Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
seafoam1

Ellitot's appeal likely to be August 29

Recommended Posts

What I do know is this guy is a thug in general...

 

 

no, you don't know that. you've seen him goofing around with a girlfriend in an inappropriate way, and you know he has a speeding ticket. that's all you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

no, you don't know that. you've seen him goofing around with a girlfriend in an inappropriate way, and you know he has a speeding ticket. that's all you know.

Whatever. To you its just another day for someone who gets accused of beating his girlfriend multiple times, gets in bar altercations where the other person he confronted is knocked out, gets in multiple car accidents, is tagged for driving 100+ mph, and rips a shirt down on some girl for his personal pleasure. On top of that, let me ask you, do you think he gets away with any of his thug activities or has he only gotten caught for everything he does bad?

 

Also, he will get suspended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever. To you its just another day for someone who gets accused of beating his girlfriend multiple times, gets in bar altercations where the other person he confronted is knocked out, gets in multiple car accidents, is tagged for driving 100+ mph, and rips a shirt down on some girl for his personal pleasure. On top of that, let me ask you, do you think he gets away with any of his thug activities or has he only gotten caught for everything he does bad?

 

Also, he will get suspended.

He didn't beat the girl, she clearly lied. People in bars often like to confront atheletes, that's not a shock. Drunk clown vs world class athelete, knockout expected. Driving like an idiot? He's a 23 yr old who just got rich and bought a new sports car, it happens. Rips down the shirt? A playful act, the party girl didn't care and she wasn't traumatized, relax, that's clearly making a mountain from a molehill.

 

If it was a white guy you would be calling him a party dude, because he's black you say he's a thug. He hasn't done anything reprehensible to me yet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't beat the girl, she clearly lied. People in bars often like to confront atheletes, that's not a shock. Drunk clown vs world class athelete, knockout expected. Driving like an idiot? He's a 23 yr old who just got rich and bought a new sports car, it happens. Rips down the shirt? A playful act, the party girl didn't care and she wasn't traumatized, relax, that's clearly making a mountain from a molehill.

 

If it was a white guy you would be calling him a party dude, because he's black you say he's a thug. He hasn't done anything reprehensible to me yet.

Oh its race again with you. I criticized patrick kane for being a thug as well. Now what do have to say? And who would believe a race baiter like you anyway?

 

Heads up everyone, dont tell truths about any person of a race that this tantastic chick doesnt want to hear negative things about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I drafted Elliot in the late 2nd rd, failed to get McFadden, kind of bummed...he went in the 9th rd, seemed early for me. Hopefully the suspension will be reduced to 4-games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I drafted Elliot in the late 2nd rd, failed to get McFadden, kind of bummed...he went in the 9th rd, seemed early for me. Hopefully the suspension will be reduced to 4-games.

Well, most optimistically for you his reps will be able to delay until next year. Then you got a huge deal for sure. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh its race again with you. I criticized patrick kane for being a thug as well. Now what do have to say? And who would believe a race baiter like you anyway?

 

Heads up everyone, dont tell truths about any person of a race that this tantastic chick doesnt want to hear negative things about.

 

You know, sirensong and I disagree about Elliots fate and that affects fantasy football and draft strategy. You on the otherhand are a race baiter, and that is not cool. Im done with you, as that situation is a huge problem with our country and has no worth in this forum.

Overreaction. "This tanatastic chick"? That's supposed to be a clever dig? I've posted here for 10 years, you've been here for 10 minutes. Cmon man, I know I set you off but relax.

 

Also I stand by my statements. You are calling a guy a thug for things that I think if he were white he would just be a party guy like Gronk. Rowdy partying, driving fast etc. I'm not going to condemn Elliot yet, especially for the beatdown that clearly he didn't do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever. To you its just another day for someone who gets accused of beating his girlfriend multiple times, gets in bar altercations where the other person he confronted is knocked out, gets in multiple car accidents, is tagged for driving 100+ mph, and rips a shirt down on some girl for his personal pleasure. On top of that, let me ask you, do you think he gets away with any of his thug activities or has he only gotten caught for everything he does bad?

 

Also, he will get suspended.

 

 

you're missing the point. you claim to know things without the benefit of evidence. you believe things, but you know very little about the situation. For example, you're taking the word of someone who tweeted about a bar fight without a clear view of the situation, and who a number of other eyewitnesses have disputed. You're taking the word of a woman who everyone associated with the case has acknowledged as a liar. somehow, you think that these reports allow you to know things about Elliott, instead of the rational position that they're just hearsay.

