Kyrie in headlines once again for not-great reasons...

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I'm just curious where you draw the line at ignoring off-the-field issues.

If you think the content of the show he chose to associate himself with has no victims...well...you're talking to someone who grew up 5 minutes from sandy hook elementary.

Mind you, you can choose to draw the line wherever you want, but as other have said, your painting of this is a bit generous.

I'm absolutely not ignoring anything, and I don't appreciate that insinuation. I said he's an astonishing talent and he's a weirdo.

I would never in a million years defend Alex Jones. I wouldn't defend Kyrie either.

I don't understand how saying he's nuts but talented is being "generous."

I don't have Kyrie shoes or jersey, I don't root for him, I don't make excuses for him. But I also don't pretend he isn't an extraordinary talent and one of the best to play at Duke.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

You can draw an extremely direct line from the flat Earth stuff to the COVID misinformation and the conspiracy theories here.

Kyrie is basically the perfect case of why some base level of science literacy is important, and why we all need to be extremely careful about being dismissive with comments like "oh, haha, sure flat Earth is a dumb thing, but it doesn't actually matter in a practical way".

I agree. I don't understand why people are suddenly discovering that Kyrie isn't based in reality. I guess some people weren't paying attention.

[scottdude8]

Was waiting to see if this would make its way to this board. It's sad because I was on campus with Kyrie and he was so darn incredible... I actually covered our non-conference tournament for The Chronicle that year and his domination was just incredible to watch. He also seemed to be a genuinely good teammate and beloved by everyone on the bench, even with his injury.

Then, somewhere along the line, things got weird. Weird is fine; I can ignore weird. I can't ignore dangerous, which is what some of his COVID stances were starting to become, and this most recent incident certainly is.

I can't stomach rooting for him personally anymore. And coming from me that's saying something... I'm the first to admit that many of my strong moral stances are way too easily compromised by my crazy sports fandoms. Heck, as a teenager I stomached rooting for Todd Bertuzzi for a few years on the Red Wings even after he almost killed a guy on the ice. I'm not proud of that, but it's true. So trying to be a slightly better person now, I simply can't stomach claiming any fandom or relationship to Kyrie anymore after this latest thing.

All that said, I fully respect anyone who thinks differently... this is very much a "your mileage may vary" situation where truly well-intentioned people might vehemently disagree. I hope we all remember that as this thread inevitably goes off track

[JasonEvans]

Maybe we could compromise by inviting him to events, but only have him attend the first 1/3rd or so, then sort of awkwardly reappear at the end.

Brilliant... but too soon. Too... soon...

[HoKogan]

You can draw an extremely direct line from the flat Earth stuff to the COVID misinformation and the conspiracy theories here.

Kyrie is basically the perfect case of why some base level of science literacy is important, and why we all need to be extremely careful about being dismissive with comments like "oh, haha, sure flat Earth is a dumb thing, but it doesn't actually matter in a practical way".

It isn't just scientific literacy. Its the ego stroking notion of "i have secret knowledge" that drives people to baseless and harmful conspiracy theories. Irving definitely strikes me as a guy who, like a lot of conspiracy theorists, thinks he is smarter than everyone else. All the rubes and normies have it wrong, they believe what everyone tells them, not me, I know the real story, I am a chosen one. It fosters cult like behavior. Its why they are so easy to grift. For them to really confront whats incorrect about their beliefs, to admit they weren't correct goes well beyond just cognitive dissonance and shakes the core of who they are as a person. Much easier to double down and move a few goalposts here and there.

[MartyClark]

Was waiting to see if this would make its way to this board. It's sad because I was on campus with Kyrie and he was so darn incredible... I actually covered our non-conference tournament for The Chronicle that year and his domination was just incredible to watch. He also seemed to be a genuinely good teammate and beloved by everyone on the bench, even with his injury.

Then, somewhere along the line, things got weird. Weird is fine; I can ignore weird. I can't ignore dangerous, which is what some of his COVID stances were starting to become, and this most recent incident certainly is.

I can't stomach rooting for him personally anymore. And coming from me that's saying something... I'm the first to admit that many of my strong moral stances are way too easily compromised by my crazy sports fandoms. Heck, as a teenager I stomached rooting for Todd Bertuzzi for a few years on the Red Wings even after he almost killed a guy on the ice. I'm not proud of that, but it's true. So trying to be a slightly better person now, I simply can't stomach claiming any fandom or relationship to Kyrie anymore after this latest thing.

