Players supporting Incognito -- Why this is bad.

[Dave Gray]

At best, players supporting Incognito is irrelevant.  It's like taking a high school jock bullying a nerd, then polling the school about who is more popular.  Of course the bully will win.

But it also doesn't really matter what the locker room thinks.  These guys are, by and large, meatheads with no understanding of how business works, have no real-world experience in managing others, and probably little to no training.  They aren't qualified to answer the question asked of them.  I'm not saying that everyone in the locker room is a bonehead, but by and large, these guys aren't who you would look to in order to determine what's appropriate in terms of workplace bullying.

But the fact that Incognito, a known lunatic dating back forever, is the beacon of leadership (so much so that he's given a title) in your locker-room speaks volumes and shows a lack of organizational control.  Incognito needed to be following the lead of the "character guys".....you don't look to a crazy person to be the character guy.

This story gets worse every day and I'm sad to see the support of the some of the players towards Incognito over Martin.  It tells me that the coaching staff has the lunatics running the asylum...of course they support Incognito.

To those that think that this isn't a big deal -- you're just way off.  Teams that are at the bottom of the pack for decades don't need to be doing lunchroom pranks.  This is organizational dysfunction from top to bottom.  You better hope that things change.  If you want us to go back to business as usual, the short term band-aid will mean more decades of irrelevancy. 

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

At best, players supporting Incognito is irrelevant.  It's like taking a high school jock bullying a nerd, then polling the school football and wrestling team about who is more popular.  Of course the bully will win.

Close but not quite.

Corrected. 

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

But actually I think it matters.

The best resolution (from a Dolphin perspective) is Martin returning to the team and getting a contract extension this off-season.  (A contract extension basically eliminates most of Martin's damages making a lawsuit unlikely.)

The likelihood of this happening is greatly enhanced if Martin's bully is gone and he feels he will be welcomed by the rest of the team.  If on the other hand he is worried Richie's gang is going to seek out revenge if he returns, this become impossible.   

[Phishfan]

You realize it isn't just in the Dolphins locker room (not condoning his actions. The racial slurs and threatening his family is over the top) as SI has interviewed a couple of NFL executives and gotten a similar response that Martin's actions were not the right course of action.

This would be similar to a pricipal speaking up in your analogy.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

You realize it isn't just in the Dolphins locker room (not condoning his actions. The racial slurs and threatening his family is over the top) as SI has interviewed a couple of NFL executives and gotten a similar response that Martin's actions were not the right course of action.

This would be similar to a pricipal speaking up in your analogy.

Of course Martin didn't handle it 100% the right way either.

Keeping with your analogy. 

Kid gets bullied.  Teachers are aware of it and do nothing to stop it, possibly even encourage it.  One day kid has enough and goes truant lunch period to escape the bullying.

Did the victim handle it the right way?  Nope. 

But that does change that the core problem was the bully and teachers?  Nope.  Doesn't change that a bit.

Absolutely Martin didn't handle it the right way. He should have gone to Philban and if that did work gone to Godell.  Doesn't excuse anybody else though. 

[Spider-Dan]

Phishfan, keeping Dave's analogy I think that would be more like a teacher (who was also a coach) speaking up.  Anyone who says Martin's actions were bad is almost certainly not saying so from a workplace harassment standpoint, but an unwritten code of the locker room standpoint.

[CF DolFan]

At best, players supporting Incognito is irrelevant.  It's like taking a high school jock bullying a nerd, then polling the school about who is more popular.  Of course the bully will win.

But it also doesn't really matter what the locker room thinks.  These guys are, by and large, meatheads with no understanding of how business works, have no real-world experience in managing others, and probably little to no training.  They aren't qualified to answer the question asked of them.  I'm not saying that everyone in the locker room is a bonehead, but by and large, these guys aren't who you would look to in order to determine what's appropriate in terms of workplace bullying.

But the fact that Incognito, a known lunatic dating back forever, is the beacon of leadership (so much so that he's given a title) in your locker-room speaks volumes and shows a lack of organizational control.  Incognito needed to be following the lead of the "character guys".....you don't look to a crazy person to be the character guy.

