Ridiculous - Brady suspended & a 1st rounder docked.

Ass Dan wrote:Now if you'll excuse me, I gotta go put some water in steveschneider's momma's dish

steveschneider wrote:

Ass Dan wrote:Now if you'll excuse me, I gotta go put some water in steveschneider's momma's dish

If I ever meet you at a tailgate I'm going to spit a mouth full of beer right in your face.

LooseGoose wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

If I ever meet you at a tailgate I'm going to spit a mouth full of beer right in your face.

The love on this board is heartwarming.

steveschneider wrote:

Ass Dan wrote:Now if you'll excuse me, I gotta go put some water in steveschneider's momma's dish

If I ever meet you at a tailgate I'm going to spit a mouth full of beer right in your face.

Ass Dan wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

If I ever meet you at a tailgate I'm going to spit a mouth full of beer right in your face.

You don't have the balls.

We agree with the Wells Report on DeflateGate commissioned by the NFL after the AFC title game between the Colts and Patriots: it's "more probable than not" that Tom Brady was aware of inappropriate handling of Patriots footballs. If guilty, he should be punished.

Regardless, here's the story you don't hear: officials found both at halftime and after the AFC title clash that, to steal a weak phrase, "it's more more probable than not" that the Colts played the entire game with under-inflated footballs.

That's not OUR interpretation. Those findings of likely under-inflation are straight from the report.

As you no doubt now know, NFL game balls are supposed to be inflated between 12.5 and 13.5 PSI. As part of the NFL's sting operation to catch the Patriots playing with under-inflated footballs, game officials at half time checked the PSI of 11 Patriots footballs.

All 11 came in under 12.5 PSI. Some way under 12.5 PSI. But you already knew that.

Here's the other story uncovered in the Wells Report you've NOT been told: 3 of 4 Colts footballs checked at halftime weighed in under 12.5 PSI by one of the two officials measuring them. Then, they suddenly stopped checking. The other 8 Colts footballs simply, and conveniently, went unchecked.

But here's the point: it's impossible to argue that allegedly deflated footballs gave the Patriots a competitive advantage when it was the Colts, not the Patriots, who might have played most of the game with balls below the almighty 12.5 PSI. The Patriots played only one half with under-inflated balls.

Keep in mind, all this idiociy and outrage over a pound or two of PSI in a football came during a game in which the Patriots humiliated the Colts 45-7, no matter which team's footballs were over- or under-inflated.

And in the six quarters of football that followed the NFL's awkward halftime sting in the AFC title game, the Patriots outscored the powerhouse Colts and defending champ Seahawks by a combined score of 56-24, while produding the greatest fourth-quarter comeback in Super Bowl history.

The Wells Report simply proves that the Patriots were better than the Colts and the Seahwaks no matter the PSI of the balls on the field.

And that's pretty deflating for those fans and teams who have whipped this idiocy into a national scandal.

Vlad wrote:The reputational damage is done.  Pats and UM fans will always stand behind him, and the rest will always view him as a cheater.

Time to move on. On legal grounds the NFL's case was very weak, so not a huge surprise.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

The Pantry wrote:ESPN said yesterday the Pats would appeal

might very well win an appeal.

Vlad wrote:The reputational damage is done.  Pats and UM fans will always stand behind him, and the rest will always view him as a cheater.

Time to move on. On legal grounds the NFL's case was very weak, so not a huge surprise.

InTenSity wrote:

Vlad wrote:The reputational damage is done.  Pats and UM fans will always stand behind him, and the rest will always view him as a cheater.

Time to move on. On legal grounds the NFL's case was very weak, so not a huge surprise.

BTW, it only took me about 15 seconds to find this thread, and then hit reply. Probably would've taken longer to start my own thread, but thought this one was pretty relevant.

Vlad wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
BTW, it only took me about 15 seconds to find this thread, and then hit reply. Probably would've taken longer to start my own thread, but thought this one was pretty relevant.

Will try to keep that in mind next time, although I don't make any promises.

Sheesh, people really take this message board stuff seriously...Ironic, since most threads on ANY board are absolute trash to begin with, yet we need to search through them out of fear that we might start one too many threads and make InTenSity angry.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Vlad wrote:
Will try to keep that in mind next time, although I don't make any promises.

Sheesh, people really take this message board stuff seriously...Ironic, since most threads on ANY board are absolute trash to begin with, yet we need to search through them out of fear that we might start one too many threads and make InTenSity angry.

