Jump to content

SectionC3

Community Member
  • Posts

    7,136
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

3,406 profile views

SectionC3's Achievements

Veteran

Veteran (6/8)

3.2k

Reputation

  1. The point is that daboll got along with most everyone and said goodbye to role in person and the right way. It’s reflective of a good relationship. Josh and Diggs parted ways, apparently, with a text message. That parting speaks for itself. There was friction there.
  2. Diggs wears makeup, yes. There was a stupid dispute about whether the makeup bag could come into the locker room. Who counts and reports any votes for captain? As for the bad interactions, ask around if you have any LEO friends. The guy is a jerk. From what I understand somebody eventually put their foot down with him late in the season and that ended it. Case in point - after Daboll left for the Giants, he was back here for the summer. From what I understand, he said goodbye to a lot of the guys before camp started, including Allen, in person at his house. That was a good relationship. Other relationships end with text messages and the team paying to send a malcontent on his way.
  3. This might be true. I don’t know. But I know the other stuff to be true, and that Diggs was an enormous headache that they were tired of dealing with.
  4. That says it all. The people who saw him every day paid for him to leave.
  5. This is just a guess, but I suspect he was named a captain to try to calm him down a little bit. Now, on the other hand, I can say with near certainty that he was a major malcontent at least last year. Chronic lateness, special parking spot to help him be less late, arguments over stupid things like his makeup, bad interactions with law enforcement (he's simply a jerk; nothing violent or criminal, at least to my knowledge), stopped talking to Cook altogether at one point last year, broken relationship with Allen. And this is just what I've heard about. Best for both sides that he's gone. See above. All of that stuff is 2023.
  6. The best of what likely is a bad lot. But not one that would give me a ton of hope.
  7. That might be the explanation . There’s a difference between mischaracterizing a campaign expense and not declaring a campaign expense. I don’t know anything about the Hillary issue, though, so not fair for me to say. And, in any event, it doesn’t change that what trump did is a crime.
  8. I’ll give it you you straight. The FEC expert contention is garbage. Anyone pushing that doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Experts don’t opine on conclusions of law. Now, precluding testimony that the FEC determined not to charge Trump is a different ball of wax. That’s a discretionary call. I think it should have come in. Others may disagree. And, even if the first department agrees with me, the question will be whether the error is harmless under a nonconstituonal standard. I doubt that it is, although I didn’t sit through the trial. Venue contentions also are trash for reasons that distill to each juror either did or should have unequivocally assured impartiality. If that didn’t happen (highly unlikely) then it’s on defense counsel to object/challenge. Absence of objection there potentially is ineffective assistance of counsel but only through a 440 motion. But I’d doubt that would be raised because it seems like trump is going to do the unorthodox thing of having Blanche handle the post-trial litigation (who likely won’t contend that he was ineffective). sufficieny and weight contentions don’t have legs. Having read the final jury instructions and assuming the media reports of the *****, cohen, and hicks testimony are accurate, it’s a slam dunk on the facts. (This case is incredibly complicated on the law, but once one understands that piece, it’s pretty easy on the facts.) statute of limitations challenge similarly is junk. That contention involves only the felonies, for which the statute had not run. so there’s your nonpartisan analysis. All of these whiners about rigged trial and whatnot are clueless. Want to say that he shouldn’t have been prosecuted? I’ll listen. Maybe there’s an appellate argument laying around somewhere about unequal enforcement of this law. But the jury appears (see above re media reports) to have done the right thing on this all day long.
  9. I thought it was Lysol. Or maybe some yummy HCQ. Hoax.
  10. Isn't she the senator from Maine who supported a candidate for president who chanted "Lock Her Up" about a political opponent who had not been convicted of a crime? I'll be happy once he gets around to defining insurrection. Hoax.
  11. None. Another magat talking out of his rear.
  12. They move him around a bit and put him in motion a fair amount to help scheme him open. Stat line, based on the last 11 games of last year, should be somewhere around 70/850/4.
  13. This brings back so many bad memories. There's too many candidates from the Gregg and Dickball eras. I can't even go there. I'll go with a couple of nice fits of anger instead of a player who regularly made me mad. Nate Clements, knock the ball down. Bryce Brown, hang on to the ball. Nathan Hackett, don't throw the ball at the goal line early in the set of downs with Jeff Tuel. EJ Manuel, hit Stevie Johnson somewhere other than the shins on third down against New England.
  14. It's a good point about bigger corners. I read the commentary from Thad earlier in the thread, and I have to say I have no idea how Elam's (larger) size impairs his fit in this defense. Douglas fits in this defense. Benford, who is probably about 20 pounds heavier than Elam and the same height, fits in this defense. Josh Norman has long fit in this defense. And so have smaller corners like Levi Wallace. So, contrary to Thad's point, I'm a little lost as to how size dictates fit at that position in this D, and I too am hopeful that Elam can figure things out.
  15. After watching one JAG (Sherfield) and a guy who played like a JAG (Diggs) single-handedly screw up the divisional round game I think they opt for more quantity this year in the hopes that lightning strikes with a younger guy (shorter, claypool, hamler, whomever).
×
×
  • Create New...