Vikings Message Board.Com

I applaud the moderators for letting this thread go. FWIW - My favorite comedian is Louis C.K. and he is straight nasty with his words. Comedy can cross lines but does have limits.

Valhalla wrote: The data is still inconclusive but yes, psychologists do say some/a lot of the cases are environmental. What's the expression? Nature or Nurture. One would not know much if they deny environment doesn't sometimes at least, play a part.

Explain more...? Are you implying something like "If you grow up in an environment that's surrounded with GLBT you might have more influence towards being gay or not"?

If so, I know PLENTY of people who grew up in extremely conservative and religious homes who have been estranged from their family for their sexual preference.

Loeffler is the last of the three old STers left on the team and I'm sure he's been looking over his shoulder after seeing how Longwell and Kluwe were unceremoniously shown the door. I don't expect him to say a thing until Priefer is gone, and maybe not even then.

Eli wrote:Loeffler is the last of the three old STers left on the team and I'm sure he's been looking over his shoulder after seeing how Longwell and Kluwe were unceremoniously shown the door. I don't expect him to say a thing until Priefer is gone, and maybe not even then.

Interesting point, Eli. I've been having similar thoughts. Would things be different if Priefer had been fired along with Frazier? After all, out of the coaches and assistants, Priefer might be the only one who some thought should or could stick around. How hard would it be to work alongside a guy that you spoke up against? That's a big reason why Kluwe didn't speak up--and why it's safe to do so now. It makes a lot of sense. This is a big issue now, and Loeffler has to think about his own career.

Eli wrote:Loeffler is the last of the three old STers left on the team and I'm sure he's been looking over his shoulder after seeing how Longwell and Kluwe were unceremoniously shown the door. I don't expect him to say a thing until Priefer is gone, and maybe not even then.

Players still on the team are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If the back Kluwe there is nothing that prevents them being shown the door. Which is why Kluwe would not name them. They know who they are and they are keeping quiet for now. I am sure when asked by investigators it will be a very dicey subject for them.

I'm not really implying that players are afraid to speak up, although with an older player like Loeffler, who will be replaced in a year or two, it does become touchier. Simply, why rock the boat? Be a professional and not another Kluwe about what goes on in the work place.

Eli wrote:I'm not really implying that players are afraid to speak up, although with an older player like Loeffler, who will be replaced in a year or two, it does become touchier. Simply, why rock the boat? Be a professional and not another Kluwe about what goes on in the work place.

Right. As long as it doesn't get out in public it's ok. That is exactly the sentiment of what went on with women and blacks in the workplace years ago, and in some cases still today.

A professional would never say those types of things in the firs place. A real professional would not put up with someone else saying it.

Here's the portion of Kluwe's statement that I'm still wrestling with:

One of the main coaching points I've heard throughout my entire life is, "How you respond to difficult situations defines your character," and I think it's a good saying. I also think it applies to more than just the players.

If there's one thing I hope to achieve from sharing this story, it's to make sure that Mike Priefer never holds a coaching position again in the NFL, and ideally never coaches at any level. (According to the Pioneer Press, he is "the only in-house candidate with a chance" at the head-coaching job.) It's inexcusable that someone would use his status as a teacher and a role model to proselytize on behalf of his own doctrine of intolerance, and I hope he never gets another opportunity to pass his example along to anyone else.

I realize Kluwe stated that he held back on making his statement because a.) he still has friends on the Vikings and he didn't want his statement to become a distraction to them during the season and b.) he wanted to prove he could still compete in the NFL. I also realize he backed off of his comment about Priefer never coaching again at any level. Nevertheless, if Priefer's actions were SO egregious that Priefer should never have the opportunity to pass his example, his "doctrine of intolerance" along to anyone else, and IF Kluwe's motivations are pure here and he is trying to be true to a philosophy that states "how you respond to difficult situations defines your character", then why wait so long to come forward? By doing so, he gave Priefer the very opportunity he supposedly wants to deny him, another season in which Priefer could "proselytize on behalf of his own doctrine of intolerance".

Kluwe essentially told us that he put his career ahead of what he thought was right. Now, that would be a very human thing to do and it would be understandable but again, if what Priefer did was so egregious Kluwe felt Priefer should never coach again at any level, why wait?

He closed his statement by saying:

Some will ask if the NFL has a problem with institutionalized homophobia. I don't think it does. I think there are homophobic people in the NFL, in all positions, but that's true for society as well, and those people eventually get replaced. All we can do is try to expose their behavior when we see it and call them to account for their actions.

