The Washington Post nails deflate gate yet again...must read.

[handicappers]

<Sigh> I'm starting to look back fondly on the off season threads on Brett Farve.
Can we let it go and just wait and see how it all pans out?

Not a chance. Have you seen how many threads about Brady are on here. I rolled the dice and just picked one.

On a side note, Rae Carruth gets out of prison in 3 years.

 

[Payton]

Yet somehow Goodell found Brady guilty of lack of cooperation and willful destruction of evidence on appeal, all because he upgraded to an iPhone 6?

Seriously, homer?

He upgraded that day?

And happened to, not just retire, but destroy his old phone?

That startling coincidence is somehow lost on you?

 

[Rock Strongo]

Seriously, homer?

He upgraded that day?

And happened to, not just retire, but destroy his old phone?

That startling coincidence is somehow lost on you?

what size is your tin foil hat?

 

[Payton]

<Sigh> I'm starting to look back fondly on the off season threads on Brett Farve.
Can we let it go and just wait and see how it all pans out?

I'm game...

...But might want to remind your compadres that starting a (wishful) "Drop the Mic, The Washington Post Has Fully Exhonerated Tom Brady!!!" thread is going to get comments.

 

[handicappers]

Seriously, homer?

He upgraded that day?

And happened to, not just retire, but destroy his old phone?

That startling coincidence is somehow lost on you?

I have nearly every cell phone I've ever owned. Not once did I think "hey, the responsible and sensible way to discard my old phone is to smash the shit out of it".

 

[Payton]

what size is your tin foil hat?

Seriously? It's Pat Fans that have been beating the "Conspiracy Theory" drum during this entire thing...

And just to help you along, destroying a cellphone on the day he was to testify isn't a freaking 'X Files' episode. It bears remarkable resemblance to purposeful destruction of evidence.

 

[handicappers]

what size is your tin foil hat?

Why are you getting defensive?

 

[handicappers]

Seriously? It's Pat Fans that have been beating the "Conspiracy Theory" drum during this entire thing...

And just to help you along, destroying a cellphone on the day he was to testify isn't a freaking 'X Files' episode. It bears remarkable resemblance to purposeful destruction of evidence.

That's the logical conclusion. We are trying to run with the "way out there" conspiracy theory here. You know, the "it's Rogers fault" theory.

 

[Rock Strongo]

Why are you getting defensive?

i'm not.

 

[Rock Strongo]

That's the logical conclusion. We are trying to run with the "way out there" conspiracy theory here. You know, the "it's Rogers fault" theory.

im not saying that.

 

[Money]

I'm saying.... Why quote a Wikipedia article? I hate that site, that's all I am saying.

A. It's a bio (not an article). Where else are you going to go for a quick glance at who someone is.

B. I later posted the Washington Post article she wrote confirming what Wiki had on her.

I'm simply not overly impressed by an article written in defense of Brady by someone who is a staunch Lance Armstrong defender (to this very day). Are you a big Armstrong fan as well???

 

[redseat]

A. It's a bio (not an article). Where else are you going to go for a quick glance at who someone is.

B. I later posted the Washington Post article she wrote confirming what Wiki had on her.

I'm simply not overly impressed by an article written in defense of Brady by someone who is a staunch Lance Armstrong defender (to this very day). Are you a big Armstrong fan as well???

Right... I don't like how people use wikepedia to "show" proof because anyone writes for that site... The Washignton Post article is good and is a reputable site.

I get that you were trying to make her sound dumb (which she is). I wasn't commenting on any of that.. Simply stating Wikepedia sucks... That's all.

 

[Rock Strongo]

A. It's a bio (not an article). Where else are you going to go for a quick glance at who someone is.

B. I later posted the Washington Post article she wrote confirming what Wiki had on her.

I'm simply not overly impressed by an article written in defense of Brady by someone who is a staunch Lance Armstrong defender (to this very day). Are you a big Armstrong fan as well???

that has nothing to do with john dowd.

 

[Money]

that has nothing to do with john dowd.

Would you like to state why everyone should take John Dowd more seriously than countless others? Why is he the expert of all experts and why should his opinion be taken as gold while countless others are discredited (other than, of course, that it fits your agenda)?

 

[Money]

that has nothing to do with john dowd.

Also...can you provide something written by John Dowd on the topic at hand. That would be much more credible than something cherry picked and spun around by and staunch Lance Armstrong supporter.

 

[PolarVortex]

There are journalists who should be given raises over Deflategate, and others who should be fired. But leaving "attack the source" posts aside, what is it people make of the substance of the arguments? When you are about which journalist said what, you are taking the discussion into the realm of the irrelevant.

The detailed AEI takedown of the Wells report, of which the NFL's ruling this week shockingly said NOTHING, is what should be discussed. Instead, every thread I read everywhere is like a bunch of teenagers arguing about which student paper chick is the hottest.

FIRE ROGER GOODELL. NOW.

I seriouly doubt the the NFLPA will sign another collective bargaining agreement as long as Goodell is in office.

 

[Rock Strongo]

Would you like to state why everyone should take John Dowd more seriously than countless others? Why is he the expert of all experts and why should his opinion be taken as gold while countless others are discredited (other than, of course, that it fits your agenda)?

because he actually banned an all time great from a sport. these other people, frankly, havent.

ive seen like 300 people make pete rose references with brady.

 

[Rock Strongo]

Also...can you provide something written by John Dowd on the topic at hand. That would be much more credible than something cherry picked and spun around by and staunch Lance Armstrong supporter.

why?

my opening post has his words already.

I'll hold your hand, yet again...


Watching this case closely and curiously is John Dowd, the special counsel who conducted Major League Baseball’s investigation into Pete Rose and got him banned from the game. As a neutral observer, Dowd finds the abuse of process in DeflateGate to be the real scandal. “I still don’t know what this is about. . . . Like ‘Seinfeld,’ this is about nothing,” he said in an e-mail. He called Goodell’s ruling against Brady based on a sudden issue over Brady’s cellphone “an ambush,” and added, “The entire NFL disciplinary process lacks integrity and fairness.”

 

[Money]

why?

my opening post has his words already.

I'll hold your hand, yet again...


Watching this case closely and curiously is John Dowd, the special counsel who conducted Major League Baseball’s investigation into Pete Rose and got him banned from the game. As a neutral observer, Dowd finds the abuse of process in DeflateGate to be the real scandal. “I still don’t know what this is about. . . . Like ‘Seinfeld,’ this is about nothing,” he said in an e-mail. He called Goodell’s ruling against Brady based on a sudden issue over Brady’s cellphone “an ambush,” and added, “The entire NFL disciplinary process lacks integrity and fairness.”

Yes...people's words and quotes are never presented out of context in articles written by a columnist given their biased opinion. Is this all that he has said on the topic?

I'd like to know what the "..." was.

BTW...he said this in an email? To who? The columnist? Where is the entire email?

 

[Money]

because he actually banned an all time great from a sport. these other people, frankly, havent.

ive seen like 300 people make pete rose references with brady.

Awesome. Has he done anything since 1989?