quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

Shocking...

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter 10m10 minutes ago
And Johnny Manziel suspended first four games of season for violations of substances of abuse.

Shocking... that it's only 4 games?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I didn't know Manziel was even on an NFL roster

He's not.

How can he be suspended when he isn't even employed?

I imagine this is done so teams are aware of it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kurt bilben

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

Shocking...

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter 10m10 minutes ago
And Johnny Manziel suspended first four games of season for violations of substances of abuse.

Shocking... that it's only 4 games?

Yikes, could you imagine if we'd followed the suggestion of some "Lil" guys in here that know all about Quarterbacking, and who will be good, and who most definitely won't like Teddy, and selected Johnny Dumpster fire?

We'd be back in the Josh Freeman sweepstakes...(Cue Sammy's Freeman video)

quote:

ORIGINAL: drviking

suck on that brady!!

http://www.ksfy.com/content/news/Tom-Bradys-Deflategate-appeal-rejected-by-federal-court-386656441.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

All the ruling means is that, yes, the CBA gives Goodell the power to suspend players without any regard for facts. The NFL can't even demonstrate that the crime was committed - the Wells report is so poorly conducted that it's impossible to use to say that any balls were ever deflated by anything other than nature, and experiment after experiment carried out in collegiate physics departments across the country demonstrates that the conditions alone are enough to explain any deflation that occurred.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

All the ruling means is that, yes, the CBA gives Goodell the power to suspend players without any regard for facts. The NFL can't even demonstrate that the crime was committed - the Wells report is so poorly conducted that it's impossible to use to say that any balls were ever deflated by anything other than nature, and experiment after experiment carried out in collegiate physics departments across the country demonstrates that the conditions alone are enough to explain any deflation that occurred.

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way? Is it possible you are only listening to one side of the argument and ignoring the other. So far what I have read leads me to believe that some tampering did occur, however I'm not going to state that as if it is a fact.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

All the ruling means is that, yes, the CBA gives Goodell the power to suspend players without any regard for facts. The NFL can't even demonstrate that the crime was committed - the Wells report is so poorly conducted that it's impossible to use to say that any balls were ever deflated by anything other than nature, and experiment after experiment carried out in collegiate physics departments across the country demonstrates that the conditions alone are enough to explain any deflation that occurred.

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way? Is it possible you are only listening to one side of the argument and ignoring the other. So far what I have read leads me to believe that some tampering did occur, however I'm not going to state that as if it is a fact.

There's no PROOF that tampering occurred, even if there might be some things that make you go "HMMMMMM".

The Ruling is basically that the NFL and NFLPA have a CBA and in that CBA the NFLPA gives the NFL broad powers to discipline players that they think need disciplining.

No matter what you think of the Brady case, the ruling is that Brady can't deny their judgement because the CBA allows it, and has a process in place for arbitration if the player objects.

Now they need to find independent arbitrators...yes. When the commish can just appoint a loyal underling to "arbitrate" it really doesn't seem like a fair trial etc.

As for the balls, the league easily could have resolved the entire thing by taking the balls out of the team's control.

quote:

ORIGINAL: drviking

Jason La Canfora
✔
@JasonLaCanfora

Von Miller has agreed to terms with the Broncos. Done deal

quote:

ORIGINAL: drviking

Jason La Canfora
✔
@JasonLaCanfora

Von Miller has agreed to terms with the Broncos. Done deal

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

All the ruling means is that, yes, the CBA gives Goodell the power to suspend players without any regard for facts. The NFL can't even demonstrate that the crime was committed - the Wells report is so poorly conducted that it's impossible to use to say that any balls were ever deflated by anything other than nature, and experiment after experiment carried out in collegiate physics departments across the country demonstrates that the conditions alone are enough to explain any deflation that occurred.

On the other side I hear people like El Duderino claiming PROOF that no tampering occurred.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

All the ruling means is that, yes, the CBA gives Goodell the power to suspend players without any regard for facts. The NFL can't even demonstrate that the crime was committed - the Wells report is so poorly conducted that it's impossible to use to say that any balls were ever deflated by anything other than nature, and experiment after experiment carried out in collegiate physics departments across the country demonstrates that the conditions alone are enough to explain any deflation that occurred.

