Jump to content

Antonio Brown RELEASED, signed by PATS


Chandler#81

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, from_dunkirk said:

Nope. Stop it. Calling him racist is political. That's the point you don't get.

 

General comment to all:

 

Just for clarity, the rule isn't exactly "no political discussion".  If it's directly relevant to football (eg the politics of building a new stadium, politics of taking a knee during game) it's OK in that limited context.  Whether or not "calling him racist is political", expressing a viewpoint about the football player AB and his behavior/language is topical here.

But broadening it to general political discussion - please, take it to PPP or somewhere else.  Not OK. 



 

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

Calm the * down! Your attempt to hijack this potent thread speaks volumes to your AB ADHD. Newsflash: You’re not the only one with a view to express.

Double your meds.

 

I'll have you know that SeeBiscuit played college football!!!!  He is "in the know," ya know.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mark Vader said:

Second time that the Raiders have done it.

 

The first was Randy Moss.

There's got to be at least 10 players over the years. Some didn't work out like Ochocinco. But I'm tired of every team acting like they're too good for these players while NE swoops in and gets them for basically no compensation.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

how long til AB tweets out some criticism of Brady or Belichek, or complains that he's not getting the ball enough

 

hopefully as soon as Gordon has a good game or before.. Hopefully another JuJu type issue.  But even then, AB still performed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

So they could have put him on the "Reserved Left Squad" list and he doesn't play all year?  

 

Omg.  The Raiders are the worst run franchise in North American sports.  

 

I'd have put him on that and told him to pound sand.  

 

 

Didn't want to upset the Players union......................

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Can't see NE signing him. They sign guys who've been humbled for a year or two, guys who are cheap (maybe Brown will be this time) and guys willing to subvert themselves to the system, often because they've been out in the cold for long enough to make them desperate for a way back in. Brown shows no signs whatsoever of being willing to subvert himself to Belichick's system. 1000 to 1 shot right now, IMO.

 

I can see him getting a contract, but can't see any team giving him significant guarantees, and he asked out of Oakland when his guarantees disappeared. I wonder if he's going to take the year off. Purely a guess, but I think that's what will happen.

 

 

Saw the news about the Pats on the screen at Tony Roma's tonight eating with the wife.

 

Immediately thought about getting back here and pointing out how thunderously, magnificently wrong I was.

 

I mean, there's wrong, and then there's stunningly dumb, and that's what I was here. "1000 to 1 shot," jeez what an absolute eejit. This'll be a good thing for me to learn from. It's hard to be wronger than I was here.

 

I can't imagine him lasting on that team, but if I've proved anything today, it's that you shouldn't listen to me on this issue.

Edited by Thurman#1
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Saw the news about the Pats on the screen at Tony Roma's tonight eating with the wife.

 

Immediately thought about getting back here and pointing out how thunderously, magnificently wrong I was.

 

I mean, there's wrong, and then there's stunningly dumb, and that's what I was here. "1000 to 1 shot," jeez what an absolute eejit. This'll be a good thing for me to learn from. It's hard to be wronger than I was here.

 

I can't imagine him lasting on that team, but if I've proved anything today, it's that you shouldn't listen to me on this issue.

 

Actually, you made some good points. Brown's ego trip is still in the ascending. And the Pats willingness to sign him may be an indication that they are a bit concerned about the inevitable decline of Brady's skills, and more willing to take on a risky player.

 

 

Edited by 32ABBA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CSBill said:

 

He's not smart enough to orchestrate any of this. Don't give him that much credit.

 

 

My guess is it was suggested to him and he liked the idea... could have been his agent, his posse, or even Satan... All I know is that he sure looked pleased to be let go by his second team in less than a year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sandhill Mike said:

 

My guess is it was suggested to him and he liked the idea... could have been his agent, his posse, or even Satan... All I know is that he sure looked pleased to be let go by his second team in less than a year. 

Why would he be pleased to lose @ $39 million?

 

I still like Ryan Leaf's analysis, claiming that he simply doesn't want to play football anymore.

 

That would explain the pleased look on his face, and also suggest NE will have trouble with him too.

 

The saga isn't over yet.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

Now would be a great time for Gruden to decide to press charges over that recorded phone call

California
Under California law, it is a crime punishable by fine and/or imprisonment to record a confidential conversation without the consent of all parties, or without a notification of the recording to the parties via an audible beep at specific intervals. The California Supreme Court has defined a confidential conversation as one in which the parties have a reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or eavesdropping. In addition to criminal penalties, illegal recording can also give rise to civil damages.

CA Penal Code § 632 (definition & penalty), § 637.2 (civil damages), Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575 (Cal. 2002), Cal. Pub. Util. Code Gen. Order 107-B(II)(A)

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...