The Truth about Myles/Rudolph
-
Do you really want to compare your training and experience to mine when it comes to what constitutes "credible evidence"?
The fact is, you are just dead wrong about that, and allow me to explain why:
Let's look at what you claim to be evidence.
A. The NFL has no audio. There is no NFL audio of any of the "dialogue" that happened. Good bad or indifferent. You can't prove a negative with a negative. Its like saying: because there is no turd in htown's toilet, he must have never in his life ever had to take a shit.
B. And, Did you see the video? None of the refs and none of the teammates were anywhere close enough to hear anything that was going on in a face to face confrontation like that....There are bodies flying around, men grunting....and a ton of crowd noise. They can't say they heard it....because they cannot attest to anything that was said at that point where the two of them were down on the ground. They CANNOT say that A said this...and B said that....or that "I heard everything that was said and B did not say anything"
C. So Rudolph's AA coach said he would never say that? First off, WTF is an AA coach...and what is his relationship to Rudolph, and can he be qualified as a character witness. Furthermore, I am sure that many people could probably say "Oh, he is not the kind of guy that would say that.....but then that would be OK....if Rudolph were not put into a very stressful situation. He had thrown 4 Ints. he team was being whipped every way shape or form. He was frustrated, angry and he had just be pounded again by a guy that had been in his grill all night and there he was again, slamming him to the turf (which actually...Myles could have given him a lot worse). It is certainly highly possible, highly possible that all that had built up, and that he had done something that, yes, certainly was stupid and out of character of him to do. Just as, clearly, obviously, Myles did something that was stupid and out of character for him. In fact, equally or more credible would be the testimony of Myles teammates and coaches and friends etc..and whatever an AA coach is, that it would not be in his character to swing that helmet at him....
So, what are we left with?
The same evidence we had before.. The instantaneous "excited utterance" or physical action or reaction. It was clear that at that moment something happened to cause that harsh reaction. Furthermore, there was the statement made to Freddie in the locker room immediately after the incident. These lend credibility to Garrett's claim.
So, when you reach the age of 4, let us all know.
In this instance AA obviously means African American.
Even if the accusation is "credible", which I'm entitled to believe it's not in this context, it's not an actual defense to criminal prosecution for assault. That would have to be self-defense, which this isn't the case obviously. He might have justified that with a punch, but not a helmet. Especially, when there were plenty of people to "protect" him. It's a moot point, unless you're aiming for a reduced sentence.
I'm not even sure that would work if you tried to charge Rudolph with some sort of hate crime. That requires facts that don't exist in this case.
Now, in civil court maybe. Those are clown shows if you get the right judge.
But if you think the NFL gives a shit about that defense, you're nuts. At the moment, they don't have liability insurance for head trauma. There's not an insurance company in the world that will provide it. They're not going to take that risk and who can blame them?
In this instance AA obviously means African American.
Even if the accusation is "credible", which I'm entitled to believe it's not in this context, it's not an actual defense to criminal prosecution for assault.
Who said it was? Maybe you have not been following along. I have stated all along that these are mitigating factors, not exculpatory factors.
That would have to be self-defense, which this isn't the case obviously. He might have justified that with a punch, but not a helmet. Especially, when there were plenty of people to "protect" him. It's a moot point, unless you're aiming for a reduced sentence.
Well...as I said, this is not a court of law....but merely an internal disciplinary proceeding that can...and has imo, made rulings not based on proper legal principles, but rather, on public relations positions. However, you may be wrong about it being a moot point. The claim is that the "sentence" handed down is outside the purview of the league offer to deal out because it violates the terms of the CBA. If the NFLPA chooses (and it remains to see if they are gutless or not), they could file suit to have a court overturn the punisment due to that violation.
I'm not even sure that would work if you tried to charge Rudolph with some sort of hate crime. That requires facts that don't exist in this case.
Again, no one is talking about any such thing. Where the fuck are you coming up with this?
