Brandon Spikes Video

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

You see it as an offense. I don't. Nothing he did would qualify as such. Like I said, there are Senators who have admitted doing much worse, and kept their jobs.

In fact we had a president who did what he did. He got a blow job. That's all.

 

[upstater1]

On a personal level, I could care less about any of those guys or what they have done but that's besides the point.

With the exception of Cromarite, you have cited singular instances of poor conduct that the league has taken action against. Let me restate my position....

I stated in my post that a player who undertakes a career in porn (as in does a bunch of films a year) will not be employable in the NFL. Porn, right or wrong is still taboo (no pun intended) to millions of people and has proven to be interwoven into drugs and organized crime. That's the perception people have. If you don't believe that, I don't know what else to tell you.

I don't know. I think there are a lot of things wrong with porn, but the evidence is there that tens of millions of Americans watch it, and I'd imagine that there is a high cross-section in that demographic that also watches the NFL. Men watch the NFL, men watch porn. Huge numbers.

Some of these porn stars have crossed into the mainstream, that's how accepted it's become. Like I said, I have problems with it, but since I've seen enough of it, what can I say? Does it make me a hypocrite to get self-righteous about it? You bet it does.

I know we're arguing a hypothetical here (ie if a NFL player did porn) but of course this has nothing to do with Spikes. He was engaged in an act of voyeurism not porn.

 

[upstater1]

Unintentional vs intentional ... no comparison.

Huh?

You think Spikes intentionally published his sex act for the world to see?

 

[upstater1]

He doesn't look innocent and it doesn't look like it's love.

He looks wasted, arrogant and smug ... it's kind of creepy to me.
Definitely not your average guy does some porn here ... hard to explain.
he looks to be enjoying the video way more than the sex act itself.

IMO of course ... always IMO.

This is precisely why I was questioning how some people are reacting. You're objecting to the way this particular guy was enjoying sex. You wanted him to be loving, and he wasn't. There are a lot taboos apparently being broken.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

In fact we had a president who did what he did. He got a blow job. That's all.

And I bet they both enjoyed it!

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

I gotta an idea....Spikes gets expelled from the league and any person who has ever looked at a playboy magazine is banned from attending a football game.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

And I bet they both enjoyed it!

If they didn't I would be a whole lot more worried about them, than I am now.

 

[upstater1]

He should have put a wierd mask on like they did in "Eyes Wide Shut".

LOL, then Goodell's reaction would be, "Excellent idea! And if you cover your tats, no one will find out!!"

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

This just in....

Fireman Ed has just invited Brandon Spikes to be the guest of honor during half time festivities at gate D when NE plays at the Jets.

 

[Joker]

part of the 5th amendment....

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

Spikes NFL career is his property....Jetdell does ANYTHING to deprive Spikes without due process, he is in violation and subject to a federal lawsuit.

 

[efin98]

part of the 5th amendment....

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

Spikes NFL career is his property....Jetdell does ANYTHING to deprive Spikes without due process, he is in violation and subject to a federal lawsuit.

...and for doing something BEFORE he was employed by or in the NFL no less.

Any action against him that goes beyond demotion down the depth chart for a game or two will get the gavel pounded down upon the NFL.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

part of the 5th amendment....

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

Spikes NFL career is his property....Jetdell does ANYTHING to deprive Spikes without due process, he is in violation and subject to a federal lawsuit.

The 5th amendment only applies to government action. The NFL is not the goverment. An employee can be fired with out due process of law. Terrence Johnson was cut from the NFL without due process of law. He doesn't have grounds for a federal lawsuit.

 

[apple strudel]

You see it as an offense.

No I don't. I see it as funny and I have no personal problem with it. Check the thread. Moreover, I never once said it was an offense in my view. I did say that Goodell might see it as an offense under the PCP.

Nothing he did would qualify as such. Like I said, there are Senators who have admitted doing much worse, and kept their jobs.

Under the language of the PCP, Goodell could easily interpret it as an "offense". Obviously he thinks there is some chance that it is given that they are "looking into it" and he's bringing Spikes in for the sit down. Senators and presidents have nothing to do with the PCP angle, only the morality angle and I'm not even addressing the issue on moral terms. Goodell's only problem in punishing Spikes would be that Spikes wasn't in the NFL at the time. If he were, though, it'd be a different story.

 

[apple strudel]

Being the policy is not in the CBA and the union agreed to external to the CBA with nothing in exchange, I would expect the union could simply say,"we rescind our agreement to the PCP, the commish may only punish within the guidelines of the CBA" And the policy is gone. Poof.

