thebandit27 Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 It is what it is. I don't wanna sound racist but I hope you're having a wonderful day. What was Jesus like? Well done fellas.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 That phrase doesn't bother me, but its in the same genre of when someone says "I don't want to be rude but ..." or "Don't take this the wrong way but ...." You know the poop is hitting the fan when a sentence starts like that. "No disrespect, but..." here comes the disrespect.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 "No disrespect, but..." here comes the disrespect. Or "With all due respect..." *something disrespectful*
DC Tom Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 "No disrespect, but..." here comes the disrespect. Not to mention, "It's just my opinion, but..."
Numark3 Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 http://blog.masslive..._investiga.html "With the text messages, the scope that they asked for was actually very, very wide," Yee told CNN. "I probably should have made the letter public that we received from the NFL's lawyers, but in any event, if we would have provided the phone or text messages...Tom is also member of the union, the commissioner's office actually does not have any subpoena power. If a prominent player were to provide all of their private communications absent a subpoena, that sets a dangerous precedent for all players facing disciplinary measures." "Finally," Yee continued, "any information we would have provided -- and the Wells investigative team did ask us to go through Tom's phone on our own and provide them with information if we chose to go that route -- but as you might surmise, if we would have chose to go that route any information we would have given them they probably would have had skepticism about, anyway. When it came down to it, either way you turned, you're really not playing on a level playing field." First off, that is what his lawyer is. Second, its not court ordered discovery. They could have made it as narrow as they wanted. Again, to not comply with any discovery if there is nothing to hide for the sake of making a point or not to set a precedent is bad lawyering. Which is why it didnt happen They didn't comply with discovery for a reason, and its not to help other players while hurting his client lol.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 This is the stuff that's so great about this. Mike Pettine: "I lose a lot of respect for guys who cheat." Ha. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/08/mike-pettine-on-tom-brady-i-lose-a-lot-of-respect-for-guys-who-cheat/
The Wiz Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 This is the stuff that's so great about this. Mike Pettine: "I lose a lot of respect for guys who cheat." Ha. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/08/mike-pettine-on-tom-brady-i-lose-a-lot-of-respect-for-guys-who-cheat/ I like how the article takes a shot at Farmer being a cheater. Pretty much useless to mention it.
YoloinOhio Posted May 8, 2015 Author Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) This is the stuff that's so great about this. Mike Pettine: "I lose a lot of respect for guys who cheat." Ha. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/08/mike-pettine-on-tom-brady-i-lose-a-lot-of-respect-for-guys-who-cheat/ pettine has zero filter. He's awesome. His answer to why they didn't draft a QB was also hilarious. Edited May 8, 2015 by YoloinOhio
YoloinOhio Posted May 8, 2015 Author Posted May 8, 2015 @mikefreemanNFL: Kolber on Yee: "He sounds awfully optimistic." Polian: "He sounds awfully disingenuous, too." Dayum!
The Wiz Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 @mikefreemanNFL: Kolber on Yee: "He sounds awfully optimistic." Polian: "He sounds awfully disingenuous, too." Dayum! Shoots fired. Polian apparently has a limited filter also.
Go Kiko go Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 It seems the scientists are starting to opine. http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/new-england-patriots-tom-brady-deflategate-scientist-050715 "If he were grading the Wells report like one of his students' papers, however, Syphers says it would have to be an incomplete." I'm curious about your opinion of the bottom line: from all the evidence you have heard, do you believe it is more likely than not that no member of the Patriots organization violated NFL rules?
Rubes Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 This is going to be fascinating. If Goodell doesn't come down hard on the Pats**, there will be a very loud outcry from the masses. Not to mention that it would be quite hypocritical, given his past statements about integrity and punishment. If he does come down hard on the Pats**, there is going to be an angry outcry from the Pats** organization, particularly from Kraft. There will be challenges, appeals, many defiant and angry words. And who knows what that would mean to the relationship between Goodell and Kraft. Either way, that's a ****-storm the NFL really doesn't want on its hands. It's going to have one or the other, it seems.
The Wiz Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 This is going to be fascinating. If Goodell doesn't come down hard on the Pats**, there will be a very loud outcry from the masses. Not to mention that it would be quite hypocritical, given his past statements about integrity and punishment. If he does come down hard on the Pats**, there is going to be an angry outcry from the Pats** organization, particularly from Kraft. There will be challenges, appeals, many defiant and angry words. And who knows what that would mean to the relationship between Goodell and Kraft. Either way, that's a ****-storm the NFL really doesn't want on its hands. It's going to have one or the other, it seems. Well he's either going to piss off 1 fan base, team, owner or piss off 31 fan bases, teams, owners.
May Day 10 Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 This is going to be fascinating. If Goodell doesn't come down hard on the Pats**, there will be a very loud outcry from the masses. Not to mention that it would be quite hypocritical, given his past statements about integrity and punishment. If he does come down hard on the Pats**, there is going to be an angry outcry from the Pats** organization, particularly from Kraft. There will be challenges, appeals, many defiant and angry words. And who knows what that would mean to the relationship between Goodell and Kraft. Either way, that's a ****-storm the NFL really doesn't want on its hands. It's going to have one or the other, it seems. no no. this is their agenda. they wanted this
Captain Hindsight Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 no no. this is their agenda. they wanted this Yes of course #framegate
sodbuster Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) This is going to be fascinating. If Goodell doesn't come down hard on the Pats**, there will be a very loud outcry from the masses. Not to mention that it would be quite hypocritical, given his past statements about integrity and punishment. If he does come down hard on the Pats**, there is going to be an angry outcry from the Pats** organization, particularly from Kraft. There will be challenges, appeals, many defiant and angry words. And who knows what that would mean to the relationship between Goodell and Kraft. Either way, that's a ****-storm the NFL really doesn't want on its hands. It's going to have one or the other, it seems. Also, if they come down too hard on the Pats*, people might see that as proof that the original transgression WAS a big influence in the games last season and might question the Pats* successful season. Like, if they felt like it was enough of an issue to suspend him for an entire season (I don't think they do, but this whole debate is speculative) people could argue it was enough to strip their title. Edited May 8, 2015 by sodbuster
The Wiz Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 Also, if they come down too hard on the Pats*, people might see that as proof that the original transgression WAS a big influence in the games last season and might question the Pats* successful season. Like, if they felt like it was enough of an issue to suspend him for an entire season (I don't think they do, but this whole debate is speculative) people could argue it was enough to strip their title. I don't think they will give him more than 8 games. And to be honest and unbiased, I think that would be a harsh suspension. However, it would set the tone for anyone else that ever though about cheating.
sodbuster Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 I don't think they will give him more than 8 games. And to be honest and unbiased, I think that would be a harsh suspension. However, it would set the tone for anyone else that ever though about cheating.I really don't think he should get any more than two games for the actual infraction, but I have no idea how the league feels about his stubbornness regarding the investigation. That's the real wildcard here, and in my opinion, Roger needs to be very clear about how much that unhelpfulness went into his decision, in order to avoid questions about their title.
GottaRun Posted May 8, 2015 Posted May 8, 2015 I for one do not think that Spygate nor Deflategate helped the Patriots that much if at all as far as winning. I know others do. But this is really the best part of the whole deal. That it is up for argument. And you're right about the Pats fans. It's hysterical. These are just the places they were caught cheating. I wonder what they've gotten away with? Something tells me that 30 years from now a fat balding Brady will be telling us all about the different tactics that were missed.
Recommended Posts