Now, in civil court maybe. Those are clown shows if you get the right judge.
Here you go again, digging yourself deeper into the stupid hole.
But if you think the NFL gives a shit about that defense, you're nuts.
Which defense? Let me learn you something: legally, a "defense" IS something that would exonerate your actions...like self-defense, which, again, neither I nor anyone is claiming is appropriate here. For the umpteenth time, I am talking about mitigating circumstances that would/should/could reduce punishment.
At the moment, they don't have liability insurance for head trauma. There's not an insurance company in the world that will provide it. They're not going to take that risk and who can blame them?
Well...again, here is another situation where this disciplinary proceeding varies from the application of proper legal principles. In a court, you deal with what DID happen.....not with what might have/could have happened. In this case, no harm befell Rudolph...ergo, you cannot punish someone for what could have happened but didn't.
And since you bring up head trauma and insurance....the same thing applies. If Rudolph tried to bring a claim vs. Garrett...or the NFL, and if this was referred to an insurance company for adjustment....they would laugh at the concept that there would be much if any claim for damages. The FIRST thing an insurance company asks is: Is there liability. In this case I am going to say, yes, Myles can be considered liable for his actions (but the provocation issue would, nevertheless still be in play...because an insurance company will use every factor they can think of to deflect their responsibility). But the next thing they ask is: What are the damages? What is the harm? What were the injuries? Show us the x-rays, the CT scan reports, what were the medical expenses. In this case the answer is: Nothing, no harm, no injuries, no med expenses...
And the insurance company will say to Rudolph: Fuck Off, claim denied.
-
Pouncey wasn't anywhere near the two until the helmet swing. There's no guarantee he heard it. As far as his wrs rbs ol do you not remember riley cooper of the eagles. The white wide receiver. All his receiver running mates were black. He was caught on tape at a country concert repeatedly saying a racial slur.
Yeah, I remember 100% of the people around Riley Cooper heard what he said, which is a little different than the very tiny percentage of players that heard Rudolph's N bomb. I also remember the African American WR Pitt drafted from Oklahoma State excited Pitt also drafted Mason Rudolph. Sound like race was an issue? It shouldn't.
Again, who snapped the ball to the QB attempting to throw out of the shakey cup pocket protection MG was collapsing from the edge? The Center named Pouncey who just so happens to be African American. He wasn't as far away as you wanted him to be and closer than 9 of MG's teammates that never even made it into the video at all before Ogunjobi entered after all damage was done. What do you want me to pretend with you next aside from suddenly all of MG's teammates were extremely well positioned to hear this controversial whisper? That a QB who lost 100% of his composure found the split second reasoning to conveniently just whisper the N bomb in rage? Doesn't add up at all. Sorry, it just doesn't man.
If MG, not to be confused with his agent dreaming the best way to get more support, mentioned this right after the game as small as I'm sorry how I handled the racial slur by Rudolph - it would have looked 1000 times less fishy. Is it possible I'm wrong here? Absolutely; but I have yet to see 1 thing printed beyond the hope of Cleveland Browns fans that it was actually said.
I'd love for this to be true because it could change things and force further investigation than the length of a cup of coffee it got.
Again, who snapped the ball to the QB attempting to throw out of the shakey cup pocket protection MG was collapsing from the edge? The Center named Pouncey who just so happens to be African American.
Again pouncey was not near him when he hit him or when they went to the ground. For christ sake it was a screen play. Pouncey was down field blocking. You said he would never dare say it because look at who his teammates are. I was simply pointing out riley cooper had a lot of teammates just like rudolph and that didn't stop him from using the racial slurs so you can't just assume because his teammates are mostly one race that he wouldn't use those terms.
-
If the same exact situation would have played out in reverse, the same people on here saying things like "it was like a pillow hitting Rudolph" would be demanding a public hanging for the Steelers player who did it to Baker.
