The Truth about Myles/Rudolph
-
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 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the NFL". AND, as Josh Cribbs is saying - "indefinite suspension" is not permitted in your so-called "rule book" that is supposed to apply to ALL TEAMS, NOT just your superbowl money making favorites !
Fans all over...most of the NFL - see how your "rules" don't apply when you don't want them to - and how your suspensions are not consistent. I wish I could Tweet you, you twit". (whine much?)
-
Licky boom boom down
-
heh.
James Thrash is a former teammate of the other two yahoos. Go figure.
On Thursday, former NFL receiver James Thrash upheld the NFL’s indefinite suspension of Browns defensive end Myles Garrett. The decision prompted a reaction on social media.
Thrash has reacted to the reaction.
“Please stop tweeting me about the decision,” Thrash tweeted late Thursday afternoon. “This was a grueling process and the outcome is final. Player safety is what’s most important!!!”
*************************************************************
That logic goes out with the trash, Thrash. Player safety? what the hell about getting your helmet nearly ripped off, and kicked in the groin? starting the entire fiasco in the first place? what happened to the studio guy who said he HEARD it said ? Where is that audio? Did you interview the guy who said he heard it? Why didn't you suspend mason for at least one game?
Player safety your ass. It's "superbowl teams make big $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the NFL". AND, as Josh Cribbs is saying - "indefinite suspension" is not permitted in your so-called "rule book" that is supposed to apply to ALL TEAMS, NOT just your superbowl money making favorites !
Fans all over...most of the NFL - see how your "rules" don't apply when you don't want them to - and how your suspensions are not consistent. I wish I could Tweet you, you twit". (whine much?)
heh.
James Thrash is a former teammate of the other two yahoos. Go figure.
On Thursday, former NFL receiver James Thrash upheld the NFL’s indefinite suspension of Browns defensive end Myles Garrett. The decision prompted a reaction on social media.
Thrash has reacted to the reaction.
“Please stop tweeting me about the decision,” Thrash tweeted late Thursday afternoon. “This was a grueling process and the outcome is final. Player safety is what’s most important!!!”
*************************************************************
That logic goes out with the trash, Thrash. Player safety? what the hell about getting your helmet nearly ripped off, and kicked in the groin? starting the entire fiasco in the first place? what happened to the studio guy who said he HEARD it said ? Where is that audio? Did you interview the guy who said he heard it? Why didn't you suspend mason for at least one game?
Player safety your ass. It's "superbowl teams make big $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 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?)
OK. Yes, absolutely....this basically confirms that the ruling was NOT based on facts/evidence....but on optics/public relations. While player safety, yes, is important....it is a bullshit corporate line that he gives. If he were honest he could say: We have to punish players harshly who conduct themselves in this egregious manner...using a helmet as a potential weapon...that "could have" done serious harm to another player. That would have been at least an honest answer. But, The thing is....he is basing his ruling on the "what could have happened" and not on what did happen.
Disingenuous all around.
-
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.
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.
If this is true then my suspicions are correct. A word with a degree of plausible deniability, but a word that cuts nonetheless.
Frustrated people reach for words that cut. I have little tolerance for this kind of shit. It’s where intelligence meets racism and l prefer my racists to be dumb as shit so that l can spend less time identifying and dismissing them.
-
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.
If this is true then my suspicions are correct. A word with a degree of plausible deniability, but a word that cuts nonetheless.
Frustrated people reach for words that cut. I have little tolerance for this kind of shit. It’s where intelligence meets racism and l prefer my racists to be dumb as shit so that l can spend less time identifying and dismissing them.
If this is true then my suspicions are correct. A word with a degree of plausible deniability, but a word that cuts nonetheless.
Frustrated people reach for words that cut. I have little tolerance for this kind of shit. It’s where intelligence meets racism and l prefer my racists to be dumb as shit so that l can spend less time identifying and dismissing them.
You must be in all your glory with the MAGA crowd then... ?
-
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.
You are basing this totally on what Myles said happened. As of right now, there is no proof that Rudolph said anything.
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