Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Go on record. Who still wants Watson?


Sasquatch
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Agent Blue said:

Unless there is video or audio of the crime happening or confirmed messages of DW admitting it, we will never know if he did it or not. 

Simply being convicted of a crime doesn't mean you did. 

Simply being found not guilty of a crime doesn't mean you didn't do it. 

So all 20+ women are lying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

So all 20+ women are lying?

How the fug would I know. 

It's possible they are all lying. 

It's also possible some or all aint lying. 

I wasn't there. 

At present, I haven't seen or heard of any evidence to make me think he did it. 

 

 

 

Edited by Agent Blue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Agent Blue said:

as expected, no substance lol

Are you this clueless? Most victims are scared or traumatized. People of power know what they are doing and know the victims are scared of what will happen if they try to turn them in...  Please move on from Watson and stop talking about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Agent Blue said:

Which part of that was inaccurate? 

Let me guess, you recommend people who have been assaulted to wait years and file civil suits huh?

Please go have this same conversation with some folks that you know that have been sexually assaulted. If you're open to growing, you'll learn a lot of reasons why some of the poo you're saying is super ignorant.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Icege said:

Please go have this same conversation with some folks that you know that have been sexually assaulted. If you're open to growing, you'll learn a lot of reasons why some of the poo you're saying is super ignorant.

Name 1 thing I said that was ignorant. 

All ive done was stated FACTS. 

1) Waiting to report a SA will only hinder the investigation and likelihood of the perpetrator being brought to justice. FACT

2) Not going to police and only filing a civil suit will make people more skeptical of your claims/intentions. FACT

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Are you this clueless? Most victims are scared or traumatized. People of power know what they are doing and know the victims are scared of what will happen if they try to turn them in...  Please move on from Watson and stop talking about this.

No where have I said people of SA were not scared or traumatized. 

No where have I said people of SA have no reasons why they choose to not report the crime. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Agent Blue said:

Name 1 thing I said that was ignorant. 

All ive done was stated FACTS. 

1) Waiting to report a SA will only hinder the investigation and likelihood of the perpetrator being brought to justice. FACT

2) Not going to police and only filing a civil suit will make people more skeptical of your claims/intentions. FACT

 

Before I answer, are you asking me to answer because you're open to learning or are you asking so that you can try to argue why it wasn't?

I'm not interested in screaming into the void during lunch, so if the latter I'll politely decline any further dialogue on it. If the former though, just lmk.

Edited by Icege
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Agent Blue said:

No where have I said people of SA were not scared or traumatized. 

No where have I said people of SA have no reasons why they choose to not report the crime. 

 

You started off with a “pretty simple” which is never the case. Then said the victims need to go to the police right away. If they are scared or traumatized, how can you expect them to do this? People close to me have been sexually assaulted and the damage it can do is intense. The best thing for us and the team to do is move on from Watson. If something crazy happens showing all of these women are part of some crazy hoax (highly unlikely) then we can start considering him again. Until then, we need to move on and let the courts handle it. Nothing good can come of defending a millionaire with 19 cases of sexual assault against him.

Edited by ForJimmy
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...