I don't have a problem with Garrett being suspended for the rest of the season. My problem lies with Rudolph getting off without a second lost to suspension. My hope is that he gets his a week from tomorrow.
If the same exact situation would have played out in reverse, the same people on here saying things like "it was like a pillow hitting Rudolph" would be demanding a public hanging for the Steelers player who did it to Baker.
I don't have a problem with Garrett being suspended for the rest of the season. My problem lies with Rudolph getting off without a second lost to suspension. My hope is that he gets his a week from tomorrow.
That's been my argument all around and I completely agree with you man.
-
If the same exact situation would have played out in reverse, the same people on here saying things like "it was like a pillow hitting Rudolph" would be demanding a public hanging for the Steelers player who did it to Baker.
I don't have a problem with Garrett being suspended for the rest of the season. My problem lies with Rudolph getting off without a second lost to suspension. My hope is that he gets his a week from tomorrow.
the same people on here saying things like "it was like a pillow hitting Rudolph" would be demanding a public hanging
Don't speak for everyone because I have stated that I believe things like this should be handled internally. And it doesn't matter what team, if a Steelers player did this to Baker Mayfield I would expect the same punishment that Myles Garrett received.
Again I am looking for consistency. I have seen worse things happen on the football field and they got off for less.
-
Browns fans swing helmets at a Mason Rudolph piñata. Now that’s a tailgate party!
-
clevelanddotcom@clevelanddotcomCleveland’s newest game: Mason Rudolph piñata. -
Nice Freudian slip there Mason..."It's totally tru...UNTRUE"
Brooke Pryor@bepryorMason Rudolph on Myles Garrett’s accusation he used a racial slur in the Cleveland fight:
“It’s totally untrue. I couldn’t believe it. I couldn’t believe he would go that route after the fact.”The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one. -Mark Twain- "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." -Mark Twain- -
What's even more credible is every shred of evidence suggests he didn't say it. NFL said they have no audio, none of the refs heard it, none of his teammates heard it, Rudolph's AA coach said he wouldn't say that, etc. You go into court with that argument and a 4 year old would probably mop the floor with you.
Do you really want to compare your training and experience to mine when it comes to what constitutes "credible evidence"?
The fact is, you are just dead wrong about that, and allow me to explain why:
Let's look at what you claim to be evidence.
A. The NFL has no audio. There is no NFL audio of any of the "dialogue" that happened. Good bad or indifferent. You can't prove a negative with a negative. Its like saying: because there is no turd in htown's toilet, he must have never in his life ever had to take a shit.
B. And, Did you see the video? None of the refs and none of the teammates were anywhere close enough to hear anything that was going on in a face to face confrontation like that....There are bodies flying around, men grunting....and a ton of crowd noise. They can't say they heard it....because they cannot attest to anything that was said at that point where the two of them were down on the ground. They CANNOT say that A said this...and B said that....or that "I heard everything that was said and B did not say anything"
C. So Rudolph's AA coach said he would never say that? First off, WTF is an AA coach...and what is his relationship to Rudolph, and can he be qualified as a character witness. Furthermore, I am sure that many people could probably say "Oh, he is not the kind of guy that would say that.....but then that would be OK....if Rudolph were not put into a very stressful situation. He had thrown 4 Ints. he team was being whipped every way shape or form. He was frustrated, angry and he had just be pounded again by a guy that had been in his grill all night and there he was again, slamming him to the turf (which actually...Myles could have given him a lot worse). It is certainly highly possible, highly possible that all that had built up, and that he had done something that, yes, certainly was stupid and out of character of him to do. Just as, clearly, obviously, Myles did something that was stupid and out of character for him. In fact, equally or more credible would be the testimony of Myles teammates and coaches and friends etc..and whatever an AA coach is, that it would not be in his character to swing that helmet at him....
So, what are we left with?