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way? Is it possible you are only listening to one side of the argument and ignoring the other. So far what I have read leads me to believe that some tampering did occur, however I'm not going to state that as if it is a fact.

There's no PROOF that tampering occurred, even if there might be some things that make you go "HMMMMMM".

The Ruling is basically that the NFL and NFLPA have a CBA and in that CBA the NFLPA gives the NFL broad powers to discipline players that they think need disciplining.

No matter what you think of the Brady case, the ruling is that Brady can't deny their judgement because the CBA allows it, and has a process in place for arbitration if the player objects.

Now they need to find independent arbitrators...yes. When the commish can just appoint a loyal underling to "arbitrate" it really doesn't seem like a fair trial etc.

As for the balls, the league easily could have resolved the entire thing by taking the balls out of the team's control.

Understood there is no PROOF that tampering occurred. On the other side I hear people like El Duderino claiming PROOF that no tampering occurred. I haven't looked into it hard core, but if PROOF exists that no tampering occurred I would think the NFL would have already sided with Brady and the Patriots and let it go. I question this PROOF that no tampering occurred.

I totally agree with you Scott that game balls should have never been left in control of the teams.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way?

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way?

Absolutely. I have a very strong pro-justice bias, and it drives me crazy to see the legal system abused by people with ill intent. I also have a pretty strong pro-science bias, so I have a real hard time with the fact that so many people don't actually look into the details of the league's report with any sort of critical thinking. My wife is a scientist, and doesn't give a crap about football (though she likes the Vikings to win so I'm not crabby) and even less of one about the Patriots in particular. She took one look at that report and said that it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. The "science" didn't include a control group, didn't include consistent testing procedures, and is not reproducible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

All the ruling means is that, yes, the CBA gives Goodell the power to suspend players without any regard for facts. The NFL can't even demonstrate that the crime was committed - the Wells report is so poorly conducted that it's impossible to use to say that any balls were ever deflated by anything other than nature, and experiment after experiment carried out in collegiate physics departments across the country demonstrates that the conditions alone are enough to explain any deflation that occurred.

On the other side I hear people like El Duderino claiming PROOF that no tampering occurred.

I didn't claim there was proof that no tampering occured. My quote is right there, no need to make shit up. But whether there is proof that no tampering occurred doesn't really matter, given that there is no actual evidence that it DID occur.

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way?

Absolutely. I have a very strong pro-justice bias, and it drives me crazy to see the legal system abused by people with ill intent. I also have a pretty strong pro-science bias, so I have a real hard time with the fact that so many people don't actually look into the details of the league's report with any sort of critical thinking. My wife is a scientist, and doesn't give a crap about football (though she likes the Vikings to win so I'm not crabby) and even less of one about the Patriots in particular. She took one look at that report and said that it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. The "science" didn't include a control group, didn't include consistent testing procedures, and is not reproducible.

Throw in the fact that the firm that did the "science" is a firm that has a history of producing reports that are scientifically questionable, but just so happen to support their clients' positions, and the fact that reputable scientists from places like MIT, UC Berkely, University of Michigan, USC, Stanford, Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, and even the University of Minnesota all agree that the conditions were sufficient to explain the deflation, and for the life of me the only reason I can see why anyone DOESN'T think the whole thing is bullshit is if they haven't looked into it, or if their dislike of the Patriots is so strong that they simply don't care what the facts are. I'm going to put you in column A.

Take a look at the Amicus brief filed by 21 physicists and engineers included in this story. I can't guarantee that you'll be convinced, but it is a lot more convincing than the Wells report.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/21-scientists-say-tom-brady-is-right-and-the-nfl-is-wrong_us_5745fb9ce4b0dacf7ad3c55d

But, as TGS astutely points out, the appeal had nothing to do with the science, and was only about whether or not Goodell has the power to impose punishment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

All the ruling means is that, yes, the CBA gives Goodell the power to suspend players without any regard for facts. The NFL can't even demonstrate that the crime was committed - the Wells report is so poorly conducted that it's impossible to use to say that any balls were ever deflated by anything other than nature, and experiment after experiment carried out in collegiate physics departments across the country demonstrates that the conditions alone are enough to explain any deflation that occurred.