Thank you for taking the time to read my story. Never be afraid to do what's right. If no one ever says anything, nothing ever changes.

If we're to believe what he wrote, then Kluwe clearly put his NFL career before what he thought was right. It sounds like he was afraid to do what was right until the timing suited him and yet he had no problem calling Leslie Frazier and Rick Spielman cowards for their perceived role in cutting him from the Vikings.

I'm not nuts about the intolerance evident in his statement about homophobic people eventually getting "replaced" either. Not changed, not enlightened... replaced.

I still can't shake the feeling that Kluwe's statement reeks of vindictiveness and opportunism, not to mention hypocrisy.

Valhalla wrote:Back to the topic, Colin Loeffler is whom may have been in these meetings as well and we have not heard from. Otherwise, it seems 3 have come to Priefer's defense among people who would have been in the meeting. Locke's statement surely is a denial if others want to parse words on these statements.

Again, Locke wouldn't have been in the room when the alleged comment was made.

Mothman wrote:I still can't shake the feeling that Kluwe's statement reeks of vindictiveness and opportunism, not to mention hypocrisy.

Does that make Priefer's comments any less wrong and disgusting to you? Does Kluwe's "late reaction" and "vindictiveness" make you feel better about Priefer's comments? Does Kluwe not have the right to be bitter and resentful if all of this stuff is true?

I understand where you are coming from, and I understand the hypocrisy comments. But it goes back to my comment earlier, it's not that easy when you're really in the situation. It's not that easy to put your job/career on the line when you're responsible for supporting your wife and kids. Is it?

He probably didn't think his gay activism would get him fired or in trouble at work, so he did it because he thought it was right. Once he realized it was an issue and it very well might get him fired, things changed. Things changed at work. Did he stop being active and outspoken in favor of the gay community? Did his support stop? No. He just chose to keep the two separate as best he could. Or maybe he was trying to do that all along? Apparently, that wasn't good enough for Priefer. Did he keep the two separate? Nope. Is Kluwe wrong for doing what was right for the gay community and then doing what was right for his family? All of these talks about Kluwe being selfish, is he?

As far as hypocrisy, I don't think supporting the gay community and "not putting up with a #### at work" are the same thing. Are they? So, he should have spoken up sooner, but isn't it a bit unfair to ask him to really do that when most of us couldn't do the same?

As I pointed out earlier, there is plenty of hypocrisy on here. Some of the same people saying, "Geez Kluwe. Practice what you preach. Put your job on the line for what is right." Are some of the same people so concerned about the "mods on a message board". So, Kluwe should have risked his career that supported his family, but some people on VMB are concerned with the mods and "getting kicked off the site". What? So Kluwe should risk his career and some can't even risk their username on a freaking message board? Talk about hypocrisy. It's just far too easy to suggest Kluwe should risk it all while we're sitting safely behind our computer screens, isn't it?

Funkytown wrote: As far as hypocrisy, I don't think supporting the gay community and "not putting up with a #### at work" are the same thing. Are they? So, he should have spoken up sooner, but isn't it a bit unfair to ask him to really do that when most of us couldn't do the same?

As I pointed out earlier, there is plenty of hypocrisy on here. Some of the same people saying, "Geez Kluwe. Practice what you preach. Put your job on the line for what is right." Are some of the same people so concerned about the "mods on a message board". So, Kluwe should have risked his career that supported his family, but some people on VMB are concerned with the mods and "getting kicked off the site". What? So Kluwe should risk his career and some can't even risk their username on a freaking message board? Talk about hypocrisy. It's just far too easy to suggest Kluwe should risk it all while we're sitting safely behind our computer screens, isn't it?

Um, he didn't HAVE to risk it all. As I said a couple times before, all he needed to do would've been speak up to his biggest inside supporter, Zygi Wilf and all of it could've been resolved without any questions about his motives.

thatguy wrote:
Um, he didn't HAVE to risk it all. As I said a couple times before, all he needed to do would've been speak up to his biggest inside supporter, Zygi Wilf and all of it could've been resolved without any questions about his motives.

Yeah. That would have been ideal, huh? And there's never any retaliation at work when someone runs to the big boss about issues among coworkers, huh? And ignores the chain of command? It would have just stopped that quickly? I'll ask Martin!

That would have been ideal, but I'm not sure it would have been that simple. Isn't Wilf sort of out of touch with the team? With Kluwe's more immediate bosses all being against him and actually being present, I'm not so sure Kluwe was convinced Wilf would babysit his staff and follow through with the matter. I would like to believe Wilf would have, though. Maybe.

