collapse

Resources

Recent Posts

Proposed rule changes( coaching challenges) by romey
[Today at 11:08:46 AM]


Pope Leo XIV by cheebs09
[Today at 10:47:28 AM]


Ethan Johnston to Marquette by Spotcheck Billy
[May 10, 2025, 10:16:15 PM]


Kam update by #UnleashSean
[May 09, 2025, 10:29:30 PM]


Recruiting as of 4/15/25 by MuMark
[May 09, 2025, 03:09:00 PM]


OT MU adds swimming program by The Sultan
[May 09, 2025, 12:10:04 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!


ChicosBailBonds

2008 NFL revenue = $6.4billion

2014 = $9.3 billion

By 2018 with the new contracts, looking at $16 billion

That's incredible growth, and that's what he is ultimately paid to do.

NavinRJohnson

Did they see the tape?  Did they not see the tape?  Did they ask to see it? Did they not ask to see it?  Were they not granted access? Did they do enough to get access? In the end the answers to those questions all lead to the exact same  place...the NFL and the Ravens simply don't care about this. It isn't/wasn't important to them. There is just no getting around it.

They aren't reacting now because they are concerned about domestic violence, they are reacting because of the public's reaction. They are reacting because they have to. Their concern around domestic violence on the part of their players is about the impact on their business, not the impact on the victims. Everybody can see that plain as day now, and it is for that reason that goddell's days are numbered. They will fond someone else who can make them money, but I just don't suspect they will be able to continue with him as the face of that office.

Dish

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on September 10, 2014, 09:51:33 AM
Did they see the tape?  Did they not see the tape?  Did they ask to see it? Did they not ask to see it?  Were they not granted access? Did they do enough to get access? In the end the answers to those questions all lead to the exact same  place...the NFL and the Ravens simply don't care about this. It isn't/wasn't important to them. There is just no getting around it.

They aren't reacting now because they are concerned about domestic violence, they are reacting because of the public's reaction. They are reacting because they have to. Their concern around domestic violence on the part of their players is about the impact on their business, not the impact on the victims. Everybody can see that plain as day now, and it is for that reason that goddell's days are numbered. They will fond someone else who can make them money, but I just don't suspect they will be able to continue with him as the face of that office.

Bravo sir, well said.

brandx

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on September 10, 2014, 09:51:33 AM
Did they see the tape?  Did they not see the tape?  Did they ask to see it? Did they not ask to see it?  Were they not granted access? Did they do enough to get access? In the end the answers to those questions all lead to the exact same  place...the NFL and the Ravens simply don't care about this. It isn't/wasn't important to them. There is just no getting around it.

They aren't reacting now because they are concerned about domestic violence, they are reacting because of the public's reaction. They are reacting because they have to. Their concern around domestic violence on the part of their players is about the impact on their business, not the impact on the victims. Everybody can see that plain as day now, and it is for that reason that goddell's days are numbered. They will fond someone else who can make them money, but I just don't suspect they will be able to continue with him as the face of that office.

From a few minutes ago:

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) — A law enforcement official says he sent a video of Ray Rice punching his then-fiancee to an NFL executive three months ago, while league officers have insisted they didn't see the violent images until this week.
The person played The Associated Press a 12-second voicemail from an NFL office number on April 9 confirming the video arrived. A female voice expresses thanks and says: "You're right. It's terrible."

tower912

If true....boom goes the dynamite.   
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

NavinRJohnson


SaintPaulWarrior

#481
More good news for the NFL.

http://deadspin.com/report-adrian-peterson-indicted-in-child-injury-case-1634160368?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow


Fox Houston reports that Vikings running back Adrian Peterson has been indicted in Montgomery County, Texas, for reckless or negligent injury to a child.

According to Fox Houston's Isiah Carey, the charges stem from allegations that Peterson "beat his young son." Child Protective Services confirmed to TMZ that it has a case involving Peterson and an 11-year-old boy.

NFL.com's Ian Rapaport adds this detail:


Jay Glazer adds that Peterson has been cooperating with law enforcement, and will now have to turn himself in to authorities. Rapaport notes that Peterson testified before a grand jury weeks ago.

