Judge overturns Peterson suspension

[CarolinaCoolin]

And wrong...again. But given that you generally get things wrong I shouldn't be surprised.

Of course, if you were actually trying to make a decent argument rather than just being a douchebag to troll for attention, it would make this process more interesting.

Changing your arguments when you are proven wrong makes you look weak af.

Your whole argument has been the NFL doesn't need proof to suspend Hardy. Him simply being in legal trouble is enough for them to suspend him. Since he's a PR nightmare with DV they can suspend him. Now you are trying to say you never said that.

You are the douchebag. You think your opinions are facts and you talk down to people cause you have dorky ass 'never will get you anywhere' football knowledge and you can copy and paste a link.

And I personally enjoy calling you out and watching you try to play it off like you are some god. GTFO

But have fun in your huddle ivory tower with all your useless football factoids. I hope that keeps you warm at night

[Mr. Scot]

Changing your arguments when you are proven wrong makes you look weak af.

Your whole argument has been the NFL doesn't need proof to suspend Hardy. Him simply being in legal trouble is enough for them to suspend him. Since he's a PR nightmare with DV they can suspend him. Now you are trying to say you never said that.

You are the douchebag. You think your opinions are facts and you talk down to people cause you have dorky ass 'never will get you anywhere' football knowledge and you can copy and paste a link.

And I personally enjoy calling you out and watching you try to play it off like you are some god. GTFO

But have fun in your huddle ivory tower with all your useless football factoids. I hope that keeps you warm at night

 

 

Here's the fun: I still say the NFL doesn't need proof to suspend Hardy.  Their rules allow them to do so without having to meet the kind of standard you have in a court of law.  That hasn't changed, and nowhere have I denied i (except, apparently in your fertile imagination).

 

Likewise, I have consistently said a big reason why they will likely fight tooth and nail to keep him off the field is because he reminds people of their image problems, and they don't want that.  Even people who disagree with me on other points acknowledge that.

 

As to the rest, well that's what I expect from you

 

Lemme put this plainly...

 

Debating with people who have something intelligent and interesting to say - even if they disagree with me - is enjoyable.  I can do that all day.

 

Going back and forth with trolls who just wanna pick fights with people to piss them off, on the other hand, is boring.  And frankly, that MO is kinda pathetic.

 

Conversations with you are boring.

 

Feel free to complete the syllogism.

[CarolinaCoolin]

Here's the fun: I still say the NFL doesn't need proof to suspend Hardy. Their rules allow them to do so without having to meet the kind of standard you have in a court of law. That hasn't changed, and nowhere have I denied i (except, apparently in your fertile imagination).

Likewise, I have consistently said a big reason why they will likely fight tooth and nail to keep him off the field is because he reminds people of their image problems, and they don't want that. Even people who disagree with me on other points acknowledge that.

As to the rest, well that's what I expect from you

Lemme put this plainly...

Debating with people who have something intelligent and interesting to say - even if they disagree with me - is enjoyable. I can do that all day.

Going back and forth with trolls who just wanna pick fights with people to piss them off, on the other hand, is boring. And frankly, that MO is kinda pathetic.

Conversations with you are boring.

Feel free to complete the syllogism.

from a pure informational perspective he is a news aggregator and talk radio caller style poster masquerading as some sort of football analyst. really the more i think about it, the more dead on the rick reilly comparison seems to be

because he gets his debating rocks off by being playing behind a facade of humility and down-home simple wisdom when in reality his arrogance, though unorthodox, is absolutely off the charts. how anyone cannot see this for exactly what it is (and actually i think plenty of people do) is utterly beyond me. frankly it's frustrating that he successfully labeled me a bad guy for some of you guys with such obvious sleight of hand.

and if anything, NavyPF4L got it backwards: it's scot's generation that's fuged, because if you consider this exchange as a representative of generational outlooks and ideals, scot's is being substanceless while pretending to be overflowing with substance and astounding arrogance disguised as "bless your heart" southern hospitality.

I think they were spot on.

Your arguments are weak and rifle with arrogance.

Rather admit you've been wrong about the Hardy situation since the beginning you back track and change arguments.

But whatever since I'm boring why don't you just block me since you are so above it all

[Mr. Scot]

I think they were spot on.

Your arguments are weak and rifle with arrogance.

Rather admit you've been wrong about the Hardy situation since the beginning you back track and change arguments.

But whatever since I'm boring why don't you just block me since you are so above it all

 

Haven't ever bothered to block anyone on here.

 

Easier to just ignore you.

 

I'll demonstrate...

 

[CarolinaCoolin]

Haven't ever bothered to block anyone on here.

Easier to just ignore you.

I'll demonstrate...

Telling me you are going to ignore just so you can get the last word in lol

How do you make the laughing emoticon again scot? You would know right?