Bear Down Wildcats

Amazing

Out of all the adds they could've made, they green lit this one...

Statement from the Cavaliers organization:


"During a timeout at last night’s Cavaliers vs. Bulls playoff game at The Q in Cleveland, we ran a 1-minute in-arena video that was intended to be a humorous spoof on a popular commercial centered on a song and dance from the classic movie ‘Dirty Dancing.’ While the video was not intended to be offensive, it was a mistake to include content that made light of domestic violence.


Domestic violence is a very serious matter and has no place in a parody video that plays in an entertainment venue. We sincerely apologize to those who have been affected by domestic violence for the obvious negative feelings caused by being exposed to this insensitive video.


The Cavaliers organization has a strong and lengthy track record of supporting domestic violence-related causes and efforts. We will continue to proudly work with our regional partners at the Domestic Violence & Child Advocacy Center in support of their numerous programs to end domestic violence in our country once and for all."

I've got a funny one where a cop shoots an unarmed citizen. The citizen gets pulled over for having a tail light out, and it turns out he's wearing a Bulls shirt, right? So the cop tells him to get out of the car, and when the Bulls fan gets scared and tries to run away, the cop guns him down from behind. In the next scene, the driver lays on his back with a Cavs shirt on, and he looks at the camera smiling and says, "If you're not all in, you'll be all in!" Then he closes his eyes and a guy in a white jacket slides him into a drawer and closes it as the camera pans in to show the label, "Cleveland City Morgue." It will be awesome.

Either they knew there were DV problems with the spoof in which case the makers should be fired.

Or they were too fucking stupid to know there were DV issues with the spoof, and people who are that are so fucking stupid as to miss something like that...well, it's a gots to go situation for them too.

I really, honestly, don't understand how people could make that and not see a potential issue.

Just like the millions of Bud Light cans that were recalled last week for having the slogan about "removing 'no' from your vocabulary.'

Who are the freaking morons that greenlit that without thinking it might be perceived as connected to alochol and rape/sexual assault?? It's crazy imagining all the brainpower and meetings and emails spent on these ads and videos and not one person would connect the dots.

With all of the bitching about that skit, I thought it was gonna have him slapping her or something.

PieceOfMeat wrote:With all of the bitching about that skit, I thought it was gonna have him slapping her or something.

Throwing her across the room and injuring her so she would change her mind about her favorite team isn't "violency" enough for ya?

Chicat wrote:

PieceOfMeat wrote:With all of the bitching about that skit, I thought it was gonna have him slapping her or something.

Throwing her across the room and injuring her so she would change her mind about her favorite team isn't "violency" enough for ya?

It was only a head injury.

Longhorned wrote:

Chicat wrote:

PieceOfMeat wrote:With all of the bitching about that skit, I thought it was gonna have him slapping her or something.

Throwing her across the room and injuring her so she would change her mind about her favorite team isn't "violency" enough for ya?

It was only a head injury.

Any good ref: "No harm, no foul. Play on."

azgreg wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

Chicat wrote:

PieceOfMeat wrote:With all of the bitching about that skit, I thought it was gonna have him slapping her or something.

Throwing her across the room and injuring her so she would change her mind about her favorite team isn't "violency" enough for ya?

It was only a head injury.

Any good ref: "No harm, no foul. Play on."

Obviously we're not talking Pac-12 refs...

Unreal that multiple people watched that and thought, "Yeah perfect, let's do it"

Olsondogg wrote:Unreal that multiple people watched that and thought, "Yeah perfect, let's do it"

The production quality alone was god-awful and should have had it rejected. I've seen 7th grade Spanish class videos that were done better.

Chicat wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Unreal that multiple people watched that and thought, "Yeah perfect, let's do it"

The production quality alone was god-awful and should have had it rejected. I've seen 7th grade Spanish class videos that were done better.

"Where is the canal?"

"Lo siento. No hablo ingles."

"Ah. Donde esta el canal?"

"Ah! El canal esta alli."

Olsondogg wrote:Unreal that multiple people watched that and thought, "Yeah perfect, let's do it"

In light of the topic, I know we're supposed to be all sensitive and everything. But when watching it the first time, was I the only one who kind of hoped she was going to take off her shirt?

Longhorned wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Unreal that multiple people watched that and thought, "Yeah perfect, let's do it"

In light of the topic, I know we're supposed to be all sensitive and everything. But when watching it the first time, was the only one who kind of hoped she was going to take off her shirt?

Yes. She's fug....

Not even Cleveland hot.

Chicat wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Unreal that multiple people watched that and thought, "Yeah perfect, let's do it"

In light of the topic, I know we're supposed to be all sensitive and everything. But when watching it the first time, was the only one who kind of hoped she was going to take off her shirt?

Yes. She's fug....

Not even Cleveland hot.

A Cleveland 2 would be a New York..................?

