Jump to content

The #Patriots have released WR Antonio Brown, as he indicated on Twitter. They have moved on.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Hackenberg said:

Yet, it's the truth. That's  how truth and logic work. You can't prove me wrong. You can't prove anything happened. This story is simply  some kind of hint, symbolism about the super  bowl. Just like Kraft's massage.

 

20190920_203448.thumb.jpg.84dee926f0afa019f8af714e200581b6.jpg

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 226
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaa.  F*ck that POS.  Oh, and f*ck Tom Brady. 

If I’m the Raiders I put a claim in for him so they can offer him a $1 contract 😁

Brought him in to defeat the Dolphins and then he was no longer needed.  BB playing 3D chess.

Posted Images

3 hours ago, Hackenberg said:

Care to tell me again how you can prove it actually happened? Other than saying "I read it in nationally approved media, therefore it's' true....? Mocking me while unable to prove it's real, equals a failed argument. Equals failed/no proof.

 

 

Ok, how is this. Care to tell me what proof you have other than your warped sense of reality this was all made up?

I mean are you AB's mother?

  • Upvote 2
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Beerfish said:

As another poster early stated the Pats will come out of this smelling like a rose by the national media.

They took a chance and then did the right thing when it didn't work out (after using the guy to win a game)

Most other teams would get killed over this and heaven help us if the Jets had done it.

Oh please. Like they needed AB to beat the Fins. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

Ok, how is this. Care to tell me what proof you have other than your warped sense of reality this was all made up?

I mean are you AB's mother?

I don't need to prove anything  that didn't happen.Thats what can't  prove a negative , actually means. You can't prove something  happened based on words on a screen. Until you can prove any incident  physically  took place. There's nothing I need to defend. 

  • Thumb Down 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ASH1962 said:

The only shocking thing here is they did not wait until after the Jets game Sunday to release him.

Why is that shocking? Pat's don't need him to win. They have a stable full of pass catchers. In Dec.they expect to have Gronk back. Truth is they don't need him either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hackenberg said:

I don't need to prove anything  that didn't happen.Thats what can't  prove a negative , actually means. You can't prove something  happened based on words on a screen. Until you can prove any incident  physically  took place. There's nothing I need to defend. 

You're right. I can't prove AB didn't nut on Brady's back, and they cut him anyway.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lith said:

I thought they might hang on to him until the league suspended him -- their own FU to the league. 

Such a waste of talent -- the guy is bonkers, and potentially dangerous.  He needs help more than he needs football right now.  Hopefully this will be rock bottom and he will seek help.  Should not be about football anymore.

Nothing that several hundred jolts of a taser would cure. At least it's a thought. B)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Maxman said:

When I ban you I assure you it will be real.

This is simply  a logic discussion. I'm  not personally  attacking a single soul.

There's nothing to get emotional about or take personal.

I have simply pointed out that you can not prove as real, anything that you read. How/,why is that difficult?  People base a belief in something based  on faith in media. Not on any actual  knowledge  or proof.  Believing  what you read is not knowledge or proof of anything. 

This is no different than any other disagreement  about any other topic.  You don't base liking or  hating someone  over trivial  gossip  about jocks. Or anything else.  I am friend.. me friend..me not enemy. ..me not make hate towards you.  :)   

 

 

  • Thumb Down 2
  • Post of the Week 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BROOKLYN JET said:

You're right. I can't prove AB didn't nut on Brady's back, and they cut him anyway.

Look at it this way.. What they don't  tell you about is more likely the stuff that happens. Brady does appear kind of sweet..if you know  what I mean..nudge nudge, wink wink

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hackenberg said:

I don't need to prove anything  that didn't happen.Thats what can't  prove a negative , actually means. You can't prove something  happened based on words on a screen. Until you can prove any incident  physically  took place. There's nothing I need to defend. 

So basically you don't  like the story that is critical of AB si you call it Fake News. Damn, who else does that?

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Hackenberg said:

This is simply  a logic discussion. I'm  not personally  attacking a single soul.

There's nothing to get emotional about or take personal.

I have simply pointed out that you can not prove as real, anything that you read. How/,why is that difficult?  People base a belief in something based  on faith in media. Not on any actual  knowledge  or proof.  Believing  what you read is not knowledge or proof of anything. 

This is no different than any other disagreement  about any other topic.  You don't base liking or  hating someone  over trivial  gossip  about jocks. Or anything else.  I am friend.. me friend..me not enemy. ..me not make hate towards you.  :)   

 

 

No matter what you believe... This right here is true... Either side... Being able to speak rationally about what you believe and why is why these forums exist....  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Saul Goodman said:

“STUNNING & BRAVE move by the Patriots” - media

We’ll just forget that they likely colluded in order to sign him and definitely didn’t do their due diligence. Love the egg on their faces. Hope they have to eat that $9 million 

NE tried to get Brown before he went to Oakland so the offer and contract were already there. When he became available, the details were already done. Common knowledge... They gave up nothing to get him. It was just money... 

 

One single text was all it took to dump him. Now watch KC or Baltimore will sign him. Hunt, Hill, Rice, Suggs, Lewis, etc... Murder, beatings, child abuse...  All accepted and condoned in KC and Baltimore. One text and the clown was dumped...

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, RichardTodd27 said:

Don't be so sure. Their offensive line is really banged up.

I know....Tom Brady, Blah, Blah, Blah.....

But pressure on the QB can change a lot of things.

i've heard that sh__ in pre game stuff about them every year. on the radio in the car. on tv. none of matters. theyll run the ball more this this year and just not score as much lol but theyll still win...except for one game this season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

does anyone see whats really going on here ?

The Pets knew the guy was under serious investigation yet signed him anyway.

Goodell picked up the hot line to Bob "the Human trafficker" Kraft and filled him in that the allegations are true and that the league will be putting Brown on the exempt list. So before that pending announcement the Pats cut him and save as much as they can.

Seems Obvious to me the Pats were tipped off about something and any other teams would be nuts to sign this Pile of sh*t

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

does anyone see whats really going on here ?

The Pets knew the guy was under serious investigation yet signed him anyway.

Goodell picked up the hot line to Bob "the Human trafficker" Kraft and filled him in that the allegations are true and that the league will be putting Brown on the exempt list. So before that pending announcement the Pats cut him and save as much as they can.

Seems Obvious to me the Pats were tipped off about something and any other teams would be nuts to sign this Pile of sh*t

According to Schefter the Pats didn't know much about the details of the first case right after he signed and were somewhat blindsided.  The new case (which is probably true) gave them enough ammo to move on. 

As you say, this was largely financial, b/c his paycheck was due in three days, and that's a lot of salary space to give to a player who is likely going to be suspended for a significant portion of the time.  So their best option was to void the contract, get their money back and take a bit of egg in the face in the court of public opinion.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...