MattM Posted May 15, 2016 Posted May 15, 2016 Thanks MGK...I'll take that! Or maybe Papi's wife gets HGH from Charlie Sly... That pitcher started his career in Boston, he juiced on the Yankees. Or maybe Tommy Boy sees more than his old buddy, Alex? Ever wonder who Dr. Galea was visiting in Boston the summer after Tommy's knee injury? I know I certainly wonder about that.... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/05/AR2010060503547.html
Doc Posted May 15, 2016 Posted May 15, 2016 The Cheaters know all about HGH usage. Rodney got busted for it back in 2007. I doubt he brought it with him from SD.
ALF Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 Brady reveals how he trains and can play for more years then other QBs http://www.businessinsider.com/tom-brady-explains-secret-to-playing-football-at-38-2016-5
Mr. WEO Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 The Cheaters know all about HGH usage. Rodney got busted for it back in 2007. I doubt he brought it with him from SD. Not sure which method is less clever: having it mailed to you at your home address or having it mailed to your wife...at your home address. These guys aren't very bright.
4merper4mer Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 The Cheaters know all about HGH usage. Rodney got busted for it back in 2007. I doubt he brought it with him from SD. If he had used it in SD he would have played better there. He was terrible until he got to cheaterville.
Kirby Jackson Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 I haven't read the whole thread but are there still people here that want Brady to play against us like last year? I never really understood that.
eball Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 I haven't read the whole thread but are there still people here that want Brady to play against us like last year? I never really understood that. It's the whole "I want to beat them at their best" philosophy...which is pretty meaningless. I just want Ws.
thebandit27 Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 I haven't read the whole thread but are there still people here that want Brady to play against us like last year? I never really understood that. Right? I don't care how we win; I want to win. If we march all the way to the Superbowl beating 19 backup QBs, that'll suit me just fine. Scoreboard baby.
PromoTheRobot Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 (edited) I haven't read the whole thread but are there still people here that want Brady to play against us like last year? I never really understood that. Right? I don't care how we win; I want to win. If we march all the way to the Superbowl beating 19 backup QBs, that'll suit me just fine. Scoreboard baby. Want proof of how little beating Brady matters? Does anyone care or even remember when the Fitz-led Bills beat Tommy Boy in 2011? 21-point come-from-behind win and and it's forgotten as soon as it happened. Edited May 16, 2016 by PromoTheRobot
Doc Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 Not sure which method is less clever: having it mailed to you at your home address or having it mailed to your wife...at your home address. These guys aren't very bright. Nope.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 16, 2016 Posted May 16, 2016 Brady is like the Trump of the NFL The real question then is"Will Brady be like our next President"? Beyond tapping the supermodels, obviously.
papazoid Posted May 17, 2016 Posted May 17, 2016 Brady could still delay suspension without Second Circuit rehearing http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/05/17/brady-could-still-delay-suspension-without-second-circuit-rehearing/
vincec Posted May 17, 2016 Posted May 17, 2016 Brady could still delay suspension without Second Circuit rehearing http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/05/17/brady-could-still-delay-suspension-without-second-circuit-rehearing/ The US legal system is awesome. By the time Brady's suspension finally kicks in he will be 45 and retired.
K-9 Posted May 17, 2016 Posted May 17, 2016 (edited) If the SCOTUS decides to hear this case, it most likely means that Ted Olson has called in some markers although I can't see him and Ginsberg being sympatico. I'd be surprised if they considered hearing it, regardless, as there is just too much precedent where collectively bargained labor agreements are concerned. Edited May 18, 2016 by K-9
DC Tom Posted May 18, 2016 Posted May 18, 2016 Want proof of how little beating Brady matters? Does anyone care or even remember when the Fitz-led Bills beat Tommy Boy in 2011? 21-point come-from-behind win and and it's forgotten as soon as it happened. I remember. Problem is that it's not just about "beating" Brady. It's about beating Brady. It's about watering the artificial turf at the Ralph with his pansy-ass tears.
Mr. WEO Posted May 18, 2016 Posted May 18, 2016 If the SCOTUS decides to hear this case, it most likely means that Ted Olson has called in some markers although I can't see him and Ginsberg being sympatico. I'd be surprised if they considered hearing it, regardless, as there is just too much precedent where collectively bargained labor agreements are concerned. Maybe the nuttiest take yet. Olson can "call ii" a "marker"---and get the SCOTUS to review a case? It's always worthwhile to keep clicking refresh at this site.
eball Posted May 18, 2016 Posted May 18, 2016 If the SCOTUS elects to hear this case, the terrorists have won.
PromoTheRobot Posted May 18, 2016 Posted May 18, 2016 (edited) I remember. Problem is that it's not just about "beating" Brady. It's about beating Brady. It's about watering the artificial turf at the Ralph with his pansy-ass tears. Oh Tommy had the water works on full that day. Especially after the Florence pick 6. Your reply is a great example of what I'm talking about. We convince ourselves that things we achieve aren't that good and shouldn't count. I expect that will be the case when we make the playoffs. I'm sure there will be excuses to discount it. Edited May 18, 2016 by PromoTheRobot
Recommended Posts