Manning doping report

[HumanCockroach]

LMAO. That's exactly where you guys land, "boys will be boys" right guys. Guess Manning f-ing with her a decade after the fact is just more of the same ( spare me with the "she's foul mouthed" crapola, the accusation that she was sleeping with "black" athletes in their dorms is what ultimately cost her here second job, not a proclivity to drop an f bomb, are you kidding her?).

In BOTH counts of the "lawyer advised statements" the incident isn't in question in any way shape or form, Mannings d#ck was on her head, beanbag in the face, whether he "thought it would be laughed off" doesn't change what he did inn the least. Not acceptable, whether there's intent or not. Following up in a book using libel statements, and GLOATING about "getting back at her" by sending her a copy ( as well as her boss) for something YOU did, also not acceptable.

Hope none of your daughters or wives ever have to have their lives f#cked over multiple times by some simple mistake by someone who is really good at throwing a f#ing ball. Maybe then you'll Change your tunes. Until then, enjoy being part of the good ol' boys, I'm really not interested in joining.

[RiverDog]

Hey RD, I have some Florida swampland for you too. You too Cbob.

You admit Manning violated a confidentiality clause not once but twice over a period of 9 years. That's not the act of an innocent man IMO. That's the act of a petulant child continuing to thumb his nose at his victim..
And ask yourselves which locker room guy might be lying? The one who said it was a mooning and kept his job or the one who said it wasn't and lost his job and has his letter in court evidence telling Manning to fess up. WHO would be lying there??? Common sense comes into the equation doesn't it?

You are making very light of what is a disturbing pattern emerging of witness intimidation and untruth. Its no different than Manning sending hired goons to Charley Sly's PARENTS!!!!!! house the night before the HGH report was to be released. By strange coincidence he had an impromptu denial video released the next day.
Manning is too GD indignant to believe anyone should dare to tamper with his perfectly crafted and financially protected squeaky clean image. Like Polian says, its a vicious smear campaign.
I think its a light of truth shining on darkness.

Say what you want you guys sound like a couple of good old boys right now.

Come on, Hawktalk. I'm not making light of anything and unlike you, I'm not buying any story. Make your argument if you must but don't get upset with those of us that don't embrace these allegations to the same degree that you apparently have.

[RiverDog]

Hope none of your daughters or wives ever have to have their lives f#cked over multiple times by some simple mistake by someone who is really good at throwing a f#ing ball. Maybe then you'll Change your tunes. Until then, enjoy being part of the good ol' boys, I'm really not interested in joining.

No one asked you to join anything. It's you that has asked others to join your club by embarking on some sort of crusade to win us over to your side of the debate by personalizing your argument by bringing our families into this discussion. Are you that desperate for support of your argument that you're lowering yourself to using personal insults by suggesting that we're insensitive to sexual abuse?

[HumanCockroach]

Never asked you to "join my crusade", I don't have one. Doesn't mean I don't know right from wrong, and what Manning has done in regards to this, is wrong. The original action is wrong, and the childish " I got you again" actions ten years later after someone has reestablished themselves it's even more wrong. The attitude of well, yeah he did it, but was it malicious ?is retarded, he certainly "meant it" when he screwed her ten years later, regardless of his "intent" when he exposed himself as a poor little college junior "kid", and had a "stupid" lapse in judgement. He was an "adult" and "fully aware" when he childishly, tried to "get back at her" for not "laughing off" his d#ck on her head and sack in her face, and did it anyway. He was an "adult" when he slandered her in his book, and fully aware then. And his petty actions cost this innocent ( no matter how she took it, nor Manning "intent" changes that) woman's career a second time.

You want to claim it was an "oopsie" mistake when he was a kid, fine, it wasn't, and has never been ok to my knowledge to intentionally or accidentally put your junk on someone's head/face. But that doesn't in the least cover what Manning then did. And he did it with full knowledge of what he was doing, and what it could cost this woman/ professional/ doctor. Yet you guys are excusing those actions as well.

I'm not big on famous people screwing over regular folks, just because they can. Disappointing to see so many who are ok with it, because they had success on the football field.

[HumanCockroach]

Come on, Hawktalk. I'm not making light of anything and unlike you, I'm not buying any story. Make your argument if you must but don't get upset with those of us that don't embrace these allegations to the same degree that you apparently have.