 

that's just bad brainwork.

 

and incidentally, tantastic is one of the most astute posters on the forum. if he's calling you out about race, it's because your insistence that you know things about elliott sounds a lot like the way racists claim to know things without the benefit of evidence. and i say that as an arch-conservative.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

you're missing the point. you claim to know things without the benefit of evidence. you believe things, but you know very little about the situation. For example, you're taking the word of someone who tweeted about a bar fight without a clear view of the situation, and who a number of other eyewitnesses have disputed. You're taking the word of a woman who everyone associated with the case has acknowledged as a liar. somehow, you think that these reports allow you to know things about Elliott, instead of the rational position that they're just hearsay.

 

that's just bad brainwork.

 

and incidentally, tantastic is one of the most astute posters on the forum. if he's calling you out about race, it's because your insistence that you know things about elliott sounds a lot like the way racists claim to know things without the benefit of evidence. and i say that as an arch-conservative.

Ok. You speak as if you know so much. But you dont. You keep getting back to the domestic abuse and say everything on top of that is him just being a kid. Accidents in cars are following him around. And you also dont know about the payoffs or anything else. I dare you to go 100+ mph tomorrow and get in a bar fight and pull a girls shirt down in public. All in a days work...

 

Now you are a race baiter too. I misjudged you. Oh well. Blame it all on race. I must hate white people too.

 

Done with you too.

 

Elliot will be suspended and for those that care about fantasy football, hopefully his reps can plug up the works and get a delay but then he also turns himself around if you picked him in an early draft. Im skeptical is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. You speak as if you know so much. But you dont. You keep getting back to the domestic abuse and say everything on top of that is him just being a kid. Accidents in cars are following him around. And you also dont know about the payoffs or anything else. I dare you to go 100+ mph tomorrow and get in a bar fight and pull a girls shirt down in public. All in a days work...

 

Now you are a race baiter too. I misjudged you. Oh well. Blame it all on race. I must hate white people too.

 

Done with you too.

 

Elliot will be suspended and for those that care about fantasy football, hopefully his reps can plug up the works and get a delay but then he also turns himself around if you picked him in an early draft. Im skeptical is all.

We can stay on topic, the race stuff was largely in jest and irrelevant to the points. I apologize for letting it get away from the matter.

 

There could def have been payoffs, but if you can't prove it, it didn't happen. What we KNOW is she lied and is a conniving blackmailer. He's a knucklehead for sure, but he is young and just got a taste of stardom. Winston was similar and he has been the consummate pro in the NFL. I'll give Elliot a chance to mature as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. You speak as if you know so much. But you dont. You keep getting back to the domestic abuse and say everything on top of that is him just being a kid. Accidents in cars are following him around. And you also dont know about the payoffs or anything else. I dare you to go 100+ mph tomorrow and get in a bar fight and pull a girls shirt down in public. All in a days work...

 

Now you are a race baiter too. I misjudged you. Oh well. Blame it all on race. I must hate white people too.

 

Done with you too.

 

Elliot will be suspended and for those that care about fantasy football, hopefully his reps can plug up the works and get a delay but then he also turns himself around if you picked him in an early draft. Im skeptical is all.

 

 

the difference between you and the rest of us is that we understand that there's a difference between knowledge and conjecture, and unlike you, we don't pretend to know things that aren't supported by evidence. there is very little that any of us can know for certain. you can't possibly know if he got into a bar fight--it was only hearsay from one drinker at a bar who couldn't see clearly and was contradicted by other eyewitnesses--yet you absolutely insist that it happened.

 

that's just bad wiring in your brain--you're literally delusional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

the difference between you and the rest of us is that we understand that there's a difference between knowledge and conjecture, and unlike you, we don't pretend to know things that aren't supported by evidence. there is very little that any of us can know for certain. you can't possibly know if he got into a bar fight--it was only hearsay from one drinker at a bar who couldn't see clearly and was contradicted by other eyewitnesses--yet you absolutely insist that it happened.

 

that's just bad wiring in your brain--you're literally delusional.

yep. and its my fault he has been suspended too. good for you. brilliant on your part. later dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

the difference between you and the rest of us is that we understand that there's a difference between knowledge and conjecture, and unlike you, we don't pretend to know things that aren't supported by evidence. there is very little that any of us can know for certain. you can't possibly know if he got into a bar fight--it was only hearsay from one drinker at a bar who couldn't see clearly and was contradicted by other eyewitnesses--yet you absolutely insist that it happened.