Chicat wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Unreal that multiple people watched that and thought, "Yeah perfect, let's do it"

In light of the topic, I know we're supposed to be all sensitive and everything. But when watching it the first time, was the only one who kind of hoped she was going to take off her shirt?

Yes. She's fug....

Not even Cleveland hot.

Naw, not that bad at all. Tall, slim fits the bill well enough. The dude on the other hand, complete dooosh. As cheap looking as the production value.

Taking the DV thing out of the conversation... it's just a really dumb, not funny, not entertaining, slow moving horrible spot, with even worse production value.

Embarrassing on so many levels.

Chicat wrote:

PieceOfMeat wrote:With all of the bitching about that skit, I thought it was gonna have him slapping her or something.

Throwing her across the room and injuring her so she would change her mind about her favorite team isn't "violency" enough for ya?

It's not like he picked her up and threw her or anything Chi. He caught her (as part of the dumb dance routine), said wtf bulls and tossed her to the side. Sometimes we get a little too p.c. in this world, and this is one of those times I think. Though, to be fair, if someone would have shown it to me and asked "should we run this" I'd have said no, because I know how the world works. If anything, the most offensive in my view was after the throw when she's got ice on her head. My comment about expecting worse was because I heard a LOT of bitching about it before having seen it. The level of bitching far exceeded what was there.

Would anyone be bitching if it were two guys? Two sports buds who go for a chest bump, one guy sees the other's jersey, catches the first guy and tosses him? I doubt there'd be any bitching then, or at least very very little.

Was the skit stupid? sure. Should people be in an uproar about it? No.

It looks like a high school AV club put it together.

Chicat wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Unreal that multiple people watched that and thought, "Yeah perfect, let's do it"

In light of the topic, I know we're supposed to be all sensitive and everything. But when watching it the first time, was the only one who kind of hoped she was going to take off her shirt?

Yes. She's fug....

Not even Cleveland hot.

You need to develop an appreciation for junk food.

PieceOfMeat wrote:

Chicat wrote:

PieceOfMeat wrote:With all of the bitching about that skit, I thought it was gonna have him slapping her or something.

Throwing her across the room and injuring her so she would change her mind about her favorite team isn't "violency" enough for ya?

It's not like he picked her up and threw her or anything Chi. He caught her (as part of the dumb dance routine), said wtf bulls and tossed her to the side. Sometimes we get a little too p.c. in this world, and this is one of those times I think. Though, to be fair, if someone would have shown it to me and asked "should we run this" I'd have said no, because I know how the world works. If anything, the most offensive in my view was after the throw when she's got ice on her head. My comment about expecting worse was because I heard a LOT of bitching about it before having seen it. The level of bitching far exceeded what was there.

Would anyone be bitching if it were two guys? Two sports buds who go for a chest bump, one guy sees the other's jersey, catches the first guy and tosses him? I doubt there'd be any bitching then, or at least very very little.

Was the skit stupid? sure. Should people be in an uproar about it? No.

It looks like a high school AV club put it together.

I don't think anybody here disagrees with this. Like you say, the stupidity is how obvious it was to turn south. You just don't even go there.

Domestic violence, and violence against women, are serious issues. This video is just dumb and has nothing to do with those issues. And I'm the last guy not to understand the gravity of those issues.

PieceOfMeat wrote:It's not like he picked her up and threw her or anything Chi. He caught her (as part of the dumb dance routine), said wtf bulls and tossed her to the side.

He sees her shirt and throws her in disgust. It does not at all appear to be an accident. She is physically injured. In fact, she sustains a head injury, an injury that can have very serious consequences and can even lead to death. Then the really insidious part is that after his intentional action causes her a head injury, he gets a good result out of it.

I suppose (?) some people can view the thing differently, but to me changing your female partners' views on a subject through dangerous physical violence to her person seems pretty, pretty, pretty bad.

SCCats wrote:
He sees her shirt and throws her in disgust.

Which is what I said. Notice that I also said the worst part was the scene after with the ice on her head?

He couldn't have just pulled his arms back or dropped her when he saw the shirt?

The heave into a wall and the ice bag makes it over the line.

(Seinfeld voice) Who were the ad geniuses who came up with this?

UAEebs86 wrote:He couldn't have just pulled his arms back or dropped her when he saw the shirt?

The heave into a wall and the ice bag makes it over the line.

(Seinfeld voice) Who were the ad geniuses who came up with this?

Geniuses from Cleveland. That explains everything.

All they had to do was have the "actors" switch roles, putting a blonde wig on the bearded guy and dressing her up as Ralph Kramden, bus driver outfit and all. That would have been fine.

PieceOfMeat wrote:Though, to be fair, if someone would have shown it to me and asked "should we run this" I'd have said no, because I know how the world works.

So if the world wasn't so PC, showing violence against women in this context would be cool?

