HawkShack.com

by **savvyman** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 9:16 am

I think it would have been good for the 49ers to use their last roster spot on Defense for a full time Defense Attorney.....

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutd ... 54178.html

by **NOS** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 9:35 am

Ann Killion ✔ @annkillion
Follow
Just ran thru handy Union-Tribune data base on player arrests. #49ers lead league in Harbaugh era with 10. Detroit 2nd with 9. Raiders - 3.
9:10 AM - 31 Aug 2014
93 RETWEETS 19 FAVORITES Reply

by **FolkCrusader** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 9:37 am

Apparently a birthday party for him and other 49ers were present. He is scheduled to start next Sunday but has not even been assigned bail at this point. Wow.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2182 ... n-49ers-de

by **NorthHawk** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 9:57 am

Another distraction for that team.
Talent wise, they have some pretty good depth along the DL, at least on paper.
They will still be a tough team to beat.

by **mykc14** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:40 pm

So, 6 game suspension, right?

by **RiverDog** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:46 pm

Maybe I'd better re-visit my opinion on that thread about who our toughest divisional opponent will be.

This is more than a couple of distractions. The Niners are losing key contributors to their team.

by **HumanCockroach** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 3:47 pm

No worries, Harbaugh can just sprinkle a little fairy dust on the team and win 12 ( well if you listen to some tell it)

LMAO. I still think they are the toughest oponent ( or most likely I guess, though that could go sideways for them in a hurry) just don't feel the Rams or Cards have the horses to hang, and SC has them ( for how long I have no idea at this point) STL and ARZ aren't complete teams, and have HUGE holes in multiple areas.

by **mykc14** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 4:31 pm

So, this is what it looks like to be above reproach? That was a stupid statement when he made it, but now it just looks ridiculous. I was reading somewhere that the niners lead the league in arrests over the last 3 years!

by **Anthony** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 6:03 pm

savvyman wrote:I think it would have been good for the 49ers to use their last roster spot on Defense for a full time Defense Attorney.....

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutd ... 54178.html

And future no were to be found what a surprise

by **mykc14** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 8:06 pm

Just read a quick article about the incident and they included an interesting quote from Donte Witner about Harbaugh:

"He said that we can do anything in the world and we can come and talk to him and he'll forgive us except put our hands on women," Whitner told the Bee. "If you put your hand on a woman, then you're done in his book."

It looks like we'll see what it looks like to be 'done' in harbaughs book. If it's anything like being beyond reproach it probably won't amount to much.

by **jshawaii22** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:11 pm

Well, that didn't take long before someone becomes the 'test case' for the new rule that the NFLPA did not approve or disapprove. It will be 6-9 months before anything happens, you know that for sure. Nothing will happen to him until this is adjudicated.
Any good lawyer will get delays to the next off-season.

He's been charged with a Felony, not simple assault. That means that there are some kind of 'obvious' marks on her or their were witnesses that signed statements against him. Nothing good happens after MN and this was 2:30am.

However, I actually hope it's not serious and his pregnant wife/GF is OK. It's just wrong to hit your loved ones. I've never raised a hand to my wife in almost 30 years.
I could of... but it's not right.

js

by **Futureite** » Sun Aug 31, 2014 11:01 pm

I'll wait to form an opinion. I find it a little suspicious that we renegotiated his contract to the league minimum just days before this happened AND Goodell enacted clear guidelines for domestic violence. Did our FO know of past issues he's had, and thus renegotiated to mitigate the risk?

On the otherhand, what constitutes "minor bruises"? I am not familiar with the law in these cases. I know that my GF sometimes bruises from the slightest degree of pressure, and I have unintentionally bruised her just getting out of bed. In RM's case this could mean that he did anything from violently shaking her with the intent to do more before someone intervened, to restraing her while she came at him. At this point we have none of the facts.

