Super Bowl LI

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Feb 05, 2016 4:28 pm

Clipping
Illegal Crackback Block
Chop Block
Illegal “Peel Back” Block
Blocking Below the Waist on Kicks and Changes of Possession
Unnecessary Roughness
[Unnecessary Contact Against] Players in a Defenseless Posture
Initiating Contact with the Crown of the Helmet
Rouging the Passer
Roughing/Running Into the Kicker
Roughing the Holder
Striking, Kicking, or Kneeing Opponents
Striking with Forearms or Elbows
Facemask
Horse-Collar Tackle
Use of the Helmet as a Weapon
Illegal Cut Block

Hrothgar · Post by **Hrothgar** » Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:11 pm

I'm pretty sure there was at least one game last year where JJ Watt had two roughing penalties. I can only imagine the howls if he'd been ejected. Then you'd get into the problem of refs not wanting to flag big name stars. Yeah, that sounds like a mess.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:24 pm

Terrible idea.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Fri Feb 05, 2016 10:43 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:Personal Fouls:

Roughing the Holder

Honestly, we need to see more of this, not less.

This was not called roughing the holder and not a personal foul.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Feb 06, 2016 12:06 am

Chris Conte of the Buccaneers tried the old jump-the-line-and-block-the-field-goal play. But he missed, hit the Colts' holder, and was called for a rare "leaping" penalty, giving the Colts a first down.

Leaping is classified as unsportsmanlike conduct.

There shall be no unsportsmanlike conduct. This applies to any act which is contrary to the generally understood principles of sportsmanship. Such acts specifically include, among others:
...
s. Running forward and leaping in an obvious attempt to block a field goal or Try Kick and landing on players, unless the leaping player was originally lined up within one yard of the line of scrimmage when the ball was snapped.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Feb 06, 2016 12:26 am

ESPN

If Johnny Manziel doesn't receive help, he won't make it to his next birthday, his father told The Dallas Morning News on Friday.

Manziel's father, Paul, told the newspaper that the Cleveland Browns quarterback has refused to enter area rehab facilities twice in the past week. He said the family tried to get Manziel to enter a local addiction facility on Saturday, but Manziel refused to stay. Paul Manziel said he tried to have his son admitted to a psychiatric and chemical dependency hospital on Tuesday, but Manziel was allowed to leave even though his father told officers that he believed Manziel was suicidal.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sat Feb 06, 2016 1:38 am

Isgrimnur wrote:
Chris Conte of the Buccaneers tried the old jump-the-line-and-block-the-field-goal play. But he missed, hit the Colts' holder, and was called for a rare "leaping" penalty, giving the Colts a first down.
Leaping is classified as unsportsmanlike conduct.

There shall be no unsportsmanlike conduct. This applies to any act which is contrary to the generally understood principles of sportsmanship. Such acts specifically include, among others:
...
s. Running forward and leaping in an obvious attempt to block a field goal or Try Kick and landing on players, unless the leaping player was originally lined up within one yard of the line of scrimmage when the ball was snapped.

Which isn't on the personal foul list...

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Feb 06, 2016 1:44 pm

You are correct.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:19 pm

Breaking down sexual assault allegations against Peyton Manning

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:42 pm

Moliere wrote:Breaking down sexual assault allegations against Peyton Manning

It was striking me as curious as to the timing of all of this...

article wrote:Michael McCann is a legal analyst and writer for Sports Illustrated. He is also a Massachusetts attorney

Oh, ok. Now I get it.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:08 pm

HGH and steroids? No, look over there, he mooned a chick!

Fuck Peyton.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Sun Feb 14, 2016 2:17 am

RunningMn9 wrote:
Moliere wrote:Breaking down sexual assault allegations against Peyton Manning
It was striking me as curious as to the timing of all of this...

article wrote:Michael McCann is a legal analyst and writer for Sports Illustrated. He is also a Massachusetts attorney
Oh, ok. Now I get it.

If you read the original king article, you'll see the way the timing worked out (allegedly).

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:24 am

Pyperkub wrote:If you read the original king article, you'll see the way the timing worked out (allegedly).

I was just noting that the guy that wrote the article is a MA lawyer, which made me snicker that he is a Pats fan and is obviously smarting from Deflategate.

I just read the King article. That's the first time in my life that I've ever heard an assistant trainer (at the time) referred to as "gifted".

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 3:19 am

RunningMn9 wrote:
Pyperkub wrote:If you read the original king article, you'll see the way the timing worked out (allegedly).
I was just noting that the guy that wrote the article is a MA lawyer, which made me snicker that he is a Pats fan and is obviously smarting from Deflategate.