The same evidence we had before.. The instantaneous "excited utterance" or physical action or reaction. It was clear that at that moment something happened to cause that harsh reaction. Furthermore, there was the statement made to Freddie in the locker room immediately after the incident. These lend credibility to Garrett's claim.
So, when you reach the age of 4, let us all know.
Do you really want to compare your training and experience to mine when it comes to what constitutes "credible evidence"?
The fact is, you are just dead wrong about that, and allow me to explain why:
Let's look at what you claim to be evidence.
A. The NFL has no audio. There is no NFL audio of any of the "dialogue" that happened. Good bad or indifferent. You can't prove a negative with a negative. Its like saying: because there is no turd in htown's toilet, he must have never in his life ever had to take a shit.
B. And, Did you see the video? None of the refs and none of the teammates were anywhere close enough to hear anything that was going on in a face to face confrontation like that....There are bodies flying around, men grunting....and a ton of crowd noise. They can't say they heard it....because they cannot attest to anything that was said at that point where the two of them were down on the ground. They CANNOT say that A said this...and B said that....or that "I heard everything that was said and B did not say anything"
C. So Rudolph's AA coach said he would never say that? First off, WTF is an AA coach...and what is his relationship to Rudolph, and can he be qualified as a character witness. Furthermore, I am sure that many people could probably say "Oh, he is not the kind of guy that would say that.....but then that would be OK....if Rudolph were not put into a very stressful situation. He had thrown 4 Ints. he team was being whipped every way shape or form. He was frustrated, angry and he had just be pounded again by a guy that had been in his grill all night and there he was again, slamming him to the turf (which actually...Myles could have given him a lot worse). It is certainly highly possible, highly possible that all that had built up, and that he had done something that, yes, certainly was stupid and out of character of him to do. Just as, clearly, obviously, Myles did something that was stupid and out of character for him. In fact, equally or more credible would be the testimony of Myles teammates and coaches and friends etc..and whatever an AA coach is, that it would not be in his character to swing that helmet at him....
So, what are we left with?
The same evidence we had before.. The instantaneous "excited utterance" or physical action or reaction. It was clear that at that moment something happened to cause that harsh reaction. Furthermore, there was the statement made to Freddie in the locker room immediately after the incident. These lend credibility to Garrett's claim.
OK.... I "unmasked" this one so I could quote it after reading it when it was quoted above and in full.
Well written... well thought out... except we still do not know what Freddie was told by MG... so that is hardly "furthermore" evidence.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Do you really want to compare your training and experience to mine when it comes to what constitutes "credible evidence"?
The fact is, you are just dead wrong about that, and allow me to explain why:
Let's look at what you claim to be evidence.
A. The NFL has no audio. There is no NFL audio of any of the "dialogue" that happened. Good bad or indifferent. You can't prove a negative with a negative. Its like saying: because there is no turd in htown's toilet, he must have never in his life ever had to take a shit.
B. And, Did you see the video? None of the refs and none of the teammates were anywhere close enough to hear anything that was going on in a face to face confrontation like that....There are bodies flying around, men grunting....and a ton of crowd noise. They can't say they heard it....because they cannot attest to anything that was said at that point where the two of them were down on the ground. They CANNOT say that A said this...and B said that....or that "I heard everything that was said and B did not say anything"
C. So Rudolph's AA coach said he would never say that? First off, WTF is an AA coach...and what is his relationship to Rudolph, and can he be qualified as a character witness. Furthermore, I am sure that many people could probably say "Oh, he is not the kind of guy that would say that.....but then that would be OK....if Rudolph were not put into a very stressful situation. He had thrown 4 Ints. he team was being whipped every way shape or form. He was frustrated, angry and he had just be pounded again by a guy that had been in his grill all night and there he was again, slamming him to the turf (which actually...Myles could have given him a lot worse). It is certainly highly possible, highly possible that all that had built up, and that he had done something that, yes, certainly was stupid and out of character of him to do. Just as, clearly, obviously, Myles did something that was stupid and out of character for him. In fact, equally or more credible would be the testimony of Myles teammates and coaches and friends etc..and whatever an AA coach is, that it would not be in his character to swing that helmet at him....
