Owens declines HoF Ceremony Invitation

[NFLExpert49]

2 hours ago, lancerman said:

It hard to say he was good enough as a player to go in and then years later say that something that happened well after his playing career was enough to take him out. He would never have gotten in if year 4 after retirement all that happened. 

When you say some people you mean ONE voter who VOTED FOR HIM got upset and said something dumb on twitter like about a million people do every day and then deleted it and are using it as an indictment on everyone imvolved. It’s overplayed and pretty disengenous imo. And he didn’t even say he should be removed. He said he would reconsider his vote. Which again, basically the day TO said he wasn’t going so more likely a pissed off guy having an outburst that didn’t mean much 

I'm not just talking about a voter. I'm talking about people in general saying it. It's laughable. 

 

[NFLExpert49]

2 hours ago, skywlker32 said:

He entitled to say "no thanks" and the HoF committee is entitled to not give him the same ceremonial treatment as others that showed up to accept the honor. There is no rule stating that Owens HAS to attend, but there is no rule stating how the ceremony must go for each player. You could say that they have set precedent on the amount of attention that they give each player, but that was a precedent for players that attended the ceremony or were dead. There is no precedent for Owens induction because he is the first ever person to not attend. This is the precedent for future people that may not attend.

As @lancermansaid, ex-players are very poorly prepared to select fellow players to enter the HoF as shown by the top 100 list. Not only that, but you'd have players trying to push their guys in constantly. And the fan vote is laughable because the probowl is laughable.

In the end, you won't acknowledge that you are over-reacting to sports writers because one of them must have spurned you or one of your "scout friends," but this is the process. There would not be a HoF without the sports writers. If you don't feel it would be an honor for them to select someone, then this shouldn't even be a blip on your radar.

Sports writers are lying, despicable scumbags. I'm not sure how you aren't aware of this. The notion that it is an honor for people like that to give you an award is absurd, and the idea that they are somehow better able to judge who belongs in the HOF than former players and fans in general is ludicrous. 

It's a much higher honor for former players and/or fans to consider you a Hall of Famer than people whose career depends on them lying about athletes in order to turn a profit. 

Owens is not the first person ever to not attend. Why are you still writing this? There have been numerous people who were deceased who were inducted. What difference does it make whether he can't show or he declines to show? The award is the award. They're not being given the acknowledgement for speaking at the ceremony. This isn't the Hall of Fame Speech Hall of Fame. 

It's ridiculous for the Hall of Fame to decide a bunch of scumbag journalists have 100% say in who is inducted, but then once someone they inducted politely declines to attend, decide they're going to take it personally and get upset about it. 

And if you want to know why sports journalists are scumbags, look no further than the fact that they lied about Owens for 18 years, all because of his harmless TD celebrations against the Cowboys in 2000. They vilified him for those, and after making him a villain, lied about everything he said and did to invent new stories to justify continuing to vilify him. Then, when he had been retired for 5 years, they used the Hall of Fame voting process as yet another excuse to dredge up their own lies to attack his character. Twice. 

[lancerman]

7 minutes ago, NFLExpert49 said:

I'm not just talking about a voter. I'm talking about people in general saying it. It's laughable. 

 

Those people are being drama queens. He’s going in. Can this thing just die? There are more important things going. Russia interfered, Kawhi is getting traded, and football starts in a month and a half 

[NFLExpert49]

1 hour ago, Uncle Buck said:

I'd take Owens out.  His childish behavior is PRECISELY why he had to wait in the first place.  By acting the way he is acting, he is proving their very point.  He's too stupid to figure this out.  They can mail him his jacket, and I hope when he tries it on, the arms are too short.

As far as OJ is concerned, I would have no problem whatsoever if the Hall of Fame completely removed him.  Let him be anathema. 

Proving what point? 

He politely declined to attend a ceremony after the same people who lied about him for 18 years (all because of his harmless TD celebrations against Dallas) used the HOF voting as another opportunity to use their lies to attack his character. Twice. 

 

[Uncle Buck]

1 hour ago, lancerman said:

Those people are being drama queens. He’s going in. Can this thing just die? There are more important things going. Russia interfered, Kawhi is getting traded, and football starts in a month and a half 

 

That is a matter of opinion.  It is also on the subject of politics, which we are not allowed to discuss on this forum.

[lancerman]

18 minutes ago, Uncle Buck said:

That is a matter of opinion.  It is also on the subject of politics, which we are not allowed to discuss on this forum.

I’m talking about all the PI the Russian national team got away with....

[skywlker32]

1 hour ago, NFLExpert49 said:

Sports writers are lying, despicable scumbags. I'm not sure how you aren't aware of this. The notion that it is an honor for people like that to give you an award is absurd, and the idea that they are somehow better able to judge who belongs in the HOF than former players and fans in general is ludicrous. 

It's a much higher honor for former players and/or fans to consider you a Hall of Famer than people whose career depends on them lying about athletes in order to turn a profit. 

Owens is not the first person ever to not attend. Why are you still writing this? There have been numerous people who were deceased who were inducted. What difference does it make whether he can't show or he declines to show? The award is the award. They're not being given the acknowledgement for speaking at the ceremony. This isn't the Hall of Fame Speech Hall of Fame. 

It's ridiculous for the Hall of Fame to decide a bunch of scumbag journalists have 100% say in who is inducted, but then once someone they inducted politely declines to attend, decide they're going to take it personally and get upset about it. 

And if you want to know why sports journalists are scumbags, look no further than the fact that they lied about Owens for 18 years, all because of his harmless TD celebrations against the Cowboys in 2000. They vilified him for those, and after making him a villain, lied about everything he said and did to invent new stories to justify continuing to vilify him. Then, when he had been retired for 5 years, they used the Hall of Fame voting process as yet another excuse to dredge up their own lies to attack his character. Twice. 