I just read the King article. That's the first time in my life that I've ever heard an assistant trainer (at the time) referred to as "gifted".

Well, Peyton gave her a very unwelcome gift apparently...

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 12:05 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:I just read the King article. That's the first time in my life that I've ever heard an assistant trainer (at the time) referred to as "gifted".

Out of curiosity, do you read a lot of articles discussing the relative merits and gifts of college level assistant trainers?

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 12:44 pm

It was all just a mooning prank gone horribly wrong.

This is all kinds of bad. It's one thing to place your butthole against a lady's face. I'm not going to excuse it, but we've all been there. Am I right???

But if the allegations are true and he's out there trying to screw her over after he's the one who wronged her, then fuck him indeed.

Xmann · Post by **Xmann** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 3:17 pm

It was all just a mooning prank gone horribly wrong.

This is all kinds of bad. It's one thing to place your butthole against a lady's face. I'm not going to excuse it, but we've all been there. Am I right???

I just laughed uncontrollably and had everyone in the office looking oddly at me.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:03 pm

ImLawBoy wrote:Out of curiosity, do you read a lot of articles discussing the relative merits and gifts of college level assistant trainers?

Maybe not as many as I should.

The over the top presentation of just how much of an exceptional assistant trainer she was just seemed odd, like it was written by her publicist or agent. I don't even know what it means to be a "gifted" assistant athletic trainer.

I'd be real curious to know what the earlier incident was that set the stage for Peyton's animosity towards her.

As for the timing of this coming out now, I would assume the settlement funds maybe are running dry and you've got to strike while Peyton's still in the spotlight caring about his legacy. If he did things as presented though, fuck him.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:10 pm

Unsurprisingly given the adequate performance of Langford and Carey, the Bears told Forte to find work elsewhere. Speculation has Robbie Gould following suit as his performance this year wasn't deemed worth his premium price.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:20 pm

The Peyton stuff is coming out because it was mentioned in a Title IX lawsuit - it doesn't really have anything to do with Peyton and isn't asking anything of him. It's simply using this as an example of how Tennessee failed to make it's workplace safe for everyone. It's really old news that people are acting like this is the first time they ever heard of it.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:24 pm

stessier wrote: It's really old news that people are acting like this is the first time they ever heard of it.

It's the first I've heard of it.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:39 pm

I'm pretty sure I never read a story that involved Peyton's anus and penis before.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:45 pm

Some context. The 74-page finding of facts that the Daily News guy reported as gospel is the filing that her lawyers made in her lawsuit against him. As PFT notes, it's an advocacy piece, obviously biased against Manning.

Which doesn't make him innocent, it's just curious to me why the DN reporter is so gung ho. Although it explains where his over the top descriptions of the woman are coming from (her lawyers).

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 6:44 pm

McNutt wrote:I'm pretty sure I never read a story that involved Peyton's anus and penis before.

Regardless, the lawsuit by her against Manning was settled in 1997. This isn't a new allegation.

This is not to say Manning did or didn't do it...just that reporters acting surprised are being disingenuous.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 7:00 pm

Less than 3 weeks until the Deflategate hearings on 3/3. Oh joy!

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Mon Feb 15, 2016 7:05 pm

stessier wrote: reporters acting surprised are being disingenuous.

Got it. I can agree with that.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Tue Feb 16, 2016 9:15 pm

Was listening to SiriusXM today and the Manning story came up. The host (Pat Kirwan) is a very highly respected former front office guy with the Jets. The Jets had the first pick in the draft when Peyton was a junior, and they had to be prepared in the event that he declared for the draft. The had heard about the incident and had their investigators dig into it.

He obviously wasn't going to go into details - but he did allow that if Peyton had declared, they would have drafted him number one overall without hesitation. There was nothing in their investigation that gave them pause. That was months after the incident, not 20 years.

I've heard enough to dismiss the Daily News reporter.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:24 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:Was listening to SiriusXM today and the Manning story came up. The host (Pat Kirwan) is a very highly respected former front office guy with the Jets. The Jets had the first pick in the draft when Peyton was a junior, and they had to be prepared in the event that he declared for the draft. The had heard about the incident and had their investigators dig into it.

He obviously wasn't going to go into details - but he did allow that if Peyton had declared, they would have drafted him number one overall without hesitation. There was nothing in their investigation that gave them pause. That was months after the incident, not 20 years.

I've heard enough to dismiss the Daily News reporter.