So, what are we left with?
The same evidence we had before.. The instantaneous "excited utterance" or physical action or reaction. It was clear that at that moment something happened to cause that harsh reaction. Furthermore, there was the statement made to Freddie in the locker room immediately after the incident. These lend credibility to Garrett's claim.
OK.... I "unmasked" this one so I could quote it after reading it when it was quoted above and in full.
Well written... well thought out... except we still do not know what Freddie was told by MG... so that is hardly "furthermore" evidence.
OK.... I "unmasked" this one so I could quote it after reading it when it was quoted above and in full.
Well written... well thought out... except we still do not know what Freddie was told by MG... so that is hardly "furthermore" evidence.
The fact that Freddie commented basically immediately after the game that Garrett told him that Rudolph said something to him that "he would not repeat" here, lends credibility to the fact that something was said, because it was, more or less, an "on the spot" statement. So, yes, it is evidence "furthermore". The question is what weight should it be given. It DOES refute the claim made by some on here that Garrett just made this up before he went into the hearing. It disabuses the notion perhaps that MG and Freddie somehow conspired to come up with this "defense"......
As my Evidence professor in law school taught us in one of our first lectures: Each item of of fact, each evidential point is basically a chip that you throw on the ante up pile. The more chips you have, the better for your case. If your opponent can steal some of your chips with their own facts, or there own evidential points, then you have to re-supply your ante, or block the effort of your opponent from stealing your chips..if you can.
You can have a very small chip.....say a $1.00 chip...or you can have a chip of massive value. A $1000.00 chip. Every chip counts for something, little or big. Freddie's revelation right after the game IS a chip of some undetermined value.
Could it have been a much bigger chip if he had not been coy....or deferential, or cautious? It may have been..... It may have even affected the whole narrative ab initio when the original punishment came down.
I guess Freddie felt he had to hold it close to his vest in order not to incite....something.....and not to disparage Rudolph and his character. Though, maybe, in retrospect, if Freddie honestly believed Garrett, he should not have been so deferential and cautious. If he believed Garrett, Maya would not have deserved the kind of respect that Freddie afforded him. In some sense, perhap Freddie diminished the value of that chip by not playing it right away.
-
Yes, diminished... as was MG's assertion.
I've attributed Freddie's silence to not betraying a confidence,in. However, in light of the NFL hearing leak, to continue down that path seems by far to be the lesser of his options in serving MG's interest. So I can give Freddie's being told something no weight.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Yes, diminished... as was MG's assertion.
I've attributed Freddie's silence to not betraying a confidence,in. However, in light of the NFL hearing leak, to continue down that path seems by far to be the lesser of his options in serving MG's interest. So I can give Freddie's being told something no weight.
Yes, diminished... as was MG's assertion.
I've attributed Freddie's silence to not betraying a confidence,in. However, in light of the NFL hearing leak, to continue down that path seems by far to be the lesser of his options in serving MG's interest. So I can give Freddie's being told something no weight.
Well as I have said I have given court room principles analysis in this whole thing which as we all know really doesn’t apply here because the NFL just makes up whatever rules ,evidence , anything that they want to do so that they can come up with whatever conclusion they want about how this thing should be done
-
-
Yes, diminished... as was MG's assertion.
I've attributed Freddie's silence to not betraying a confidence,in. However, in light of the NFL hearing leak, to continue down that path seems by far to be the lesser of his options in serving MG's interest. So I can give Freddie's being told something no weight.
Yes, diminished... as was MG's assertion.
I've attributed Freddie's silence to not betraying a confidence,in. However, in light of the NFL hearing leak, to continue down that path seems by far to be the lesser of his options in serving MG's interest. So I can give Freddie's being told something no weight.