Peterson keeps a home in Houston suburb The Woodlands, which lies in Montgomery County.

Peterson missed yesterday's team practice for what coach Mike Zimmer called a "veteran's day." He was back with the Vikings today.


Things are still getting sorted out, but here's some background on Texas law, from the online statutes. This appears to be what Peterson was indicted on:

Sec. 22.04. INJURY TO A CHILD, ELDERLY INDIVIDUAL, OR DISABLED INDIVIDUAL. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence, by act or intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly by omission, causes to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual:

(1) serious bodily injury;

(2) serious mental deficiency, impairment, or injury; or

(3) bodily injury.

As for if this was child abuse, Texas defines it separately in a family law chapter. So abuse is not a charge, but it is defined. You can see the very lengthy definition here: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/FA/htm/FA...

wadesworld

Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on September 12, 2014, 04:11:15 PM
More good news for the NFL.

http://deadspin.com/report-adrian-peterson-indicted-in-child-injury-case-1634160368?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow


Fox Houston reports that Vikings running back Adrian Peterson has been indicted in Montgomery County, Texas, for reckless or negligent injury to a child.

According to Fox Houston's Isiah Carey, the charges stem from allegations that Peterson "beat his young son." Child Protective Services confirmed to TMZ that it has a case involving Peterson and an 11-year-old boy.

NFL.com's Ian Rapaport adds this detail:


Jay Glazer adds that Peterson has been cooperating with law enforcement, and will now have to turn himself in to authorities. Rapaport notes that Peterson testified before a grand jury weeks ago.

Peterson keeps a home in Houston suburb The Woodlands, which lies in Montgomery County.

Peterson missed yesterday's team practice for what coach Mike Zimmer called a "veteran's day." He was back with the Vikings today.


Things are still getting sorted out, but here's some background on Texas law, from the online statutes. This appears to be what Peterson was indicted on:

Sec. 22.04. INJURY TO A CHILD, ELDERLY INDIVIDUAL, OR DISABLED INDIVIDUAL. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence, by act or intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly by omission, causes to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual:

(1) serious bodily injury;

(2) serious mental deficiency, impairment, or injury; or

(3) bodily injury.

As for if this was child abuse, Texas defines it separately in a family law chapter. So abuse is not a charge, but it is defined. You can see the very lengthy definition here: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/FA/htm/FA...


Yup.  If this is bad and Peterson is suspended for an extended amount of time, what looked like a *great* (7-9) season for the Vikings just went down the crapper.  3-13 here they come.

brandx

Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on September 12, 2014, 04:11:15 PM
More good news for the NFL.

According to Fox Houston's Isiah Carey, the charges stem from allegations that Peterson "beat his young son." Child Protective Services confirmed to TMZ that it has a case involving Peterson and an 11-year-old boy.


Goodell and Mueller confirm it's illegal to contact Child Protective Services.

brandx

Quote from: wadesworld on September 12, 2014, 04:22:47 PM
Yup.  If this is bad and Peterson is suspended for an extended amount of time, what looked like a *great* (7-9) season for the Vikings just went down the crapper.  3-13 here they come.

Ponder will come to the rescue.

Canned Goods n Ammo

#485
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on September 12, 2014, 04:11:15 PM
More good news for the NFL.

http://deadspin.com/report-adrian-peterson-indicted-in-child-injury-case-1634160368?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow


Fox Houston reports that Vikings running back Adrian Peterson has been indicted in Montgomery County, Texas, for reckless or negligent injury to a child.

According to Fox Houston's Isiah Carey, the charges stem from allegations that Peterson "beat his young son." Child Protective Services confirmed to TMZ that it has a case involving Peterson and an 11-year-old boy.

NFL.com's Ian Rapaport adds this detail:


Jay Glazer adds that Peterson has been cooperating with law enforcement, and will now have to turn himself in to authorities. Rapaport notes that Peterson testified before a grand jury weeks ago.

Peterson keeps a home in Houston suburb The Woodlands, which lies in Montgomery County.

