The narrative form day one was Tyreek was guilty. The narrative the second this news broke was that it was a cash grab simply because of timing and the fact that it’s a civil suit.
People make up their minds so fucking quickly. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
It blows my mind how narratives work.
The narrative form day one was Tyreek was guilty. The narrative the second this news broke was that it was a cash grab simply because of timing and the fact that it’s a civil suit.
People make up their minds so ****ing quickly.
Because Tyreek Hill plead guilty to punching and choking his pregnant gf. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Because Tyreek Hill plead guilty to punching and choking his pregnant gf.
I understand that, but has Antonio Brown been a saint the last 2 years?
Dudes almost killed a kid, been accused of domestic abuse and rape, fucker over his personal trainer who is suing, and had an incident with a personal chef. Now there’s something about child endangerment. Not to mention all of the football stuff. The guy is a grade A POS who should NEVER be given the benefit of the doubt. [Reply]
But seriously, what do you want him to say? All he can do is wait and let those who are able to decide (NFL and the Patriots) decide whether he stays or goes, or is suspended or not. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
It blows my mind how narratives work.
The narrative form day one was Tyreek was guilty. The narrative the second this news broke was that it was a cash grab simply because of timing and the fact that it’s a civil suit.
People make up their minds so fucking quickly.
The irony is that people assume it's a cash grab because he just got paid by the Pats (less then what he woulda got from the Raiders prior to the lawsuit, AND he was already well paid by Pitt).
Tyreek was ALSO about to get paid, but did anyone (aside from Chiefs fans) even consider the idea of a cash grab? Not a chance.
But seriously, what do you want him to say? All he can do is wait and let those who are able to decide (NFL and the Patriots) decide whether he stays or goes, or is suspended or not.
Your team has a worse history with this shit than the Raiders, and all they ever do is excuse it and ignore it. That's exactly what Tom is doing here. Not giving a shit.
Can he catch passes or not? That's all they care about.
The national media talks about the Chiefs not giving a fuck about character, yet look at the Patriots. [Reply]
I think we can all pretty much assume that if the NFL doesn't suspend or exempt him, he'll play. The Pats sure as hell won't do anything about him. That's above their standards.
So most likely nothing will come of this and he'll suite up, likely this Sunday.
With that said, how fucking hilarious would it be if (Watson?) doesn't give up #84 to Brown, and he throws a tantrum over that shit? [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
It blows my mind how narratives work.
The narrative form day one was Tyreek was guilty. The narrative the second this news broke was that it was a cash grab simply because of timing and the fact that it’s a civil suit.
People make up their minds so fucking quickly.
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Because Tyreek Hill plead guilty to punching and choking his pregnant gf.
But that's not the dispositive angle, at least for me.
The dispositive angle here is an accuser, who will have to either prove or live with the failure to prove her allegations.
Tyreek's choronology was; child broke arm, fixed without incident, then people made noise about suspicions and chid services looked into the matter, . . . the noise started with anyone and everyone 'connecting the dots' and 'coming to obvious conclusions.' What was absent was an actual accusation from either the GF or the child.
AB's situation has someone putting in writing, filed with the court, a series of allegations, and AB's pre-existing correspondance corroborating the gist of the events, but with a different narrative regarding consent.
Tyreek's 'history' is just a dot to connect in a web of inferences. It's relevance is not established and the gravity of it remains to be seen. [Reply]
