Malazan Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 If I were a betting guy, I'd say 99% of players will take the money. Careers are short, and the dollars are big - for a while. It's an even shorter window for bone heads. They will vote for top dollar, then try to litigate anything else they might wring out of the big money pool. The CBA is like player contracts....get as many guaranteed dollars as possible. The rest is gravy. The players seem really happy with the current CBA
26CornerBlitz Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 The Bills went 0-2 against the Brady-less pats in 2008. That will mean quite a bit in 2016.
McBeane Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 The Bills went 0-2 against the Brady-less pats in 2008. The Bills went 2-0 against the Brady-less Pats* in 1995. Your point?
FireChan Posted April 26, 2016 Author Posted April 26, 2016 That will mean quite a bit in 2016. It means more than nothing. The Bills went 2-0 against the Brady-less Pats* in 1995. Your point? I think his point was quite obvious. A Bill Belichick coached team shouldn't be slept on.
iinii Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 If Jimmy goes 3-1 the only thing that could stop them would be the wheels coming off Brady. one can only hope
Mr. WEO Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 That will mean quite a bit in 2016. The Bills went 2-0 against the Brady-less Pats* in 1995. Your point? The point was that one poster was mocking another poster for being concerned about facing the Brady-less pats, as though it has never happened, or it happened and the Bills had great success.
The Big Cat Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 The point was that one poster was mocking another poster for being concerned about facing the Brady-less pats, as though it has never happened, or it happened and the Bills had great success. Oh, we fully understood the point you were trying to make. Just because you took a shot at it doesn't make it salient.
quinnearlysghost88 Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 Let me guess. A Bills victory over them will be tainted now? Don't care. They win against us in all sorts of fashions and many times because of our own problems (injuries,penalties, playcalling, etc). They gladly take those wins and move on, and we will too.
Mr. WEO Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 Oh, we fully understood the point you were trying to make. Just because you took a shot at it doesn't make it salient. What shot?
PromoTheRobot Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 (edited) @AdamSchefter Tom Brady not ready to accept court ruling today - far from it, per sources. Mulling options with legal team. But this is not yet over. What a surprise Pats** ballwasher #1 has this scoop. You know what gets me? We beat the Pats with Brady with Fitz once straight up and no one cares. So I don't give a crap if Brady plays or not. Edited April 26, 2016 by PromoTheRobot
FireChan Posted April 26, 2016 Author Posted April 26, 2016 What a surprise Pats** ballwasher #1 has this scoop. It's a Pats conspiracy that the #1 NFL reporter has information on the NFL's #1 star.
PromoTheRobot Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 It's a Pats conspiracy that the #1 NFL reporter has information on the NFL's #1 star.It's a Pats conspiracy that certain members of the media can be relied upon to always deliver sympathic coverage. It wouldn't but Florio is on one, especially with tweets like this; @ProFootballTalk NFL can crow all it wants about Brady, but there was luck of the draw involved. Three judges from 22-judge panel. Narrow 2-1 win for league. 2-1 is narrow?? It's a Pats conspiracy that the #1 NFL reporter has information on the NFL's #1 star.Oh lookee, even Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe thinks there are Patriot media suck ups. Throughout the process, the Patriots unleashed their formidable media cartel (which stretches to Washington and beyond) to recite the gospel of Foxborough
FireChan Posted April 26, 2016 Author Posted April 26, 2016 It's a Pats conspiracy that certain members of the media can be relied upon to always deliver sympathic coverage. 2-1 is narrow?? Oh lookee, even Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe thinks there are Patriot media suck ups. You do realize that Schefty tweeted out the original story, no? Like page 1 post 1? Sympathetic coverage is reaching out to Brady's camp and they say he may fight, he's consulting his legal team?
PromoTheRobot Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 You do realize that Schefty tweeted out the original story, no? Like page 1 post 1? Sympathetic coverage is reaching out to Brady's camp and they say he may fight, he's consulting his legal team? No. Sympathetic coverage is what Jason Cole gave on Jim Rome yesterday. Crying about gas laws and the Wells report while ignoring the NFLPA labor deal that makes Goodell lord over all. And that is what we got from Schefter, Tony Kornheiser, and dozens of other members of Team Brady. Push the outrage, avoid the facts.
papazoid Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 @wallachlegal CA2 en banc stats (2000-2010): 8 cases out of a total of 27,856 completed appeals were reheard en banc (less than 3/100 of 1% of the cases) I don't know why it would take them so long to decide not to rehear it delay, delay, delay NFLPA: No end in sight to fight with NFL over Deflategate This fight may go on so long that Brady is ready to retire before the NFL can finally force him to serve that four-game suspension. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/04/26/nflpa-no-end-in-sight-to-fight-with-nfl-over-deflategate/
BaaadThingsMan Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 The league should just keep *marsha from playing regardless of the status of the case. If it comes out they were wrong send *marsha a fruit basket and a heartfelt apology from The commish. !@#$ that !@#$.
Beerball Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 It means more than nothing. I think his point was quite obvious. A Bill Belichick coached team shouldn't be slept on. Ah, new windmill.
sodbuster Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 No. Sympathetic coverage is what Jason Cole gave on Jim Rome yesterday. Crying about gas laws and the Wells report while ignoring the NFLPA labor deal that makes Goodell lord over all. And that is what we got from Schefter, Tony Kornheiser, and dozens of other members of Team Brady. Push the outrage, avoid the facts.That was pitiful. The crux of his beef was that this has gone on too long, and he blamed the league for that, rather than the man who refuses to take his punishment. Laughable.
Mr. WEO Posted April 26, 2016 Posted April 26, 2016 It's a Pats conspiracy that certain members of the media can be relied upon to always deliver sympathic coverage. So what was "sympathetic" about that Schefter tweet? No. Sympathetic coverage is what Jason Cole gave on Jim Rome yesterday. Crying about gas laws and the Wells report while ignoring the NFLPA labor deal that makes Goodell lord over all. And that is what we got from Schefter, Tony Kornheiser, and dozens of other members of Team Brady. Push the outrage, avoid the facts. So now Goodell's suspension decisions are unimpeachable?
Recommended Posts