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

    21 Ph.D. physicists and engineers verify that the PSI measurements for all footballs in the AFCCG were in compliance with what was expected, based upon weather conditions.

    http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/...g-name-science

    The legal brief was filed on behalf of 21 professors from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the University of California, Berkeley; University of Michigan; Stanford University; University of Southern California; University of Delaware; Purdue University; University of Pennsylvania; Boston College and the University of Minnesota.

    "This is not tampering. It is science. And it pervades the NFL. Games routinely are played with footballs that fall below the league's minimum pressure requirement," the papers said. "Courts should not be powerless to consider the absence of scientific proof when a proceeding is so interlaced with laws of science."



    The science says that, given the uncertainty about the exact conditions of the measurements (temp, timing, which gauge etc.) and the inherent error in making the measurements, the pressure drops that were recorded for all of the footballs can be fully explained without anyone taking any air out of any of the footballs.

    from their brief:
    The group looked at the temperature for 10,000 NFL games dating back to 1960 and determined that if footballs were inflated in a 70-degree room:


    –Footballs inflated to 12.5 PSI before the game would have dropped below the NFL’s allowable limit in approximately 82 percent of all NFL games since 1960.
    –Footballs inflated to 13.0 PSI before the game would have dropped below the NFL’s allowable limit in approximately 61 percent of all NFL games since 1960.
    –Footballs inflated to 13.5 PSI before the game would have dropped below the NFL’s allowable limit in approximately 38 percent of all NFL games since 1960.


    Yet the NFL never cared about PSI until this made-up case, and still doesn't.

    Educate yourself. It is not that hard.
    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 05-25-2016, 12:34 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: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

      Brady was offered the opportunity to settle the case, to accept no guilt, and receive a lesser punishment (reportedly a one game suspension) for lack of cooperation with the investigation.

      https://youtu.be/umXCSCKhI18

      If he accepted those terms, the NFL also demanded that Brady must throw the equipment boys under the bus and claim that they had acted alone, misinterpreting his preference to have the footballs set at the lowest legal limit, and had illegally deflated footballs.

      The ball boys encouraged Brady to take the deal. They assured him that they would take the fall and would not fight it, even though they are innocent, given that the NFL allowed them to be reinstated to their jobs.

      Brady refused to accept this plea deal, since 1) it would be lying on his part, which is problematic since he had told the truth while under oath (the only person who testified under oath, by the way); and 2) it would support the notion that somebody did something wrong, when that is not the case at all.

      That is why he is fighting this as far as is humanly possible. It is called integrity.
      Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 05-25-2016, 12:52 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: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post

        That is why he is fighting this as far as is humanly possible. It is called integrity.
        It's called CYA.

        Everyone knows shenanigans went on. It will just be more easily forgotten if Brady can find a technicality to get out of the suspension, even if that technicality doesn't absolve him of all guilt.
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by Bball View Post
          Everyone knows shenanigans went on.
          Bball
          or
          21 tenured physics professors from from the MIT; Berkeley; Michigan; Stanford; USC; Delaware; Purdue; Penn; Boston College; and Minnesota, none of them paid a cent for their opinion.

          Hmmm...

          The Patriots had as much to do with deflating footballs in the AFCCG as the Colts had to do with the downing of EgyptAir Flight #804.
          That is, NONE.

          I could argue the facts all day, but I have grants to write, and to argue the facts intelligently you would have had to read the Wells report, the court briefs, the scientific re-creations, the Wells Rebuttal report, and so on. You'd have to learn about the more than a dozen proven lies leaked by the NFL to the media before the Wells report, the proven 56 lies in the Wells report, and Goodell's doubling down on even more lies that periodically emerge from the National Factory of Lies. Thus I am not bothered by the widespread ignorance of the basic facts of the case. At one point I also thought that the NFL was on the up-and-up, because the media told me so. Yes, the NFL fights hard for concussion prevention. They really do their best to prevent domestic violence. They never make up anything, right? Everyone knows that, right?
          Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 05-25-2016, 03:03 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: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

            http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-of-tom-brady/


            Mike Florio: The argument is fundamentally no different than the point PFT has made consistently since the official PSI numbers were released in May 2015: With the Ideal Gas Law necessarily causing the air pressure in the footballs to drop during the first half of the game, tampering with the footballs would have resulted in dramatically lower readings than the actual numbers measured by the NFL.... the brief contains the kind of commonsensical information that could persuade a judge to take a more favorable view of the overall case.