 

that's just bad wiring in your brain--you're literally delusional.

 

Don't feed the troll, man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't we have enough race talk already with Trump running the show???

Let's stick to football guys. Hoping Zeke falls to me in round 2. I thugs on my football team. :banana:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a kid who just became rich and famous partying with hot women. He was joking around and she prob banged him later and gets naked all the time. I won't judge a kid for being a kid. He needs to grow up fast though now that he is a face of the biggest sports brand in the country.

He's not a kid. He's in his 20s. That's no excuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever. To you its just another day for someone who gets accused of beating his girlfriend multiple times, gets in bar altercations where the other person he confronted is knocked out, gets in multiple car accidents, is tagged for driving 100+ mph, and rips a shirt down on some girl for his personal pleasure. On top of that, let me ask you, do you think he gets away with any of his thug activities or has he only gotten caught for everything he does bad?

 

Also, he will get suspended.

Man, you're being awfully narrow-minded and judgmental. If I said I'd been popped for 100+, in a barfight that resulted in people going to hospital, arrested for assault and not all willing to admit all the stupid sh!t I did at the coast in my late teens/early 20's in order to get womens clothes off it would not be all that far from the truth. the difference, I'm not a professional athlete who faces a non-stop barrage of being videoed everywhere I go and scrutiny to a level that you clearly cannot understand. I also did not have a 7-figure a year salary that turns people into greedy pieces of sh!t trying to get their hands on it.

 

I was in a 14 person bar fight that I didn't start but got caught up in and several people required hospital visits. on another occasion i walked out of a restaurant with a date and saw a random guy hitting his girlfriend in the parking lot. I bounced him off the side of a truck and said if I saw him do it again I'd send him to the hospital. His girl jumped on my back from behind and when I reacted she fell to the ground. The police cuffed me for all of it. The only reason I didn't get charged was because the cops said they would have to press charges against the boyfriend if they booked me. That backed her down and everybody went home. I'm now in my 40's, father of 3, married nearly 20 years, never been in trouble since and a model worker. People do stupid crap when they are young, that's why they call it growing up. If you're perfect, man, that's great for you. The rest of us are continually a work in progress.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone will deny that we all do stupid things when we were in our early 20's but we either paid the consequences or we learned from those mistakes. If one continues to do stupid things then they are just asking for it and I don't have much remorse for them. I'm hoping Zeke learns a lot from all of this and doesn't put himself in bad situations anymore. Regardless of him actually being guilty of it or not he needs to be careful with what he does and where he goes. He can't trust everyone because there are too many crappy people out there that will take advantage of him because of his celebrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting read on MSN regarding the "nuclear" option for Zeke:

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/ezekiel-elliott-nflpa-preparing-for-nuclear-option-against-nfl/ar-AAqYWCl?li=BBnb7Kz

 

It's playing out as an attempt to wrest some of the power Goddell (yes, I know it's Goodell, I like my spelling better) has over discipline. Zeke alleging that the NFL is arbitrarily taking away his right to make a living is an interesting take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeke alleging that the NFL is arbitrarily taking away his right to make a living is an interesting take.

 

Huh. Do we have a 'right' to make a living in the particular field we choose? So if I can't find a tenure track position and need to leave academia, I can sue the schools that didn't hire me if they didn't provide a good reason for not hiring me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got Zek in the second round (#23 overall) in my 14 team league. :banana:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not a kid. He's in his 20s. That's no excuse.

 

Rental car companies have known it for years, neuroscience is catching up. Your brain isn't fully developed until you're 25 or so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Rental car companies have known it for years, neuroscience is catching up. Your brain isn't fully developed until you're 25 or so.

Say what now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say what now?

 

You made the comment that he's in his 20's, he's not a kid. I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, just pointing out that 'kid' emotionally and psychologically is being redefined by way of recent neuroscience findings. Here's a BBC article discussing the issue: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24173194

 

Quotage from the article: "Neuroscience has shown that a young person's cognitive development continues into this later stage [early 20s) and that their emotional maturity, self-image and judgement will be affected until the prefrontal cortex of the brain has fully developed. Alongside brain development, hormonal activity is also continuing well into the early twenties..."

 

(Although I hate the language of saying 'neuroscience has shown'...neuroscientists have shown. But anyway...)

