XXIVwin writes, "If an established reporter from and established source, (like Shefter, or Rappaport) reports something as fact, then yes, we can count on that to be true. :redcard:
Boy are you gullible.:baghead:
Yeah, I'll acknowledge I take this issue " a little too serious', as you would say. I don't really care about the undies in a twist thing. Honestly-- what ticks me off is when some people lump all reporters into the same pool. As if some dude passing on rumors has the same credibility as a reporter from an established organization (with rules of corroboration, and established journalistic standards).how is it insulting to tell everyone that these reporters are full of crap? Why because you posted it, so it's personal to you? I dunno man it sounds like you're taking this a little serious. I have no beef with you, nor do I care to elaborate further but I can post my opinion that people are wasting their time with these "reporters" and until an actual story breaks with some concrete evidence from a verified source my opinion will remain the same.
Also, it's insulting to tell you not to get your undies in a twist? Really? .... Really.....? Grow some thicker skin my friend this wont be the last time we disagree on something.
:argue:
Ok, just going off memory here, so I could be wrong. Last year, as Duane Brown was approaching week seven of his holdout, I remember there were some discussions of Brown needing to come in at least a week or two early to avoid the Texans declaring him unfit to play in a game or two and Brown not accruing a season. It sounded like something that normally wouldn't be an issue, but their negotiations had gotten ugly. Does anybody remember the details around that?I wonder if the wording of "material period of time" of section (b) would factor in if he were to hold out until week 10 (11) and not be ready to play the remaining six. If all he is looking to do at that point is accumulate his accrued year, I could see the club explore that argument.
Obviously, we all hope that it doesn't come to that but if he is trying to force their hand, I could see it.
View: https://twitter.com/mlombardinfl/status/1027905182649044999?s=21
If true this should help us. Donald’s agent probably hated hearing this news(assuming it’s accurate).
Gotta figure that his sources are just like most of these guys' sources - either non-existent or pretty much just another reporter guessing. The number is probably close but I'm pretty sure most of us could guess pretty close. Who knows. He may have a source. It didn't appear that even HE thought there was much substance to the # beyond an estimate.“Only” 22? Yes, if accurate i’d think this should help us
You can believe "established " talking heads, FoxNews, MSNBC lead anchors and who ever else you consider "established" all you want. I'm pushing 70 and I've leaned to question everything. Everyone has an agenda and twits things to fit their way of thinking, or what benefits them or their beliefs.
Your parents lied to you, your teachers at school lied to you, your government lies to you, and scientists lie you. They are all "established". Everyone lies.
You can believe that.
I agree with that guy, I think the hold up is the guaranteed and the structure of it.Re. the Mack report from Lombardi:
https://www.silverandblackpride.com...ack-looking-for-22m-per-year-others-skeptical
View: https://twitter.com/mlombardinfl/status/1027905182649044999?s=21
If true this should help us. Donald’s agent probably hated hearing this news(assuming it’s accurate).