If this is a true case of domestic violence, he needs to be cut as soon as it has been determined. We need to have zero tolerance for that, period.

by **jshawaii22** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:29 am

Here is the actual copy from the letter that the Commish sent out to all the teams regarding Domestic Violence. Not absolute either... interesting. The part about 'pregnant' should come into play, if it's true and he knew it. (or maybe even if he didn't)

“Effective immediately, violations of the Personal Conduct Policy regarding assault, battery, domestic violence or sexual assault that involve physical force will be subject to a suspension without pay of six games for a first offense, with consideration given to mitigating factors, as well as a longer suspension when circumstances warrant. Among the circumstances that would merit a more severe penalty would be a prior incident before joining the NFL, or violence involving a weapon, choking, repeated striking, or when the act is committed against a pregnant woman or in the presence of a child.”

by **RiverDog** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 5:02 am

Futureite wrote:If this is a true case of domestic violence, he needs to be cut as soon as it has been determined. We need to have zero tolerance for that, period. After all, we need to be above reproach in everything we do.

You forgot that last sentence, Futurerite, but I made it good for you.

by **Futureite** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:30 am

RiverDog wrote:
Futureite wrote:If this is a true case of domestic violence, he needs to be cut as soon as it has been determined. We need to have zero tolerance for that, period. After all, we need to be above reproach in everything we do that is related to the game of football

You forgot that last sentence, Futurerite, but I made it good for you.

I edited your version. Let me know when it's ok to send out to the client

.

by **RiverDog** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:59 am

Futureite wrote:
RiverDog wrote:
Futureite wrote:If this is a true case of domestic violence, he needs to be cut as soon as it has been determined. We need to have zero tolerance for that, period. After all, we need to be above reproach in everything we do that is related to the game of football

You forgot that last sentence, Futurerite, but I made it good for you.

I edited your version. Let me know when it's ok to send out to the client .

Ahh, but the "related to the game of football" didn't come from the mouth of your Fearless Leader.

by **Futureite** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 9:09 am

Ahh, but the "related to the game of football" didn't come from the mouth of your Fearless Leader.[/quote]

That is where you apply context and common sense. Even in a perfect world, it's not possible for an employer to know and control all of its employee's behavior outside of the workplace. Because that's a given, no person would even say what you continually imply here River.

by **RiverDog** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 9:16 am

Futureite wrote:Ahh, but the "related to the game of football" didn't come from the mouth of your Fearless Leader.

That is where you apply context and common sense. Even in a perfect world, it's not possible for an employer to know and control all of its employee's behavior outside of the workplace. Because that's a given, no person would even say what you continually imply here River.[/quote]

Oh. So we're now allowed to add words to a speech or interview based on what common sense says he should have said?

Sorry, Future, but Harbaugh didn't say "football related." He said "everything", as in "everything we do". It's an all inclusive statement. If he meant to place limits on it, he would have said so, and had plenty of opportunity to correct or amend his statement if he didn't really mean "everything."

Stop making excuses for him. Harbaugh is a fool.

by **mykc14** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 9:33 am

Futureite wrote:Ahh, but the "related to the game of football" didn't come from the mouth of your Fearless Leader.

That is where you apply context and common sense. Even in a perfect world, it's not possible for an employer to know and control all of its employee's behavior outside of the workplace. Because that's a given, no person would even say what you continually imply here River.[/quote]

Of course it isn't, which is why it was such a stupid statement in the first place, but that doesn't change the fact that he still said it. If your statement and your 'common sense' is true than his statement wouldn't include performance enhancing drugs either they are more than likely conducting that behavior 'outside of the workplace.' SMH you can't have it both ways future, the last part of your sentence isn't implied, he was taking a direct shot at the hawks and now he looks like a fool because of that statement.

by **Futureite** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 9:38 am

RiverDog wrote:
Futureite wrote:Ahh, but the "related to the game of football" didn't come from the mouth of your Fearless Leader.