Oh, I don't think it was a pattern behavior on his part, but I'm rather inclined to believethat he did it. The ongoing cover up is worse than the offense, imho.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:06 am

The "ongoing coverup" is part of what's more or less being fabricated/insinuated by her lawyers and the daily news reporter (inasmuch as that's the position of Mike Silver - a lawyer; and Kirwan - who had access to the Jets investigation). Allegedly of course.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:17 am

RunningMn9 wrote:Was listening to SiriusXM today and the Manning story came up. The host (Pat Kirwan) is a very highly respected former front office guy with the Jets. The Jets had the first pick in the draft when Peyton was a junior, and they had to be prepared in the event that he declared for the draft. The had heard about the incident and had their investigators dig into it.

He obviously wasn't going to go into details - but he did allow that if Peyton had declared, they would have drafted him number one overall without hesitation. There was nothing in their investigation that gave them pause. That was months after the incident, not 20 years.

I've heard enough to dismiss the Daily News reporter.

I'm not saying that Manning did exactly what was alleged, BUT I don't think a Jets investigation and decision to draft Manning is all that compelling as evidence. If nothing else, especially given Manning's talent level, they're not really investigating for "did he do this?" but rather "is he likely to do things like this in the future to an extent that it would overwhelm how good he is at football and/or land him in jail?"

Plus, honestly, it's the Jets - that probably means that he did it 10 times, including in the presence of Jets investigators, and they didn't notice.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:46 am

My opinion isn't formed by positive opinions of the Jets, per se.

But Pat Kirwan is the real deal. I trust him more than I trust Shaun King.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:58 am

Thanks Bill Belichick!!!!

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 1:30 am

RunningMn9 wrote:My opinion isn't formed by positive opinions of the Jets, per se.

But Pat Kirwan is the real deal. I trust him more than I trust Shaun King.

I will say that Shaun King's apparent acceptance of the plaintiff's statement of facts as essentially a 100% true statement of facts rather undermines his credibility.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 1:34 am

Rip wrote:Thanks Bill Belichick!!!!

Yes, I also appreciate what a great coach he is.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:14 am

RunningMn9 wrote:The "ongoing coverup" is part of what's more or less being fabricated/insinuated by her lawyers and the daily news reporter (inasmuch as that's the position of Mike Silver - a lawyer; and Kirwan - who had access to the Jets investigation). Allegedly of course.

Basically, it's the disproven allegations in the book.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:42 pm

Dangle-my-balls-in-your-face...

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:44 pm

Jaymann wrote:Dangle-my-balls-in-your-face...

The Omaha Dangler?

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 6:54 pm

Pyperkub wrote:Basically, it's the disproven allegations in the book.

Right, but they are "disproven" according to the filing that her lawyers made. Which is exactly what the filing that her lawyers made would say, no?

My point is that everything that is known about this by Shaun King, who is pushing this story, is from the filing that her lawyers made. Like...I have to believe that his lawyers filed a brief as well, that made a compelling sounding argument that the allegations in the book weren't disproven, no?

There was no finding by the court with respect to what was true - outside of the denial of Manning's motion to dismiss. The case was settled before then.

We have one side of the story - that is crafted in such a way as to exert the maximum pressure possible to force a settlement. There are other people that have additional information. Those people have all discarded this story as nonsense. Of course, these same people also discarded all of the Deflategate stuff as nonsense as well, so what do they know?

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 7:09 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:
Jaymann wrote:Dangle-my-balls-in-your-face...
The Omaha Dangler?

Well, I've got to run to keep from hidin',
And I'm bound to keep on ridin'.
And I've got one more silver dollar,
But I'm not gonna let 'em catch me, no,
Not gonna let 'em catch the Omaha Dangler.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Wed Feb 17, 2016 7:14 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:
Pyperkub wrote:Basically, it's the disproven allegations in the book.
Right, but they are "disproven" according to the filing that her lawyers made. Which is exactly what the filing that her lawyers made would say, no?

My point is that everything that is known about this by Shaun King, who is pushing this story, is from the filing that her lawyers made. Like...I have to believe that his lawyers filed a brief as well, that made a compelling sounding argument that the allegations in the book weren't disproven, no?

There was no finding by the court with respect to what was true - outside of the denial of Manning's motion to dismiss. The case was settled before then.

We have one side of the story - that is crafted in such a way as to exert the maximum pressure possible to force a settlement. There are other people that have additional information. Those people have all discarded this story as nonsense. Of course, these same people also discarded all of the Deflategate stuff as nonsense as well, so what do they know?

Science.