"Not even a good troll. Gullible is right!"So your theory now is that even Sean Payton participated in manufacturing the Bountygate scandal? Do you have any idea how stupid you sound?
Go troll someone else. I see why most people don't pay you any mind now Buctrollious.
I think you might be trying too hard to fit the round peg into a square hole. His comments were for attention not to finger the person he holds liable. The team is the only one who could be liable. Schiano is an agent of the team. Why did Freeman's camp feel they could attack Schiano without fear of a defamation suit? We now know some of the allegations were false, right? In this instance, you think it is defamatory to say a HC was involved in a decision about a player? Aren't HCs "involved" in all decisions about players? There's a big difference between being "involved" and doing what has been suggested which is that Schiano DECIDED that Tynes goes on NFI. Lol, again the question you ignored: why would a HC even care about the designation?Tynes floated Schianos name because it got his story back front and center and it played to a popular narrative.
C'mon, DingbatDude, let's hear your theory on why Sean Payton apologized for something that never happened. Schiano tricked him into it, perhaps?
C'mon, DingbatDude, let's hear your theory on why Sean Payton apologized for something that never happened. Schiano tricked him into it, perhaps?
I know you can't function without drama so you need to manufacture it around every corner. I'm sorry you found someone who won't play your game. It's not possible for you to push my buttons but clearly I can push yours. 8) Can we keep doing this until lunch when I leave on vacation? You're more fun then a yo-yo with just as many of the ups and downs.
I think you might be trying too hard to fit the round peg into a square hole. His comments were for attention not to finger the person he holds liable. The team is the only one who could be liable. Schiano is an agent of the team. Why did Freeman's camp feel they could attack Schiano without fear of a defamation suit? We now know some of the allegations were false, right? In this instance, you think it is defamatory to say a HC was involved in a decision about a player? Aren't HCs "involved" in all decisions about players? There's a big difference between being "involved" and doing what has been suggested which is that Schiano DECIDED that Tynes goes on NFI. Lol, again the question you ignored: why would a HC even care about the designation?Tynes floated Schianos name because it got his story back front and center and it played to a popular narrative.
I'm gonna use Occam's razor here...if he named Schiano specifically then it was for a good reason (not just for headlines). No need to perform gymnastics to make it fit when the words are pretty clear...
I'm not trying to push your buttons, I'm pointing out how unbelievably idiotic your "bountygate never happened" theory is. Payton himself admitted it. Let me repeat that since you don't seem to be catching on: Sean Payton himself admitted that it was true.
I'm not trying to push your buttons, I'm pointing out how unbelievably idiotic your "bountygate never happened" theory is. Payton himself admitted it. Let me repeat that since you don't seem to be catching on: Sean Payton himself admitted that it was true.
When you learn the difference between accepting responsibility and admitting guilt let me know. I'm standing by for another 103 minutes.
With abated breath, one would hope. Perhaps it would be wise for you to utilize that time learning to differentiate evidence from accusation.
I didn't read the whole thread, and I am sure it has been mentioned already.Putting him on IR is assuming liability for the team. Something they are trying to avoid.
I just read the entire thread and didn't see it which is par for the course. This is the reason.....to avoid potential liability. The NFL was also likely included in the decision as to which list to put Tynes on. This is a decision which is made by the GM and not the head coach as it is administrative. Why would the head coach care what list which is going to have the same affect on his roster no matter which list the player he was on?Schiano's "involvement" could have been zero or limited to Dominik telling Schiano Tynes was on NFI and Schiano saying "ok".
They could be throwing him a bone to get a restructure on some guarantees...What does nerve damage in Nicks' foot have to do with Tynes' nasty toenail?
Vin, I really am struggling with this one. I'm not sure why the guy would target Schiano if in fact the Glazers would be ultimately paying the ransom in a lawsuit....AND also subjecting himself to a lawsuit from Schiano for defamation?We know he is on record stating that Schiano was involved in the decision. We definitely don't know the details other than that but he felt brave enough to attach the coach's name to it so I'm thinking he's got some basis for this claim....or at least that's his perception...if Schiano feels his name is being dragged through the mud then he has every right to b1tchslap the kid legally but so far no sign of that happening.