That is where you apply context and common sense. Even in a perfect world, it's not possible for an employer to know and control all of its employee's behavior outside of the workplace. Because that's a given, no person would even say what you continually imply here River.

Oh. So we're now allowed to add words to a speech or interview based on what common sense says he should have said?

Sorry, Future, but Harbaugh didn't say "football related." He said "everything", as in "everything we do". It's an all inclusive statement. If he meant to place limits on it, he would have said so, and had plenty of opportunity to correct or amend his statement if he didn't really mean "everything."

Stop making excuses for him. Harbaugh is a fool.[/quote]

You are an adult and you are supposed to understand the context of how and when things are said. If I say "go jump off a cliff River" it is expected that you understand my true intent.

Jim Harbaugh is not a babysitter. That is impled by his title, which reads "head football coach". He is expected to police what goes on in the locker room, out in the field and at the facility. You've expanded his role to this ridiculous position of off duty police officer, as if he's contradicted himself by not holding Ray McDonald's hand at a private party. He does not "do" that nor has he ever been expected to, so he is still above reproach in "everything we do".

by **Futureite** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 9:55 am

mykc14 wrote:
Futureite wrote:Ahh, but the "related to the game of football" didn't come from the mouth of your Fearless Leader.

That is where you apply context and common sense. Even in a perfect world, it's not possible for an employer to know and control all of its employee's behavior outside of the workplace. Because that's a given, no person would even say what you continually imply here River.

Of course it isn't, which is why it was such a stupid statement in the first place, but that doesn't change the fact that he still said it. If your statement and your 'common sense' is true than his statement wouldn't include performance enhancing drugs either they are more than likely conducting that behavior 'outside of the workplace.' SMH you can't have it both ways future, the last part of your sentence isn't implied, he was taking a direct shot at the hawks and now he looks like a fool because of that statement.[/quote]

PEDs are used to gain a competitive advantage. Carroll's understudy Lane Kiffen reportedly had USC players shot up during halftime with something that players stated (paraphrase) "gave them superhuman strength". It is not a definite that Carroll knew, but their is direct correlation between PEDs and a competitive advantage - which is something Carroll has broken rules in the past to achieve.

by **NorthHawk** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 9:57 am

Futureite wrote:
RiverDog wrote:
Futureite wrote:Ahh, but the "related to the game of football" didn't come from the mouth of your Fearless Leader.

That is where you apply context and common sense. Even in a perfect world, it's not possible for an employer to know and control all of its employee's behavior outside of the workplace. Because that's a given, no person would even say what you continually imply here River.

Oh. So we're now allowed to add words to a speech or interview based on what common sense says he should have said?

Sorry, Future, but Harbaugh didn't say "football related." He said "everything", as in "everything we do". It's an all inclusive statement. If he meant to place limits on it, he would have said so, and had plenty of opportunity to correct or amend his statement if he didn't really mean "everything."

Stop making excuses for him. Harbaugh is a fool.

You are an adult and you are supposed to understand the context of how and when things are said. If I say "go jump off a cliff River" it is expected that you understand my true intent.

Jim Harbaugh is not a babysitter. That is impled by his title, which reads "head football coach". He is expected to police what goes on in the locker room, out in the field and at the facility. You've expanded his role to this ridiculous position of off duty police officer, as if he's contradicted himself by not holding Ray McDonald's hand at a private party. He does not "do" that nor has he ever been expected to, so he is still above reproach in "everything we do".[/quote]

I think you've lost the context from which Harbaugh made the "beyond reproach" statement. It was in relation to the PED suspensions of the Seahawks.
These supplements (or substances) were not part of the programme, rather the players took them on their own.

Now we have a situation where 49er players on their own have been arrested 10 times over the last few years. The "crimes" may be different, but the "beyond reproach" statement is in play and coming back to slap the HC in the face.
The actions of his players outside the team facilities isn't Harbaughs fault, but he has to wear the statement - that is unless he jettisons those players that were arrested.
Then he could make that statement and walk tall.

by **burrrton** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 10:08 am

And by the way Carroll, thanks for the new PI enfircenent that odf course your play had nothing to do with. Says no one outside of the PNW.