 

People's brains aren't done developing, and they therefore are more likely to made bad decisions, until they are about 25. Rental car companies and actuarial tables have known this for years. Try renting a car in the US by yourself if you are under 25. They won't give you one, because you're much more likely to make bad decisions with it.

 

So the idea is that, yeah, people in their early 20s are 'kids'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got new evidence from a guy who was with both of them the night of the supposed beating and she had no bruises. This is gonna get tossed, he is innocent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got new evidence from a guy who was with both of them the night of the supposed beating and she had no bruises. This is gonna get tossed, he is innocent.

Link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You made the comment that he's in his 20's, he's not a kid. I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, just pointing out that 'kid' emotionally and psychologically is being redefined by way of recent neuroscience findings. Here's a BBC article discussing the issue: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24173194

 

Quotage from the article: "Neuroscience has shown that a young person's cognitive development continues into this later stage [early 20s) and that their emotional maturity, self-image and judgement will be affected until the prefrontal cortex of the brain has fully developed. Alongside brain development, hormonal activity is also continuing well into the early twenties..."

 

(Although I hate the language of saying 'neuroscience has shown'...neuroscientists have shown. But anyway...)

 

People's brains aren't done developing, and they therefore are more likely to made bad decisions, until they are about 25. Rental car companies and actuarial tables have known this for years. Try renting a car in the US by yourself if you are under 25. They won't give you one, because you're much more likely to make bad decisions with it.

 

So the idea is that, yeah, people in their early 20s are 'kids'.

 

They're not kids. Maybe not fully developed but still an adult. Many people are already married and have kids by the time they're 25. People have served in the military and have returned home already. They are not kids, they are adults in the work force.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're not kids. Maybe not fully developed but still an adult. Many people are already married and have kids by the time they're 25. People have served in the military and have returned home already. They are not kids, they are adults in the work force.

You are arguing semantics. Ever watch football? Announcers all the time say "this kid looks great, this is a good kid, this kid is smart." Etc. Its a term meaning a young player. No one is saying he's the legal definition of a child as stated under the 8th commandment of the holy jurisdiction of federal judiciary subdivisional bilateral law of the commonfolk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are arguing semantics. Ever watch football? Announcers all the time say "this kid looks great, this is a good kid, this kid is smart." Etc. Its a term meaning a young player. No one is saying he's the legal definition of a child as stated under the 8th commandment of the holy jurisdiction of federal judiciary subdivisional bilateral law of the commonfolk.

 

Well, actually some people are actually considering him a kid/young adult and making excuses for him because that's just what kids that age do. Remember, we all did stupid things when we were kids? While agree that's true, when I did stupid things I paid the price and I learned from my mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They're not kids. Maybe not fully developed but still an adult. Many people are already married and have kids by the time they're 25. People have served in the military and have returned home already. They are not kids, they are adults in the work force.

 

Some people are married with children at 13. Not typically in the US, but it happens in the world. People have served in the military at 15. You're not going to have success trying to find a definitive age at which the term 'kid' is no longer used, or should no longer be used.

 

In the US we default to 18 really for legal reasons. In rural Honduras, it's more like 14. But our laws have been driven by social forces. 18 doesn't 'make any more sense' objectively than 25 does. I'll even say 18 is based on a lack of information/data...data that we now have a lot more of.

 

18 you can vote, serve in the military. But not drink. So not fully an 'adult'. 21 you can drink, but not rent a car. An 'adult' yet? There's no clear cutoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting read. I expect someone who is 21 to know to not do what he has I guess. Doesn't get a pass from me regardless of the neuroscience saying he's 4 years shy of not bein a dooshbag.

 

To the case, the girl seems just as shady as he is. I could see him getting off through appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Some people are married with children at 13. Not typically in the US, but it happens in the world. People have served in the military at 15. You're not going to have success trying to find a definitive age at which the term 'kid' is no longer used, or should no longer be used.

 

In the US we default to 18 really for legal reasons. In rural Honduras, it's more like 14. But our laws have been driven by social forces. 18 doesn't 'make any more sense' objectively than 25 does. I'll even say 18 is based on a lack of information/data...data that we now have a lot more of.

 

18 you can vote, serve in the military. But not drink. So not fully an 'adult'. 21 you can drink, but not rent a car. An 'adult' yet? There's no clear cutoff.

 

You can actually rent a car if you're under the age of 25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't beat the girl, she clearly lied.