IANAL but my understanding of contract law says that it is not so easy to break a contract once you've entered into it. Either that or I'm going to have to talk to the bank holding my mortgage pronto.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

IANAL but my understanding of contract law says that it is not so easy to break a contract once you've entered into it. Either that or I'm going to have to talk to the bank holding my mortgage pronto.

You are absolutely correct it is very hard to break a contract. But not all agreements are contracts. A contract requires and an agreement plus consideration. Without getting into the finer points of a nephew promising his uncle he would not smoke, drink or gamble until he turns 21, basically that means both sides had to get something out of the deal.

You no doubt have a contract with the bank and the consideration they gave was the initial money, and the consideration you gave is giving the money back plus interest.

I doubt this was actually a contract, and I bet part of the agreement including an understanding that the NFLPA had the right to end it. If not the union is a bunch of idiots for making this agreement.

 

[RobertWeathers]

With the exception of Cro, all of the folks I listed engaged in criminal behavior. My point is owner and fans don't care all that much about players behavior off the field only what they can do on the field.

So while porn is considered taboo, it would be forgiven by the fans and thus the owner and coach if the player helped the team win.

Hypothetically: Spikes goes to the pro-bowl this year. After the pro-bowl he head to hollywood and stars in variety of the most disgusting hard core porn flicks imaginable. Is he going to get cut? I doubt it. If he did would another team sign him? Absolutely.

His stock rises and falls based on what he does on the field. Very few fans care what he does off the field, and if dozen STH canceled their ticket to protest the employment of a porn start, the team would have no trouble selling those tickets to others.

Again, you cite a singluar instance. If he shows a pattern of behavior that the league feels is innapropriate, he will not be employable.

We'll just agree to disagree....

 

[apple strudel]

I doubt this was actually a contract, and I bet part of the agreement including an understanding that the NFLPA had the right to end it. If not the union is a bunch of idiots for making this agreement.

Arguably they are even if they do.

I don't know this, I'm just guessing, but I would have expected that the union got at least some consideration(s) in return for agreeing to the PCP. And if they could just walk away from it, wouldn't they have already as a negotiating ploy for the new CBA? Doing so would have given them some leverage.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don't know. I think there are a lot of things wrong with porn, but the evidence is there that tens of millions of Americans watch it, and I'd imagine that there is a high cross-section in that demographic that also watches the NFL. Men watch the NFL, men watch porn. Huge numbers..

Agree completely. The problem is that you have sponsorships, advertising, etc. that spend billions annually that take the moral high ground- right or wrong.

Some of these porn stars have crossed into the mainstream, that's how accepted it's become. Like I said, I have problems with it, but since I've seen enough of it, what can I say? Does it make me a hypocrite to get self-righteous about it? You bet it does. .

I'm with you. I personally don't have a problem with it. But I guarantee the league, owners, corporate sponsors and advertisers do as it relates to having player(s) be porn stars. These owners spend billions on staduims, payroll, etc and DO NOT like bad publicity. They'll tolerate some stuff in exchange for on the field production but doing porns is on a whole other level IMO.

I know we're arguing a hypothetical here (ie if a NFL player did porn) but of course this has nothing to do with Spikes. He was engaged in an act of voyeurism not porn.

Agreed on the Spikes situation. The problem is that these dummies like Paris Hilton, Pamela Anderson and Kim Kardashian do these "sex tapes" under the guise of voyeurism but IMO are amature porns/attention getters.

My.02$

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Arguably they are even if they do.

I don't know this, I'm just guessing, but I would have expected that the union got at least some consideration(s) in return for agreeing to the PCP. And if they could just walk away from it, wouldn't they have already as a negotiating ploy for the new CBA? Doing so would have given them some leverage.

If I was arguing the leagues case, I would argue the consideration the NFLPA got is a better image for its members. Would be a very hard case to make.

I think the union likes the idea that the league punished Stalworth, Vick, Pacman and other real bad characters. And won't oppose the policy as long as Goodell acts reasonably. Big Ben, I think pushed it a bit further than the union would like and if he goes any further he will lose their support.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Agree completely. The problem is that you have sponsorships, advertising, etc. that spend billions annually that take the moral high ground- right or wrong.

Big Ben lost sponsorships because of his conduct. But the Steelers did not.

Tiger Woods lost sponsorships because of his conduct, but the PGA did not.

Big Bobs discount furniture is unlikely to have an ad showing Bradon Spikes on one of their beds or couches. But it is highly unlikely that they will stop advertising on the Pats website even if Spike becomes the biggest porn star in history.