RiverDog
Legacy

Posts: 4713
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 9:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Allegations? They aren't "allegations" they are facts per every person in the room, including the "accused" Peyton Manning himself, can you get more factually accurate than everyone involved agreeing it happened? The "intent" is the ONLY thing Manning argued, not the actual instance or result of them.

[c_hawkbob]

No one asked you to join anything

Hogwash, you're absolutely asking everyone to join in your way of thinking about what happened and ridiculing us for not doing so.

I'm not taking either side. I've only said I don't believe the extremes on either end and saying I don't know enough to condemn anyone as absolutely as you seem to be.

I haven't condoned anything, I'm not excusing anything, I'm not "admitting" anything, I'm not asking you to "join my side" or any of that BS. I'm merely stating my own opinion and leaving it at that. you're the one getting all butt hurt that we all don't think like you do.

Just stop already.

[RiverDog]

Allegations? They aren't "allegations" they are facts per every person in the room, including the "accused" Peyton Manning himself, can you get more factually accurate than everyone involved agreeing it happened? The "intent" is the ONLY thing Manning argued, not the actual instance or result of them.

The allegations are that this was an intentional act of sexual abuse. That's the part I'm not necessarily buying. I don't know enough about the case to characterize it as abuse.

I'm not sure why you guys are getting so emotionally upset at those of us that don't see everything in exactly the same light as you are seeing it. No one is using any kind of inflammatory language in anywhere near the same manner as which you two are doing.

[HumanCockroach]

Sorry Bob. Your "opinion" was that Manning didn't do anything "wrong" because it was just "stupid"( not evil, just stupid) both times he jacked this lady's career. I'm not going to apologize for MY opinion either, which was pretty clear, and included my opinion of those hell bent on not only excusing the initial act, but the even more obscene act that he followed it up with. I'm entitled to that opinion the same as you right? I have not "attacked" you or RD, but I'm not going to apologize for expressing my disappointment that you are making excuses for the man. What happened isn't in question per Mannings own testimony, It's there, factual and accurate, the only thing you can "debate" is his "intent" but as I've pointed out, intent is irrelevant to the discussion, plenty of people sitting in jail right now, for doing things they didn't "intend" to do. Manning admitted doing it, and co authored the book where he libelled the lady, and sent the transcript not only yup her, but her boss. Those things aren't " allegations" or "claims" those are accurate and backed up by the guy, you want to create excuses FOR. Not the Doctor, but Manning himself.

[RiverDog]

Sorry Bob. Your "opinion" was that Manning didn't do anything "wrong" because it was just "stupid"( not evil, just stupid) both times he jacked this lady's career. I'm not going to apologize for MY opinion either, which was pretty clear, and included my opinion of those hell bent on not only excusing the initial act, but the even more obscene act that he followed it up with. I'm entitled to that opinion the same as you right? I have not "attacked" you or RD, but I'm not going to apologize for expressing my disappointment that you are making excuses for the man. What happened isn't in question per Mannings own testimony, It's there, factual and accurate, the only thing you can "debate" is his "intent" but as I've pointed out, intent is irrelevant to the discussion, plenty of people sitting in jail right now, for doing things they didn't "intend" to do. Manning admitted doing it, and co authored the book where he libelled the lady, and sent the transcript not only yup her, but her boss. Those things aren't " allegations" or "claims" those are accurate and backed up by the guy, you want to create excuses FOR. Not the Doctor, but Manning himself.

He didn't say it was right. What he said was what ever happened that it was more stupid than it was evil, a point to which I agree (Sorry for stealing your thunder, CBob).

Intent most definitely is relevant if you want to call what happened sexual abuse. It's a requirement stated in the definition of the term.

I don't see how the fact that there are people sitting in jail because they didn't intend on doing something is relevant to this discussion. There are one helluva lot of people that are not charged with a crime or not charged with a more serious crime due to a lack of intent (accidental homicide, for example).

[c_hawkbob]

1- there's a difference between "wrong" and "evil". Either or both can be stupid. I never said he didn't do anything wrong.

2- Yes you have attacked both of us, whether you choose to recognize it as such or not.

3- I have not at any instance made any sort of excuse for Manning's actions. Only questioned whether they reached the level of egregiousness you're assigning them.

4- What happened is absolutely in question! Manning's own testimony was not what you have said it was. It was that he "did it thinking the trainer wasn't where she would see" (and no, I'm not saying that I believe him).

5- Intent means everything as it pertains to most legal proceedings.

