Beck Water

To be fair, I don't know that Dunne cherry-picked fired or dismissed former Bills. But, he has to go out and independently persuade people to talk to him. And, typically, people who are "salty" are more interested in having someone give them a voice, right? Then there's the fact that who knows how many people Dunne talked to overall - people who were "I had fun playing for Buffalo, nothing really bad to say about it" aren't much of a story.

Just to be clear, in the post you're following up where I said "yes he was charged:, I was talking about Justyn Ross. Re: Von Miller: Did I mishear, or did Beane say something to the effect "I think this case is going to be open for a while"? The prosecutor has a doozy - 911 call, any police statements or evidence, victim statements at the time, now alleged victim allegedly recanting and saying there was no assault, it's just a big misunderstanding, and an alleged perpetrator who is wealthy and high profile. It's A Lot. I don't think the NFL is intentionally treating low- and high-profile players differently, but if they're taking the stance "no charges" = "no exempt list", since high-profile players typically have more $$ thus access to better attorneys and therefore, prosecutors may be more reluctant to just charge them, it effectively seems that way.

Um. Two of the four paragraphs in my post were about bail. " "Further down it says "The magistrate shall allow the person arrested reasonable time and opportunity to consult counsel and shall, after determining whether the person is currently on bail for a separate criminal offense and whether the bail decision is subject to Article 17.027, admit the person arrested to bail if allowed by law." Now it doesn't say that the law only allows the person arrested to bail if they have been charged. It would go against common sense that an arrested/not charged person could not obtain bail, while an arrested/charged person could obtain bale - but, to paraphrase what I said to Muppy, "these are legal proceedings. I'm expecting them to make sense. That's my mistake. That's where I'm going wrong." "

Not at all; peer-reviewed scientist (not clinician) objects to being doxxed on a football fan site, where scientific credentials (not to mention my home address) are not at all relevant to assessing my POV on football fan topics. Thank you for your kind words. We agree that this piece was a substantial investment of time, and that time is money to Dunne as to the rest of us. This is how Dunne makes his living and feeds himself and his family. And, whether coincidence or not, the timing of the release likely maximized interest - and thus, potentially, money through subscribers. I don't think it was frivolous or shoddy, but it does seem pretty clear that Dunne is not simply serving as a conduit for others anecdotes and opinions, but either 1) shaping what he gathered to support his own POV or 2) inserting his own POV that was shaped by the opinions and anecdotes he gathered. I can't tell which. Probably to some extent, both. And I don't think we can rule out shaping a POV to maximize controversy - and thus, potentially, money through subscribers. As you say, it was an investment of time, and time is money. Dunne had to collect his own sources and persuade them to talk to him. One way to do that is talk to a handful of guys, and they each suggest you talk to a couple guys, and so forth. It wouldn't take long to build up a large number of sources that way, but it would be pretty easy to slide into a collection of sources that pretty much serve as an echo chamber, reinforcing the same POV. And, if current players and coaches don't generally want to talk to him, especially during the season, many of his sources will be former coaches and players. It leads to, as John Wawrow said, "People have issues with their former boss: story at 11".

Thank you very much for your research and for sharing this. It does go against what's said on a number of other legal sites. On the other hand, many of them are not specific to Texas. This document is: https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/CR/htm/CR.15.htm You might notice the description of a warrant of arrest does not mention charges being filed - simply that it must name the offense of which the person is accused, and that further down there is a statement "IF charges are filed" which implies that a warrant may be issued without charges and the charges are separate Further down it says "The magistrate shall allow the person arrested reasonable time and opportunity to consult counsel and shall, after determining whether the person is currently on bail for a separate criminal offense and whether the bail decision is subject to Article 17.027, admit the person arrested to bail if allowed by law." Now it doesn't say that the law only allows the person arrested to bail if they have been charged. It would go against common sense that an arrested/not charged person could not obtain bail, while an arrested/charged person could obtain bale - but, to paraphrase what I said to Muppy, "these are legal proceedings. I'm expecting them to make sense. That's my mistake. That's where I'm going wrong." So I'm left unclear, based on the above Texas Legal Statutes site, whether your DA friend and legal subreddit advice are correct here 🤷‍♂️ I've been actually hoping to draw out one of our site lawyers/jurists to weigh in since it's well known the best way to get correct info on the Interweb is to post wrong info, but so far No Joy. You're certainly not wrong in that it is in the league's interest to obfuscate here

It's published and accessioned in Medline and PubMed. But I ain't telling you my name. Sorry.NotSorry.

