Aaron Rodgers leaving Jets to be VP of United States?

[TuscanyTile2]

1 minute ago, usanyj said:

For everyone saying he needs to address this, would that honestly make it better...If he comes out and says, of course I didn't say this, that's ridiculous... Would the people who want him tarred and feathered be okay with it, or still believe the story regardless? 

Thats the thing about the media today, they aren't held to a standard, they can write anything, and when they are proven wrong, they still aren't held to a standard.

Like so many of you on here say when someone floats a rumor about a trade or signing, "Sources or it didn't happen"

@sourceworx said "Whether the Sandy Hook rumor is true or not, I agree it's best that he leaves the Jets. He's toxic."

In other words, anyone can say anything without any proof and that makes someone toxic.  

 

 

[JetPotato]

15 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

There's talk of him running for political office with a controversial candidate and all of a sudden we hear smears. But because you have confirmation bias, AR8 "needs to address this"?

There's no question the timing is extremely suspect and shady. 

He still needs to address it. It's an unfortunate reality of our times. A mess has been made. Cleanup is required.

[usanyj]

1 minute ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

@sourceworx said "Whether the Sandy Hook rumor is true or not, I agree it's best that he leaves the Jets. He's toxic."

In other words, anyone can say anything without any proof and that makes someone toxic.  

 

 

[TuscanyTile2]

3 minutes ago, JetPotato said:

Most of my posts here aren't serious ones, but this is a real question: is there salary cap relief if a player retires before their contract expires? Every day that passes where this VP/Sandy Hook truther garbage goes unaddressed really makes him look like a huge clown. What happened to minimizing non-football distractions?

Not that anyone cares about my take, but here it is. If true, it's astonishing levels of ignorance. But frankly, I've become immune to ignorance. I don't necessarily think ignorance makes one a scum bag. Scum bags to me are people who KNOW the truth, but still use lies regardless for their own personal gain (see virtually every politician/Patriots employee). Being dumb just makes you dumb. If you're a Sandy Hook truther, it's hard to understand how one can actually be that delusional and insensitive. But again, frankly, I don't find it more delusional than much of what I hear on a daily basis. Those kind of beliefs are no more insane than any of the things 90% of the world believes and cloaks into the title of religion or most modern political ideology. Sorry, but evidence-free assertions like this aren't better because you label them "faith".

The stuff in bold!  100%

[usanyj]

1 minute ago, JetPotato said:

There's no question the timing is extremely suspect and shady. 

He still needs to address it. It's an unfortunate reality of our times. A mess has been made. Cleanup is required.

Maybe so, but the clean up as you put it still won't be good enough...He comes out an denies it, most people, because they don't like him will still believe the story is true...

[Trotter]

10 hours ago, AFJF said:

The media smear campaign has started less than 24 hours after the rumor surfaced.

Somebody somewhere in the world of media politics is taking it seriously.

I agree with that 100% but they are doing that for ratings and to appease their base of party

their concern is what percentage does rfk take away from their side and the fact that rodgers name is in the mix us gravy for them

no politics so I am stopping there
 

[Xtina]

10 minutes ago, usanyj said:

For everyone saying he needs to address this, would that honestly make it better...If he comes out and says, of course I didn't say this, that's ridiculous... Would the people who want him tarred and feathered be okay with it, or still believe the story regardless? 

Thats the thing about the media today, they aren't held to a standard, they can write anything, and when they are proven wrong, they still aren't held to a standard.

Like so many of you on here say when someone floats a rumor about a trade or signing, "Sources or it didn't happen"

He needs to say whether he’s considering joining the RFK jr ticket as VP candidate 

[UntouchableCrew]

11 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Says? Not really? Running for VP yeah that’s bad and obviously he’s going to get fried for doing so. I’m not a thought crime guy. Orwell I guess worked on me.

Still waiting to hear why you feel qualified to chime in on how I feel about crime.

Question — is there any position a football player could take that would make you think “I don’t want to root for this guy?”

[usanyj]

Just now, Xtina said:

He needs to say whether he’s considering joining the RFK jr ticket as VP candidate 

That's fair, I think that is different than the claim that is being floated around as fact.

[UntouchableCrew]

13 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

And every time you address stuff like this, it sets the precedent that anyone can smear you and you'll be forced to spend all of your time responding to this type of stuff.

This isn’t a random yahoo on Twitter. It’s hitting every major media cycle out there. He’s a public figure.

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

[nj meadowlands]

1 minute ago, usanyj said:

That's fair, I think that is different than the claim that is being floated around as fact.

Why, exactly?

[TuscanyTile2]

Just now, UntouchableCrew said:

This isn’t a random yahoo on Twitter. It’s hitting every major media cycle out there. He’s a public figure.