Vlad, you can start any thread you like here. 

Vlad wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
BTW, it only took me about 15 seconds to find this thread, and then hit reply. Probably would've taken longer to start my own thread, but thought this one was pretty relevant.

Will try to keep that in mind next time, although I don't make any promises.

Sheesh, people really take this message board stuff seriously...Ironic, since most threads on ANY board are absolute trash to begin with, yet we need to search through them out of fear that we might start one too many threads and make InTenSity angry.

InTenSity wrote:

Vlad wrote:
Will try to keep that in mind next time, although I don't make any promises.

Sheesh, people really take this message board stuff seriously...Ironic, since most threads on ANY board are absolute trash to begin with, yet we need to search through them out of fear that we might start one too many threads and make InTenSity angry.

I just don't see the need to talk about the same topic in 3 threads that are already on the first page, that's all. My 3 year old even understands this.

Vlad wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
I just don't see the need to talk about the same topic in 3 threads that are already on the first page, that's all. My 3 year old even understands this.

That's fair.  And I don't see the need to post in threads that you find repetitious.  Even my 2 year old (dog) understands this.

If I offend you by starting a repeat thread, just move on to the next garbage thread. Hey, did you know that the power is out in EL?

InTenSity wrote:

Vlad wrote:
That's fair.  And I don't see the need to post in threads that you find repetitious.  Even my 2 year old (dog) understands this.

If I offend you by starting a repeat thread, just move on to the next garbage thread. Hey, did you know that the power is out in EL?

What's so hard about continuing the conversation in the thread that already exists? That way I only have to stay away from one thread, not three and it doesn't clutter up the front page? The one things mods can do here is merge threads, I wish they'd do it more often.

Vlad wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
What's so hard about continuing the conversation in the thread that already exists? That way I only have to stay away from one thread, not three and it doesn't clutter up the front page? The one things mods can do here is merge threads, I wish they'd do it more often.

So until they start merging more threads, is it your mission to educate the masses on using the search function?

Again, I'd like to suggest that you spend your energy elsewhere.

And you know what, since it means so much to you, let me just tell you why I hate the search function:  BECAUSE AFTER ABOUT THE FIRST 15-20 OR SO RESPONSES, NO THREAD IS WORTH POSTING IN, OR READING.

InTenSity wrote:

Vlad wrote:
So until they start merging more threads, is it your mission to educate the masses on using the search function?

Again, I'd like to suggest that you spend your energy elsewhere.

And you know what, since it means so much to you, let me just tell you why I hate the search function:  BECAUSE AFTER ABOUT THE FIRST 15-20 OR SO RESPONSES, NO THREAD IS WORTH POSTING IN, OR READING.

Look forward to this. I'm on vacation next week, knock yourself out, and I won't notice shit that's going on.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I've said it before but now it's more clear than ever. This whole "controversy" was nothing more than a convenient way for the nfl to stay in the headlines all off-season. Nothing was ever going to impact Brady. It reeks of a WWE style soap opera designed to get you talking about them. And it worked.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I've said it before but now it's more clear than ever. This whole "controversy" was nothing more than a convenient way for the nfl to stay in the headlines all off-season. Nothing was ever going to impact Brady. It reeks of a WWE style soap opera designed to get you talking about them. And it worked.

steveschneider wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I've said it before but now it's more clear than ever. This whole "controversy" was nothing more than a convenient way for the nfl to stay in the headlines all off-season. Nothing was ever going to impact Brady. It reeks of a WWE style soap opera designed to get you talking about them. And it worked.

Not sure the NFL intended to lose in court on purpose to stay in the headlines. This is an embarrassment to Goodell, if his intent was to just stay in the headlines not sure this is how envisioned it going down.

Vlad wrote:

InTenSity wrote:

Look forward to this. I'm on vacation next week, knock yourself out, and I won't notice shit that's going on.

That's too bad because I'm on vacation next week too.  You're not going to Alaska by any chance, are you??  You better f'in not be!!! Don't let me catch you there you little...

Never mind. Have a great time.

steveschneider wrote:http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/tom-brady-gisele-bundchen-marriage-trouble-report-article-1.2345561

Looks like Tom's marriage is on the rocks.

steveschneider wrote:http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/tom-brady-gisele-bundchen-marriage-trouble-report-article-1.2345561

Looks like Tom's marriage is on the rocks.