All that said, I fully respect anyone who thinks differently... this is very much a "your mileage may vary" situation where truly well-intentioned people might vehemently disagree. I hope we all remember that as this thread inevitably goes off track

Well said, thanks.

[Phredd3]

Not inviting a former basketball player back to a basketball celebration of any kind because some alum don't agree with, or is somehow embarrassed by, non-basketball-related use of free speech, seems abhorrent to me. I'm not even sure how you become embarrassed by someone else's legal behavior without a very personal association.

I hope I'm not intruding into PPB space here, but I need to take this on: I think you misunderstand what freedom of speech is. Freedom speech is the right to say what you want to and be free from governmental action in retaliation. It doesn't mean that anything you say can or should be ignored by everyone, everywhere. Promoting flat earth nonsense is one thing, but this is beyond the pale. The government hasn't done anything in retaliation, nor should they. But responsible members of society need to make it clear that some things are out of bounds. Personally, I think this kind of division of power - where individual citizens have a greater power to act than their government does - is a good thing for society at large. It keeps the government at bay and it keeps the citizenry more empowered to act than the government which ostensibly serves that citizenry. But the corollary of that is that citizens occasionally must step in when the government can and should not. In my opinion, this is such a case.

As a responsible citizen, I no longer believe that further association with Kyrie Irving - without at least some kind of retraction or rational explanation on his part - in any way benefits Duke University. Enough is enough.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

It isn't just scientific literacy. Its the ego stroking notion of "i have secret knowledge" that drives people to baseless and harmful conspiracy theories. Irving definitely strikes me as a guy who, like a lot of conspiracy theorists, thinks he is smarter than everyone else. All the rubes and normies have it wrong, they believe what everyone tells them, not me, I know the real story, I am a chosen one. It fosters cult like behavior. Its why they are so easy to grift. For them to really confront whats incorrect about their beliefs, to admit they weren't correct goes well beyond just cognitive dissonance and shakes the core of who they are as a person. Much easier to double down and move a few goalposts here and there.

Yes. He's the equivalent of that obnoxious guy in Philosophy 101 who is convinced he has out-thought classic western thinkers.

He reminds me of a story my wife tells about a freshman seminar class at UC-Santa Cruz where a student raised their hand and prefaced their statement with "well, speaking as an intellectual..."

I used to think Kyrie said outrageous things for attention. I don't believe that anymore. I can't imagine why he says what he says.

But I do maintain that if this particular incident is shocking to you - you haven't been paying very close attention to Kyrie. Which certainly isn't meant as a judgment. We'd all do better to pay less attention to him.

(I hope this puts to rest any discussion of me being a Kyrie apologist. I've been extremely hard on him over the years. I've never excused anything he has done. But no, I don't put him in the same class of athletes who have done hard time for murder or assault)

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I hope I'm not intruding into PPB space here, but I need to take this on: I think you misunderstand what freedom of speech is. Freedom speech is the right to say what you want to and be free from governmental action in retaliation. It doesn't mean that anything you say can or should be ignored by everyone, everywhere. Promoting flat earth nonsense is one thing, but this is beyond the pale. The government hasn't done anything in retaliation, nor should they. But responsible members of society need to make it clear that some things are out of bounds. Personally, I think this kind of division of power - where individual citizens have a greater power to act than their government does - is a good thing for society at large. It keeps the government at bay and it keeps the citizenry more empowered to act than the government which ostensibly serves that citizenry. But the corollary of that is that citizens occasionally must step in when the government can and should not. In my opinion, this is such a case.

As a responsible citizen, I no longer believe that further association with Kyrie Irving - without at least some kind of retraction or rational explanation on his part - in any way benefits Duke University. Enough is enough.

In other words, "freedom of speech" doesn't mean "your speech is protected from consequences, least of all my right to decide that you are a POS because of what you say."

Sporks to you

[MarkD83]

In other words, "freedom of speech" doesn't mean "your speech is protected from consequences, least of all my right to decide that you are a POS because of what you say."

Sporks to you

And to add on to this...Alex Jones is starting to see the consequences of his "freedom of speech". Kyrie whether he realizes it or not is feeling the consequences of his views. Right here on this board we are dissociating Kyrie the "talented basketball player" from Kyrie "a person whose opinion I would respect or even pay attention to".

The fact that we are doing this also disconnects Kyrie from "Duke basketball".