Shorter Futureite: "Richard Sherman still gives me a hard-on, everyone."

by **HumanCockroach** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:16 pm

SMH. Trolls are sad. Even in a thread with NO excuse, he falls back on some completely unrelated topic to defend, actions, or things said by Niners players.

by **RiverDog** » Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:57 pm

Futureite wrote:
RiverDog wrote:[You are an adult and you are supposed to understand the context of how and when things are said. If I say "go jump off a cliff River" it is expected that you understand my true intent.

Jim Harbaugh is not a babysitter. That is impled by his title, which reads "head football coach". He is expected to police what goes on in the locker room, out in the field and at the facility. You've expanded his role to this ridiculous position of off duty police officer, as if he's contradicted himself by not holding Ray McDonald's hand at a private party. He does not "do" that nor has he ever been expected to, so he is still above reproach in "everything we do".

"Go jump off a cliff" is a figure of speech. Nothing in Harbaugh's statement could be interpreted by anyone as being figurative. You're making the assumption that he meant something that he didn't say, putting words into his mouth that would have changed the context of his statement. Harbaugh was using the occasion to contrast two entire organizations and compare all aspects of them to each other. If he meant to limit it to PED's or on field activities, he could have found different words to convey that meaning instead of relying on people like you to finish his sentences for him. He's not as stupid as you are saying he is.

by **c_hawkbob** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:50 am

by **RiverDog** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:05 am

Q: Want to hear a 49ers joke?
A: Michael Crabtree!

Why doesn't Michael Crabtrees home have electricity?
He's already used to living in Richard Shermans shadow.

Did you hear that Levi's Stadium had to be resodded?
Thats really sad when you cant even get your own grass to root for you!

Q: What do San Francisco and Los Angeles have in common?
A: Neither city has a professional football team.

Q: What's the difference between the San Francisco 49ers and a dollar bill?
A: You can still get four quarters out of a dollar bill.

Q: What do the San Francisco 49ers playoff run and the Civil War have in common?
A: Both of them were ended by a man named Sherman.

Q: What is the difference between an 49ers fan and a baby?
A: The baby will stop whining after awhile.

Q: What did the 49ers fan say after his team won the Super Bowl?
A: "Dammit mom, why'd you wake me up? I was having an amazing dream!"

Q. How are the 49ers like my neighbors?
A. They can't pick up a single yard!

Q: Why is Vernon Davis like a grizzly bear?
A: Every fall he goes into hibernation.

Q: How many 49ers fans does it take to change a light bulb?
A: None they are happy living in Seattle's shadow!

Q: What do the San Francisco 49ers and a Chick-Fil-A manager have in common?
A: Neither one shows up for work on Sunday.

Q: What do the San Francisco 49ers and possums have in common?
A: Both play dead at home and get killed on the road!

Q: How many San Francisco 49ers does it take to change a tire?
A: One, unless it's a blowout, in which case they all show up

Q: What do you call 53 millionaires around a TV watching the Super Bowl?
A: The San Francisco 49ers.

Q: How do you know the California State Police are seriously enforcing the Speed Limits into San Francisco.
A: For the first offense, they give you two 49ers tickets. If you get stopped a second time, they make you use them.

Q: Why was Jim Harbaugh upset when the Greg Roman changed the playbook?
A: Because he hadn't finished coloring it.

Q: What do the San Francisco 49ers and Billy Graham have in common?
A: They both can make 70,000 people stand up and yell "Jesus Christ".

Q: How do you keep an San Francisco 49ers out of your yard?
A: Put up goal posts.

Q: Why are so many San Francisco 49ers players claiming they have the Swine Flu?
A: So They don't have to touch the pigskin!

Q: What is a San Francisco 49ers fan's favorite whine?
A: "We can't beat Arizona."