(no worries Dog, we were writing simultaneously)

[HumanCockroach]

The absolutely amazing thing to me, is you both keep going back to the original transgression as the worst thing Manning did, and because somehow magically you either believe it was some minor kid mistake, or not accurate despite a lot of evidence to the contrary, makes the later actions somehow mi moot. How is that possible?

The most disturbing thing to me wasn't Mannings " young "accidental" exposure" but the petty, childish EVIL way ten years later Manning with FULL intent felt out was ok to cost her her job, AGAIN. You both are so wrapped up in working out how this "might not really be any big deal" because... Well Hell I'm honestly not sure how anyone with a daughter, wife, sister, niece, mother could feel like dropping trow in front of a woman or girl is o.k., and certainly not putting your genitalia on them, regardless of being 19 or not, but that's got nothing, not one thing to do with what has disgusted me the most. What disgusted me the most was the attack on the lady 10 years later. To me, f# cking with someone's ability to make a living, live their life or to lie to sully their name isn't forgivable, especially for someone with fame, money and prestige in the same field one makes their living.

Bob went so far as to say those actions were just "stupid" again not evil.

RD seems stuck inn the "he can't be prosecuted for that act this far down the road" rut, and yet with the exception of Bob's blurb about messing with someone's career, and GLOATING about it not being evil but stupid, you both continue to go back to Manning dropping his twig and berries and some lady checking his ankle face..

I don't have a crusade against Manning, didn't start this thread, and have NEVER ONCE in all the years posting on either site ever once questioned Mannings character or as a human being, in fact I can't count the times I've said he's "classy" or one of the "good guys", I don't need Manning to write me a PERSONAL NOTE to be able to read some documents to know I was mislead. Mannings actions at Tennessee were disgusting, his actions a decade later were much, MUCH worse. And were done so with full intent to "harm" the lady. How can that be twisted to no big deal?

( edit: by the by, don't you two think if I was on a crusade against Manning, I might have posted something derogatory about him when the HGH thing was first posted? Yet, interestingly enough, I made no comment, none... Weird)

[RiverDog]

I never said you had a bias against Manning. The crusade I accused you of going on was your attempt to persuade others to your POV by ridiculing anyone with an opinion even slightly contrary to your own, that your take was the absolute right one and that anyone that dared express an opinion to the contrary would never "see the light" unless their family members were subjects of sexual abuse and therefore are bunch of blind fools.

[HumanCockroach]

But I thought it wasn't, sexual abuse, just a silly, stupid mistake, so no harm no foul, right?

This entire time, I have continually discussed that while not acceptable ( not even close to acceptable, or even worse just a young mistake in judgement) that what Manning did after the fact, was worse by FAR and he did it without the excuses used for his previous / original stupidity/offense/assault whatever you want to call it. Be wasn't a "kid" by a long stretch, and still felt the actions acceptable. Neither one of you seem to be able to get past defending the original action, and again "intent" may matter to you in that instance, but how in the world can you claim the same when he screwed her a decade later that took months and years to fruition? How is that even possible? Much less reasonable?

Maybe sexual assault "offends" me, I'll own that, and people being blaise about it pushes me to the point of boiling, but believe it or not, rich, powerful, influential people screwing hard working people pisses me off a Hell of a lot more. People ( all people) deserve better, not just from guys like Manning, but everyone else.

My opinion about what Manning did along the entirety of this disgusting debacle hasn't changed and won't. I apologize to both you and Bob for "involving" your families, it wasn't intended as an attack, it was intended to get you to see or feel it on a personal level. For me, that means thinking about my family, or friends and how I would feel about it. In this situation, the whole thing disgusted me from Manning "accidentally dropping "himself" on a woman's head" and from there it went downhill.

[RiverDog]

But I thought it wasn't, sexual abuse, just a silly, stupid mistake, so no harm no foul, right?

This entire time, I have continually discussed that while not acceptable ( not even close to acceptable, or even worse just a young mistake in judgement) that what Manning did after the fact, was worse by FAR and he did it without the excuses used for his previous / original stupidity/offense/assault whatever you want to call it. Be wasn't a "kid" by a long stretch, and still felt the actions acceptable. Neither one of you seem to be able to get past defending the original action, and again "intent" may matter to you in that instance, but how in the world can you claim the same when he screwed her a decade later that took months and years to fruition? How is that even possible? Much less reasonable?