This story gets worse every day and I'm sad to see the support of the some of the players towards Incognito over Martin.  It tells me that the coaching staff has the lunatics running the asylum...of course they support Incognito.

To those that think that this isn't a big deal -- you're just way off.  Teams that are at the bottom of the pack for decades don't need to be doing lunchroom pranks.  This is organizational dysfunction from top to bottom.  You better hope that things change.  If you want us to go back to business as usual, the short term band-aid will mean more decades of irrelevancy. 

No offense but this sounds like you've been bullied and are looking for retribution. I'm not saying you are but it does come across that way to me ... a meat head.  I'd be willing to bet there are many very intelligent guys in that locker room who way surpass your intelligence, IQ and sophistication. They just don't do it in the testosterone induced locker room.

I would probably say I've been through more sensitivity, liability,loss prevention, diversity,  leadership, sexual harassment in the workplace,  training than most of you. I also would be willing to bet at work that I am least likely to be associated with any of those things. But, NFL football and working in an office is miles apart.  You can't even begin to compare the two.

[Dave Gray]

I didn't really face bullying.   Though I was small and has some run-ins with the occasional moron, it wasn't an ongoing problem.  I saw other people face it, though.

If you can't compare a locker room to a working environment, you're doing it wrong; a locker room is a working environment.  While the level of what's found acceptable by members most of the time may different, it's legally held to the same standard and protections.  There are state laws and unions that protect employment, even if that employment is football.

[Spider-Dan]

CF, no offense but all of your commentary on this topic sounds like a former jock who did a lot of bullying and thinks it's not a big deal.

[Phishfan]

And commentary from others sound like people who were never part of an organized athletic team. Having a coach ask a team member to help toughen up someone is not uncommon or unheard of. The extent it was taken may be out of the norm, but that message happens a lot.

[Spider-Dan]

If the point is that NFL locker rooms should not be subject to labor laws, someone should make that point directly instead of beating around the bush.

Otherwise, Dave's commentary stands: the locker room is a workplace.  NFL players are not gladiators or soldiers (or even kids doing this for fun); they are professional, unionized employees.

[CF DolFan]

NFL players are not gladiators

Yes they are. Herein lies the difference in thinking.

A gladiator (Latin: gladiator, "swordsman", from gladius, "sword") was an armed combatant who entertained audiences in the Roman Republic and Roman Empire in violent confrontations with other gladiators

Take away the weapons and it's exactly that. The working world does not put their physical welfare to risk every single time they go to work.

[Heatles]

Yes they are. Herein lies the difference in thinking.

A gladiator (Latin: gladiator, "swordsman", from gladius, "sword") was an armed combatant who entertained audiences in the Roman Republic and Roman Empire in violent confrontations with other gladiators

Take away the weapons and it's exactly that. The working world does not put their physical welfare to risk every single time they go to work.

Cops and firefighters do. Do they engage in these same hazing practices? (maybe they do I'm not sure)

[Phishfan]

Do players and staff deserve levels of protection, certainly. Do they as a group as well as us as outsiders expect there to be some level of shenanigans that push past certain layers, we should.

[Spider-Dan]

Yes they are. Herein lies the difference in thinking.

A gladiator (Latin: gladiator, "swordsman", from gladius, "sword") was an armed combatant who entertained audiences in the Roman Republic and Roman Empire in violent confrontations with other gladiators

Take away the weapons and it's exactly that.

...except when you keep going:

Some gladiators were volunteers who risked their legal and social standing and their lives by appearing in the arena. Most were despised as slaves, schooled under harsh conditions, socially marginalized, and segregated even in death.

So no, these paid union employees with healthcare packages and pensions are not gladiators.  The total number of NFL players who have died on the "field of battle" is less than the number of gladiators who would die in a single event.

The working world does not put their physical welfare to risk every single time they go to work.

I'm pretty sure coal miners or Bering Sea fisherman would disagree, particularly since their jobs have drastically higher mortality rates than NFL players.

Is this the underlying argument?  That labor laws should not apply in the locker rooms of the National Football League?  Because you'd have to be incredibly naive to believe that any judge would uphold that.