You really don't know anything about what you are talking about, do you? You are reading a media report about a grievance, not the grievance itself. The Glazers are not ignored. They are party to it as well. The reason Schiano's name is mentioned in the media report is that nobody gives a rat's azz about the second assistant dietitian or third shift janitor. Nobody needs to point out that the Glazers are part of it because it is their team, so of course they are named in it, only an idiot would need that spelled out for them.You are making ridiculous assumptions about something based on an extremely brief media account that only highlights the parts that the person writing the article found interesting. And the big bad Freeman-abusing monster is interesting. The people who actually handled the supposedly flawed medical treatment, who actually have whatever real culpability there is (if any), are not interesting stories. You might also not that the person writing the story hasn't actually, you know, seen the grievance, he is just reporting on what "sources" told him about it. And not just "sources" but "union sources". You don't think they might be working teh media just a bit? What better way to get attention and attempt to "try the case in the media" to get a settlement?
+1
I think you might be trying too hard to fit the round peg into a square hole. His comments were for attention not to finger the person he holds liable. The team is the only one who could be liable. Schiano is an agent of the team. Why did Freeman's camp feel they could attack Schiano without fear of a defamation suit? We now know some of the allegations were false, right? In this instance, you think it is defamatory to say a HC was involved in a decision about a player? Aren't HCs "involved" in all decisions about players? There's a big difference between being "involved" and doing what has been suggested which is that Schiano DECIDED that Tynes goes on NFI. Lol, again the question you ignored: why would a HC even care about the designation?Tynes floated Schianos name because it got his story back front and center and it played to a popular narrative.
I'm gonna use Occam's razor here...if he named Schiano specifically then it was for a good reason (not just for headlines). No need to perform gymnastics to make it fit when the words are pretty clear...
Ask Occam why a head coach would care if Tynes was put on IR or NFI. We know why the team would care (eg., liability) but why would the designation matter to a coach?
Vin, I really am struggling with this one. I'm not sure why the guy would target Schiano if in fact the Glazers would be ultimately paying the ransom in a lawsuit....AND also subjecting himself to a lawsuit from Schiano for defamation?We know he is on record stating that Schiano was involved in the decision. We definitely don't know the details other than that but he felt brave enough to attach the coach's name to it so I'm thinking he's got some basis for this claim....or at least that's his perception...if Schiano feels his name is being dragged through the mud then he has every right to b1tchslap the kid legally but so far no sign of that happening.
You really don't know anything about what you are talking about, do you? You are reading a media report about a grievance, not the grievance itself. The Glazers are not ignored. They are party to it as well. The reason Schiano's name is mentioned in the media report is that nobody gives a rat's azz about the second assistant dietitian or third shift janitor. Nobody needs to point out that the Glazers are part of it because it is their team, so of course they are named in it, only an idiot would need that spelled out for them.You are making ridiculous assumptions about something based on an extremely brief media account that only highlights the parts that the person writing the article found interesting. And the big bad Freeman-abusing monster is interesting. The people who actually handled the supposedly flawed medical treatment, who actually have whatever real culpability there is (if any), are not interesting stories. You might also not that the person writing the story hasn't actually, you know, seen the grievance, he is just reporting on what "sources" told him about it. And not just "sources" but "union sources". You don't think they might be working teh media just a bit? What better way to get attention and attempt to "try the case in the media" to get a settlement?
There are assumptions being made on both sides of this argument however the difference is my assumptions are based on information made available through the press from one of the parties impacted...yours appear to be based on a 12-pack of Bud Lite and Season 2 of CSI...
Can we still talk about Carl Nicks? I have a question that is more appropriate here than in the Alex Mack thread. I'll wait for response in order to not derail the current conversation.