Peterson missed yesterday's team practice for what coach Mike Zimmer called a "veteran's day." He was back with the Vikings today.


Things are still getting sorted out, but here's some background on Texas law, from the online statutes. This appears to be what Peterson was indicted on:

Sec. 22.04. INJURY TO A CHILD, ELDERLY INDIVIDUAL, OR DISABLED INDIVIDUAL. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence, by act or intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly by omission, causes to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual:

(1) serious bodily injury;

(2) serious mental deficiency, impairment, or injury; or

(3) bodily injury.

As for if this was child abuse, Texas defines it separately in a family law chapter. So abuse is not a charge, but it is defined. You can see the very lengthy definition here: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/FA/htm/FA...

Edit:

Nevermind.

Looks like AP might have beat him with a switch. Not good.

4everwarriors

So what. Peterson came back better than ever from ACL surgery, a'ina?
"Give 'Em Hell, Al"

wadesworld

Quote from: 4everwarriors on September 12, 2014, 05:39:35 PM
So what. Peterson came back better than ever from ACL surgery, a'ina?

I don't mean this to come off in the wrong way, but of all the people out there you would think someone who lost a child to an adult beating (granted, he never knew the child) would not be someone who beats his own child.  Sad, dark world sometimes.

Dish

He should never play again. EVER.

wadesworld


brandx

Quote from: wadesworld on September 12, 2014, 05:49:59 PM
On a lighter note, because I can and because it's fun, this article is pretty darn spot on.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11505329/flem-file-chicago-bears-quarterback-jay-cutler-never-just-right

I read it this morning and was gonna post the link - but it's just too easy with Cutler.

brandx


jesmu84

Posted in Rice thread... maybe belongs here:

The Greg Hardy 911 call... wow.

brandx

Goodell isn't the only one who can't be trusted.

The pretrial intervention program offered to Ray Rice in the assault case involving his wife was granted in less than 1 percent of all domestic violence assault cases from 2010-13 that were resolved, according to New Jersey Judiciary data obtained Friday by "Outside the Lines."

jesmu84

NFL/NFLPA just passed a new drug policy. Wes Welker and Orlando Scandrick re-instated

Dish

Quote from: brandx on September 12, 2014, 06:29:01 PM
I read it this morning and was gonna post the link - but it's just too easy with Cutler.

Sadly, that's probably the happiest written NFL story this season too.

ChitownSpaceForRent

unnatural carnal knowledge that article about Cutler. Seriously.

jesmu84

Only think I'll say about the Cutler article is that rarely has Jay ever made the claims that the article is implying he made: need an offensive coach, need receivers, etc. etc. Media, analysts and "journalists" often came out and said how those things would help Jay reach his potential. As well, he almost always takes the blame for his own mistakes when approached about them, just like the end of the article shows (though it tries to imply that was the first time ever that he did it)

ChitownSpaceForRent

Quote from: jesmu84 on September 12, 2014, 07:39:10 PM
Only think I'll say about the Cutler article is that rarely has Jay ever made the claims that the article is implying he made: need an offensive coach, need receivers, etc. etc. Media, analysts and "journalists" often came out and said how those things would help Jay reach his potential. As well, he almost always takes the blame for his own mistakes when approached about them, just like the end of the article shows (though it tries to imply that was the first time ever that he did it)

This. That and when he did have an excuse like a torn miniscus they ripped him anyways.

brandx

Quote from: jesmu84 on September 12, 2014, 07:39:10 PM
Only think I'll say about the Cutler article is that rarely has Jay ever made the claims that the article is implying he made: need an offensive coach, need receivers, etc. etc. Media, analysts and "journalists" often came out and said how those things would help Jay reach his potential. As well, he almost always takes the blame for his own mistakes when approached about them, just like the end of the article shows (though it tries to imply that was the first time ever that he did it)

I read the article a bit differently. I felt he was saying that other people always had excuses for Jay's play, not that Jay was complaining about it. But, Bear fans especially have excused his play even as he marched the Bears through the playoffs year after year. :o

Sorry, I cant help myself when it comes to Jay.

Previous topic - Next topic