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

Again, if he starts addressing every random accusation (which is exactly what this was) you can dictate the man's entire life.

[usanyj]

1 minute ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Still waiting to hear why you feel qualified to chime in on how I feel about crime.

Question — is there any position a football player could take that would make you think “I don’t want to root for this guy?”

I think that's a good question....do you root for a team, or a player....we employed Mike Vick, the NFL employees plenty of players who beat their wives or girlfriends or kids...I think the point he is trying to make is, we watch players who actually commit crimes, but right now everyone is bothered by a thought that may have been said, 11 years ago, without proof.

[Matt39]

8 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Still waiting to hear why you feel qualified to chime in on how I feel about crime.

Question — is there any position a football player could take that would make you think “I don’t want to root for this guy?”

You said other than rapists and murderers, this is the next category. Yeah, someone allegedly saying something to me is not in the same ballpark as killing or raping someone. This is a league that happily employs Joe Mixon and Tyreek Hill and no one bats an eye.

[doitny]

12 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Yes, unequivocally. If it’s a lie — if its a BS media smear — deny it forcefully as soon as possible.

Every second you let it hang out there gives it credibility.

so im guesing when that hit piece against the Jets from those 2 reporters who had 30 UNAMED sources must all be true because the Jets didnt come out to fight it?

imagine they did? you would still be hearing about it. but they ignored it and look, after a day or 2 nobody talks about it.

if this story isnt already over it will be in a day or 2. only Jet fans will care. the only way you ever here this again is if Rodgers is the VP candidate. 

if Rodgers came out today and said he didnt say that then the person who wrote this will come back and say he did. then it goes back and forth and the story gains legs and becomes a big problem. if Rodgers is smart he doesn't say anything

but of course Rodgers will probably say something in a week or 2 and bring this story back from the dead.

[UntouchableCrew]

Just now, TuscanyTile2 said:

Again, if he starts addressing every random accusation (which is exactly what this was) you can dictate the man's entire life.

No, it’s not. It’s a major media outlet. You may not believe it for whatever reason but it’s not a random accusation on the internet.

[Matt39]

19 minutes ago, nj meadowlands said:

Finally an immaculate take. 

Is now a good time for the Jets to say something? I’m thinking yes.

[usanyj]

1 minute ago, nj meadowlands said:

Why, exactly?

He should mention whether he is going to run a political campaign because that can hinder his playing and practice time if he needs to go to events and speeches and fundraisers and things that take him away from the football field. That directly impacts the jets organization and team...this claim of what he may have said 11 years ago is a joke without evidence.

[bicketybam]

1 minute ago, usanyj said:

I think that's a good question....do you root for a team, or a player....we employed Mike Vick, the NFL employees plenty of players who beat their wives or girlfriends or kids...I think the point he is trying to make is, we watch players who actually commit crimes, but right now everyone is bothered by a thought that may have been said, 11 years ago, without proof.

It's because it fits their preconceived notions of the guy.

[nj meadowlands]

Just now, usanyj said:

He should mention whether he is going to run a political campaign because that can hinder his playing and practice time if he needs to go to events and speeches and fundraisers and things that take him away from the football field. That directly impacts the jets organization and team...this claim of what he may have said 11 years ago is a joke without evidence.

Both are backed up by the same amount of evidence.  One seems to trigger you a little harder. 

[usanyj]

3 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

No, it’s not. It’s a major media outlet. You may not believe it for whatever reason but it’s not a random accusation on the internet.

But without proof or evidence, it is a random accusation, regardless of where it comes from. 

[Xtina]

5 hours ago, 83Kelly2Allen18 said:

Why do you think legacy media broke the story right now? Seems odd if this was ten years ago 

Because it was one guy on a football team, not someone rumored to be running for VP. It did not matter back then 

[usanyj]

2 minutes ago, nj meadowlands said:

Both are backed up by the same amount of evidence.  One seems to trigger you a little harder. 

I mean, RFK specifically said he was considering Rodgers for a VP role and the other was a journalist who said she heard something 11 years ago and decided not to say anything until yesterday with no proof. They're a little different in scope.

[maury77]

4 hours ago, Falco21 said:

Not for nothing, but how is this on him? I mean he literally has not said a word publicly for weeks other than talking about his status on his recovery and how long he wants to play football and yet you want to blame him for a VP report, that the candidate is claiming and a report about something he is accused of saying years later that has zero proof? 

The guy has been a public figure for a long time. A long time. Suddenly now a report comes out about him being a Sandy Hook truther launched by a CNN anchor right after reports about the VP stuff...convenient. Would be nice if there was proof but I'd be willing to bet there is absolutely no proof just the claim.

