GaryPinC

I watched the video. You're right on with everything you're saying. It's not like that drunk girl was going to hurt anybody with those bag swings or weak punches, especially that dude who knocked her out. Guy was built and probably more than twice her weight, plus she punched him on the arm 2-3 times and he cold-cocks her like that. The way she fell I wouldn't be a bit surprised if she got a concussion. Dude should be arrested and everybody on that video and this board who think she got what she deserved should be ashamed of themselves for their lack of basic human compassion. That girl's obviously got major issues but no way does she deserve that. No way should a guy hit a woman but I certainly could understand if a guy's life or serious injury was imminent from a female assault. This was not anywhere near that type of situation.

JMO reading between the lines, I think Maybin isn't listening to/doing what the coaches are trying to teach him. He seems a bit too full of himself and maybe he "knows" how best to do things. Obviously he's working at it, so I wonder if he's just mentally immature. He's running out of time to grow up, and if/when he does get cut I'm sure he'll be blaming the coaches for not being able to coach him properly.

Mr. Peterson: Welcome to the working world, jackass. I guess your description would be apt if we didn't get PAID. Only most of the rest of us don't have the size paychecks you do.

Excellent post and one that I agree on completely. It's all about power for Smith, he wants to elevate the players to partners so they can control the money flow of the league. Seems like the owners made a fair offer on Friday and came way down on most of their demands. Smith had already made up his mind that unless he saw the detailed financials, they were decertifying. Seems like the owners are the only ones trying to seriously negotiate. Now that Smith has seen how much the owners were willing to negotiate, he will try and hammer even more out of them. At least the court case wasn't assigned to Doty this time.

1. I agree, but this can be shown without "opening your books". Of course it sounds like nothing will satisfy the players unless the owners do indeed open the books and that just isn't going to happen. Seems to me business owners only truly "open their books" to new potential owners. 2. I agree the players aren't controlling the league and the owners aim to keep it that way. Partnership means control, players are employees. Every company needs its employees but that doesn't mean they get to control the company. Define "justifiable" in a way everyone can agree on. That's at the crux of this disagreement, and neither side will fully agree. This league's been around quite a while and players are well paid. So why do they now need to become partners? 3. If the NBA is okay with players colluding to have their contracts expire at the same time so they can form their own "super" team that's fine. I don't agree with it and understand why the NFL does not want this to happen in their league. As I said in my first post corporations are not democracies. 4. You're making your own huge leap assuming the owners would be all over the press about losses/potential losses. What's worse than a bunch of millionares crying about money? A bunch of billionaires crying about money. Ever think maybe those billionaires realize this? 5. Nice. It'll be both sides' fault. I've met a number of the Browns players and have a connection inside the facility. Most of the players are not super spoiled and are pretty normal people. Of course the spoiled ones make it a bad rap for everybody. Outside of the spoiled players, it's probably the union leaders who are delusional about what the players deserve.

Why should the owners be transparent about it? Because their employees say so? The owners run the league and the teams. They are not a public company and are under no obligation to open their books. I feel a big, seldom discussed part of all this is that the owners don't want the players controlling the league, and I can't blame them for that. Look at the NBA, I think it's crap that players like Lebron/Wade/Bosh can get together and manipulate the fortunes of certain teams. Let's say the owners show the players negative percent changes in profits/revenues since the new CBA took effect. Would that be good enough? Probably not, but the NFL is not a democracy. It's great when commercial companies do profit sharing, etc. but there are plenty of companies in the world that aren't going to be doing any profit sharing ever. I've worked for some, and if they decide to give a bonus the first thing they'll say is "don't expect it again next year". The owners were stupid to sign the CBA last time around and the players are stupid to think they should be treated as equals in determining where the revenues go. That's why I don't think this lockout is going away anytime soon. Like others, I have issues with both sides but mildly favor the owners as I'm not a big fan of unions.

most of the commercials are just ridiculous. Bunch of unfunny marketing people jumping-the-shark with "comedy".

Agree completely, this is the thing that bothers me the most about those superbowl years. Dumb mistake but still can't believe the players mailed it in the rest of the game.

I agree and am surprised there wasn't a blanket policy prohibiting the wearing of team apparel. I don't go to dealerships very often (usually to pick up parts) but I've never seen a salesperson dressed less than professionally, and never seen any of them wearing anything expressing an opinion or favorite team. Generally salespeople try to connect with the customer and even wearing the home team's apparel may turn a customer off if they're not a fan or dislike football. That being said, if your boss calls you into the office as soon as you get in and tells you to change your tie, then tells you later again in the day, do you just ignore him and assume it's a joke?