Q: How do you stop an San Francisco 49ers fan from beating his wife?
A: Dress her in New Orleans Black and Gold!

Q: What is th difference between a bucket of s*** and a San Francisco 49ers fan?
A: The bucket.

Q: If you have a car containing a 49ers wide receiver, a 49ers linebacker, and a 49ers defensive back, who is driving the car?
A: The cop.

Q: How do you casterate an San Francisco 49ers fan?
A: Kick his sister in the mouth

Q: What should you do if you find three San Francisco 49ers football fans buried up to their neck in cement?
A: Get more cement.

Q: What's the difference between an San Francisco 49ers fan and a carp?
A: One is a bottom-feeding, scum sucker, and the other is a fish.

Q. How did the San Francisco 49ers fan die from drinking milk?
A. The cow fell on him!

Q: What does an San Francisco 49ers fan do when his team has won the Super Bowl?
A: He turns off the PlayStation 3.

Q: What do you call a San Francisco 49ers in the Super Bowl?
A: A referee.

Q: What's the best way to teach your dog to roll over and play dead?
A: Have him watch a couple San Francisco 49ers games.

Q: Did you hear that San Francisco's football team doesn't have a website?
A: They can't string three "Ws" together.

Q: How many San Francisco 49ers fans does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None. Lava lamps don’t burn out man!

Q: What does a San Francisco 49ers fan and a bottle of beer have in common?
A: They’re both empty from the neck up.

Q: Why do San Francisco 49ers fans keep their season tickets on their dashboards?
A: So they can park in handicap spaces.

Q: How do the 49ers spend the first week of training camp?
A: Studying the Miranda Rights

Q: How do you keep a 49ers fan from masterbating?
A: You paint his dick New Orleans gold and he won't beat it for 4 years!

Q: Why do the San Francisco 49ers want to change their name to the San Francisco Tampons?
A: Because they are only good for one period and do not have a second string!

Q: What's the difference between the San Francisco 49ers & the Taliban?
A: The Taliban has a running game!

Q: Where do you go in San Francisco in case of a tornado?
A: Candlestick Park - they never get a touchdown there!

Q. Why do ducks fly over Candlestick Park upside down?
A. There's nothing worth craping on!

Q: Why doesn't Sacramento have a professional football team?
A: Because then San Francisco would want one.

Q: Why are San Francisco 49ers jokes getting dumb and dumber?
A: Because 49ers fans have started to make them up themselves.

Q: What's the difference between San Francisco 49ers fans and mosquitoes?
A: Mosquitoes are only annoying in the summer.

San Francisco 49ers One Liners

49ers vs Ravens should be a pretty decent opening act for the Beyoncé concert.

If Ravens & 49ers are tied at end of regulation of Super Bowl XLVII, the 2 Harbaugh brothers will meet at midfield and wrestle to see who wins.

NFC champions San Francisco 49ers are 5-0 in Super Bowl appearances. They've never lost a Super Bowl game in NFL history.

Congrats to the San Francisco 49ers on winning their Beyonce concert tickets.

My dreams of an Angry Bird Bowl (Ravens vs Falcons) were shot when the 49ers won today

49ers Fan
On the first day of school a first grade teacher explains to her class that she is a 49ers fan.
She asks her students to raise their hands if they, too, are 49ers fans.
Wanting to impress their teacher, everyone in the class raises their hand except one little girl.
The teacher looks at the girl with surprise, 'Janie, why didn't you raise your hand?'
Because I'm not a 49ers fan,' she replied.
The teacher, still shocked, asked, 'Well, if you are not a 49ers fan, then who are you a fan of?'
'I am a Seahawks fan, and proud of it,' Janie replied.
The teacher could not believe her ears. 'Janie please tell us why you are a Seahawks fan?'
"Because my mom is a Seahawks fan, and my dad is Seahawks fan, so I'm a Seahawks fan too!"
"Well," said the teacher in a obviously annoyed tone, 'that is no reason for you to be a Seahawks fan. You don't have to be just like your parents all of the time. What if your mom was an idiot and your dad was a moron, what would you be then?'
"Then," Janie smiled, 'I'd be a 49ers fan.'

