Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    No one denies that PSI falls when air temp does. We question the AMOUNT it falls, not whether or not it does.
    Why do you question that? Guillaume Amontons described the AMOUNT it falls, precisely, in about 1702. Absolute pressure drops linearly, in direct proportion to the drop in absolute temperature.

    George Washington's grandfather might well have known what Bob Kravitz still does not!
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment


    • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

      Read the article I cited in my edit. Then go lecture that physicist, along with all the other ones I can cite that weighed in their professional opinion, that he denies the Ideal Gas Law even exists.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

        It wasn't my impression that the Pats were cleared of wrong-doing; it was my impression that the Patriots got off the hook because the NFL didn't "prove" it correctly. Right? The NFL lost their heads and took action without first getting their ducks in a row. I think had they gone about it properly, there easily could've been a case presented that proved the Pats guilty. But the NFL didn't make it happen, because... well... that's the NFL today.

        Had they gone about it properly, the league easily could have nailed the Patriots up for this. The Patriots didn't get penalized for conducting themselves improperly, because the NFL didn't conduct the investigation properly. Pretty backwards and awesome, eh?

        So defending the Patriots actions, to me, is kind of hilarious. You only got cleared because of a botched investigation. I think most fans, except Patriots fans, agree that the they were up to something.
        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-17-2015, 02:21 PM.
        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

        Comment


        • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

          Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
          It wasn't my impression that the Pats were cleared of wrong-doing; it was my impression that the Patriots got off the hook because the NFL didn't "prove" it correctly. Right? The NFL lost their heads and took action without getting their ducks in a row.
          Part of it. Said Tom wasn't given access to the investigator and files. The other part was that the NFL didn't properly notify Tom of the rule, and the punishment of breaking said rule. Which is hilarious in itself.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

            Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
            I am discussing FACTS. You are speculating about the meaning of cryptic text messages sent in the offseason between a bunch of joking idiots, whom even the NFL admits should be permitted to be re-hired. By the way, they have been re-hired! Do you accuse them of having penises made of tortilla chips, since they called each other "dorito dicks"?

            We know what the Ravens told that Ryan Grigson, we know what Ryan Grigson lied about when he contacted Mike Kensil, and we know with almost complete certainty that no air was taken out of any football during the AFCCG.

            The scientific analyses of the case are summarized nicely here: http://wellsreportcontext.com/wells-...ence-articles/

            You do not have to be a chemistry professor, only a modestly educated and unbiased human, to conclude with near certainty that nobody took any air our of any footballs after inspections at the AFCCG. Every reputable scientist on Earth, other than those paid off handsomely by Roger Goodell, has reached that conclusion. If the Patriots footballs were deflated, it was by about an average of about 0.02 psi, and (here is the kicker) that 0.02 psi is with an error in the measurement of about 0.4 psi. Yes, from the numbers, all footballs were at their expected pressures, as best as we can tell. they might have been a little overinflated, and they might have been a little underinflated. The error in the measurement totally overwhelms the small differences alleged to be important.

            But.... why don't you do the experiment yourself? Why would you rather continue to mindlessly argue forever, when you could, in a few hours, do the simple experiment that thousands of people have already done but that apparently seems like voodoo magic to you? Why argue about it for 11+ months?

            It's easy. Inflate a football, cool it 25 degrees by putting it in a refrigerator for 2 hr. You may have to set the fridge at a high setting to reach 45 or so degrees.

            You will see that the air pressure in the football drops a little over 1 psi (like a Pats football at the AFCCG! 12.5 to 11.5!), then if you let it warm up toward room temperature for 8-10 minutes and you will see that the pressure has then dropped only 0.5 psi (like a Colts football! 13.0 to 12.5 in the AFCCG!).

            It is what happens on Earth. Confined gas loses pressure as it cools and gains pressure as it warms. Say... on the first cold day of winter, when your low tire pressure light came on in your car, did you blame Tom Brady? If you did, go ask an 8th grader about the ideal gas law.
            Here's a fact: The P*triots cheated. More than once.

