Page 1 of 65 123515 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 644

Thread: 2015 NFL Offseason Thread

  1. #1

    2015 NFL Offseason Thread

    I think it's time for the Cowboys to look for a different back up for Peterson.

    edit: Packers' Guion makes two already.
    Last edited by Yoshi; 04 Feb 2015 at 03:58 PM.

  2. Wow, weed. We don't tolerate that in the NFL.

  3. I'm seeing the future for those players as.....Not For Long!
    Last edited by gamevet; 04 Feb 2015 at 11:27 PM.
    <a href= target=_blank></a>

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Yoshi View Post
    I think it's time for the Cowboys to look for a different back up for Peterson.
    Orange Peanut?

  5. Part of me wants to Suh stay in Detroit but a crazy bing contract, which he will get somewhere, will just keep the Lions from adding more pieces. Let Suh walk, try to sign Fairley for a reasonable amount and draft yet another DT.
    "Remember, not knowing how to cook is like not knowing how to fuck."
    Geek in the Desert

  6. #7
    If Suh weren't a gigantic douche, he might be worth a huge contract. He's a unique talent for sure, but at what point does he do something stupid enough to warrant a significant suspension?

  7. #8
    Hardy's charges were dismissed, allegedly because he paid his ex-girlfriend off. I can't decide how I feel about this from a league standpoint. Legally, the guy did nothing wrong, yet he lost a whole season. The league really needs to rethink its policy to act before the legal system can.
    Last edited by Yoshi; 09 Feb 2015 at 12:24 PM.

  8. Not to get into specifics for each case, but why? Aaron Hernandez is on trial, should the league (and owners, not sure who would have actually signed him, and of course now he's in jail so w/e) not take action for these last 2 years (or whatever)?

    When is it OK to act? When you're convicted, when you're put in jail...?

  9. #10
    Why? Because careers are very short, and we have this concept of "innocent until proven guilty." Acting on accusations is bullshit, regardless of who the employer is. The only exceptions that immediately come to mind would be situations like a teacher accused of having a relationship with a student and being allowed to continue to interact with kids. In that type of situation, I understand getting the teacher out of classroom, but they shouldn't lose a single penny or have their career permanently impacted based on an accusation. The Hernandez case has an additional variable, which is a judge feels he is enough of a danger to society to remand him until trial.

    What exactly is the league's policy? Does it act upon accusation? Does it act upon indictment? Does it act upon conviction? Is there any consistency? We all know the answer to the last one, and that makes it impossible to answer the others.

    Let's say you were accused of something. Should 1/10 or 1/5 of the length of your career be able to be lost if it turns out you didn't do anything in the eyes of the law?


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  • logo