Well, I must first thank you for being willing to put your life on the line to defend this country. You men and women are all true heroes. Certainly freedom of expression is an important right in this country, but when you choose to work at most jobs you give up certain freedoms. For example, you give up a lot of freedom to work in the military. Just because the constitution guarantees us certain freedoms does that mean you can exercise them whenever you want in the military? Same thing here but on a lesser scale. Image is everything in sales and this gentleman knows that. His boss requested/told him more than once to remove the tie and it went unheeded. Even though it's not the military, this salesman is part of a team that has standards for dress and appearance. Didn't bother any customers or hurt sales? Maybe a couple of customers just left without saying anything. The boss may have been a bit over the top but it's part of his job to ensure he doesn't lose business because of the way the salesman was dressed. The salesman was insubordinate, plain and simple. He can wear his Green Bay stuff outside of work.

You're right, it's a great point and I used to view JP that way. I guess I look at the fact that Wyche, Mularky and Fassel have reputations of being able to develop quarterbacks, I remember reading that Wyche was working JP on a 4 second timer in pre-season, trying to speed up his decision making process. These coaches and others in Seattle and Oakland have thus far failed with JP. JP's been around the league long enough and worked with enough respected coaches that I chalk it up to him not being good enough even in a stable environment. As far as Trent, Lee Evans didn't seem to like him from day 1 and I think it's because Trent had no ability to throw his receivers open nor spot throw them the ball and allow them to make a play around the DB. Too mechanical, robotic and he's a bit younger so maybe he can improve, in which case you can chalk it up to his new environment. Sad irony that we drafted 2 early round QB's in a row with great physical talent that can't handle the mental aspects of the NFL game. At this point I can't blame the coaching turnover for that, though I agree that giving a rookie QB stable coaching, environment, and time on the bench to adjust to the NFL before going in is the best way to do it.

I don't think it would have helped JP much. He's had Sam Wyche, Mularky, Fassel, and former quarterbacks like Schonert and Van Pelt coach him. He never seemed to be able to handle the reads/quick decisions and has never showed significant improvement in his career. Despite all his athletic ability he's never been able to master the mental components and probably never will no matter what the environment. Just doesn't have it, and I had high hopes for him when we came here.

"The appeals court ruling allows Leach to try to show Texas Tech's reasons for firing him were wrong, but without monetary relief. The appeals court also reinstated one of Leach's claims. The two sides will return to court to determine whether Texas Tech's allegations were "proper" against Leach in the Adam James situation, Dobrowski said." So Leach lost but the judge was willing to let him try and prove there was some kind of impropriety anyways. I guess the judge figures if Leach is too ignorant to see the error of his own ways let him keep spending money till he does. Good luck nailing down that subjective "proper". Sadly, he won't even be able to do that. Should have settled when Dicky Griggs offered. I wonder if Texas Tech still has to pay him his $1.2 mill buyout?

Winslow is a hell of a player, but liked to complain about all the pain his knee was in and seemed to always be dinged up on the Browns. The guy brought it on himself when he crashed his bike hot-dogging with it in a parking lot. Browns could have paid him next to nothing as he sat out but decided to be generous and pay a decent portion of his contract. He plays the game the right way but was bucking for a new contract with 2 years left on his and given his knee condition, propensity for getting injured, and how he liked to complain to the papers about it, I don't blame the Browns for cutting him loose. At that time everyone was wondering how many years of productive play they could get out of him. Colt seems to do well with Ben Watson and Evan Moore.

Problem is he's seldom interested anymore. I hear even before Mangini got fired that he's interested in a change of scenery. I'd rather see Kyle Williams in there, Rogers seems to like the salary but not the game.

That'd be great. If we could reprocess the pacific garbage patch into Nerf it'd be a double win for everyone!

But if we follow your logic of "blame the inanimate object with the capacity to kill" then we should level all the buildings and lower all the bridges (ie. take the gun away) so the person who decides to jump off won't be hurt. No thanks, I'd rather focus on the reality of why someone would decide to do such a terrible thing and try to prevent that decision from being made.