I haven't read 20% of the thread, but here it is what I think:
Myles drags him, they exchange words and Mason says SOMETHING that infuriates Myles and sets everything off. Myles, ashamed, doesn't speak to nobody but his coach, knowing that he shouldn't have reacted that way, no matter the word, even if it is the N-word. (it's a disgusting word, but if someone whispers it and it sets you off you're only acting the way the "offender" wants you to).
Myles wasn't called the N-word, but something else. His agent and lawyer, knowing that it is his only possible defense, convince him to declare it using the N word, because in the end it was an offensive word what set him off.
Someone leaks it, and the NFL has audio evidence of both players in the wrong (Mason saying something he shouldn't, Myles being proved a liar), so Godell decides not to take any further actions.
That makes sense to me.
-
Yes, diminished... as was MG's assertion.
I've attributed Freddie's silence to not betraying a confidence,in. However, in light of the NFL hearing leak, to continue down that path seems by far to be the lesser of his options in serving MG's interest. So I can give Freddie's being told something no weight.
I haven't read 20% of the thread, but here it is what I think:
Myles drags him, they exchange words and Mason says SOMETHING that infuriates Myles and sets everything off. Myles, ashamed, doesn't speak to nobody but his coach, knowing that he shouldn't have reacted that way, no matter the word, even if it is the N-word. (it's a disgusting word, but if someone whispers it and it sets you off you're only acting the way the "offender" wants you to).
Myles wasn't called the N-word, but something else. His agent and lawyer, knowing that it is his only possible defense, convince him to declare it using the N word, because in the end it was an offensive word what set him off.
Someone leaks it, and the NFL has audio evidence of both players in the wrong (Mason saying something he shouldn't, Myles being proved a liar), so Godell decides not to take any further actions.
That makes sense to me.
I haven't read 20% of the thread, but here it is what I think:
Myles drags him, they exchange words and Mason says SOMETHING that infuriates Myles and sets everything off. Myles, ashamed, doesn't speak to nobody but his coach, knowing that he shouldn't have reacted that way, no matter the word, even if it is the N-word. (it's a disgusting word, but if someone whispers it and it sets you off you're only acting the way the "offender" wants you to).
Myles wasn't called the N-word, but something else. His agent and lawyer, knowing that it is his only possible defense, convince him to declare it using the N word, because in the end it was an offensive word what set him off.
Someone leaks it, and the NFL has audio evidence of both players in the wrong (Mason saying something he shouldn't, Myles being proved a liar), so Godell decides not to take any further actions.
That makes sense to me.
But no one ever confirmed that Myles claimed he said the n word just that Rudolph used a racial slur.
-
What is missing here is the two Steelers offensive linemen holding Garrett down.
-
What is missing here is the two Steelers offensive linemen holding Garrett down.
What is missing here is the two Steelers offensive linemen holding Garrett down.
That is really clever !
(but you need to smack the guy holding the stick first they wrestle him to the ground trying to unscrew his head and kick him in the nuts.....more realistic!
)
-
Yes, diminished... as was MG's assertion.
I've attributed Freddie's silence to not betraying a confidence,in. However, in light of the NFL hearing leak, to continue down that path seems by far to be the lesser of his options in serving MG's interest. So I can give Freddie's being told something no weight.
I haven't read 20% of the thread, but here it is what I think:
Myles drags him, they exchange words and Mason says SOMETHING that infuriates Myles and sets everything off. Myles, ashamed, doesn't speak to nobody but his coach, knowing that he shouldn't have reacted that way, no matter the word, even if it is the N-word. (it's a disgusting word, but if someone whispers it and it sets you off you're only acting the way the "offender" wants you to).
Myles wasn't called the N-word, but something else. His agent and lawyer, knowing that it is his only possible defense, convince him to declare it using the N word, because in the end it was an offensive word what set him off.