Dunne? Ty Dunne? Is that you? 😄 Just kidding. I write reports. I write for publication. Last paper I wrote had 32 referenced sources and was so dry and technical you could place it in the desert and have it blend right in. Journalism isn't my thing. However, I feel I have some idea how journalists operate because I chat with them on occasion. Here's the thing: Ty Dunne is technically an independent contractor now. He isn't writing for AP or for TBN which have standards for sourcing and verification in what they publish (Source: discussion with TBN sports editor Josh Barnett and AP reporter John Wawrow). Upthread, I quoted an article by reporter and former Dunne mentor Chuck Pollock who points out that if Dunne were writing for a newspaper, there is no way he could have published a piece like that based on so many anonymous sources. So, writing independently gives Dunne great power he wouldn't have if he were writing for a publication. "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" as Spiderman's Uncle Ben said repeatedly. What Dunne wrote is, in journalistic terms, an opinion piece or opinion column. He has sources, but he's not simply a conduit; he's not limiting himself to the "testimony of others". He's mixing in his own slant and interpretation and using the sources to illustrate and support it. That's not necessarily a bad thing, just a style of journalistic writing. Several people upthread have gone point by point through fair-use excerpts and shown this pretty conclusively. But, that you don't recognize this and refer to Dunne as "a conduit" and say "the testimony belongs to others", casts some doubt about your own understanding. I wouldn't argue that it was 'released to inflict damage'. I don't know or pretend to know Dunne's motivations. Dunne himself said in public interviews that he rushed completing the article after the Eagles game because he felt that close OT loss illustrated many of his points. I think releasing it at a nexus point in the season, has the potential to maximize the interest it generates, and thus the traffic to Dunne's site/subscribers. It's pretty clearly in Dunne's financial interest to release it now, but I don't know for sure whether financial interest motivated him, either. Releasing it now also has a high potential to cause damage to the Bills season, but I can't tell you if that was a motivation or collateral damage.

We'll apparently do it as many times as necessary. I grant you that the media is not writing in a way that clarifies the distinction but "facing" a charge, means to the media, "according to what you're said to have done, these are the charges that could be filed against you." not "you have been charged with these crimes". It's kind of an unclear way of writing about it. But Miller has not (as far as I know still) been formally charged with a crime https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/von-miller-has-no-comment-on-felony-assault-charge same article See the distinction they're making "facing" vs. not "formally charged"? It's the same one the NFL is making, like it or don't (and there are things to like about it) I'm not sure what CBS news item you're looking at but some of the ones I've seen are even worse for blurring the distinction Again: Arrested on suspicion does not equal charged Police can arrest you when they believe (and get a judge to agree) they have 'probable cause' that you committed a crime (arrested on suspicion) Charges have to be filed by a prosecutor or a Grand Jury If he were being arrested and charged it would be "arrested on charges of...." He can also be charged without being arrested, and issued a summons to appear in court to answer for the charges At which point we are going way over my paygrade. But that's the distinction the NFL is making

No, Peterson was not at the "same stage Von Miller is at" (being arrested. Peterson was indicted by a grand jury Sept 12 and placed on the exempt list 5 days later. The league has said they will wait to act until/unless there are charges. That's apparently their standard for "exempt list" This has been explained multiple times up thread. The bottom line TL;DR is: Police can arrest someone they have 'probable cause' to determine to have committed a crime. This is different than charges, which are filed by a prosecutor or by a Grand Jury. A person can be indicted or charged without being arrested A person can be arrested without being charged (anyone who is arrested can plea for bail) Don't believe me? ==> Google

The difference is right in the headline of the linked article in the post. "Charge against Chiefs receiver Justyn Ross upgraded to felony in domestic violence case" See the key word "charge"? Ross was charged. That's why he went on the "exempt" list.

We are in entire agreement here.

Jerry is such a Rosebud. Ralph fired Bill Polian, despite the pleadings of Marv Levy, because, as Levy recounted Ralph to have said, "I just can't get along with him", over a period of 3 years Ralph said so in an interview at the time published in TBN, I think

Yes, he was charged. In November he made a deal to misdemeanor "disturbing the peace", pled guilty, and was sentenced to a diversion program for 1st timers.

I believe in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus 🎅, the Easter Bunny🐇 , and that Ty Dunne in fact just happened to randomly finish this story and decide to put it on his site 3 days before one of the biggest games of the year. In fact, someone upthread posted about an interview Dunne did, where Dunne said that he hurried to finish the article and get it out after the Eagles game because reasons. I'm feeling too lazy to dig that post out of 101 pages though, so Believe it or Don't

You may have to be logged in to see the whole chain of 7 or so 'tweets' or "X"s or whatever they're called now. You can log in with a google account and then log right out again without setting anything up.

I thought it was pretty clear the reporters caught Hyde on the way from practice and asked if he had any statement about it.

playing with a cast on his wrist apparently. Hope he's not allowed to use it to club people a la Gronk

Interesting perspective from someone known to a number of folks here.

Bite Your Everlovin' Muther-fudging Tongue!

