Fire Vrabel?

[ahmed]

Voting should be made public. I'd love to see who voted to fire his ass....

I voted for summary execution because I thought it was a joke. I did not even read past the execution part.

Firing your coach for sleeping around (outside the org) is stupid. I mean if NFL gets some morals, it would fold.

 

[sb1]

Russini helped break the story about the Kraft video idiots filming the Bengals sidelines in 2019. Based on her reputation it makes you wonder how she knew.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Stevenson fumbled in the game prior to seeing only 2 attempts in game 16. He was out of game 17 vs Buffalo and NE won because Buffalo laid down. Stevenson had 7 fumbles that season and BB would do the same exact thing by benching him.

The problem is that he announced he was going to make a change at RB that morning, only for Stevenson to start anyways. He then tried to deflect by calling Stevenson a "coach's decision," which is utterly absurd.

 

[Since1960]

If there is a Cheerleader opening, perhaps we can bring back a “familiar” college coach….,

 

[Bill Lee]

No prob, and thanks for the compliments. I feel I should apologize for giving in to my penchant for stirring **** up.

The man did already volunteer to chop off half of his tallywhacker, so you weren't that far out of line.

Note also: RLKAG, P2!

Or his consequences may be coming home, telling his wife the details to get her excited and then having her proceed to outdo Dianna in the sack.

We have no idea what kind of relationship the two of them have.

What we do know is a lot of correspondents here think their standards on morality and relationships are universal.

Guess what, others can and do have different standards!

 

[Bill Lee]

No, it isn't.

The undeniable fact is that there is evidence of an extra-marital affair. I won't say there is proof, but there certainly is evidence, enough evidence to make belief that something happened a very reasonable conclusion.

We also know for a fact that the Missus is a devout Catholic. That is not an assumption; that is a widely reported fact. There are countless articles describing how she brought him back into the fold after he had lapsed during his college days. There are also countless articles about them supporting their local diocese when he was in Tenneessee.

It takes a special type of moron to look at what we know and conclude "hey gee, maybe the devout Catholic wife of 25 years and mother of 2 is perfectly comfortable with an open marriage and polyamorous relationship!!"

Your homework is to read a biography of the Kennedy family.

You might learn something new about how some people approach Catholicism.

 

[XLIX]

Your homework is to read a biography of the Kennedy family.

You might learn something new about how some people approach Catholicism.

Your homework is to understand that just because there are scumbag people out there who claim to be Catholic doesn’t imply a single damn thing about a woman who has absolutely no relationship to them whatsoever.

Report back here with your results.

 

[borisman]

A lot of people cheat. A lot of you cheated. A lot of you have been cheated on. A lot of you wanted to cheated, if you hadn't already. It's human nature. But being a head coach or athlete gets you easy and better strange, which makes it more tempting.

 

[Bill Lee]

Your homework is to understand that just because there are scumbag people out there who claim to be Catholic doesn’t imply a single damn thing about a woman who has absolutely no relationship to them whatsoever.

Report back here with your results.

You're the ones making the assumptions.

Just trying to get you to see there may be other interpretations to be had.

If you don't want to consider that, IMO, it's on you for being close-minded.

 

[XLIX]

You're the ones making the assumptions.

I am drawing logical conclusions based on the facts.

Sorry not sorry, but I am not going to apologize for concluding that a devout Catholic wife of 25 years is probably not a polyamorous swinger.

 

[Bill Lee]

I am drawing logical conclusions based on the facts.

Sorry not sorry, but I am not going to apologize for concluding that a devout Catholic wife of 25 years is probably not a polyamorous swinger.

That's the problem, you are making conclusions without having facts.

You don't know if the Vrables are the XLIX kind of Catholic or the Kennedy kind of Catholic.

You don't know if Mike and Diana are long-time friends going back to their TEN days and were just socializing all day, or if a minute after the pictures were taken they went inside and banged.

Yet you're leaning heavy into the idea that they banged and the wife is pissed off.

As someone famous once said, let he who has not sinned cast the first stone....

 

[XLIX]

That's the problem, you are making conclusions without having facts.

No, I am making logical conclusions based on facts.

You don't know if the Vrables are the XLIX kind of Catholic or the Kennedy kind of Catholic.

Like I said, I am not going to apologize for believing a 25 year married devout catholic wife is not a polyamorous swinger.

If “they have an open marriage” is the hill you want to die on, you go right ahead.

You don't know if Mike and Diana are long-time friends going back to their TEN days and were just socializing all day, or if a minute after the pictures were taken they went inside and banged.

I am making logical conclusions based on the facts.

Yet you're leaning heavy into the idea that they banged and the wife is pissed off.

I am making logical conclusions based on the facts.

As someone famous once said, let he who has not sinned cast the first stone....

You clearly have no clue whatsoever what that phrase means. But keep humiliating yourself anyway, I am enjoying seeing you dig your hole deeper and deeper.

 

[Bill Lee]

I am making logical conclusions based on the facts.

You are jumping to conclusions based on circumstantial evidence.

But keep humiliating yourself anyway, I am enjoying seeing you dig your hole deeper and deeper.

Right back at ya!

 

[XLIX]

You are jumping to conclusions based on circumstantial evidence.

You keep using that phrase.

It does not mean what you think it means.

Ditto.

My hole is the one which says a 25 year married devout Catholic woman would not approve of her husband having an affair.

Your hole is the one which says they are in a polyamorous open relationship and Mrs. Vrabel doesn’t care if her husband of 25 years has sex with other women.

Yeah, I’m comfortably digging the metaphorical hole I dug.

 

[Bill Lee]

My hole is the one which says a 25 year married devout Catholic woman would not approve of her husband having an affair.

Your hole is the one which says they are in a polyamorous open relationship and Mrs. Vrabel doesn’t care if her husband of 25 years has sex with other women.

Your hole is the one created by saying things like they are without knowing if they are or they are not.

PS: Circumstantial evidence is information that suggests a fact is true indirectly, rather than proving it outright.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

I kinda want both of you to shut yer (pie) holes....

 

[XLIX]

Your hole is the one created by saying things like they are without knowing if they are or they are not.

My hole is a logical conclusion based on what we know.

To say your hole strains credulity is generous.

PS: Circumstantial evidence is information that suggests a fact is true indirectly, rather than proving it outright.

Your above definition of circumstantial evidence implies that regular evidence proves something is true.

Rest assured that that is most certainly not the case.

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

What a ridiculous thread.

 

[Bill Lee]

Your above definition of circumstantial evidence implies that regular evidence proves something is true.

Rest assured that that is most certainly not the case.

That's another interesting world view to have: regular evidence isn't proof so we are free to jump to any conclusions our brains are pre-wired to make after it takes in circumstantial evidence.

What a ridiculous thread.

I can see why that is the logical conclusion that one should be reaching at this point of the thread.

The evidence for it is absolutely real.

 

[XLIX]

That's another interesting world view to have: regular evidence isn't proof so we are free to jump to any conclusions our brains are pre-wired to make after it takes in circumstantial evidence.

You keep double talking yourself into a corner, desperately trying to misrepresent my statements.

None of your double talking nonsense changes the fact that I have made a logical conclusion based on the available evidence (and the available evidence is not merely circumstantial).

Never - not once - did I say I had proof. I have drawn my conclusion based on the preponderance of evidence out there.

Reasonable minds may disagree but your routine that I am just pulling this all out of thin air without any real evidence whatsoever is weaksauce.