            Comment


            • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

              Originally posted by Shade View Post
              Here's a fact: The P*triots cheated. More than once.
              But we don't have a control environment to test this Shade to remove all possibilities of doubt. I mean Kraft productions was simply filming for a Kraft commercial using multiple shots over multiples years to generate the best way to sell overly processed cheese offer kids with a need for macaroni diets. You simply can't prove this either.

              Comment


              • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                But we don't have a control environment to test this Shade to remove all possibilities of doubt. I mean Kraft productions was simply filming for a Kraft commercial using multiple shots over multiples years to generate the best way to sell overly processed cheese offer kids with a need for macaroni diets. You simply can't prove this either.
                I can't seem to get the Deflater Diet to work for me. Maybe I'm using the needle wrong.

                Comment


                • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

                  Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
                  It is abundantly clear that anyone can say anything about framegate (aka deflatategate) in ANY THREAD that they want to, as long as everything that is said is critical of the Patriots.

                  Responses that question those posts, however, will NOT be tolerated
                  I don't think DeflateGate mattered, I just crack up about people getting so worked up over it, on both sides. Kravitz will be catching **** from Pats fans for the rest of his life, EVERY tweet he makes there's some Boston Bro calling him a lying scumbag or whatever. Football fandom's weird man, it's so...uncivilized.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

                    Since you will most definitely NOT bother to ask an 8th grader, I can walk you through the math. Fear not: all you need to know is 1702-era science!

                    What kind of a temperature drop does it take to drop a 12.5 psi football to 11.4 psi?

                    This is not unanswerable! It is a drop in absolute temperature that is in proportion to the drop in absolute pressure.

                    12.5 psi is the beginning relative pressure = 14.7 + 12.5 = 27.2 psi absolute pressure (since atmospheric pressure at sea level = 14.7 psi).
                    11.4 is the ending relative pressure = 14.7 + 11.4 = 26.1 psi absolute pressure (same reasoning)

                    So, what was the drop in absolute pressure? 27.2 to 26.1 is a 4.0% drop.

                    Hmmm…what kind of a temperature drop does it take to drop a 12.5 psi football to 11.4 psi? A 4% drop in absolute temperature, of course! And how much is that?

                    Assume the 12.5 psi football was at room temp = 72 degrees F = 22C = 295 Kelvin. A 4% drop from 295 Kelvin = 283 Kelvin = 10 C = 50 degrees Fahrenheit.

                    Conclusion 1: A football at 72 degrees Fahrenheit and 12.5 psi gauge pressure, cooled to 50 degrees Fahrenheit, will then have a gauge pressure of 11.4 psi.

                    Conclusion 2: Since nobody bothered to record temperatures & pregame air pressures, there is real world uncertainty. Footballs were somewhere in the range of 68-75 degrees Fahrenheit, and were at about 12.5 psi gauge pressure (according to the best memory of the ref). When they were cooled to somewhere in the range of 45-50 degrees Fahrenheit (the estimated halftime temperature), they should have had had a gauge pressure somewhere in the range of 11.32-11.50 psi.

                    Fact 1: The average of all measurements on the Patriots footballs at halftime using the pressure gauge that, according to the best memory of the ref was the one he had used before the game, was 11.48 psi.

                    Fact 2: The average of all measurements on the Patriots footballs at halftime was 11.30 psi.

                    Fact 3: there is one and only one instance at the AFCCG where a football’s pressure was measured more than once. Why is that important? It gives an indication of the error bars inherent in using the equipment that was used to make the pressure readings. The football that the Colts had intercepted was pressure-checked 3 times by an NFL employee. The readings he noted? 11.35 psi, 11.45 psi, and 11.75 psi.