Every player that you talk to on this team absolutely loves having the guy around. Every player gushes about his character and the friendships he holds. Let's all ignore all of that and worry about bullsh*t reports that he seems to have no part in creating. Makes total sense

I'm skeptical about the Sandy Hook claims because of the video circulating where he expressed sympathy re the event, but the rest is absolutely on him. With all his "let's remove distractions" comments, when RFK's people approached him about the VP spot, he should have said "I'm not interested" and just moved on. I sincerely doubt RFK's people would have leaked the VP story unless Rodgers indicated some level of interest. 

Let's see how he responds once he is done tripping balls in Costa Rica. 

[UntouchableCrew]

1 minute ago, Matt39 said:

You said other than rapists and murderers, this is the next category. Yeah, someone allegedly saying something to me is not in the same ballpark as killing or raping someone. This is a league that happily employs Joe Mixon and Tyrell Hill and no one bats an eye.

Right… Not the same as rapists or murders. Thats what I said.

But yeah, I think deniers of child mass murder are horrible people. I live 30 minutes from Sandy Hook and interviewed a nanny who took care of one of the kids who was murdered. It’s dark, dark stuff. Rich powerful people using their position to spread that stuff is reprehensible so I really hope it isn’t true.

It’s weird to me this is a remotely controversial opinion but I guess everyone has their “side” these days and can’t even coalesce around basic decency.

[JetPotato]

15 minutes ago, usanyj said:

Maybe so, but the clean up as you put it still won't be good enough...He comes out an denies it, most people, because they don't like him will still believe the story is true...

Seems like their problem

[FidelioJet]

12 hours ago, Mogglez said:

Joe Douglas and Robert Saleh were, quite literally, the top of the top when they were hired.

If you’re of the opinion that the Jets might get turned down by some top candidates anyway, so they should cut their nose to spite their face and go nuclear, that is ridiculous.

What?

im not looking to fire them.  Nor am I hoping the quit. 
All I’m saying is if, for any reason, Rodgers decides not to come back is Woody Johnson will play a much larger role on the off season decision making.  And, frankly? I would agree with him.

That is it. 

[T0mShane]

35 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

 

No, actually, this is good for the Jets. Go, Aaron Rodgers. 

[usanyj]

2 minutes ago, JetPotato said:

Seems like their problem

Right, but my point is, it won't make the story go away.

[TuscanyTile2]

9 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

No, it’s not. It’s a major media outlet. You may not believe it for whatever reason but it’s not a random accusation on the internet.

https://weeklyworldnews.com/ is a more reliable source.

[bicketybam]

Why can't CNN cook up some story about Pat Mahomes? We need to get him out of the way to clear a path to the Super Bowl? 

[T0mShane]

2 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Right… Not the same as rapists or murders. Thats what I said.

But yeah, I think deniers of child mass murder are horrible people. I live 30 minutes from Sandy Hook and interviewed a nanny who took care of one of the kids who was murdered. It’s dark, dark stuff. Rich powerful people using their position to spread that stuff is reprehensible so I really hope it isn’t true.

It’s weird to me this is a remotely controversial opinion but I guess everyone has their “side” these days and can’t even coalesce around basic decency.

Wild that anyone would use Sandy Hook to say, “yes, but what about the horrors of illegal immigration?” but alas

[Creepy Lurker]

44 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

I mean, we knew this was coming. The Packers beat told us this was coming. And here it is. 

I’m sorry but no one could have predicted this level of injury and this level of sideshow. No one that was against the trade that had injury and distraction concerns could have expected a season ending injury after only 4 plays and Vice President running mate as distractions. It’s just way too extreme and ridiculous. I’m happy it blew up in everyone’s faces because the trade should have never been made. It’s karma for a garbage organization that does the bare minimum and tried cutting corners. I enjoy this. 

[Matt39]

4 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Right… Not the same as rapists or murders. Thats what I said.

But yeah, I think deniers of child mass murder are horrible people. I live 30 minutes from Sandy Hook and interviewed a nanny who took care of one of the kids who was murdered. It’s dark, dark stuff. Rich powerful people using their position to spread that stuff is reprehensible so I really hope it isn’t true.

It’s weird to me this is a remotely controversial opinion but I guess everyone has their “side” these days and can’t even coalesce around basic decency.

It’s not controversial. Relying on this as some sort of evidence I think is controversial. Unless there’s audio there’s no proof.

[bicketybam]

1 minute ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

https://weeklyworldnews.com/ is a more reliable source.

https://www.theonion.com/new-evidence-finds-neil-armstrong-mistakenly-believed-h-1851320109