards that our athletic department holds our teams to, a huge disadvantage when you are competing every year against teams like Transfer U and Thug U, that are getting away with murder in some cases. Losing a very good prospect that wasn't even indicted to a kangaroo court and what our coaches called our best DB in a long time in Caffey to TWO mj violations (when Thug U allows six and none are reported at Transfer U) are two examples IMO.

Are you comparing what Petrino did to what Mixon?

 

[ok-cats-computer]

Additional questions for you. Looking back, do you wish UK wouldn't have won the 1996 championship because Rick Pitino is an adulterous, abortion paying, scumbag? Are you glad we lost to Duke in 1992 because Rex Chapman isn't a great guy? My guess is that the answer to both of those questions is no.

There is a big difference between shoplifting a cell phone and a man beating a girl so badly that she is hospitalized with fractures in her face. I'm actually beginning to wonder if you can figure out which one is worse.

 

[WildcatofNati]

It's exactly what it is. How many people have researched every team's players to conclude the Bengals are the only team in all of sports to be doing this? I'll bring this up again, where is the outrage that Ben Roethlisberger is still in the NFL? He's been accused of rape twice, and settled out of court once. To me, raping someone is far worse than punching them. Kobe Bryan had his sexual assault case. Should he not be allowed in the Hall of Fame? Peyton Manning put his nuts on a female trainer's face. Don't see anyone upset about his career. Why are they different? Some might say it's because Mixon has video of him doing that, and that's fair, but if these people were so righteous, morally sound and vehement that athletes that do bad things to women shouldn't play, I'd think they'd be just as upset as 3 out of court settlements and fail to believe Manning's claim that he was mooning another athlete, which that athlete denies him doing.

No one says the Steelers are a trash organization that accepts trash people. Why? I argue part of it's because they've been successful. If you win, no one cares about those other things. The Bengals haven't been successful, so it's easy to bash on them. How many people that hate Burfict have a Ray Lewis jersey, or would say they loved to watch him play? If the Bengals are successful, no one will care about the off field issues.

Leaving aside the issue of whether Roethlisberger, Lewis, and Bryant were actually innocent (in the case of Bryant, he probably was), there is a distinction here. These guys got into trouble after they were already on their respective teams. None of these guys had notable red flags upon their being drafted, that I am aware of. It's one thing when a player with no flags goes wrong on you; it's other to go out of your way, over and over and over and over again, to bring these guys in. The examples of PItino and Chapman don't apply either- in fact, in the case of those guys, they found their way into problems after they had left UK. Of course I'm not going to say that we should take the banner down because of Pitino's post-UK antics. But I would say that those antics are sufficient reason to NEVER consider re-hiring him again.

 

[JBHolmesfan]

Leaving aside the issue of whether Roethlisberger, Lewis, and Bryant were actually innocent (in the case of Bryant, he probably was), there is a distinction here. These guys got into trouble after they were already on their respective teams. None of these guys had notable red flags upon their being drafted, that I am aware of. It's one thing when a player with no flags goes wrong on you; it's other to go out of your way, over and over and over and over again, to bring these guys in. The examples of PItino and Chapman don't apply either- in fact, in the case of those guys, they found their way into problems after they had left UK. Of course I'm not going to say that we should take the banner down because of Pitino's post-UK antics. But I would say that those antics are sufficient reason to NEVER consider re-hiring him again.

So, is your argument that it's ok to keep players who do bad things to women on your team because you didn't know they were going to do it, but it's not ok to draft them? That makes no sense. The argument the people are making against the Bengals is that they shouldn't have those types of players on the team. Why should it make any difference of when they did it? If you're so outraged that the Bengals drafted Joe Mixon, but don't care that other people who do bad things to women are kept on the team so long as they did WHILE they were a member of the team, it doesn't suggest to me that your concern is about not doing bad things to women.

I'd actually argue the reverse of that if anything. To me, it should reflect much more on the organization that doesn't do anything about the guys that do terrible things to women (or other serious crimes) while they are a part of the organization. I don't understand how drafting a player who punched a woman is considered condoning the behavior, but keeping the players who do similar things on the team after they've done it isn't condoning such behavior.

 

[Cawood86]

So, is your argument that it's ok to keep players who do bad things to women on your team because you didn't know they were going to do it, but it's not ok to draft them? That makes no sense. The argument the people are making against the Bengals is that they shouldn't have those types of players on the team. Why should it make any difference of when they did it? If you're so outraged that the Bengals drafted Joe Mixon, but don't care that other people who do bad things to women are kept on the team so long as they did WHILE they were a member of the team, it doesn't suggest to me that your concern is about not doing bad things to women.

I'd actually argue the reverse of that if anything. To me, it should reflect much more on the organization that doesn't do anything about the guys that do terrible things to women (or other serious crimes) while they are a part of the organization. I don't understand how drafting a player who punched a woman is considered condoning the behavior, but keeping the players who do similar things on the team after they've done it isn't condoning such behavior.

It's called hypocrisy. Because those players helped those teams win so they don't truly care that they did bad things as a member of the team.

 

[bookerfan66]

The Bengals are garbage with a joke of a coach so of course they take a POS guy.