More silliness regarding Ron Rivera’s comments on Eric Bieniemy

Thank goodness we have a football game on to focus on — preseason or not.

Ron Rivera’s comments regarding Eric Bieniemy have been discussed nationally in the last few days.

Theories are being suggested, some bizarre, some reasonable, most unfounded.

Jason Whitlock joined in, suggesting that “Bieniemy was hired to replace Rivera” and that “Rivera is letting the media and ownership know that Bieniemy’s style won’t work in the ultimate leadership position.”

Rivera, of course, has the top position when it comes to the football side of the organization. There is not a general manager or team president who outranks Rivera when it comes to the football team.

Going further, when Daniel Snyder cleared out his office last December, he never returned to a game nor to any business of the Commanders. He was done, moving out.

Consequently, if not Rivera, who was it that hired Bieniemy to replace Rivera? The Josh Harris ownership group did not even become official until July 20, months after the hiring of Bieniemy.

Perhaps might this be a case of Whitlock (and others) not realizing the coach-centric structure in place for the Washington Commanders, which gives all football-related decisions to Rivera for his oversight and final call.

Wednesday, Rivera went out of his way to read a prepared statement, owning his clumsy remarks. Some have strongly suggested the statement was written for Rivera, and he was forced to read it. But doesn’t that necessitate Rivera wasn’t truly owning it?

For instance, to those suggesting Rivera had to read the statement. Who was it then that prepared the statement? And whom was it ordering Rivera to read it?

One thing that remains true is that it is so much easier to form one’s theories and make one’s accusations than it is to provide proof/evidence of one’s theories. That has been and will always remain true in the human race.

It’s been a wild week; how about, until we actually know more, let’s talk some Washington Commanders football for the next few days, shall we?

Jason Whitlock’s craven LeBron James accusation is a low moment, even for him

Jason Whitlock has hit a new low with a craven attempt to call out LeBron James.

On Wednesday night LeBron James took to social media to speak out about the death of Ahmaud Arbery, a 25-year-old black man who was gunned down by two white men while jogging, unarmed, in February in Georgia.

Gregory McMichael, 64, and his son Travis McMichael, 34, admitted to getting guns and pursuing Arbery as he jogged past them, according to police records. 

On Tuesday, a video of the shooting was made public. James spoke out on Twitter a few hours later:

Which brings us to what happened next: Fox Sports personality Jason Whitlock quote tweeted James, then accused James of “using” the death of Arbery to … showcase the difference between LeBron and Michael Jordan?

As more than one person pointed out in the replies, James never mentioned Jordan, and the only person who had done that was Jason Whitlock himself. In fact, you could make the strong argument the only person trying to make this tragedy about himself is, in fact, Whitlock.

Which makes this whole thing depressing and predictable, and I fully realize that by writing about this I am, in turn, giving Whitlock what he so desperately craves with moves like this: attention.

I don’t have a good answer. Stay quiet, you risk tacitly validating what Whitlock is saying. Speak up, he gets what he wants in continuing to, however fleetingly, stay relevant.

But there’s a shelf life to these things, and Whitlock may be past his expiration date.

[lawrence-related id=805211]

[jwplayer A1TsVfxI-q2aasYxh]