MLB Changes 2017

[ColeJ]

Not everything is as black and white folded away as most people want to act.

 

Acknowledging great memories shared with imperfect human athletes after either their death or their fall from grace is fine with me. If a team chooses to mourn someone or celebrate someone because of what the good times meant for their franchise or their fanbase, who are we to judge the team or the athlete on a moral grounds? Humans are flawed. Some more than others.

 

This board is quick to tout the incredible importance relocated franchises' past identities hold with their original locales, but feels human to human connections are subject to judgement based on the criminality of all involved? I'm not saying I support the actions of anyone in particular, but I understand that a patch honoring a dead player of a team I don't care about isn't meant for me, so I am in no place to levy judgement on either the player or the franchise that some of you feel are condoning immoral actions.

 

Take my father for example. We were never particularly close, though he lived with my family for all of my adolescence. He was an alcoholic, a drunk driver, a drug dealer, and emotionally abusive to those around him. He eventually disappeared one day in my early 20s and ended up overdosed on his own drugs in a trailer in the middle of nowhere rural Texas.

 

I attended his funeral, because it was the right thing to do for me. We were never close, and in no way do I ever condone any of his drug dealing, drunk driving, emotional abuse, or the eventual abandonment of my family...

 

How much should I care if any of you on this forum think I should have taken a stand and skipped his funeral to make a statement that I don't condone his actions?

 

That's how much the Marlins should care what we think about them wearing a memorial patch for someone who by all accounts was less of a jerk than my dad, but one that nonetheless met an earlier fate than my father by doing some of the exact same things.

 

TL;DR, get off your high horses. Acknowledging the tragedy of a flawed human's poor choices is in no way condoning those poor choices. It isn't as black and white as that. Nothing ever is.

[IceCap]

26 minutes ago, ColeJ said:

TL;DR, get off your high horses. Acknowledging the tragedy of a flawed human's poor choices is in no way condoning those poor choices. It isn't as black and white as that. Nothing ever is.

When you go back and look at the history of this topic you see people making excuses for Fernandez. Not going "he made a bad decision but let's celebrate his life." 

No, it was along the lines of "we don't even know if he driving, why are people questioning his integrity?!?!"

Some people have changed that stance since more facts have come to life, but yeah. Being a major league-calibre athlete will always get you waves of people willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, even if you don't deserve it. 

 

There's also the nature of his death. Had he just overdosed somewhere? That's one that. That's victimless, aside from himself. 

This though? Impaired driving is one of the most selfish, heinous things someone can do. You're not just endangering herself. You're endangering who knows how many other people who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in your path. Not to mention your passengers.

And yeah, those passengers were adults who made their own decisions, but there's a reason "designated driving" exists as a concept. It's so people who are too impaired to drive (or operate a boat) aren't put in a position where they have to.

 

The Marlins? I really don't care if their players care what I think. If they're even aware of it. Which is unlikely. As far as they go? I recognise they lost a friend, and I don't blame them for a moment if they want to mourn him. 

I take issue with Fernandez being promoted in the way that he's being promoted by an influential entertainment corporation though. 

 

As for your father? I don't care. I don't mean that in a callous way. I'm just saying that it was your decision in your life. You were the only one who could make that decision for yourself. You made it, and that's all anyone can ask of someone in that situation. 

Though I do find it a flawed analogy. You went to your father's funeral. A private event intended for friends and family. There wasn't a large entertainment corporation going on about what a great guy he was and memorialising him. 

 

[IceCap]

22 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

  I think it's a little shortsighted to ditch the memorial at this point. 

I would argue the shortsighted thing was to go all-in on the memorial idea before the facts of his death could be properly established. 

 

Ideally? Yes. I think the Marlins ought to just quietly drop the retirement and memorial. No big announcement. Just quietly drop it. 

 

If that can't be done? Your idea is pretty good, using his legacy as a means to educate people. 

Of course you and I know that's not what will happen. Some kid will ask why his number is retired and the person who answers will go "he was good at baseball."

Which is why I think @WSU151 has the right idea. No one will realistically use Fernandez's memorial as a means to educate people about the dangers of impaired driving.

[Ray Lankford]

16 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

When you go back and look at the history of this topic you see people making excuses for Fernandez. Not going "he made a bad decision but let's celebrate his life." 