 

I'm asking legitimately, not sarcastically, how do you know this. All I know is

1 - There was an initial claim of abuse

2 - The claim was rescended

3 - No charges were filed

4 - NFL conducts its own investigation

5 - The NFL give him a 6 game suspension which is the going rate for domestic violence

 

The NFL doesn't have to have the same burden of proof that the criminal justice system requires. I think the NFL thinks Elliott did commit this abuse. I also think it's likely there was a out of court "agreement" between Elliot and the potential victim. This is also consistent the Ray Rice case. There was no real prosecution of Rice because his wife wouldn't cooperate with the investigation (i.e. didn't want him to go to jail)

 

I'm just curious what makes you think the NFL would go after him for this with absolutely no evidence that he abused her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm asking legitimately, not sarcastically, how do you know this. All I know is

1 - There was an initial claim of abuse

2 - The claim was rescended

3 - No charges were filed

4 - NFL conducts its own investigation

5 - The NFL give him a 6 game suspension which is the going rate for domestic violence

 

The NFL doesn't have to have the same burden of proof that the criminal justice system requires. I think the NFL thinks Elliott did commit this abuse. I also think it's likely there was a out of court "agreement" between Elliot and the potential victim. This is also consistent the Ray Rice case. There was no real prosecution of Rice because his wife wouldn't cooperate with the investigation (i.e. didn't want him to go to jail)

 

I'm just curious what makes you think the NFL would go after him for this with absolutely no evidence that he abused her?

Because Goodell fashions himself as some sort of moral crusader above the legal system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm asking legitimately, not sarcastically, how do you know this. All I know is

1 - There was an initial claim of abuse

2 - The claim was rescended

3 - No charges were filed

4 - NFL conducts its own investigation

5 - The NFL give him a 6 game suspension which is the going rate for domestic violence

 

The NFL doesn't have to have the same burden of proof that the criminal justice system requires. I think the NFL thinks Elliott did commit this abuse. I also think it's likely there was a out of court "agreement" between Elliot and the potential victim. This is also consistent the Ray Rice case. There was no real prosecution of Rice because his wife wouldn't cooperate with the investigation (i.e. didn't want him to go to jail)

 

I'm just curious what makes you think the NFL would go after him for this with absolutely no evidence that he abused her?

She has been caught red handed plotting to conspire and blackmail. There is now testimony and pictures refuting the time that she says she was beaten. It's open and shut right there but I'll continue. Why press it if there is no evidence? Because the league can't be seen as soft on domestic violence. She had her friend beat her up and accuse Elliot in an attempt to extort him because she knows this. The league has to crack down if there is even a whiff of man on woman violence or the public opinion becomes negative. Evidemce and proof don't matter to the NFL, perception and public opinion do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, this thread is getting deep. Entertaining reading and a lot of well stated positions on both sides of the coin, kudos gentlemen.

 

In my opinion no one but the two directly involved will ever know what really happened. There's evidence on both sides but I think the text conversations the alleged victim had with her friend show bad intent. The case against EE is much less believable as a whole because of this.

 

Kent's comment about Goodell is spot on. The guy is an egomaniac who makes way too much money. Sometimes I think he wants to be the face of the NFL instead of the players. A good commissioner should rarely be seen or heard from and I think we've had way too much Roger. In this situation I really think he is lumping several bad behavior incidents together with the possibility that he may have hit this girl and using the situation to punish him for all of it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting read. I expect someone who is 21 to know to not do what he has I guess. Doesn't get a pass from me regardless of the neuroscience saying he's 4 years shy of not bein a dooshbag.

 

To the case, the girl seems just as shady as he is. I could see him getting off through appeal.

Way back in time, someone arbitrarily said "18 is an adult" and that mentality has stuck. It's not like a light going on, it's a gradual process. Teenage and early 20's males die an inordinately higher percentage of time in car accidents...why? Because the part of their brain that controls impulsiveness hasn't developed, and sometimes doesn't until well after 25 yrs of age. It's not rental car agencies that started it, it's insurance companies. Scores of actuaries determined the risks associated with insuring young males tapers off after 25 years of age, so they charge the fock out of you during that time (as a dad of 3 teenage sons and a former insurance guy, I know this part all too well). It's also why exponentially more males die from alcohol overdoses, have a lower college graduation rate, and typically don't have the grades in high school or college that females do comparatively. That part of their brain just doesn't mature as quickly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×