This then ties into the "scientific literacy" discussion in this thread, which I associate more with a broader "trusting experts" discussion. Everyone can have an opinion about anything but I first want to see your credentials, data and proper analysis of the data before I elevate your words to "expert opinion".

And the final thought (definitely on the way to the PPB), if you are so gullible that you don't check someone's credentials, data and proper analysis of the data and just take the opinion of anyone off the street...please IM me and I'll send you my Zelle account information for you to donate to my upcoming political campaign (which will never happen).

[HayYou]

How come when I posted this yesterday afternoon it was taken down and now it is on page 2?

[rsvman]

Maybe it's time to just come right out and say it.... Kyrie appears to be an idiot.

That is all.

[MarkD83]

How come when I posted this yesterday afternoon it was taken down and now it is on page 2?

My comments may get taken down soon as well...

[Kfanarmy]

I hope I'm not intruding into PPB space here, but I need to take this on: I think you misunderstand what freedom of speech is. Freedom speech is the right to say what you want to and be free from governmental action in retaliation. It doesn't mean that anything you say can or should be ignored by everyone, everywhere. Promoting flat earth nonsense is one thing, but this is beyond the pale. The government hasn't done anything in retaliation, nor should they. But responsible members of society need to make it clear that some things are out of bounds. Personally, I think this kind of division of power - where individual citizens have a greater power to act than their government does - is a good thing for society at large. It keeps the government at bay and it keeps the citizenry more empowered to act than the government which ostensibly serves that citizenry. But the corollary of that is that citizens occasionally must step in when the government can and should not. In my opinion, this is such a case.

As a responsible citizen, I no longer believe that further association with Kyrie Irving - without at least some kind of retraction or rational explanation on his part - in any way benefits Duke University. Enough is enough.

______________
I think this is in bounds of the forum, as it is about the treatment and amount of "control" folks think they should have over former Duke basketball players...
______________

I appreciate the verve with which you state your opinion, though I'm not sure I fully understand the rules for what a former Duke basketball player may say and not garner some civil "punishment" by "we." I assume that "we" means you and whoever thinks like you on any given societal topic. If it is the larger "we," as in society as a whole, I disagree. In fact, I think it is a far more egregious act against a free society to have people wanting to ostracize others because of opinion. I dare say Kyrie's continued association with the university is far more in line with its, at least public, stance on tolerance than is yours. There will always be people who have differing opinions. Kyrie is NOT a university official. He is NOT, as far as I can tell, in anyway claiming to represent Duke University with his opinions. It is far better to let those opinions be expressed publicly without attempting to quash them and create resentment or worse.

I'm gonna guess Duke alum have a wide array of opinions about what is and isn't with respect to COVID fact/fiction and science. Do you want to silence any basketball players who disagree with you on the subject of genetically created viruses and vaccines, wear/don't wear masks, the good and bad for vaccinations, age appropriate decisions, etc.?

Don't like him, so be it. Don't read, listen to, talk about him, watch old Duke games he is in, highlights...whatever. Don't like what he's got to say, I get it. I don't get what moral authority people claim so they get to decide what is "beyond the pale" and "out of bounds." So long as he isn't intentionally hurting anyone, (and I'll bet that isn't his intent), I vehemently object to the notion that Duke should ostracize him because some don't like what he is posting to Instagram.

Yes, I think I do understand the concept of "freedom of speech." I also understand this second layer of people who believe they have the moral authority to tell others what they can and cannot say, on the flimsiest of relationships, to find ways to punish those whose positions and opinions differ. In my personal opinion, the latter is far worse for all of us.

IMO Kyrie and his, perhaps off-the-wall, opinions add color to the tapestry of our society. The thread may be course to the touch, but it is worth having.

[SMAX]

Freedom of speech. We don’t have to like it or promote it but KI has
his 1st amendment right to say what he thinks. I know I’ll be kicked off this forum again for disagreeing with your thread but I still have a right to say it. For the record, I’m not a KI fan on or off the court.

[MarkD83]

______________
I think this is in bounds of the forum, as it is about the treatment and amount of "control" folks think they should have over former Duke basketball players...
______________

I appreciate the verve with which you state your opinion, though I'm not sure I fully understand the rules for what a former Duke basketball player may say and not garner some civil "punishment" by "we." I assume that "we" means you and whoever thinks like you on any given societal topic. If it is the larger "we," as in society as a whole, I disagree. In fact, I think it is a far more egregious act against a free society to have people wanting to ostracize others because of opinion. I dare say Kyrie's continued association with the university is far more in line with its, at least public, stance on tolerance than is yours. There will always be people who have differing opinions. Kyrie is NOT a university official. He is NOT, as far as I can tell, in anyway claiming to represent Duke University with his opinions. It is far better to let those opinions be expressed publicly without attempting to quash them and create resentment or worse.

