Dibs

In 2016

I apologize for not addressing your point and instead got heated due to your apparent assumption that I am an idiot &/or a Manti hater.....and simply elaborated on my initial point which you had misinterpreted. My point was not to say that I think that the lack of evidence proving him innocent meant he should be "shredded".....it was that the lack of evidence means there is still nothing reported that can curtail the strong level of doubt amongst unbiased observers that he may have been complicit in the hoax. This concept is particularly relevant in this thread as earlier several were using the ND investigation as some sort of proof of his innocence. ....show some sort of evidence of your relationship with the imaginary girlfriend like phone records or emails. INNOCENT!

Good Lord! I even pasted some of the relevant part of the article so you wouldn't have to read it.....and I get that response???? The article states that upon questioning, the university said that the investigators didn't interview T'eo....nor his family....nor Tuiasosopo....nor any of his family. They didn't look into T'eo's phone records....nor his emails....nor any other electronic communications he had in relation to the situation. In short.....they took T'eo at his word and didn't investigate anything in relation to whether he might or might not have been in some way complicit in the situation. With all of the strangeness involved in this(Tuiasosopo being known to T'eo.....close enough for T'eo to plug his youtube single on twitter, the picture of the girlfriend being a prom queen from T'eo's high school, the extraordinary amount of time/effort that the as yet unnamed "girlfriend" put in to the hoax, etc, etc, etc).....it is fully reasonable to think that T'eo might well have been involved. I have said before, all T'eo need do is show his phone records to one of the hundreds of reporters that would love to be able to break the story that he was indeed a victim and not a perpetrator in the hoax.

Did I miss some important piece of information that supports T'eo? This article suggests he is far from being unshredable. http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/1/20/3896486/manti-teo-hoax-notre-dame-investigation The investigation ordered by Notre Dame was limited to the electronic search, [Notre Dame spokesman Dennis] Brown said. Investigators did not interview Te'o or his family, nor did anyone attempt to contact Ronaiah Tuiasosopo or any of his relatives. In response to questions, university officials said the investigators did not examine cell phone records, e-mails or other electronic communication to determine the length or extent of Te'o's communication over the past few years with the person claiming to be Lennay Kekua....

Really??? Why would they cut him? Why wouldn't they trade him? Fitz is on a $8,885,000 per year contract. Surely some team in the league will perceive a QB who's team was 4 points away from the SB last year & who had a 104.1 QBR this year.......who only is going to cost $7.5M, to be worth trading a 7th round draft pick for.

If he was "in on it", he wasn't going to be able to stop the hoax from being discovered. Deadspin were fishing around the story....well before Te'o told ND.....and before he claims to have been told about it himself.

I've seen this quite a few times on the board over the last bunch of weeks and I am confused by it. As far as I can tell, Alex Smith becomes a FA in 2015. Unless the 49ers cut him we would need to trade for him. Does anybody know if I'm wrong on this?

Seems you just read the flashy headline. What he actually said was.... “Money has no utility to me beyond a certain point. Its utility is entirely in building an organisation and getting the resources out to the poorest in the world.” After you have your first BILLION, what difference does having more money make to you?

I guess I'm calling you out on this a little bit here.....but mainly I am honestly curious. You have stated the above several times in this thread, that it is a fact that catfishing is relatively common place and is often as elaborate as the Te'o situation. Each time you have declared this I have endeavored internet searches to try and find examples for myself. Apart from the movie/TV show I have been unable to find any. Regardless of the possible(likely) situation that the movie was a setup, it seems that all of the examples in the TV show(& movie) are quite basic situations. One (lonely or ill?)person pretends to be someone different. This concept is IMO entirely believable....and is very believable that people will fall for this(for a time). If you have some sort of link or reference to a catfishing example where there was a small cadre of people doing the fishing....and committing the same level of dedication and time as in the T'eo case....could you please link it as to me the concept is still totally unbelievable. On a side note, I personally would believe his story regardless of the above if he shows somebody proof of the nightly 8 hour phone conversations. At this point it could still be an elaborate ruse on his part that was conducted with the help of a friend.

You actually can(Favre, Brees etc).....but it's extremely unlikely.

I wonder when we'll get to know the facts.

Sexual assault is a very broad term. It could be something as simple as he put his arm around a girl and drunkenly slurred "Come on baby, you know you want it." ......or could be as viscous as attempted rape etc. Neither is acceptable but....

And 16 used to be the new 12. Where are we headed? Will the next generation think that 30 is too young to act responsibly? Young people act rashly and are inexperienced in many things.....but even a 12 year old knows that telling a lie is wrong.

I totally agree that he will definitely be on the roster next season. Typically WRs break out in their 3rd NFL season.....it's highly unlikely they will give up on a 3rd round WR pick so soon. With that in mind, the save face concept really doesn't enter into it at this point.

UFA

I'm of two minds in regards to what you are saying.

Actually, I was trying to be subtle to Mike in Syracuse. I figured that if one was going to point out that the Mormon religion specifically was "made up" then they likely were not an atheist or agnostic, as atheists & agnostics generally believe that "all" religions have been made up. This would mean that Mike has some form of religious belief and would perhaps be offended by my comment......which hopefully would make him mindful that his comment would be derogatory and offensive to people of the Mormon faith. FWIW I am not Mormon, atheist nor agnostic.

All religions are made up.

Authenticity questioned In an interview Ariel Schulman related that some viewers believe Catfish to be a fake documentary, or a hoax. Morgan Spurlock, director and subject of the documentary Super Size Me, walked up to the producers of the film during one of its initial screenings and told them "it was the best fake documentary I have ever seen." Comedian Zach Galifianakis also has stated that he does not believe the events in the film to be true.[4] Kyle Buchanan at Movieline questions why the filmmakers would begin obsessively documenting Nev's online relationship so early on, and argues that it is highly improbable that media-savvy professionals like the Schulmans and Joost would not use the Internet to research Megan and her family before meeting them.[5] Others have also questioned the trio's decision to begin filming, as well as the seemingly improbable coincidence of them catching everything of importance to the story on film as it happens. It has also been pointed out that the group's supposed movements in Catfish are not documented in their public blog postings at the time. [6] Since the movie's release, Angela has been interviewed by ABC's 20/20[7] and the Los Angeles Times has spoken with neighbors familiar with her family.[8] In the summer of 2011, The Mining Journal ran a two-part profile[9] of Angela in connection with the North of the 45th Parallel 2011 exhibition at the DeVos Art Museum on the campus of Northern Michigan University.[10]

It is a big difference.....but maybe they thought there was a larger chance TJ could pan out compared to a rookie 6th rounder QB. IMO the error that they made was to not draft a QB in rounds 2-4 last year. Having made that choice(error) they are then in the position of needing a backup QB and determined that TJ was the best option(which he likely was a good option under those considerations).

He's the OP of the thread....I really don't think he's a troll. He's just new here and probably doesn't realize that if you spout ridiculous hyperbole or ill conceived thoughts around here you are likely to get "politely" slammed.

Realistically though, that's all a 6th round pick is worth. You have a tiny chance of the player becoming a quality starter.....similar to the chance that TJ is/was going to become a quality starter.

Yeah....the adverse effects were mainly bad memory loss.