This is quite the unexpected take from you....

They crowd sourced from /r/THEREDPILL didn't they?

Chicat wrote:

PieceOfMeat wrote:Though, to be fair, if someone would have shown it to me and asked "should we run this" I'd have said no, because I know how the world works.

So if the world wasn't so PC, showing violence against women in this context would be cool?

This is quite the unexpected take from you....

I believe I've articulated this well enough for you Chi (LH seems to have read and understood what I typed)....but you go ahead and keep tilting at whatever windmill you believe is there.

Sorry I quoted your opinion and responded. My bad.

It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

Peyton didn't do that skit in the wake of A-Peterson...

So that's kinda the point...

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

Peyton didn't do that skit in the wake of A-Peterson...

So that's kinda the point...

Sorry, I thought child abuse had been around for years. Only now we care?

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

Peyton didn't do that skit in the wake of A-Peterson...

So that's kinda the point...

Sorry, I thought child abuse had been around for years. Only now we care?

You just don't get it. And that's ok.

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

Peyton didn't do that skit in the wake of A-Peterson...

So that's kinda the point...

Sorry, I thought child abuse had been around for years. Only now we care?

You just don't get it. And that's ok.

I get that you didn't care before. Or correct me. I'm open.

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

Peyton didn't do that skit in the wake of A-Peterson...

So that's kinda the point...

Sorry, I thought child abuse had been around for years. Only now we care?

SNL gets a lot more leeway than a team produced spot. If they ran a "Go Colts" ad at halftime featuring Manning pelting kids with footballs it wouldn't have gone over well then either. I don't think anyone is outraged, but it was just incredibly dumb given the spotlight currently on athletes and domestic violence.

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

Peyton didn't do that skit in the wake of A-Peterson...

So that's kinda the point...

Sorry, I thought child abuse had been around for years. Only now we care?

You just don't get it. And that's ok.

I get that you didn't care before. Or correct me. I'm open.

You tried to draw parallels and it didn't work. The focus on sports right now is injuries, domestic violence, and drug use...if the incidents of Adrian Peterson had been in the limelight prior to Payton on SNL, you'd have a point. But it didn't and you don't.

Run with the "caring about child abuse" angle if you want, but that's changing the focus.

the real dill wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

Peyton didn't do that skit in the wake of A-Peterson...

So that's kinda the point...

Sorry, I thought child abuse had been around for years. Only now we care?

SNL gets a lot more leeway than a team produced spot. If they ran a "Go Colts" ad at halftime featuring Manning pelting kids with footballs it wouldn't have gone over well then either. I don't think anyone is outraged, but it was just incredibly dumb given the spotlight currently on athletes and domestic violence.

Thanks, Dill. Makes sense. Still, why is more leeway given in any instance if the intent is the same and the content is similar?

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

the real dill wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:It's fiction, and ill advised. Sometimes people think they're doing an SNL skit without thinking, or employing a team of PC lawyers.

Who here was enraged when Peyton Manning did the piece where he abused kids in a football skit? Who here thought it was funny? In the Wake of A-Peterson, shouldn't Peyton be banned from his sport like Pete Rose was?

Peyton didn't do that skit in the wake of A-Peterson...

So that's kinda the point...

Sorry, I thought child abuse had been around for years. Only now we care?

SNL gets a lot more leeway than a team produced spot. If they ran a "Go Colts" ad at halftime featuring Manning pelting kids with footballs it wouldn't have gone over well then either. I don't think anyone is outraged, but it was just incredibly dumb given the spotlight currently on athletes and domestic violence.

Thanks, Dill. Makes sense. Still, why is more leeway given in any instance if the intent is the same and the content is similar?

You tune into SNL to see something edgy. You don't look for that in a timeout of a basketball game. You look for the kiss cam.

[tweet]https://mobile.twitter.com/letsgomemphi ... 6600836097[/tweet]

Here is what reel dill tried to post above. Our imbed link didn't like that it was a mobile.twitter address.

Ghost and others maintain that the Cavs PROMOTE domestic violence. Read thread title.

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:Ghost and others maintain that the Cavs PROMOTE domestic violence. Read thread title.

Fair point. Title should have said "make light of domestic violence."

ANGCatFan wrote:

Here is what reel dill tried to post above. Our imbed link didn't like that it was a mobile.twitter address.

whoop that trick
What you do when your girlfriend gets out of line. Basically giving her a pimp slap when she acts up.
"My girl started mouthing off to me so I had to whoop that trick."
by IceWarm July 10, 2008
46 33 SHOP

Thanks for the translation for us white guys.

UAEebs86 wrote:Thanks for the translation for us white guys.

The Bulls new slogan, "hoes gotta eat too"'seems more self explanatory for us who grew up in the 80s.

That ad is cavalier and bull. Tough double to pull off.