jetlord 10,210 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 Just a question for all you experts. During the time you were in your early twenties, did you ever have a disagreement with your wife/girlfriend that if she secretly recorded it you would have come away embarrassed or looking threatening? What if she was trying to set you up to make you look bad in divorce court? I'm not excusing Hill, just pointing out that most of us have said things in anger that we never seriously meant. To say someone should be frightened of you in a period of anger isn't all that damning. Hill's history makes it seem much worse, but that one statement isn't the end of the world IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kkuenn 3,614 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 2 minutes ago, jetlord said: Just a question for all you experts. During the time you were in your early twenties, did you ever have a disagreement with your wife/girlfriend that if she secretly recorded it you would have come away embarrassed or looking threatening? What if she was trying to set you up to make you look bad in divorce court? I'm not excusing Hill, just pointing out that most of us have said things in anger that we never seriously meant. To say someone should be frightened of you in a period of anger isn't all that damning. Hill's history makes it seem much worse, but that one statement isn't the end of the world IMHO. I did it once, ended up with 2 black eyes and knew to shut my mouth ever since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetlord 10,210 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 1 minute ago, kkuenn said: I did it once, ended up with 2 black eyes and knew to shut my mouth ever since. You shouldn't have been dating woman boxers. ☺️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kkuenn 3,614 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 Just now, jetlord said: You shouldn't have been dating woman boxers. ☺️ House hold 6 does not mess around with lower ranks in the Chain of Command! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamixoye 604 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 6 minutes ago, jetlord said: To say someone should be frightened of you in a period of anger isn't all that damning. I've said things in anger that I regret, but no, I've never said anything at the level of what Tyreek said. Plus, like you said, it's worse because of the history. It has to be viewed in that light, not excused. Having said that, I do hope the statement was not an actual physical threat, and as I said I can live with a suspension based on the audio even if it wasn't a physical threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhitter 1,426 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 14 minutes ago, jetlord said: Just a question for all you experts. During the time you were in your early twenties, did you ever have a disagreement with your wife/girlfriend that if she secretly recorded it you would have come away embarrassed or looking threatening? What if she was trying to set you up to make you look bad in divorce court? I'm not excusing Hill, just pointing out that most of us have said things in anger that we never seriously meant. To say someone should be frightened of you in a period of anger isn't all that damning. Hill's history makes it seem much worse, but that one statement isn't the end of the world IMHO. Embarrassed? Absolutely! Threatening? Never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhitter 1,426 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 I am amazed at the number of ridiculous posts out there in the webverse! People are still parroting the belief that Tyreek broke his son's arm and deserves to be in prison. The fact no charges were brought against him is because he is famous and rich and paid off someone. I've seen that post multiple times. He also beat his girlfriend in a rage at the same time he was brutalizing his son. Fan's saying if justice isn't served they will refuse to support the NFL ever again! My words to those people....GOOD RIDDANCE YOU INBRED WASTES OF SPACE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mloe68 1,521 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 12 minutes ago, dhitter said: I am amazed at the number of ridiculous posts out there in the webverse! People are still parroting the belief that Tyreek broke his son's arm and deserves to be in prison. The fact no charges were brought against him is because he is famous and rich and paid off someone. I've seen that post multiple times. He also beat his girlfriend in a rage at the same time he was brutalizing his son. Fan's saying if justice isn't served they will refuse to support the NFL ever again! My words to those people....GOOD RIDDANCE YOU INBRED WASTES OF SPACE! Its the media's fault really. They run huge headlines that scream Tyreek Hill broke his kids arm and is a child abuser but when facts emerge which clearly dispute that they end up on the back page near the classified ads. Just not as compelling to tell the truth as it is to bury a person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 4 hours ago, Handswarmer said: " At issue is an allegation that Hill physically abused his son and broke his arm, a comment Hill made in a recorded conversation that his fiancee needs “to be terrified of me,” and the circumstances that led to Hill’s son being removed from their home. " Jimmy Smith got 4 games for threatening his ex-gf (baby mama) verbally and via text messages which is a violation of the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy. The quote is from PFT The last sentence is my post 4 hours ago, Adamixoye said: I don't know who, if anyone, this is directed at, but two things: I know all we have is Kietzman's reporting, and people are probably scared to invoke his name right now, but until further information I think it's unfair to keep bringing up the broken arm. The best and only report indicates it was an accident, so referencing it in this context is poisoning the well. I said above that I won't complain about a suspension if there is OTHER evidence of abuse, OR if they cite the audio specifically. I think the audio is damning regardless of the context, and a (short) suspension is fair. (Because it was one statement rather than a series of messages, I have to think Hill's suspension will be equal to or less than Smith's.) What I WON'T be okay with is if Hill is suspended for the "general ugliness" or "guilt by association" with the situation. I was only poi9nting out what is being said in the media 4 hours ago, reesebobby said: Yes. I think there is no allegation that Tyreek broke the kids arm. Sounds like that was cleared up fairly quickly. But it does add some zing to people's posts when they add it every time. I only quoted the source because I am sure the league asked him about it. No one has said publicly how it happened; just that it was ''an accident". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 NFL.com- June 7th Hill's case with the Kansas Department for Children and Families also remains on-going, and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in May that the league would wait until the conclusion of law enforcement investigations before weighing in on the matter. Per the NFL's personal-conduct policy, Hill can be subject to a suspension regardless of if he is charged with a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamixoye 604 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 11 minutes ago, Handswarmer said: The quote is from PFT The last sentence is my post I was only poi9nting out what is being said in the media I only quoted the source because I am sure the league asked him about it. No one has said publicly how it happened; just that it was ''an accident". I understood that you were quoting from somewhere; my points were responding to the content of that post regardless of whether it was original to you or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FANATIC 852 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 1 hour ago, jetlord said: Just a question for all you experts. During the time you were in your early twenties, did you ever have a disagreement with your wife/girlfriend that if she secretly recorded it you would have come away embarrassed or looking threatening? What if she was trying to set you up to make you look bad in divorce court? I'm not excusing Hill, just pointing out that most of us have said things in anger that we never seriously meant. To say someone should be frightened of you in a period of anger isn't all that damning. Hill's history makes it seem much worse, but that one statement isn't the end of the world IMHO. Exactly I agree .....but WARNING not politically correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHard 2,061 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 Could mean you should be terrified of me because I could turn you in for lying to the police and trying to extort me. Probably not what he meant, but that’s what I would tell the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetlord 10,210 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 2 hours ago, DieHard said: Could mean you should be terrified of me because I could turn you in for lying to the police and trying to extort me. Probably not what he meant, but that’s what I would tell the league. Goodell probably has a penalty in mind even before he considers the interview. Gotta protect the shield, ya know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomahawkChop 255 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 3 hours ago, DieHard said: Could mean you should be terrified of me because I could turn you in for lying to the police and trying to extort me. Probably not what he meant, but that’s what I would tell the league. You know, it could mean so many things that people of my skin color and age could never understand. There are so many modern colloquialisms that astonish me when I hear them that are accepted, meant and understood a million miles of separation between what I think they mean and what they actually mean. I'm in no way saying that's what this is, but it's certainly possible. If I were Tyreeks agent, lawyer and NFPLA rep I'd be selling that to Goodell hard. You can't prove a negative. It's impossible to prove someone didn't do or mean something - you can only prove that they did if the evidence supports the argument. In this case, there's very little actual (if any) proof that supports the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mloe68 1,521 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 8 hours ago, jetlord said: Just a question for all you experts. During the time you were in your early twenties, did you ever have a disagreement with your wife/girlfriend that if she secretly recorded it you would have come away embarrassed or looking threatening? What if she was trying to set you up to make you look bad in divorce court? I'm not excusing Hill, just pointing out that most of us have said things in anger that we never seriously meant. To say someone should be frightened of you in a period of anger isn't all that damning. Hill's history makes it seem much worse, but that one statement isn't the end of the world IMHO. Tyreeks past will always follow him and make him look guilty to many people if he’s even mentioned in the same breath with abuse or battery. That’s on him and part of the price he has to pay. But true judgement needs to be based on facts and not a few words in a set up audio under aggravating conditions. Many people I know in that spot probably would say something similar at that point in their life. I wouldn’t because my wife would kick my ass. