On the circumstances of a player being released the norm?
-
-
No, but I'm skeptical about what they can investigate and/or prove.Originally posted by Greenstealth View Post
I follow the Eagles closely and the reporters that reported the smear were not on my radar screen prior to the smear. For me, that raises a red flag. I mean, I follow the Eagles closely!
Here's my theory: The Eagles were floating the idea to reporters that maybe they should check into Jackson's affiliations. Like: "Hey maybe you should check into what the LAPD has to say about Jackson", etc. They didn't have to say anything explicit, they just had to point the reporters in that direction
Most reporters were uncomfortable and nobody bit or was wiling to go with such defaming information until the NJ.com people did. But well before then it was common knowledge among people in the media that Kelly and the Eagles wanted Jackson gone.--------
"We choose to go to the moon." -
Regardless of what they can investigate or prove, it shows what a clusterfuck it's been. Bush league eagles antics. They can't get anything for a player they have under contract, if that's the case it's their fault for making such a bad deal. They panic and cut him. Let him walk to a division rival while still in his prime. I won't post another thread about it, I just don't believe how fucked up this all got.Comment
-
To support my theory...
Exhibit A: Observe this tweet from Les Bowen last week:
Les Bowen @LesBowen Mar 28
This issue of DeSean's associations has been out there for a while. Tough to write about without tiptoeing close to libel/defamation.--------
"We choose to go to the moon."Comment
Comment