What a Tuel

1sts without Taylor

I tried one out here in Royalton and didnt get much of anything unfortunately. Ill probably bounce between Paramount and Peacock for those games. Not sure what ill do for fox/espn. Really wish the NFL or someone would come out with a standalone service. i dont want 100 channels i just want the games.

Yeah i got the trial just to watch this game. It tells me in market. Immediate canceling the trial. First only live games are available on mobile and tablet devices and now I cant even watch the hometown team. garbage.

coincidentally someone told me they heard at a bar mitzvah that McDuffie was disappointing the chiefs org.

It is indefensible, they signed him at all costs including ensuring effect of suspension is minimal. There is language in the contract that protects his signing bonus, so the fact that the browns did or didnt write the contract to benefit Watson and his situation is not really debatable. It just isn't really about the first year base salary being low. https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/03/18/source-deshaun-watson-deal-carves-out-potential-impact-of-suspension-for-pending-allegations/

I think that was the goal all along with them. The arbitrator is nothing more than a temperature test for the publics reaction. Not saying it isnt an independent decision but like you said, now the NFL can take a look at public reaction and adjust accordingly and let the arbitrator take the heat. If they blow it and give him anything less than a year, then it was all for nothing.

That was my question. If I put it on my tablet, can I just screencast to the TV. So that's probably a no, but not 100% sure yet? Come on NFL, I just wanna watch the games without paying for a $65 a month tv subscription i won't use for anything else.

So why would a Bills official say they can't get it done? Is it possible the Bills themselves arent interpreting the rules correctly? I know that sounds silly but crazier things have happened. Edit: I'm still obviously confused but are we saying the Bills 65 standing Buffalo prevents us from having another alternate helmet? so what Sal reported was right, but the rule doesn't apply to teams who don't already have an alternate / throwback helmet? (I thought at least the jets do, but maybe they gave the historical throwback helmet up?)

I am just going off of the Sal tweet from early in the thread that said the alternate helmet color can only be used by either color rush/alternate or throwback unis. I want the current uniform with the red helmet. TBH I want us to have our own identity with the red helmet and not dressing up as the 90s. "Spoke to Bills COO Ron Raccuia who told me the red helmet Josh Allen wore won’t be a helmet they wear in 2022 because the league only allows an alternate helmet with either: 1. Throwback unis 2. Color rush/alternate unis Bills can’t wear red helmet with the throwbacks because the throwbacks use the standing buffalo while the red Josh had on is the charging buffalo. No match Their color rush unis are all red. Can’t use it with those because all red head/toe is not their preferred look. So the Bills will either wait until the NFL changes policy and allows an alternate helmet with regular home/away uniforms, or wait to unveil a new alternate uniform themselves."

Allen's is pretty rough, I was super excited. Maybe the NFL will take notice of how excited people were and change the dumb rule. Are the Bengals uniforms color rush with the white helmet?

I am struggling to understand the "only played x playoff team" metric. I could be wrong but by my count every playoff team played between 5-8 playoff teams. We are really making a stink about 6 being a low amount? Max two games? I mean I couldve counted wrong somewhere but thats not a great metric. Then on top of it, yes we lost 4 of the 6, but we didn't get blown out of any of them. In fact, the 4 we lost were: Patriots Wind Game (go ahead and hold that against us, I am sure itll happen again 🙄) Titans came down to the last snap of the game Buccaneers came down to OT Steelers we lost and that one sucked We dismantled the Chiefs and the Patriots (part 2).

I don't even know if this is worth arguing about. I said: Which it does. This part of my post is separate from the other part of the post where I am literally asking a question not making a statement. You said: Which both answers my question correctly but also tells me I am wrong for thinking per the rules that a player cannot contact another team while under contact. They cannot, but the onus is on the team they contacted to show them the door and then advise the league which you stated. No need for arrogance, its just a discussion.

Well it does actually say what i thought, but they just blame the offending team like you said. Which is crazy in my opinion, it takes two to tango. Contact by Player. If a club is contacted by a player (or his representative) who is under contract to or whose negotiating rights are held by another club, and such player has not been given permission to negotiate with other clubs, or such player is not in a permissible negotiating period under the terms of an operative collective bargaining agreement, then the contacted club is prohibited from (i) negotiating with the player or his agent; (ii) discussing even in general terms the player’s possible employment with the contacted club; or (iii) discussing the player’s contract or his potential or ongoing contract negotiations with his current club In addition, the contacted club representative must inform the player or his representative that under NFL rules the club is not permitted to discuss such matters, and, if such matters are raised by or with the player or his representative, the club representative must immediately report such contact to the owner or operating head of the club that holds the player’s rights. Nothing in this section shall preclude a club from negotiating with the certified agent of a prospective Unrestricted Free Agent during the two-day negotiating period, subject to that provision’s prohibition against direct contact by the club with the player himself

May be true but even when the player clearly engages back and have active, meetings, and open discussions in response? What is the official tampering rule? Feel like it says "Players may not...." as well as "Teams may not..."

Wait now that I think about it, wasn't this all coming out publicly around the time Brady retired? It is too coincidental. I am theorizing that Brady found out this was coming out and planned to retire after the 2021 season to avoid tainting his "legacy" (already tainted but probably not to him) and getting suspended for the 2022 season which may have been his last. So then he gets assurances from the NFL that he wont get any sort of suspension for this and then unretires.