No, it was along the lines of "we don't even know if he driving, why are people questioning his integrity?!?!"

Some people have changed that stance since more facts have come to life, but yeah. Being a major league-calibre athlete will always get you waves of people willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, even if you don't deserve it. 

Why didn't he deserve the benefit of the doubt?

[IceCap]

Just now, Ray Lankford said:

Why didn't he deserve the benefit of the doubt?

Well I would say that he didn't because such insistence that he did wouldn't be extended to anyone who wasn't a pro athlete. 

If all three people who lost their lives were just normal folks? The sentiment would probably have been "three idiots were drunk and high while boating." Who drove wouldn't have mattered.

With Jose Fernandez though? Certain people were willing to go "we can't tarnish his memory, we don't even know if he was driving!"

 

And hey. Time passes, more info come to light. We now know that hey. He was driving. It's an opportunity for people to go "well ok, I was wrong."

Some people just like to double down I guess.  

[Ray Lankford]

3 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Well I would say that he didn't because such insistence that he did wouldn't be extended to anyone who wasn't a pro athlete. 

If all three people who lost their lives were just normal folks? The sentiment would probably have been "three idiots were drunk and high while boating." Who drove wouldn't have mattered.

With Jose Fernandez though? Certain people were willing to go "we can't tarnish his memory, we don't even know if he was driving!"

 

And hey. Time passes, more info come to light. We now know that hey. He was driving. It's an opportunity for people to go "well ok, I was wrong."

Some people just like to double down I guess.  

As someone who defended Fernandez, I'm not going to apologize for it and I hope that it'll help me to keep things in perspective the next time I hear about something like this. I hope I can recognize that no one is simply their worst moment, no matter how terrible it was.

[IceCap]

2 minutes ago, Ray Lankford said:

As someone who defended Fernandez, I'm not going to apologize for it and I hope that it'll help me to keep things in perspective the next time I hear about something like this. I hope I can recognize that no one is simply their worst moment, no matter how terrible it was.

No one is their worst moment, but their worst moment sure as hell matters a lot when it takes the lives of two other people and endangers the lives of who knows how many others.

[infrared41]

Sorry, but you don't get a trophy or a patch or memorial or a...well...anything nice for driving drunk. Period. Should you manage to survive the stupid and selfish act of drunk driving, you should get a jail cell. I don't care who you are.

[ColeJ]

I think the argument is flawed there, though.

They aren't wearing a patch that says World DWI Champions. The patch isn't commemorating the DWI. Nor should the DWI define an entire person's existence, even if Innocents are killed.

 

Again, I just don't like the over simplification of any issue.

[IceCap]

7 minutes ago, ColeJ said:

Nor should the DWI define an entire person's existence, even if Innocents are killed.

I don't really agree with that. I don't think they ought to be forever shamed while someone goes "MURDERER!" at them, but if you take a life as a result of your own stupidity and shelfishness? That ought to follow you to the grave in one form or another.

[Silent Wind of Doom]

@ColeJ, I went around figuring out how to dscuss what you said, but nothing sounded right.  So all I'll say is that I'm very sorry for the situation you had to live with in your life.  Although I find it very different from the situation at hand.

 

1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said:

Well I would say that he didn't because such insistence that he did wouldn't be extended to anyone who wasn't a pro athlete. 

If all three people who lost their lives were just normal folks? The sentiment would probably have been "three idiots were drunk and high while boating." Who drove wouldn't have mattered.

 

With Jose Fernandez though? Certain people were willing to go "we can't tarnish his memory, we don't even know if he was driving!"

 

And hey. Time passes, more info come to light. We now know that hey. He was driving. It's an opportunity for people to go "well ok, I was wrong."

Some people just like to double down I guess.  

 

I was also originally a defender (or rather, someone who gave him the benefit of the doubt), and I think recent statements have made it obvious that I have no issue condemning him now.  The difference is not that he was given the benefit of the doubt because of his fame.  It was because if these had been three normal schmucks, one would likely have not had a representitive to make a statement that he absolutely was not driving, leading a number of us to believe there was some evidence.  And unless they had a family member who wanted the truth to be known and didn't want to just bury it to avoid dragging out things any more, no one would have ever known.  That's the difference.