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way? Is it possible you are only listening to one side of the argument and ignoring the other. So far what I have read leads me to believe that some tampering did occur, however I'm not going to state that as if it is a fact.

There's no PROOF that tampering occurred, even if there might be some things that make you go "HMMMMMM".

The Ruling is basically that the NFL and NFLPA have a CBA and in that CBA the NFLPA gives the NFL broad powers to discipline players that they think need disciplining.

No matter what you think of the Brady case, the ruling is that Brady can't deny their judgement because the CBA allows it, and has a process in place for arbitration if the player objects.

Now they need to find independent arbitrators...yes. When the commish can just appoint a loyal underling to "arbitrate" it really doesn't seem like a fair trial etc.

As for the balls, the league easily could have resolved the entire thing by taking the balls out of the team's control.

Understood there is no PROOF that tampering occurred. On the other side I hear people like El Duderino claiming PROOF that no tampering occurred. I haven't looked into it hard core, but if PROOF exists that no tampering occurred I would think the NFL would have already sided with Brady and the Patriots and let it go. I question this PROOF that no tampering occurred.

I totally agree with you Scott that game balls should have never been left in control of the teams.

You REALLY need to rethink that.

There is a difference between "no proof that it happened" and "proof that it didn't happen".

And it's not a subtle difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way?

Absolutely. I have a very strong pro-justice bias, and it drives me crazy to see the legal system abused by people with ill intent. I also have a pretty strong pro-science bias, so I have a real hard time with the fact that so many people don't actually look into the details of the league's report with any sort of critical thinking. My wife is a scientist, and doesn't give a crap about football (though she likes the Vikings to win so I'm not crabby) and even less of one about the Patriots in particular. She took one look at that report and said that it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. The "science" didn't include a control group, didn't include consistent testing procedures, and is not reproducible.

Throw in the fact that the firm that did the "science" is a firm that has a history of producing reports that are scientifically questionable, but just so happen to support their clients' positions, and the fact that reputable scientists from places like MIT, UC Berkely, University of Michigan, USC, Stanford, Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, and even the University of Minnesota all agree that the conditions were sufficient to explain the deflation, and for the life of me the only reason I can see why anyone DOESN'T think the whole thing is bullshit is if they haven't looked into it, or if their dislike of the Patriots is so strong that they simply don't care what the facts are. I'm going to put you in column A.

Take a look at the Amicus brief filed by 21 physicists and engineers included in this story. I can't guarantee that you'll be convinced, but it is a lot more convincing than the Wells report.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/21-scientists-say-tom-brady-is-right-and-the-nfl-is-wrong_us_5745fb9ce4b0dacf7ad3c55d

But, as TGS astutely points out, the appeal had nothing to do with the science, and was only about whether or not Goodell has the power to impose punishment.

Dude I have looked into it and to this point what I have seen leads me to believe some tampering occurred. So I have looked into it and feel that way so I am not column A.
It is possible that if I continue to look into it further that I will change my opinion to that of no tampering occurred. I don't believe your second column fits me either.
I'm a person who typically doesn't just take they or somebody or whatever somebody is claiming as proof, because I think everyone has an agenda. That is why at this point in time I don't think either side has proven much of anything.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way?

Absolutely. I have a very strong pro-justice bias, and it drives me crazy to see the legal system abused by people with ill intent. I also have a pretty strong pro-science bias, so I have a real hard time with the fact that so many people don't actually look into the details of the league's report with any sort of critical thinking. My wife is a scientist, and doesn't give a crap about football (though she likes the Vikings to win so I'm not crabby) and even less of one about the Patriots in particular. She took one look at that report and said that it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. The "science" didn't include a control group, didn't include consistent testing procedures, and is not reproducible.