I'm gonna guess Duke alum have a wide array of opinions about what is and isn't with respect to COVID fact/fiction and science. Do you want to silence any basketball players who disagree with you on the subject of genetically created viruses and vaccines, wear/don't wear masks, the good and bad for vaccinations, age appropriate decisions, etc.?

Don't like him, so be it. Don't read, listen to, talk about him, watch old Duke games he is in, highlights...whatever. Don't like what he's got to say, I get it. I don't get what moral authority people claim so they get to decide what is "beyond the pale" and "out of bounds." So long as he isn't intentionally hurting anyone, (and I'll bet that isn't his intent), I vehemently object to the notion that Duke should ostracize him because some don't like what he is posting to Instagram.

Yes, I think I do understand the concept of "freedom of speech." I also understand this second layer of people who believe they have the moral authority to tell others what they can and cannot say, on the flimsiest of relationships, to find ways to punish those whose positions and opinions differ. In my personal opinion, the latter is far worse for all of us.

IMO Kyrie and his, perhaps off-the-wall, opinions add color to the tapestry of our society. The thread may be course to the touch, but it is worth having.

The issue for me is that Kyrie is linking to / promoting someone who is encouraging his audience to target the families of children who were killed. Kyrie is entitled to his opinion but this does sound like "intentionally hurting someone".

[scottdude8]

Freedom of speech. We don’t have to like it or promote it but KI has
his 1st amendment right to say what he thinks. I know I’ll be kicked off this forum again for disagreeing with your thread but I still have a right to say it. For the record, I’m not a KI fan on or off the court.

I don't think any rational person on this forum will disagree with this. The only thing being discussed here, at least by those acting in good faith, is whether there should be consequences for those statements, and if so, what those should be. Most relevant to us here is how this relates to Duke: the university and athletic department would certainly be well within their rights to no longer hype Kyrie as a member of the "Brotherhood" if they don't want to be associated with these types of statements (note I'm not saying whether they should or shouldn't do this, as I'm trying not to touch that 3rd rail quite yet... just saying that's more than justifiable). Similarly, Kyrie's sponsors would be well within their rights to similarly dissociate themselves from him.

No one is in any way suggesting that Kyrie's ability to speak be limited by the government, or that he's broken any laws. So despite the combative tone of your post, I'm pretty sure you won't find anyone willing to fight you on this point.

[tommy]

Not sure if folks saw, but our own Kyrie Irving is back in the headlines for more bizarre behavior, this time pushing some strange theory about a new world order running everything. And unfortunately it involved a very controversial radio host, who has been in the news recently for aggressively pushing the theory that school shootings are staged, and encouraging his large audience to target the families of children who were killed.

Personally, I am done with Kyrie... it is one thing to promote silliness like flat earth stuff, but another to push ideas that might be harmful. Beyond that, is there a point that either the basketball program or the University at large should distance themselves from Kyrie? Does he "represent" us still? Or is the sort of thing that you just ignore?

Who?

[bundabergdevil]

Freedom of speech. We don’t have to like it or promote it but KI has
his 1st amendment right to say what he thinks. I know I’ll be kicked off this forum again for disagreeing with your thread but I still have a right to say it. For the record, I’m not a KI fan on or off the court.

You don’t understand freedom of speech. See Phredd’s thoughtful explanation. Kyrie and everyone else in the US has the freedom to say whatever they want (with a few exceptions) without government punishment or censorship. That’s it.

Kyrie can be punished or censored by any other institution or individual though.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Kyrie on the whole has been like most OADs to me. He played, left, and I haven't paid much attention after because honestly I don't care.
He's only made it difficult to ignore because he's got issues and keeps himself in the news.
On the whole, though, I still don't care.


By the way, he's not ever gotten a degree, right*? So even less attention worthy. It's not like he's the poster child for me of going out and celebrating players going back to school to anyone. He played 11 games for Duke, and then bye. And I agree, adios.


*In fact, according to a "promise" to his father, he was going to, but I guess the study of two dimensional spherical entities got in his way.