Nice snark, Bro. Some pundits predicted the Vikings would improve in their 2nd season under Kevin O'connell. It's not an uncommon prediction for a 2nd year HC. Darrisaw and Addison were viewed as strong additions. So no, not everyone but me had them "regressing". And to their 'relatively knowedgeable fans', success was expected. So yeah, by some viewpoints, they've under-achieved. By the same token, a number of pundits predicted that the Bills would only finish 2nd in the AFC East this season due to a surge by the Dolphins under 2nd year head coach Daniels, while the Bills didn't do enough to improve on offense or defense. Sports Illustrated I believe predicted us at 9-8. So if the Vikings haven't underachieved because some pundits predicted them to regress, wouldn't that same logic apply to the Bills? As for "Burrow hurt", if the Bengals get a "pass" for their 2-3 start because "Burrow was playing hurt" (therefore they didn't under-achieve), shouldn't the Bills get a "pass" for under-achieving during the Giants game and 4 games afterwards, when they went 2-3 (therefore they didn't under-achieve)?

Interesting perspective. I know someone who once made the statement (this was back in the height of the Cold War Era with the Soviet Union dominating Eastern Europe and concern about the "domino effect" in Vietnam, Korea, etc, so give it that context): "if we really cared about fighting communism, we should never have defeated Hitler in WWII". This was at a dinner party with some veterans and people of Jewish faith in attendance. It went over like the proverbial "Lead Zeppelin" and could best be described as socially clueless. But one could probably craft a strong historical argument that it wasn't, objectively, a mistaken statement. Given the multitude of other reasons why WWII was a "must win" (as historian Marv Levy once said) and the probability that people in the room lost relatives either in the Holocaust or in Military Service, it was a totally clueless thing to say. I think the reason so many of us do find that 9/11 anecdote troubling is because one of the biggest jobs of a football HC is to be a Leader of Men, to be able to deal with multiple different diverse personalities and viewpoints effectively and meld them into a team fighting for one objective. So for a HC to be socially and emotionally clueless enough to choose the perpetrators of the 9/11 terrorism as any kind of positive example, is troubling. It represents a monumental failure to "read the room". But on the other hand, it happened 4 years ago and the team has had strong success since then.

? I mean, the Bengals were 12-4 and appeared in the conf champ for the 2nd time in a row in 2022. A repeat was expected, This season they're 6-6 at present, but they were 5-5 before losing their franchise QB in a loss to the Ravens. Most relatively knowledgeable fans see that as "underachieving" for the Bengals The Vikings were 13-4 last season and were expected to advance in the playoffs, not lose to the Giants and to correct that flaw and go deeper into the playoffs this season. They were 4-4 when they lost their franchise QB, Kirk Cousins, in a win over GB, and are now 6-6 and 2nd in their division. Most relatively knowledgeable fans see that as "underachieving" for the Vikes. I could go on. It's legit hard to sustain success in the NFL.

Like I said elsewhere, I've actually enjoyed Dunne's writing with TBN and early Bleacher Report. I thought he was a good writer then. Of course, editing plays a role. I can't judge the $8 fee piece he just wrote, because as you pointed out, I haven't read the entire thing. I didn't like his 2020 Aaron Rodgers piece. I thought it was disjointed and not particularly well crafted. I will note that one thing Covid taught most of us is what we needed to set up to work effectively from home. A headcoach with school-age children who expects (say) his subordinates to assemble film breakdowns before they leave and send them to him for evening analysis, would not be a shock

Well, I do appreciate your viewpoint. On the QB thing, it seems to me it's not been uncommmon for a coach to talk about his QB's mental state usually in the guise of "his confidence leve" or etc. Seems to me Gailey did it with Fitzpatrick, seems to me I've heard it before with a couple other players as well - Martz talking about Warner maybe? But, I don't make a practice of tuning in to HC pressers for 31 other teams around the league week after week. So, if you do and you feel you have the data set to say "I can't think of a single other example of such a thing" in a meaningful way, I have to defer to your superior knowledge of HC-speak Around The League. (Obviously, if you can't think of a single other example of such a thing but you only tune in to a few other team's HC pressers a few times a year, what you say would be True, but Meaningless) Sounds to me as though your mind is made up and Dunne's article reinforces your viewpoint. One of three things is true: either McDermott actually does sound authentic to his players and has the respect of the locker room or He doesn't or The picture is far more nuanced I would say Wawrow's tweets imply (3) is true.

Yeah, that's the Cold Hard Financial Facts of the situation. If Dunne pulled in 100 new subscribers who spent their $8, that's $800 and a Merry Christmas for family and friends. If he pulled in 1000, that's $8000, a Merry Christmas and a trip to Hawaii (or the server bill and maybe his home's utilities and property tax too.) If he pulled in 10,000, that's $80,000 - twice the per capita income reported for Erie County by Census.gov With a story that got nationwide airplay as the 9/11 anecdote from 2019 has done, I don't think it's beyond the pale that 10,000 people might have had $8 of curiousity.