[infrared41]

6 hours ago, ColeJ said:

I think the argument is flawed there, though.

They aren't wearing a patch that says World DWI Champions. The patch isn't commemorating the DWI. Nor should the DWI define an entire person's existence, even if Innocents are killed.

 

Again, I just don't like the over simplification of any issue.

 

This isn't about the DWI. It's about killing someone as a result of the DWI. Killing someone is killing someone is killing someone. You're just as responsible whether you pulled out a gun and shot someone or because you decided to drive while drunk. Honestly, your logic would also suggest that we judge Charles Manson differently because, let's face it, being the mastermind behind those murders doesn't define his entire life. Right? And before anyone goes there, no, I am not comparing Fernandez to Manson nor am I saying they are in any way similar. My point is simply this; when you kill a couple people, your time as the President of the local theatre troupe isn't likely to be the lead line in your obituary. 

 

These are the facts as we know them. Jose Fernandez got drunk, drove a boat while drunk, and ended up killing himself and two other people. Sorry, but I don't see the scenario in which you reward that with a patch. 

[masterchaoss]

I know I'm gonna get a :censored: ton of hate for saying this, but we have an overpopulation problem on this planet and we lost someone stupid enough to drive drunk and two people stupid enough to get in a boat and let some one drive who was that drunk think he deserves to be honored for helping the human race and earth as a whole in that way alone.  

[JosiahWVU]

26 minutes ago, masterchaoss said:

I know I'm gonna get a ton of hate for saying this, but we have an overpopulation problem on this planet and we lost someone stupid enough to drive drunk and two people stupid enough to get in a boat and let some one drive who was that drunk think he deserves to be honored for helping the human race and earth as a whole in that way alone.  

So you are saying that it is a good thing that 3 people died? Do 3 lost people really make much of a difference in a world with 7 billion people? 

Now I understand that drunk driving is stupid, but for you to think it is OK for people to die is absurd. No one deserves to die like this at such a young age. Is there a overpopulation problem today? Yes, but this is not a way to control it. THREE people do not make a difference in the world's population, as for every person that dies more are born. 

Did Jose Fernandez and the 2 others with him make a bad decision? Absolutely, but for you to think it is okay that people died is no a good end result. I know that there are people all over the place, especially in South Florida, that wish JF was still here today.   

[Gobbi]

You know a thread is off the rails when I start to miss Padres discussions...

[SilverBullet1929]

2 hours ago, masterchaoss said:

I know I'm gonna get a ton of hate for saying this, but we have an overpopulation problem on this planet and we lost someone stupid enough to drive drunk and two people stupid enough to get in a boat and let some one drive who was that drunk think he deserves to be honored for helping the human race and earth as a whole in that way alone.  

What a way to think. Have you never once made a stupid decision in your life? Has anyone in your immediate family ever driven drunk before? 

[Gothamite]

1 hour ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

What a way to think. Have you never once made a stupid decision in your life? Has anyone in your immediate family ever driven drunk before? 

 

Hey, I've made lots of stupid decisions.  I've passed up career opportunities for silly reasons.  I stayed in a bad relationship too long.  I even used to wear a turtleneck with a sport coat. 

 

But driving drunk?  Nope.  Not once. Because that's not a mere "stupid decision". 

[chcarlson23]

I really hope the Twins ditch that ugly, piss-gold next year...

[Big Yellow Flag]

I'm one of the people who said that they should drop the patch, but I've changed my mind a little. I think the patch can and should be left, but only if the team does something separate to acknowledge and "make up for" the fact that they're honoring a player who got himself and two others killed by drunk driving a boat. What form that might take, I don't know. A program in the community to educate people against drunk driving, maybe, I don't know. You can acknowledge that he was a star and a beloved member of the team, but you have to recognize at the same time that he did things that weren't so great.

 

The Twins gold is bad and should be very gone.

[Yippy]

6 hours ago, chcarlson23 said:

I really hope the Twins ditch that ugly, piss-gold next year...

It is quite ugly and hardly "gold" more like a dehydrated urine

 

Truth be told, I had no idea this even existed, let alone since 2015. So the logic was: since their new field has this "gold" color everywhere, they added it as a tertiary color to their home uniform and logo? Or am I missing something?