                    Use this handy/dandy website that gives you stats analysis: http://www.calculator.net/standard-d...1.75&x=65&y=12

                    With the error expressed as a student’s T-test, or 95% confidence interval, he measured 11.52 psi plus/minus 0.42 psi. This tells you that any one measurement has an inherent error of about 0.4 psi.

                    Should that trouble you, if you are accusing someone of cheating based upon measurements being “off” by 0.02 psi? Yes, it should. The error bars of the measurement are 20 times larger than the “discrepancy” that you think you have measured!

                    You are in essence arguing that 11.32 psi is not cheating, and 11.30 is cheating, wile ignoring that the 11.30 reading is really 11.30 plus/minus 0.42!

                    Now, was this really all that hard?

                    Peter King understood it when I walked him through it.
                    Mike Florio understood it when I walked him through it. (Mike has an engineering degree from Carnegie Mellon, so he was especially receptive)
                    Mike Reiss understood it when I walked him through it.

                    Not surprisingly, their written opinions changed rather drastically after our conversations.

                    Once you realize that the original accusation, that all patriots footballs were depressurized by at least 2 psi, was FALSE and that the real readings showed a drop HALF that in magnitude, it becomes quite clear that NOTHING HAPPENED TO THE FOOTBALLS other than the normal pressure drop that is brought on by cooling, always, in our universe.
                    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 11-18-2015, 05:03 PM.
                    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

                      Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                      But we don't have a control environment to test this Shade to remove all possibilities of doubt. I mean Kraft productions was simply filming for a Kraft commercial using multiple shots over multiples years to generate the best way to sell overly processed cheese offer kids with a need for macaroni diets. You simply can't prove this either.
                      Robert Kraft has NOTHING to do with Kraft foods.

                      A controlled environment is not needed. You simply need to be, however, within the confines of our UNIVERSE, to be sure that the normal laws of physics apply.

                      We are demanding that the data remove all possibility of doubt. We are asking the data to to point us toward ANY evidence whatsover of wrongdoing. It fails to do so.
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

                        Originally posted by Shade View Post
                        Here's a fact: The P*triots cheated.
                        show me your calculations, please.

                        What should have been the measured pressure of the Patriots footballs?
                        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                        Comment


                        • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)


                          Comment


                          • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

                            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                            It wasn't my impression that the Pats were cleared of wrong-doing...

                            You only got cleared because of a botched investigation.
                            It is absolutely the truth that the judge, asked by the NFL to settle a labor dispute, would have ensured that his ruling be immediately discarded if his opinion touched on any issue other than the issues of labor law being disputed.

                            When he laughingly puts the phases "independent investigation" and "alleged deflation" into quotation marks over thirty times in his written ruling, rather than just the first time they were mentioned, the judge's opinions on the facts of the case were made crystal clear, while preserving his ruling.

                            The Patriots were cleared, because in the judge's exact words, Roger Goodell decided, without merit and without abiding by the fairness principle of the Federal Arbitration Act, to "impose his own brand of vigilante justice"
                            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                            Comment


                            • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

                              I think you need to chill out, Slick. Maybe have something to eat:

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2015-2016 Non-Colts Regular Season Thread: The Dark Side of the Force and the other 30 teams

                                Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                                The Patriots were cleared, because in the judge's exact words, Roger Goodell decided, without merit and without abiding by the fairness principle of the Federal Arbitration Act, to "impose his own brand of vigilante justice"
                                Which was about not notifying Tom about the rule, and punishment, not clearing him of wrong-doing. The judge didn't make any statement about whether or not the footballs lost the right amount of PSI under the Ideal Gas Law.

                                This idea that the NFL would investigate and punish the defending SuperBowl champions and Golden Boy Tom Brady questioning the very integrity of the NFL over a lie that Ryan Grigson cooked up in his basement, is like the loons who think 9/11 was an inside job.

                                It makes absolutely zero sense, to think the NFL would just fall for something and go to a very public war with one of Goodell's most staunch supporters over something that was made up and that didn't have any evidence.

                                Absolutely insanity type stuff.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X