OT: Skip Bayless Leaving ESPN

[Galeb]

Aikman was being called gay and bayless wrote about it.


Framing doesn't matter. You incorrectly used something I didn't say to imply my argument was weak. You were wrong.

I will repeat this quote exactly.

"I must have misinterpreted this then, since I was discussing his beef with Bayless. "Not sure why you feel you get to decide how troy aikman should feel about being called gay""

If you don't understand that I misinterpreted what you said after I explained it twice, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Ring 6]

Have you read those 6 pages? If not, then stop ****ing citing them. As I said in one of the first posts, if the article is misquoting Bayless, then Aikmen has a legit right to be pissed.

If I had access to those six pages, I would absolutely read them, but I'm certainly not going to buy a book written by that douchebag. I'll take the article at face value since, if it were wrong, it would likely have already been disproven in the media.

Of course I have.
The article isn't quoting bayless so it can't be misquoting him

It's his buddy's excuse making.

 

[Ring 6]

I will repeat this quote exactly.

"I must have misinterpreted this then, since I was discussing his beef with Bayless. "Not sure why you feel you get to decide how troy aikman should feel about being called gay""

If you don't understand that I misinterpreted what you said after I explained it twice, I don't know what to tell you.

As long as you accept that you were wrong and further wrong to make the statement that you made regarding it then that is fine.

 

[Galeb]

Of course I have.
The article isn't quoting bayless so it can't be misquoting him

It's his buddy's excuse making.

Did you read the whole book? If not, where did you see the six pages? I've been googling like crazy to find it. The info I can find is that the rumor was pretty big in Dallas before Bayless started talking about it.

 

[Galeb]

As long as you accept that you were wrong and further wrong to make the statement that you made regarding it then that is fine.

As soon as you called it out, I realized I misinterpreted and admitted it. I have no idea about this "further wrong" crap that you're spouting, as I conceded it immediately. Your argument is still **** unless you actually did read the 6 pages, which I strongly doubt.

I gotta admit, it's supremely ironic seeing you lecture about being admitting being wrong about something.

 

[Ring 6]

As soon as you called it out, I realized I misinterpreted and admitted it. I have no idea about this "further wrong" crap that you're spouting, as I conceded it immediately. Your argument is still **** unless you actually did read the 6 pages, which I strongly doubt.

I gotta admit, it's supremely ironic seeing you lecture about being admitting being wrong about something.

Wait. You admit you didn't read it and say my argument is **** if I didn't???
I have no problem admitting I am wrong. Show me any fact I was ever wrong about and I will be the first to admit it. I'm sure there have been many.

 

[Ring 6]

As soon as you called it out, I realized I misinterpreted and admitted it. I have no idea about this "further wrong" crap that you're spouting, as I conceded it immediately. Your argument is still **** unless you actually did read the 6 pages, which I strongly doubt.

I gotta admit, it's supremely ironic seeing you lecture about being admitting being wrong about something.

Other professionals have called what bayless did to aikman wrong and unprofessional.

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/...ff-pearlman-author-of-boys-will-be-boys/?_r=0

Bayless’ old editor at the Dallas Morning News, Dave Smith, told best-selling author Jeff Pearlman in his his tell-all book on the Cowboys’ championship seasons of the 1990s, Boys Will Be Boys, that Bayless’ handling of the matter was the “most unfair thing” he’s seen in more than 40 years as a journalist.

 

[Galeb]

I have no problem admitting I am wrong. Show me any fact I was ever wrong about and I will be the first to admit it. I'm sure there have been many.

How about this beauty.
Patriots have filed an amicus brief in support of Brady/NFLPA.
Patriots have filed an amicus brief in support of Brady/NFLPA.

 

[Ring 6]

How about this beauty.
Patriots have filed an amicus brief in support of Brady/NFLPA.
Patriots have filed an amicus brief in support of Brady/NFLPA.

What was I wrong about? That I disagreed with your made up possible version of what maybe could have happened?
My facts were correct.