Blog Entry

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'

Posted on: May 11, 2011 11:51 pm
Edited on: May 12, 2011 9:12 am
  •  
 
Posted by Will Brinson

Rashard Mendenhall's opinions of 9/11 aren't very popular -- it cost the Steelers running back an endorsement deal with Champion and a lot of flak from the general public.

Turns out, it wasn't just the general public who thinks Mendenhall made a mistake saying what he did. His teammate, Hines Ward, also recognizes how dumb the tweets were.

“Everybody’s entitled to their opinion,” Ward said, per Michael David Smith of Pro Football Talk. “But that wasn’t a good opinion.”

Ward also discussed the consequences of social media in today's world and, unlike his teammate Ryan Clark, who thinks athletes simply shouldn't use it, he was spot on.

“If that’s your opinion leave it as your opinion,” Ward said. “When you tweet that out there, you have to deal with the backlashes that come with that. You put everybody out there because everywhere we go we get asked questions about the comments you made. When you tweet like that, you’ve got to be careful.
Mendenhall

"I’m not a big tweeter because sometimes your emotions get caught up, you speak your mind and it’s not always the best thing to say.”

Look, anyone can get caught up in the heat of the moment and say something stupid on social media; it's not a requirement that you be an athlete.

But being an athlete means you're more high profile, and that means being a little more careful about what opinions you throw out there.
  •  
Comments

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 8, 2012 1:42 pm
 

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'

Since i be taught the person component spanking new onto different blogs day-to-day. It's for truly moments refreshing to endure tips involved with numerous webmasters together with capture just about everything from those. A number of thank you for bl ogging.


hgtrerte
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 3, 2011 5:51 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator



tomlye
Since: Nov 28, 2011
Posted on: December 1, 2011 7:51 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: Dec 2, 2007
Posted on: May 15, 2011 1:12 am
 

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'

Only to right wing loons and unreasonable left wing idiots



Since: Dec 2, 2007
Posted on: May 15, 2011 1:12 am
 

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'

I NEVER said anything about Obama. For the record, YES, he has been a huge disappointment as president



Since: Nov 21, 2006
Posted on: May 14, 2011 10:34 pm
 

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'

I'm kind of ashamed to admit this since i'm a 25 year old guy, and it hurts my pride a little. 

Those wack job truthers honestly scare the crap outa me.  The idea that one of these crazies might be a neighbor of mine instead of in a looney bin where they belong is terrifying.



Since: Feb 10, 2009
Posted on: May 13, 2011 8:51 am
 

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'

<span style="color: #000000;">wow, this thread just goes to show how lost some people really are



Since: May 31, 2007
Posted on: May 12, 2011 8:46 pm
 

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'

Wouldn't this type of process take hours and hours.. to complete
No, it would take a matter of minutes.  The fires have little or nothing to do with it.  The physical impact of the plane knocks out most of the support beams and stud walls.  The strain of all of the upper floors (whose weight is now being supported by the few remaining supports from those damaged floors) is far too much.  Depending upon the percentage of the supports knocked out by the initial impact (and the number of floors above the point of damage), the remaining now-overburdened supports could only hold up for a matter of minutes before folding under the increased weight distribution.  The combined weight of the top 10-20 floors then crashing down on the next floor below the destruction crushes that floor instantly, adding to the mass of downward-headed materials, and consecutively shattering each level on the way down.

The Spain incident is an irrelevent comparison for two reasons.  The first is that it hit at the top, and only the top few floors were damaged.  With the twin towers, the lower hit meant there were 10+ solid floors ABOVE the point of impact, whose weight was too much for the damaged structure to support (and which made for a huge mass crashing downward).  The Spanish skyscraper was damaged at the top, where the few damaged floors were similarly damaged, but didn't have the mass on top of them to crash down.  This resulted in the second issue:  the only damage that spread downward was fire damage, which is insufficient to harm the concrete and metal supports.  Thus, no fall.  With the trade center, it was the falling floors from above that crushed the floors below, not fire.

The Spanish building is a similar construction... but not a similar point of impact (or at least, not nearly similar enough).  Neither the fires, nor the foundation were a significant factor in the fall of the trade center buildings, so whether or not they affected the Spanish building is largely a moot point.

The perpetrators were not fools.  They did their research.  A hit at the top (like in Spain) would not have collapsed the building.  And as you quite accurately pointed out, the foundation at the bottom would also not have been sufficiently damaged by an explosion to bring the building down (a tactic that was actually tried using a car bomb in the 80's or 90's, and did nothing but mess up the underground parking area).  Hitting the building in the middle is actually THE way to bring that type of building down upon itself.

I've seen the "911 Ripple Effect" and several similar diatribes.  Unfortunately, for all of their spectacular video footage, and dramatic emphasis on tangential information and comparison to non-comparable situations, they fail to properly address the actual science of the trade center case itself.

Basically, either they are melodramatic and don't understand and/or care about the laws of physics... or there's some grand conspiracy.  Having watched the films (in addition to seeing the 9/11 incident on live TV at the time), I find the first option far more likely.



Since: Sep 27, 2006
Posted on: May 12, 2011 7:04 pm
 

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'


Let's see, Bush and Cheney's same Generals and Commanders are still running the military forces, we have not close Guantonomo Bay (where the lead to the courier came from to go get Osama Bin Laden), we still use enhanced interrogation methods, the patriot act is still active, we have not pulled out of Afghanistan, we are still in Iraq, and have started another war in Libya.  So how is OBAMA and the Democrats working out for your little twisted liberal mind?  At least be consistent turd.....


I NEVER said anything about Obama. For the record, YES, he has been a huge disappointment as president, but no where near as bad as Bush was. It was stupid of him to keep most of Bush's top lieutenants. He hasn't ended free trade like he said he would during his campaign (among other things as you genuinely stated.) so most of you guys out there are being absolutely killed by this economy.....


Please, everyone check out two films and then call it a night: "911 Ripple Effect" and "The Power of Nightmares" (by Adam Curtis). The latter documentary gives you a powerful, TRUTHFUL look at the REAL beginnings of the crazytrain Militant Muslims alongside the REAL beginnings of crazytrain NeoCons in this country (and how it all basically lead up to 9/11). They're BOTH real eye-openers and they're BOTH available for free on YouTube. Peace! 




Since: Sep 27, 2006
Posted on: May 12, 2011 6:54 pm
 

Ward on Mendenhall: 'That wasn't a good opinion'

The plane itself did not (as you point out) take down the building.  What it did was ruin the structural integrity of about 3-5 stories of the building.  Those stories were no longer able to support the levels above them, because all of the supports were destroyed.  Thus, all of the floors above those 3-5 where the plane hit collapsed downward onto the damaged floors.  The mass and gravitational acceleration of all of the floors above the damaged area coming downward onto the floor immediately below was greater than the supports for that floor could singularly support, which lead to the collapse of that next floor down.  The cascade continued, adding both gravitational acceleration and the mass of each added floor as it collapsed onto the floor beneath it.

Wouldn't this type of process take hours and hours.. to complete, assuming there were very little/poor attempts to put out the fires at the point of contact...?? I suggest you check out "911 Ripple Effect" (available for free on YouTube or for purchase on DVD at Amazon) where at one point they talk about a similar occurence happening with a skyscraper in Spain, where the fires burned for hours on end and Finally when it was put out the Building STILL STOOD thanks to its strong foundation (which every skyscraper MUST have in order for it to be built)! It's just that the plane crash destroyed the top several floors of the building. THAT part had to be rebuilt/re-assembled, but the building itself still stood its ground ---- no demolition-like collapse to the ground...


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com