            Mike Florio gets it too, Steelers fan, with engineering degree from Carnegie Mellon
            Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 05-26-2016, 10:38 AM.
            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)

              The Patriots have been caught cheating enough that they no longer get the benefit of the doubt. Boo hoo. Tom Brady is suspended 4 games.
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


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

                Innocent people don't destroy evidence.

                Does Brady care about his reputation? Absolutely. Doesn't mean he's innocent.

                Comment


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

                  Slick is someone who thinks a guy texting about a needle, a football, and naming himself the "deflator" is talking about losing weight. And when confronted with that evidence, say's "I'm not a linguist."
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


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

                    I make no apologies for being qualified to recognize junk science as soon as the NFL started spewing it, as thousands of other scientists, grade schoolers, middle schooolers, high school teachers, and people with common sense from all over the country have also done. I make no apologies for having the knowledge and the integrity to tell you the truth, that Emperor Roger was (and is) both a liar and a fraud.

                    So... valid question, why would I get rid of my old broken phone after I get a new one?

                    I for sure as hell wouldn't, until I was assured that the other side had no rights to it and moreover that the other side declared that they did not want it but wanted a detailed log of all communications, which I then provided. This was a log that proved that the investigator already had access to every communication with every other Patriots or NFL employee, because the investigator already possessed their phones, since they were not protected by a collectively-bargained agreement that simply does not give the NFL rights to personal communications of NFLPA members.

                    All of those conditions were met
                    .

                    At that point, Tom's phone is Tom's phone. He already gave them his emails in confidence, which they leaked to the press so that he was hammered for trivial crap like commenting that Peyton is likely to retire soon and for demanding that a pool service company provide him a pool cover of the color that he had requested.

                    But why? Why Tom, why?

                    -Maybe the phone has texts where he told Peyton "No thanks, I don't need any of your HGH"
                    -Maybe the phone has nude pics of his wife that he doesn't want anyone to leak, like the NFL had already leaked his emails
                    -Maybe the phone has nude pics of someone else that he doesn't want anyone to leak, like the NFL had already leaked his emails
                    -Maybe, as senior union player representative, his phone has texts with NFLPA representatives about sensitive labor negotiations
                    -Maybe there were texts that called Roger Goodell an EFFING ARSEHOLE, and he didn't want that to get out.
                    -Maybe there were texts calling the Colts a bunch of paranoid whiny excuse-making tanking losers, and he didn't want that to get out, either.

                    All of these, and 100 more, are perfectly valid reasons for getting rid of an old phone that nobody had any right to have in the first place, besides it also being standard practice for anyone in the public eye.

                    And oh the humanity on those text messages. You know, the 3000+ text messages where in one of them, in the off season and in a conversation having nothing to do with football or with his job, a ballboy used the word "deflator" one time. Sure, the NFL lie will be that this was his "nickname", with him having used the word one time in his entire life. Well, actually two times if you expand the search to the word "deflate", with the other instance being a year and an half later in a text saying "deflate and get a new jacket". That was was obviously about footballs, too, right? Maybe the first time it was, who knows. His job was to inflate and yes deflate footballs to be within legal parameters.

                    And after that May 2014 "deflator" text, there was obviously a deflation scheme going on, right? Like during the Jets game, when there was a flurry of texts about footballs that "were supposed to be at 13 psi, but the refs screwed us over and pumped them up to 16, and now Tom is pissed". Surely in any "deflation scheme" the balls are supposed to be at 13 psi, and you are surprised and stunned that they were well above that, right? 13 psi must be cheating, right? Oh wait, it's not.

                    Then in carrying out any "deflation scheme" occurring in games after that, you are lock-sure to actually show the referee a copy of the rule book and specifically remind him that footballs are allowed to be as low as 12.5 psi, right? You want them to know the rules, right?

