Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Whitlock's article is dead on.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by capitaleagle View Post
    Good theory. Makes sense.
    No it doesn't. They could simply say they weren't comfortable with his alleged associations. They wouldn't be liable for anything.

    Actually if they do know something and haven't reported it to Mr McMahon they will be in deep doo doo.

    But now we have chowderheads waiting for murder charges to drop against him because the Eagles won't clear the air.
    Blue Chip College Football - Coach Your College to the National Championship

    Comment


    • #32
      Iverson was shown the door...

      Originally posted by TerpEagle View Post
      Iverson was a Philadelphia player of quality talent who was known to have a me-first attitude at times and conflicted with his coaches and eventually got shown the door.

      Jackson was a Philadelphia player of quality talent who was known to have a me-first attitude at times and conflicted with his coaches and eventually got him shown the door.
      ...after his skills had declined considerably. And he was re-acquired by the team at the tail end of his career.

      Bad comparison.
      Officially awaiting Douchebagnacht II since
      May 7, 2010




      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Maniac View Post
        No it doesn't. They could simply say they weren't comfortable with his alleged associations. They wouldn't be liable for anything.

        Actually if they do know something and haven't reported it to Mr McMahon they will be in deep doo doo.

        But now we have chowderheads waiting for murder charges to drop against him because the Eagles won't clear the air.
        But why would the Eagles say that if they didn't cut him due to off field associations? If they cut him for his me first I don't need to practice attitude why say we aren't comfortable with his possible gang ties?

        It is quite possible not saying anything was the best course of action for litigation and PR reasons. It's shitstorm now but what would have happened had they said they cut him for gang ties and it's proven he doesn't have them. You would still be accusing them of being racist. Jackson could potentially sue for defamation of character, and more people would be pissed.

        If they said we cut him for work ethic and he doesn't have gang ties and it turns out he did the eagles look a fool and welcome possible recourse from another team through the league for "hiding" his gang ties.

        I know this doesn't fit your agenda but it is a very real possibility.

        Comment


        • #34
          AI

          Originally posted by Irish George View Post
          ...after his skills had declined considerably. And he was re-acquired by the team at the tail end of his career.

          Bad comparison.
          was also never a loafer. That guy didn't take plays off. Practice maybe, but a game - no.

          Comment

          Working...
          X