How amazing is it that this guy is so blinded by his agenda that he doesn't realize that this post hurts his position.
If the NFL was willing suspend Reed - a very good pass rusher for a well known squad with a marquee quarterback and recent Lombardi - without a pile of evidence, it's pretty !@#$ing apparent that they'd have suspended Hill if they had anything to work with.
In fact, it suggests pretty strongly that the bar Hill had to clear wasn't just 'not guilty' but rather 'strongly exonerated'.
If the NFL suspended Reed but not Hill, what the hell do you think that says about how that 8 hour hearing went?
But Rosen's too fucking dense to grasp that very simple conclusion. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
How amazing is it that this guy is so blinded by his agenda that he doesn't realize that this post hurts his position.
If the NFL was willing suspend Reed - a very good pass rusher for a well known squad with a marquee quarterback and recent Lombardi - without a pile of evidence, it's pretty !@#$ing apparent that they'd have suspended Hill if they had anything to work with.
In fact, it suggests pretty strongly that the bar Hill had to clear wasn't just 'not guilty' but rather 'strongly exonerated'.
If the NFL suspended Reed but not Hill, what the hell do you think that says about how that 8 hour hearing went?
But Rosen's too fucking dense to grasp that very simple conclusion.
Yeah, he doesn't seem very bright.
Oh, I just looked him up. He works at the Star. No wonder. I don't pay attention to those people any more since they're fake news. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
How amazing is it that this guy is so blinded by his agenda that he doesn't realize that this post hurts his position.
If the NFL was willing suspend Reed - a very good pass rusher for a well known squad with a marquee quarterback and recent Lombardi - without a pile of evidence, it's pretty !@#$ing apparent that they'd have suspended Hill if they had anything to work with.
In fact, it suggests pretty strongly that the bar Hill had to clear wasn't just 'not guilty' but rather 'strongly exonerated'.
If the NFL suspended Reed but not Hill, what the hell do you think that says about how that 8 hour hearing went?
But Rosen's too ****ing dense to grasp that very simple conclusion.
I am going to keep saying this because it needs to keep being said....
The NFL's Conduct policy is very clear there must be clear evidence of a violation for there to be punishment.
Obviously there was no evidence Hill had violated the policy therefore they could not punish him. Obviously they found evidence Reed did violate the policy.
The system isn't as willy nilly as people believe and Goodell uses 3rd party investigators to give him the info he needs to make decisions. [Reply]
Rosen is from Seattle so he couldn't care less about the Chiefs. the KCStar is just a stepping stone to him and he saw a chance to fuck over KC with the Hill nonsense. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TravelingChiefs:
Rosen is from Seattle so he couldn't care less about the Chiefs. the KCStar is just a stepping stone to him and he saw a chance to **** over KC with the Hill nonsense.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
How amazing is it that this guy is so blinded by his agenda that he doesn't realize that this post hurts his position.
If the NFL was willing suspend Reed - a very good pass rusher for a well known squad with a marquee quarterback and recent Lombardi - without a pile of evidence, it's pretty !@#$ing apparent that they'd have suspended Hill if they had anything to work with.
In fact, it suggests pretty strongly that the bar Hill had to clear wasn't just 'not guilty' but rather 'strongly exonerated'.
If the NFL suspended Reed but not Hill, what the hell do you think that says about how that 8 hour hearing went?
But Rosen's too fucking dense to grasp that very simple conclusion.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Don't. Give. These. Motherfuckers. Any. More. Clicks.
Never. At all. Not Sam, not a poll, not a game recap.
Nothing - they need to be dead to all of you. And they need to be dead to anyone who considers themselves Chiefs fans.
I cannot for the life of me understand how anybody on this board, a board dedicated to the Chiefs, can comfortably maintain even a passing associating with the Kansas City Star.
Originally Posted by DaFace:
It's almost tempting to put a url filter in place to ensure that they don't get clicks from here.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Look at what we can get from independent sources.
Stout's little quip about the Chiefs running 10 personnel with an average 40 time under 4.4 - that's gold.
And I guarantee the Brooke Pryor has no !@#$ing clue what a '10 personnel' means.
There is no reason at all to continue to give them pageviews. They are a 2nd rate newspaper that has joined the mewling clickbaiters in appealing to the lowest common denominator in pursuit of advertising dollars. They have 1 talented writer who's hardly blameless in this affair and ultimately arises to little more than acceptable collateral damage.
Cut the cord with these guys. It starts here - if a board as rabid as this one, with nothing but fervent Chiefs supporters can't have the self-control to rid themselves of this tripe, then the Star will never face the consequences of this nonsense. If we won't punish them, nobody will.
They just can't let it go....they all thought they had broke a huge story and were going to be hailed as great journalists and were all oh we got him...and boom the entire thing blows up in their stupid fucking faces.
They can't accept it, Brooke thought this was her new Mixon and Rosen is her lapdog...