                    On and on the NFL goes. The NFL will wade through hundreds of more texts and find a dozen examples of one ballboy advising the other to "get some" from his wife that night by "pulling out his big needle" (i.e., his penis-- the other guy is calling him a needle-dick, and he calls him a dorito-dick in reply). The NFL won't publish those texts, "out of respect to Mrs. Jastremski" but will then concoct a story about those needle-dick penis jokes being all about taking air out of a football. That's just what they do.

                    I'm not sure who is more stupid, the NFL for not comprehending 1700-era science, of the many fools who buy their proven lies.

                    Yes, the NFL would never try to influence the NIH on concussions.
                    Yes, the NFL would never do anything to cover up their "so what" attitude about players beating up women.
                    Yes, the NFL would never be too stubborn to admit their own scientific ignorance that they would do anything possible to cover it up.

                    Yes, you Pats haters believe in a flat Earth, faked moon landings, and Bigfoot too.
                    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 05-26-2016, 02:10 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: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

                      Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                      I'm not sure who is more stupid..............
                      I know the answer to this one ...............

                      Comment


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

                        Text messages that have nothing to do with football, but rather weight loss.

                        McNally: You working
                        Jastremski: Yup
                        McNally: Nice dude….jimmy needs some kicks….lets make a deal…..come on help the deflator
                        [No response]
                        McNally: Chill buddy im just fu-kin with you ….im not going to espn……..yet
                        McNally: Tom sucks…im going make that next ball a fu-kin balloon
                        Jastremski: Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done…
                        Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though…
                        Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn… The refs fu-ked us…a few of then were at almost 16
                        Jastremski: They didnt recheck then after they put air in them
                        McNally: Fu-k tom …16 is nothing…wait till next sunday
                        Jastremski: Omg! Spaz

                        Jastremski: Can’t wait to give you your needle this week
                        McNally
                        : Fu-k tom….make sure the pump is attached to the needle…..fu-kin watermelons coming
                        Jastremski: So angry
                        McNally: The only thing deflating sun..is his passing rating
                        Jastremski: I have a big needle for u this week
                        McNally: Better be surrounded by cash and newkicks….or its a rugby sunday
                        McNally: Fu-k tom
                        Jastremski: Maybe u will have some nice size 11s in ur locker
                        McNally: Tom must really be working your balls hard this week
                        Jastremski: Size 11?
                        Jastremski: 2 or 3X?
                        McNally: Tom must really be on you
                        McNally: 11 0r 11 half……2x unless its tight fitting
                        Jastremski: Nah. Hasn’t even mentioned it, figured u should get something since he gives u nothing
                        McNally: Remember to put a couple sweet pig skins ready for tom to sign
                        Jastremski: U got it kid…big autograph day for you
                        McNally: Nice throw some kicks in and make it real special
                        Jastremski: It ur lucky. 11?
                        McNally: 11 or 11 and half kid
                        http://time.com/3849688/deflategate-...ots-tom-brady/



                        I'm sure ESPN is really interested in an equipment manager's weight loss, Just stick with the "I'm not a linguist" argument, it's less embarrassing.
                        Last edited by Since86; 05-26-2016, 02:54 PM.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


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

                          I don't know why this is still being argued over. Everyone knows where everyone else stands on the topic, and it is clear neither side is going to convince the other they are wrong. Just give it up. Yikes.
                          #LanceEffect

                          Comment


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

                            This thread makes me glad I don't support any teams whose shadiness requires me to spend hours and hours typing paragraph after paragraph on another team's message board trying to convince everyone they don't cheat.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by LuckSwagger View Post
                              This thread makes me glad I don't support any teams whose shadiness requires me to spend hours and hours typing paragraph after paragraph on another team's message board trying to convince everyone they don't cheat.
                              All teams are shady at some point or another in the Patriots case their reputation precedes them.

                              Comment


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

                                If all teams are shady, then the Pats are pitch black. They're the one team that is constantly pushing the bounds. From deflating footballs, to illegally taping opponents, to defensive holding, to faking injuries to stop the clock. They're the epitome of the saying "If you aren't cheating, you aren't trying."
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X