Oliver Sacks
Dropping Like Flies
Wes Craven. :'(
Space wrote:Julian, wrote:RatBastard wrote:I am violently angry that they include a list of some of his trademark dunks and left off the greatest name in the history of names - Turbosexophonic Delight.
Chocolate Thunder
The fact that you get violently angry over so often and over such little things make me thankful for gun control.
Don't you mean people control?
Temple of Bel
ggw wrote:How the owners don't demand he and Wells tender their resignations is beyond me.
Roger Goodell's Authority
I'm not usually a Deadspin guy, but I've been basically saying this for months. It's like Goodell never considered at any point in the last several weeks that they could lose when they pushed all of their chips into the middle of the table for the dumbest. scandal. ever. His hubris is off the charts. This guy is Dave Brandon 2.0.
good for the judge..; it was all bullshit…
It will be very interesting to read the justification by the judge for his ruling. I don't even see where the judge had any standing in the matter at all. ASSUMING that everything was done in accordance with the mutually agreed to CBA, the whole matter should have ended with the commissioner's decision. As it sits now, the judge had told the teams and players that they can do whatever they want whenever they want and not have to answer to anyone.
RatBastard wrote:
It will be very interesting to read tyeh justification by the judge for his ruling. I don't even see where the judge had any standing in the matter at all. ASSUMING that everything was done in accordance with the mutually agreed to CBA, the whole matter should have ended with the commissioner's decision. As it sits now, the judge had told the teams and players that they can do whatever they want whenever they want and not have to answer to anyone.
The judge had no right to arrive at a sensible decision. His job was to ensure King Rog was doing what both parties agreed he should do. And he was. While making millions.
Nuke wrote:
The judge had no right to arrive at a sensible decision.
My hatred for just about all pro sports is well known in these parts
but that this 'not a thing' is such a big THING, astounds me
From a purely business/legal angle, it's quite a precedent that a judge would overrule an internal business decision….or do I have no idea what I'm talking about?
The judge essentially said that Goodell overstepped the bounds of the CBA and that Brady had no way of knowing that he would be subject to a suspension for having a "general awareness" of the misconduct of others (the equipment guy who deflated the balls). There was no precedent for such a punishment.
ggw wrote:
The judge essentially said that Goodell overstepped the bounds of the CBA and that Brady had no way of knowing that he would be subject to a suspension for having a "general awareness" of the misconduct of others (the equipment guy who deflated the balls). There was no precedent for such a punishment.
So in other words it is OK to know about cheating and take advantage of it as long as you do not actively participate in the actual cheating events since it was not written in the CBA that you can't cheat without being penalized. Well we know what views the judge subscribes to.
Rico Rodriguez
RatBastard wrote:I think the judge more subscribes to the belief that there is no evidence cheating occurred in the first place nor that Tom Brady knew anything about it AND EVEN IF THERE WAS AND HE DID the collectively bargained punishment for that is a $25,000 fine not a 4 game suspension.
So in other words it is OK to know about cheating and take advantage of it as long as you do not actively participate in the actual cheating events since it was not written in the CBA that you can't cheat without being penalized. Well we know what views the judge subscribes to.
the judge does not accept that the NFL has the power to do ANYTHING based on the CBA…
there must be reasonable restraints on the NFL's power vis a vis the players..or is anything game? That is the NFLs position..its not that of the NFLPA…they don't believe they signed off on that
there must be reasonable restraints on the NFL's power vis a vis the players..or is anything game? That is the NFLs position..its not that of the NFLPA…they don't believe they signed off on that
Julian, wrote:
I think the judge more subscribes to the belief that there is no evidence cheating occurred in the first place nor that Tom Brady knew anything about it
Your a Michigan fan, right?
Just checking….
The NFL's attorney admitted in open court they had no evidence. This is hardly some insane bias.
Shouldn't this belong in one of your sporting threads? Do we need a Dropping Like Flies - Commentary Thread?