Maryland also didn't get a coach who was fired for insubordination. While Leach and the press like to focus on Adam James, at the time Texas Tech wanted Leach to sign a sheet outlining how he should handle injured players and write a "regret the situation" letter to the James family. Leach would have been fined and the matter closed; he'd still be coaching for TT. Leach refused and from the depositions I looked through, they indirectly indicate Leach became verbally belligerent when asked to cooperate with the TT administration. Here's some links to some court depositions and exhibits. Parts are missing from many, I focussed on Leach's deposition which is fairly complete. http://www.doubletnation.com/2010/5/6/1460333/leach-and-james-fire-back-world http://today.ttu.edu/2010/05/texas-tech-files-motion-to-dismiss-mike-leach-lawsuit/ Sadly, Texas Tech has done a poor job of highlighting the real motivation behind Leach's firing, but it's there in Leach's own statements. In my view, even if a university's athletic director is highly interested in Leach it'll be difficult for the university administration to support the hire once they delve into the nuts and bolts of the TT case. There's even an email sent by TT pres Hance indicating his frustration at the time with Leach's unwillingness to cooperate. TT didn't really want to fire Leach, he brought it on himself. Certainly Leach's ability to win may trump everything (as I thought with this MD situation) but it's good to see MD come to their senses. Don't get me wrong, Leach is a good and unique college football coach who built a solid, successful program at TT and I'd like to see him back as a head coach. Personalities like him are part of why I enjoy college football. Problem is, his ego is out of control. He doesn't need a slice, he needs 2-3 humble pies to bring him back to reality. My hope is that no one (except for a community college) hires him as a HC until he accepts responsibility for the TT situation. If Leach can come to that realization, I think he's on his way to becoming one of the elite college coaches. Chances are though that a smaller FBS univ desperate to build a winning program will take a chance on Leach, or he'll become an OC somewhere. Just hope it's not till 2012.

The one thing IMO that gets overlooked about Fitzy is the quality of the offense around him and how much better he makes it look. Our O-line immediately looked better when he took over. He's making rookie wide receivers look better. Once Fitzy has a seasoned O-line and receivers, I think that will cut down on his mistakes. But he'll always have some. For those who say Fitzy isn't clutch, that throw to Stevie against Pittsburgh was as clutch as it gets. It was a perfect pass and shows Fitzy has "it". He is definitely the leader of this offense and deserves to stay there next season.

Gailey has a history of getting quality play out of marginal QB's. Why do you think Gailey believed he couldn't do it again with Trent? As far as analyzing film, how do you separate QB performance from poor offensive scheme? Sure Fitz did better than Trent last year, but ultra-conservative Jauron was gone. As Gailey went over the films, I doubt he knew the exact play calls and any last second adjustments/audibles. So, were Trent's short passes the desired plays or Trent's deficiency? Jauron certainly seemed to like what Trent was doing. I can't remember which preseason game I saw(maybe game 3), but I watched Trent throw mid-range passes, be aggressive in the pocket, and make good plays. I thought he looked like a much improved quarterback over last season. You're right about Gailey blowing this but I am willing to give him credit for giving players a chance and correcting his mistakes quickly. No one on this planet can be right about everything and IMO it's more important to make things right rather than pretend you're always right. Gailey could have dug his heels in and stuck with Trent just like Jauron did. Also, with the need to infuse more talent on this team, I give Gailey credit for making sure he's not accidentally letting some go. Especially at the QB position.

Spiller just needs time (&playing) to adjust to the NFL game. Early in the year he was trying to use his speed all the time and not following his blocks; he didn't understand timing and how to execute on any given play to maximize his abilities. Towards the middle of the year he had no field vision and was trying to get comfortable with following the flow of the play. This past Sunday was clear his vision and timing were better (though not there yet). He was cutting more and waiting for plays to develop, but his field vision still seems limited so he isn't comfortable yet. Gailey is obviously starting to work him in more and that should continue. I think that Spiller has finally reached the point that he understands how to execute/time plays, now he needs reps so he can start to see the entire field better and really start to use his full talent. I don't think he'll break out this coming Sunday but am thinking one of the last 2 games of the year he will. We'll see, some players require more patience than others.

Thanks for posting the great write-up San Jose. I was impressed with how our line did against the Browns. It'll be exciting to see if the Wood move to center becomes permanent after the season plays out. From the sounds of Chan Gailey's compliments, Rinehart has a real shot to become our starting right guard. One of the best parts of this season is watching the interior of our O-line start to solidify. When healthy, Cordero Howard plays a pretty good guard and I think would be a great backup. Future line: D. Bell, Levitre, Wood, maybe Rhinehart, RT. If Rhinehart doesn't cut it, one of Howard/Hangartner should be able to do the job. This may be the beginning of a dominant offensive line in 2 years. They definitely need to address the tackle position and find a good backup out there also, but for the first time since the SB years I really like where this line is going.

I think all teams do this. I know Cleveland does, but I've heard of players working out for Cowboys, etc this year.

I'm starting to wonder if Moats can fill the LB rusher role. It'll be interesting watching him these last 3 games.

Very true. 0-8 as the players try to learn the new schemes and the coaches try and adjust the schemes to the players on hand. 3-2 since the players have become comfortable with the schemes.