It's very clear that you can't discuss this rationally (or any topic for that matter) so I'm just going to leave it at this response. While I did type that he is the first ever to not attend, the context of the sentence was meant to say that he is the first person to CHOOSE not to attend (since I mentioned dead players in the previous sentence). I misspoke, but that should have been understood. Also, the HoF fame was always meant for the journalists to vote on. There is already the pro bowl (which is hilariously poorly voted on) to give honor to players. Using ex players has already been shown to be a poor use (not to mention how do you choose which players to vote).

All Owens is doing is proving the HoFers and HoF committee right because he is the first player ever to CHOOSE to not attend the ceremony. By actively declining the invitation, he is creating a new situation for himself, AGAIN he IS the precedent for this situation now.

I have no idea why you have something so personal against sports writers, but you really need to deal with your issues with them.

[NFLExpert49]

28 minutes ago, skywlker32 said:

It's very clear that you can't discuss this rationally (or any topic for that matter) so I'm just going to leave it at this response. While I did type that he is the first ever to not attend, the context of the sentence was meant to say that he is the first person to CHOOSE not to attend (since I mentioned dead players in the previous sentence). I misspoke, but that should have been understood. Also, the HoF fame was always meant for the journalists to vote on. There is already the pro bowl (which is hilariously poorly voted on) to give honor to players. Using ex players has already been shown to be a poor use (not to mention how do you choose which players to vote).

All Owens is doing is proving the HoFers and HoF committee right because he is the first player ever to CHOOSE to not attend the ceremony. By actively declining the invitation, he is creating a new situation for himself, AGAIN he IS the precedent for this situation now.

I have no idea why you have something so personal against sports writers, but you really need to deal with your issues with them.

Proving them right about what? What does not attending the ceremony have to do with him not getting into the HOF? Attending the ceremony is not a criteria for HOF voting. They voted Harry Carson in after Carson publicly announced he wouldn't attend even if they voted him in. He later changed his mind after they actually did vote him in, but that's irrelevant. They voted him in knowing he was saying he wouldn't attend the ceremony. Not to mention, Owens himself had said he wouldn't attend if he was voted in (when someone brought up Carson changing his mind after saying that, he went, "I'm not Harry Carson"), but people ignored it. 

And it has nothing to do with why they kept him out. They held him out over lies that they created about what kind of teammate he was. Owens (rightly) took it as another attack on his character.

It's unprecedented because what Owens had to deal with from the media was unprecedented. His TD celebrations were unprecedented, and the despicable lies told about him ever since were unprecedented. Holding a guy out of the HOF for piles and piles of lies in which the voters created is unprecedented. 

So it should come as no great surprise that the player in question - a guy who also doesn't consider football to be his passion in life, unlike most players - declined the invitation. 

But again, what difference does it make if he declines it or if he can't make it? Why should that affect anything? Because the HOF committee has hurt feelings? That's an absolute joke. They don't get to feel hurt when they're the ones who decided they want nothing to do with deciding on who gets in. They put the scumbag sports writers in charge. They're the ones who are supposed to be following orders, because that's the system they put in place. 

I told you what my issues with sports writers are. They're liars. Despicable liars. 

[Sugashane]

12 hours ago, lancerman said:

OJ wouldn’t be in right now if the murder trial happened before he was inducted. 

They could remove him if they chose though. The University of Florida pretty much erased Aaron Hernandez from the premises. Took his brick from Ben Hill Griffen Stadium, his likeness from the locker room, team area, etc.

 

 

[seminoles1]

18 hours ago, NFLExpert49 said:

And if you want to know why sports journalists are scumbags, look no further than the fact that they lied about Owens for 18 years, all because of his harmless TD celebrations against the Cowboys in 2000. They vilified him for those, and after making him a villain, lied about everything he said and did to invent new stories to justify continuing to vilify him. Then, when he had been retired for 5 years, they used the Hall of Fame voting process as yet another excuse to dredge up their own lies to attack his character. Twice. 

Okay, enough of this.  He badmouthed his teammates, for some reason questioned their sexuality, was disruptive in the locker room to the point his own team suspended him, and did many more things beyond the "media scumbags" supposedly lying about him.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

11 hours ago, Sugashane said:

They could remove him if they chose though. The University of Florida pretty much erased Aaron Hernandez from the premises. Took his brick from Ben Hill Griffen Stadium, his likeness from the locker room, team area, etc.

 

 

Then they would counter their own bylaws in place. Which would open up a can of worms for other guys.

[Jimmy Austin]

Dude had the talent to be one of the best WRs but also the personality of Ariana Grande. 

[NFLExpert49]

5 hours ago, seminoles1 said:

Okay, enough of this.  He badmouthed his teammates, for some reason questioned their sexuality, was disruptive in the locker room to the point his own team suspended him, and did many more things beyond the "media scumbags" supposedly lying about him.

Not true. He never badmouthed a teammate in his entire career. Never questioned a teammate's sexuality in his entire career. The media made you think he did, though. But absolutely none of that is actually true. We can go through everything if you'd like. 

The Eagles didn't suspend him for being disruptive in the locker room. The Eagles suspended him because he refused to apologize after ESPN took one of his answers to a question from the Graham Bensinger interview out of context. They made you and McNabb think he took a shot at McNabb when he did not. 

 

[J-ALL-DAY]

Love his decision even more after hearing all the bitter responses from the HOF voters and fellow players in the HOF.  Good stuff #81. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

Owens has been dropped from the Edmonton Eskimos negotiation list. Shocking.