Someone leaks it, and the NFL has audio evidence of both players in the wrong (Mason saying something he shouldn't, Myles being proved a liar), so Godell decides not to take any further actions.
That makes sense to me.
I haven't read 20% of the thread, but here it is what I think:
Myles drags him, they exchange words and Mason says SOMETHING that infuriates Myles and sets everything off. Myles, ashamed, doesn't speak to nobody but his coach, knowing that he shouldn't have reacted that way, no matter the word, even if it is the N-word. (it's a disgusting word, but if someone whispers it and it sets you off you're only acting the way the "offender" wants you to).
Myles wasn't called the N-word, but something else. His agent and lawyer, knowing that it is his only possible defense, convince him to declare it using the N word, because in the end it was an offensive word what set him off.
Someone leaks it, and the NFL has audio evidence of both players in the wrong (Mason saying something he shouldn't, Myles being proved a liar), so Godell decides not to take any further actions.
That makes sense to me.
No, it doesn't....not one damned bit......because you have the fact pattern all wrong. Whatever was said by Rudolph was said while the two of them were on the ground wrestling. It was what Rudolph said, along with him trying to wrench Garrett's helmet off that infuriated him....causing him to then drag Rudolph by the helmet.
-
I haven't read 20% of the thread, but here it is what I think:
Myles drags him, they exchange words and Mason says SOMETHING that infuriates Myles and sets everything off. Myles, ashamed, doesn't speak to nobody but his coach, knowing that he shouldn't have reacted that way, no matter the word, even if it is the N-word. (it's a disgusting word, but if someone whispers it and it sets you off you're only acting the way the "offender" wants you to).
Myles wasn't called the N-word, but something else. His agent and lawyer, knowing that it is his only possible defense, convince him to declare it using the N word, because in the end it was an offensive word what set him off.
Someone leaks it, and the NFL has audio evidence of both players in the wrong (Mason saying something he shouldn't, Myles being proved a liar), so Godell decides not to take any further actions.
That makes sense to me.
No, it doesn't....not one damned bit......because you have the fact pattern all wrong. Whatever was said by Rudolph was said while the two of them were on the ground wrestling. It was what Rudolph said, along with him trying to wrench Garrett's helmet off that infuriated him....causing him to then drag Rudolph by the helmet.
No, it doesn't....not one damned bit......because you have the fact pattern all wrong. Whatever was said by Rudolph was said while the two of them were on the ground wrestling. It was what Rudolph said, along with him trying to wrench Garrett's helmet off that infuriated him....causing him to then drag Rudolph by the helmet.
We're not sure what he was called, but I've heard rumors it was the b word (boy).
Regardless of what was said, Rudolph looked weak in his response and guilty.
-
heh.
James Thrash is a former teammate of the other two yahoos. Go figure.
On Thursday, former NFL receiver James Thrash upheld the NFL’s indefinite suspension of Browns defensive end Myles Garrett. The decision prompted a reaction on social media.
Thrash has reacted to the reaction.
“Please stop tweeting me about the decision,” Thrash tweeted late Thursday afternoon. “This was a grueling process and the outcome is final. Player safety is what’s most important!!!”
*************************************************************
That logic goes out with the trash, Thrash. Player safety? what the hell about getting your helmet nearly ripped off, and kicked in the groin? starting the entire fiasco in the first place? what happened to the studio guy who said he HEARD it said ? Where is that audio? Did you interview the guy who said he heard it? Why didn't you suspend mason for at least one game?
Player safety your ass. It's "superbowl teams make big $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the NFL". AND, as Josh Cribbs is saying - "indefinite suspension" is not permitted in your so-called "rule book" that is supposed to apply to ALL TEAMS, NOT just your superbowl money making favorites !
Fans all over...most of the NFL - see how your "rules" don't apply when you don't want them to - and how your suspensions are not consistent. I wish I could Tweet you, you twit". (whine much?)
-
Licky boom boom down
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login