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qnet 1,159 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 1 hour ago, TomahawkChop said: You know, it could mean so many things that people of my skin color and age could never understand. There are so many modern colloquialisms that astonish me when I hear them that are accepted, meant and understood a million miles of separation between what I think they mean and what they actually mean. I'm in no way saying that's what this is, but it's certainly possible. If I were Tyreeks agent, lawyer and NFPLA rep I'd be selling that to Goodell hard. You can't prove a negative. It's impossible to prove someone didn't do or mean something - you can only prove that they did if the evidence supports the argument. In this case, there's very little actual (if any) proof that supports the latter. As an older dude now, I get that, but I'm the same race as Tyreek Hill, was raised by a single mother until age 11, and lived in what many of you may call the hood in KC. When someone says something like he said, it would mean that he could knock her up side her head at any minute. Having said that, I'm 50, and young people are more loose and crazy with stuff than when I was young, and I don't understand it either. She didn't seem too shocked or astonished when he said it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mloe68 1,521 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 Two key points to me from Nate Taylor’s article in the Athletic today... One #Chiefs official predicts a max 4 game suspension for Tyreek - Tyreek reportedly provided the NFL a "massive amount of evidence to support his testimony." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mloe68 1,521 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 13 hours ago, Handswarmer said: NFL.com- June 7th Hill's case with the Kansas Department for Children and Families also remains on-going, and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in May that the league would wait until the conclusion of law enforcement investigations before weighing in on the matter. Per the NFL's personal-conduct policy, Hill can be subject to a suspension regardless of if he is charged with a crime. The investigative portion of the case involving Tyreek at CPS is over and now they are in the process of integrating the kid back into the home. And that’s why the NFL is proceeding with the process. NFL investigators will supply a report to Goodell in the next week and it seems very likely at this point whatever suspension that may be handed out will come before training camp. The 8 hour meeting yesterday mainly focused on the audio tape from what the Athletics Nate Taylor is reporting as there is very little evidence Tyreek was abusive to the kid. And apparently Tyreek provided a lot of evidence yesterday that seemed to help his cause. Whatever that means. I’m hearing more and more scuttlebutt among the beat writers who have legit sources that this will be a 2-6 game suspension. But again who really knows what Goodell will do. The Chiefs are expected to allow Tyreek back with the team after Goodell makes his ruling. All things considered from where he was in April this is about as best case scenario as possible for Tyreek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 3 hours ago, Mloe68 said: The investigative portion of the case involving Tyreek at CPS is over and now they are in the process of integrating the kid back into the home. And that’s why the NFL is proceeding with the process. NFL investigators will supply a report to Goodell in the next week and it seems very likely at this point whatever suspension that may be handed out will come before training camp. The 8 hour meeting yesterday mainly focused on the audio tape from what the Athletics Nate Taylor is reporting as there is very little evidence Tyreek was abusive to the kid. And apparently Tyreek provided a lot of evidence yesterday that seemed to help his cause. Whatever that means. I’m hearing more and more scuttlebutt among the beat writers who have legit sources that this will be a 2-6 game suspension. But again who really knows what Goodell will do. The Chiefs are expected to allow Tyreek back with the team after Goodell makes his ruling. All things considered from where he was in April this is about as best case scenario as possible for Tyreek. Where did you hear that? I have seen nothing in print or on line. But it sounds like you are connected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetlord 10,210 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Handswarmer said: Where did you hear that? I have seen nothing in print or on line. But it sounds like you are connected The Athletic. Good site for selecting news articles for the teams you select in all sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kkuenn 3,614 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 6 minutes ago, jetlord said: The Athletic. Good site for selecting news articles for the teams you select in all sports. Quote yeah if you download their ap and go for a subscription etc. I see their articles a lot but never finish any of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mloe68 1,521 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Handswarmer said: Where did you hear that? I have seen nothing in print or on line. But it sounds like you are connected LOL. I've got no resources and I'm not connected. This was reported a few weeks ago as they noted they were still looking at her for this potential Proxy disorder diagnosis. And it fits with the league coming in yesterday. I'll try and find and post article. It wasn't considered a big deal to most because it had nothing to do with the closed criminal case. But it looks like that was important to the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 42 minutes ago, jetlord said: The Athletic. Good site for selecting news articles for the teams you select in all sports. I pay for enough stuff...as it is..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FANATIC 852 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 TYREEK HILLWR, KANSAS CITY CHIEFS Tyreek Hill and the Chiefs "could potentially re-engage in contract negotiations for an extension in the not-too-distant future" if the investigation ends with a "positive outcome for Hill." Yahoo Sports' Terez Pryor reports the Chiefs are hopeful a ruling will come down on Tyreek Hill before training camp. If it's favorable for Hill -- sources believe yesterday's meeting with Roger Goodell went well -- he'll join the team at the beginning of camp. Hill's suspension is reportedly a "maximum" of four games, not long enough to scare the Chiefs away from contract negotiations with their top receiver. SOURCE: Yahoo Sports Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.