Telling Wilf seems like the obvious choice, but with him being fairly distant from the team, I'm not so sure the results would have been much different for Kluwe. I know how my coworkers act when the bosses are around vs. when they're not. I think the coaches still would have had resentment towards Kluwe for his "distractions" and then some added for "running to the boss and telling on us". Call me crazy, but there's risk to that. It's far more risky than trying to "ignore it and hope it stops". Kluwe was trying to tough it out to keep his job that supports his wife and kids. What a d-bag, huh? So selfish and wrong.

Funkytown wrote:Does that make Priefer's comments any less wrong and disgusting to you?

I still don't know if he made the comments or if he did, in what context they were made. If Kluwe's description is accurate, than no, it doesn't make Priefer's comments less wrong. However, until there's some confirmation of the allegations leveled at Priefer, the problem I'm having is that Kluwe has provided too many reasons for me to distrust the veracity of his statement and the sincerity of his claimed motivations. To me, he has seriously undermined his own case.

I understand where you are coming from, and I understand the hypocrisy comments. But it goes back to my comment earlier, it's not that easy when you're really in the situation. It's not that easy to put your job/career on the line when you're responsible for supporting your wife and kids. Is it?

Nobody is saying it's easy but a man as smart as Kluwe is purported to be, who has made the kind of money he's made, should have no trouble supporting his wife and kids for a long time. We're not talking about a low-paid factory worker living paycheck to paycheck. Kluwe made millions punting a football so the "he needed to support his family" defense is somewhat ridiculous unless this smart, intelligent man has already squandered all the money he made in his NFL career.

So, he should have spoken up sooner, but isn't it a bit unfair to ask him to really do that when most of us couldn't do the same?

No, I don't, especially because I'm not convinced most of us would do the same. I've risked a job in the past to do what I thought was right. Heck, I once quit a job to do what I thought was right. More importantly, it's not unfair because Kluwe himself made a point about doing the right thing. He emphasized that you shouldn't be afraid to speak out and do what's right, after conveniently putting it off just to make sure there were no teams in the NFL that might still want to pay him hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep punting. Of course, once he felt that door was closed and was contemplating writing his NFL memoirs, suddenly the time to speak out seemed right. It's suspicious.

As I pointed out earlier, there is plenty of hypocrisy on here. Some of the same people saying, "Geez Kluwe. Practice what you preach. Put your job on the line for what is right." Are some of the same people so concerned about the "mods on a message board" So, Kluwe should have risked his career that supported his family, but some people on VMB are concerned with the mods and "getting kicked off the site". What? So Kluwe should risk his career and some can't even risk their username on a freaking message board?

You've completely lost me. I don't see whatever connection you're trying to make.

Funkytown wrote: Yeah. That would have been ideal, huh? And there's never any retaliation at work when someone runs to the big boss about issues among coworkers, huh? And ignores the chain of command? It would have just stopped that quickly? I'll ask Martin!

That would have been ideal, but I'm not sure it would have been that simple. Isn't Wilf sort of out of touch with the team? With Kluwe's more immediate bosses all being against him and actually being present, I'm not so sure Kluwe was convinced Wilf would babysit his staff and follow through with the matter. I would like to believe Wilf would have, though. Maybe.

Telling Wilf seems like the obvious choice, but with him being fairly distant from the team, I'm not so sure the results would have been much different for Kluwe. I know how my coworkers act when the bosses are around vs. when they're not. I think the coaches still would have had resentment towards Kluwe for his "distractions" and then some added for "running to the boss and telling on us". Call me crazy, but there's risk to that. It's far more risky than trying to "ignore it and hope it stops". Kluwe was trying to tough it out to keep his job that supports his wife and kids. What a d-bag, huh? So selfish and wrong.

Your sarcasm is pretty obnoxious at this point. I'm not "afraid" of getting kicked off the message board, and I know for sure what I would've done had I been in his same situation. If he TRULY cared about his cause, he wouldn't have worried about losing his job (even though he would've gotten support from the guy who makes the whole show go on in Minnesota). If he was REALLY strapped for cash, he wouldn't have released a statement at all after getting CUT from Oakland with hopes that he could still make money in the NFL in the future.

One of Kluwe's statements mentioned that one of the reasons he put it off was he did not want the team to be distracted during the year. However, on the other side of that he could have said something after he was cut. But then that might have sounded more like sour grapes then it does now, and he would not have had a chance with any team. I think at this point he has resigned himself to never be playing in the NFL again and hence he has nothing to lose. It also seems that the timing was that Priefer could have been called by other teams for other coordinator positions. Which at the moment is not going to happen.