Throw in the fact that the firm that did the "science" is a firm that has a history of producing reports that are scientifically questionable, but just so happen to support their clients' positions, and the fact that reputable scientists from places like MIT, UC Berkely, University of Michigan, USC, Stanford, Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, and even the University of Minnesota all agree that the conditions were sufficient to explain the deflation, and for the life of me the only reason I can see why anyone DOESN'T think the whole thing is bullshit is if they haven't looked into it, or if their dislike of the Patriots is so strong that they simply don't care what the facts are. I'm going to put you in column A.

Take a look at the Amicus brief filed by 21 physicists and engineers included in this story. I can't guarantee that you'll be convinced, but it is a lot more convincing than the Wells report.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/21-scientists-say-tom-brady-is-right-and-the-nfl-is-wrong_us_5745fb9ce4b0dacf7ad3c55d

But, as TGS astutely points out, the appeal had nothing to do with the science, and was only about whether or not Goodell has the power to impose punishment.

Dude I have looked into it and to this point what I have seen leads me to believe some tampering occurred. So I have looked into it and feel that way so I am not column A.
It is possible that if I continue to look into it further that I will change my opinion to that of no tampering occurred. I don't believe your second column fits me either.
I'm a person who typically doesn't just take they or somebody or whatever somebody is claiming as proof, because I think everyone has an agenda. That is why at this point in time I don't think either side has proven much of anything.

You'll note that the Dude never makes a claim that no tampering occurred. Just that there was no proof that tampering occurred.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way?

Absolutely. I have a very strong pro-justice bias, and it drives me crazy to see the legal system abused by people with ill intent. I also have a pretty strong pro-science bias, so I have a real hard time with the fact that so many people don't actually look into the details of the league's report with any sort of critical thinking. My wife is a scientist, and doesn't give a crap about football (though she likes the Vikings to win so I'm not crabby) and even less of one about the Patriots in particular. She took one look at that report and said that it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. The "science" didn't include a control group, didn't include consistent testing procedures, and is not reproducible.

Throw in the fact that the firm that did the "science" is a firm that has a history of producing reports that are scientifically questionable, but just so happen to support their clients' positions, and the fact that reputable scientists from places like MIT, UC Berkely, University of Michigan, USC, Stanford, Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, and even the University of Minnesota all agree that the conditions were sufficient to explain the deflation, and for the life of me the only reason I can see why anyone DOESN'T think the whole thing is bullshit is if they haven't looked into it, or if their dislike of the Patriots is so strong that they simply don't care what the facts are. I'm going to put you in column A.

Take a look at the Amicus brief filed by 21 physicists and engineers included in this story. I can't guarantee that you'll be convinced, but it is a lot more convincing than the Wells report.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/21-scientists-say-tom-brady-is-right-and-the-nfl-is-wrong_us_5745fb9ce4b0dacf7ad3c55d

But, as TGS astutely points out, the appeal had nothing to do with the science, and was only about whether or not Goodell has the power to impose punishment.

Dude I have looked into it and to this point what I have seen leads me to believe some tampering occurred. So I have looked into it and feel that way so I am not column A.
It is possible that if I continue to look into it further that I will change my opinion to that of no tampering occurred. I don't believe your second column fits me either.
I'm a person who typically doesn't just take they or somebody or whatever somebody is claiming as proof, because I think everyone has an agenda. That is why at this point in time I don't think either side has proven much of anything.

You'll note that the Dude never makes a claim that no tampering occurred. Just that there was no proof that tampering occurred.

He does make a claim that everyone should recognize it is bullshit Big O. As I stated to me that goes way beyond just saying their is no proof that it happened.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way?

Absolutely. I have a very strong pro-justice bias, and it drives me crazy to see the legal system abused by people with ill intent. I also have a pretty strong pro-science bias, so I have a real hard time with the fact that so many people don't actually look into the details of the league's report with any sort of critical thinking. My wife is a scientist, and doesn't give a crap about football (though she likes the Vikings to win so I'm not crabby) and even less of one about the Patriots in particular. She took one look at that report and said that it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. The "science" didn't include a control group, didn't include consistent testing procedures, and is not reproducible.