Maybe sexual assault "offends" me, I'll own that, and people being blaise about it pushes me to the point of boiling, but believe it or not, rich, powerful, influential people screwing hard working people pisses me off a Hell of a lot more. People ( all people) deserve better, not just from guys like Manning, but everyone else.

My opinion about what Manning did along the entirety of this disgusting debacle hasn't changed and won't. I apologize to both you and Bob for "involving" your families, it wasn't intended as an attack, it was intended to get you to see or feel it on a personal level. For me, that means thinking about my family, or friends and how I would feel about it. In this situation, the whole thing disgusted me from Manning "accidentally dropping "himself" on a woman's head" and from there it went downhill.

Thanks for the apology. It's nice to see a person man up sometime. I can tell that this is a sensitive issue for you and I can assure you that the subject matter is just as concerning to me as it is to you.

But I'd be careful how you throw some of those terms around. "Sexual abuse" and "sexual assault" are terms that most states have used to replace the word "rape" in their criminal statutes. So unless you want to accuse Manning of rape, I suggest that you start substituting the terms "sexual impropriety" or "sexual harassment" in their place.

[HumanCockroach]

Sorry, I simply used the words that were used in the court documents, and fit the accepted definition of the term.

Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient

.

I can certainly use another term, though I'm not sure it matters much.

[RiverDog]

Sorry, I simply used the words that were used in the court documents, and fit the accepted definition of the term.

I can certainly use another term, though I'm not sure it matters much.

Without asking for permission, have you ever let your hands wander to see how far the girl will let you go before she tells you to stop? Would that not be sexual assault according to the definition you quoted? Where's the romance and the passion if you have to ask your partner "do you mind if I take your bra off?" before proceeding? IMO the more reasonable definition would not include such a definitive term as "explicit consent" and make it clear that there's a line you cross when you don't take no for an answer that elevates the activity to assault.

l'm not saying the definition you quoted is wrong as I know that there are different definitions of the same word, but the fact is that many states have replaced the term "rape" with the term "sexual assault" or "sexual abuse" in their statutes, so IMO the more appropriate terms for our discussions would be either harassment, impropriety, or misconduct rather than the industrial strength terms you've been using.

I don't want to get into an argument about semantics, but you and I both know that a good debate strategy is to use the most inflammatory words possible to make a point so that people will sit up and listen.

[Hawktawk]

If someone flashes their junk its a sex crime of some denomination or another. Obviously it isn't the same as rape or something like that but still a wrong, depraved act.

I cant find a link right now but I read yesterday that Manning's lawyers have had under seal a 1994 allegation that Manning cheated on a pass/fail exam which would have meant not showing up in person and the instructor was Jamie Nautwright who was filling in for the regular instructor.So following the bouncing ball Manning had a reason to do what he did in 1996, revenge for the accusation as a freshman. Nautwright's lawyers are asking the records prior to 1996 be unsealed to demonstrate the pattern of harassment that started long before the locker room incident. The accusation of academic fraud is hotly contested by the professor himself who trashed Nautwright's reputation and recently had a 3 million dollar building on the Tennessee campus named in his honor courtesy of Mr. Manning, just a coincidence I'm sure.

Good old boys club stuff, 100%.
Long term it really wont matter. His fans will stand by him. His detractors will hate him more. Unless there's a lot more to the story he will be a first ballot HOF inductee and do whatever the hell he wants in the NFL from ownership, GM, coach, or media.
Not much of a penalty I can see.

[HumanCockroach]

I don't think so Hawk, I was a "fan" not a detractor, and after the continued harassment ( even if I was more in line with the "young" stupidity excuse. Which I'm not.) isn't acceptable to me. Just isn't. Anyone with that amount of privilege, prestige and money that felt the continued harassment for something they did was acceptable, much less a right to gloat about it on the way, is one of the lowest possible human beings I can imagine. Far as I'm concerned at this point, I hope he loses every penny he's ever made, never gets elected to the hall, and can't find employment anywhere for the rest of his days... Not even as a delivery boy for good ole Papa John's. Simply have zero sympathy for someone that drops his junk on someone's head "even by accident" and then proceeds to trash their career, name and anything else they get their hands on for the better part of 10-15 years. I'm not sure how anyone can defend those actions, regardless of how well he played the game...

I would feel the same about ANY player, including my "heros" growing up like Easely or Largent, or current faves currently playing like Russ or Sherm, I simply would not defend them, or provide excuses.