Throw in the fact that the firm that did the "science" is a firm that has a history of producing reports that are scientifically questionable, but just so happen to support their clients' positions, and the fact that reputable scientists from places like MIT, UC Berkely, University of Michigan, USC, Stanford, Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, and even the University of Minnesota all agree that the conditions were sufficient to explain the deflation, and for the life of me the only reason I can see why anyone DOESN'T think the whole thing is bullshit is if they haven't looked into it, or if their dislike of the Patriots is so strong that they simply don't care what the facts are. I'm going to put you in column A.

Take a look at the Amicus brief filed by 21 physicists and engineers included in this story. I can't guarantee that you'll be convinced, but it is a lot more convincing than the Wells report.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/21-scientists-say-tom-brady-is-right-and-the-nfl-is-wrong_us_5745fb9ce4b0dacf7ad3c55d

But, as TGS astutely points out, the appeal had nothing to do with the science, and was only about whether or not Goodell has the power to impose punishment.

Dude I have looked into it and to this point what I have seen leads me to believe some tampering occurred. So I have looked into it and feel that way so I am not column A.
It is possible that if I continue to look into it further that I will change my opinion to that of no tampering occurred. I don't believe your second column fits me either.
I'm a person who typically doesn't just take they or somebody or whatever somebody is claiming as proof, because I think everyone has an agenda. That is why at this point in time I don't think either side has proven much of anything.

You'll note that the Dude never makes a claim that no tampering occurred. Just that there was no proof that tampering occurred.

He does make a claim that everyone should recognize it is bullshit Big O. As I stated to me that goes way beyond just saying their is no proof that it happened.

Even you just said NO ONE HAS PROVEN MUCH OF ANYTHING! Yet your good with Brady being suspended.

Pretty sure that makes you unable to recognize bullshit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Duderino

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Dude you aren't biased about this in any way?

Absolutely. I have a very strong pro-justice bias, and it drives me crazy to see the legal system abused by people with ill intent. I also have a pretty strong pro-science bias, so I have a real hard time with the fact that so many people don't actually look into the details of the league's report with any sort of critical thinking. My wife is a scientist, and doesn't give a crap about football (though she likes the Vikings to win so I'm not crabby) and even less of one about the Patriots in particular. She took one look at that report and said that it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. The "science" didn't include a control group, didn't include consistent testing procedures, and is not reproducible.

Throw in the fact that the firm that did the "science" is a firm that has a history of producing reports that are scientifically questionable, but just so happen to support their clients' positions, and the fact that reputable scientists from places like MIT, UC Berkely, University of Michigan, USC, Stanford, Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, and even the University of Minnesota all agree that the conditions were sufficient to explain the deflation, and for the life of me the only reason I can see why anyone DOESN'T think the whole thing is bullshit is if they haven't looked into it, or if their dislike of the Patriots is so strong that they simply don't care what the facts are. I'm going to put you in column A.

Take a look at the Amicus brief filed by 21 physicists and engineers included in this story. I can't guarantee that you'll be convinced, but it is a lot more convincing than the Wells report.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/21-scientists-say-tom-brady-is-right-and-the-nfl-is-wrong_us_5745fb9ce4b0dacf7ad3c55d

But, as TGS astutely points out, the appeal had nothing to do with the science, and was only about whether or not Goodell has the power to impose punishment.

Dude I have looked into it and to this point what I have seen leads me to believe some tampering occurred. So I have looked into it and feel that way so I am not column A.
It is possible that if I continue to look into it further that I will change my opinion to that of no tampering occurred. I don't believe your second column fits me either.
I'm a person who typically doesn't just take they or somebody or whatever somebody is claiming as proof, because I think everyone has an agenda. That is why at this point in time I don't think either side has proven much of anything.

You'll note that the Dude never makes a claim that no tampering occurred. Just that there was no proof that tampering occurred.

He does make a claim that everyone should recognize it is bullshit Big O. As I stated to me that goes way beyond just saying their is no proof that it happened.

Even you just said NO ONE HAS PROVEN MUCH OF ANYTHING! Yet your good with Brady being suspended.

Pretty sure that makes you unable to recognize bullshit.

I already stated that the nfl doesn't have to prove anything. If they believe it happened IMO they need to take action.