Count me as one of the "fans" that have switched. Far as I'm concerned, everything he has done is "tainted" and not worth an ounce of my respect. When I talk about "alltime greats" at QB, his name won't be in the conversation.

[obiken]

Will he go to Jail? No. Will he be kicked out of the league? No. Will his rep take a hit? Yes. Will he be kept out of the HOF? No.
So beat up on each other on this topic is meaningless. Come on, lets move on.


IF the Doping scandal is true that is a different Kettle of fish.

[RiverDog]

I don't think so Hawk, I was a "fan" not a detractor, and after the continued harassment ( even if I was more in line with the "young" stupidity excuse. Which I'm not.) isn't acceptable to me. Just isn't. Anyone with that amount of privilege, prestige and money that felt the continued harassment for something they did was acceptable, much less a right to gloat about it on the way, is one of the lowest possible human beings I can imagine. Far as I'm concerned at this point, I hope he loses every penny he's ever made, never gets elected to the hall, and can't find employment anywhere for the rest of his days... Not even as a delivery boy for good ole Papa John's. Simply have zero sympathy for someone that drops his junk on someone's head "even by accident" and then proceeds to trash their career, name and anything else they get their hands on for the better part of 10-15 years. I'm not sure how anyone can defend those actions, regardless of how well he played the game...

I would feel the same about ANY player, including my "heros" growing up like Easely or Largent, or current faves currently playing like Russ or Sherm, I simply would not defend them, or provide excuses.

Count me as one of the "fans" that have switched. Far as I'm concerned, everything he has done is "tainted" and not worth an ounce of my respect. When I talk about "alltime greats" at QB, his name won't be in the conversation.

If a person only has X amount of wrath at their disposal, you will have used all yours up on Manning and won't have enough left over to join in on the discussion should someone start a thread on Aaron Hernandez.

[Hawktawk]

I don't think so Hawk, I was a "fan" not a detractor, and after the continued harassment ( even if I was more in line with the "young" stupidity excuse. Which I'm not.) isn't acceptable to me. Just isn't. Anyone with that amount of privilege, prestige and money that felt the continued harassment for something they did was acceptable, much less a right to gloat about it on the way, is one of the lowest possible human beings I can imagine. Far as I'm concerned at this point, I hope he loses every penny he's ever made, never gets elected to the hall, and can't find employment anywhere for the rest of his days... Not even as a delivery boy for good ole Papa John's. Simply have zero sympathy for someone that drops his junk on someone's head "even by accident" and then proceeds to trash their career, name and anything else they get their hands on for the better part of 10-15 years. I'm not sure how anyone can defend those actions, regardless of how well he played the game...

I would feel the same about ANY player, including my "heros" growing up like Easely or Largent, or current faves currently playing like Russ or Sherm, I simply would not defend them, or provide excuses.

Count me as one of the "fans" that have switched. Far as I'm concerned, everything he has done is "tainted" and not worth an ounce of my respect. When I talk about "alltime greats" at QB, his name won't be in the conversation.

Sure there will be some intelligent "fans" who will switch opinions but it was reported 2 days ago NFL network is throwing the kitchen sink at him trying to land him as a commentator. Their exit polling is saying something else.

Look Roach I completely agree with you about how I feel. Sexual crime is something that my family has had to deal with personally and let me tell you its a life sentence, sometimes without a physical rape having occurred. Its a terrible thing and then as you say compounded by Manning on numerous occasions by violating court orders to try and destroy this woman completely.

The NFL press and the league is complicit. Why does Rapelburger get a 4 game suspension and we don't even hear a peep about Manning being in court for mitigation of sexual harassment claims? It was in the same time frame, only a couple of years later. He's been sheltered He's been the fortunate son his entire career. Especially in the last SB where the defense was so dominant Tim Tebow could have won a world championship. He looks like a complete Narcissist ass delaying his retirement, basically putting the screws to Denver who wants to move forward. There isn't enough HGH left on the planet to restore that noodle arm.

To be fair its easier for me to say these things, I never was quite as big a fan.....Id love to see him lose big though. He deserves it IMO.

[HumanCockroach]

Guess I'm just one of the fortunate few that has an unlimited amount of wrath to dole out RD. I don't see that drying up any time soon, and never in regards to a sexual offense, and a privileged arse destroying the work of a regular person who's only crime was to come into contact with them....

Maybe it's because I don't expend so much on trivial offenses like pizza signs and pot smells LOL...



( just good natured ribbing RD)