4 Football Fans
A Redskins fan, an Eagles fan, a 49ers fan, and a Cardinals fan are climbing a mountain and arguing about who loves his team more.
The Redskins fan insists he is the most loyal. 'This is for the Redskins! ' he yells, and jumps off the side of the mountain.
Not to be outdone, the Eagles fan shouts, 'This is for the Eagles!' and throws himself off the mountain.
The Cardinals fan is next to profess his love for his team.
He yells, 'This is for everyone!' and pushes the 49ers fan off the mountain.

by **NorthHawk** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:16 am

You should have started a new thread for that post, RD.

by **Hawktown** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 10:18 am

GREAT STUFF RD!!! 8-)

by **Futureite** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 10:53 am

Lol wow. I think I may get Lynched if I wear my Niner shirt up in my next trip. Get it? "Lynched", with a captial L?

But I'll take every single word in each punchline literally. I mean, if you didn't mean it you wouldn't have posted it River

.

by **Agent 86** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:59 am

NorthHawk wrote:
That is where you apply context and common sense. Even in a perfect world, it's not possible for an employer to know and control all of its employee's behavior outside of the workplace. Because that's a given, no person would even say what you continually imply here River.

Oh. So we're now allowed to add words to a speech or interview based on what common sense says he should have said?

Sorry, Future, but Harbaugh didn't say "football related." He said "everything", as in "everything we do". It's an all inclusive statement. If he meant to place limits on it, he would have said so, and had plenty of opportunity to correct or amend his statement if he didn't really mean "everything."

Stop making excuses for him. Harbaugh is a fool.[/quote]

You are an adult and you are supposed to understand the context of how and when things are said. If I say "go jump off a cliff River" it is expected that you understand my true intent.

Jim Harbaugh is not a babysitter. That is impled by his title, which reads "head football coach". He is expected to police what goes on in the locker room, out in the field and at the facility. You've expanded his role to this ridiculous position of off duty police officer, as if he's contradicted himself by not holding Ray McDonald's hand at a private party. He does not "do" that nor has he ever been expected to, so he is still above reproach in "everything we do".[/quote]

I think you've lost the context from which Harbaugh made the "beyond reproach" statement. It was in relation to the PED suspensions of the Seahawks.
These supplements (or substances) were not part of the programme, rather the players took them on their own.

Now we have a situation where 49er players on their own have been arrested 10 times over the last few years. The "crimes" may be different, but the "beyond reproach" statement is in play and coming back to slap the HC in the face.
The actions of his players outside the team facilities isn't Harbaughs fault, but he has to wear the statement - that is unless he jettisons those players that were arrested.
Then he could make that statement and walk tall.[/quote]

Ding Ding Ding...we have a winner.

by **Anthony** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 12:00 pm

Futureite wrote:Lol wow. I think I may get Lynched if I wear my Niner shirt up in my next trip. Get it? "Lynched", with a captial L?

But I'll take every single word in each punchline literally. I mean, if you didn't mean it you wouldn't have posted it River .

A mind is a terrible thing to waste to bad for you its to late

by **kalibane** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 1:37 pm

Future I don't know why you fight this thing so much. I mean I actually agree with you on the one aspect. Harbaugh was directly answering a question about PEDs.

That doesn't mean his words don't smack of of self-righteous douchebaggary. You simply can't walk around using buzz phrases like "above reproach" when your own front yard isn't in order. You can argue the technicalities of whether his words should be taken literally until the cows come home. Doesn't make a difference. You can't take the position of looking down your nose at someone morally speaking while you're presiding over an eruption of imorality without looking a fool whether it's the exact same moral principal or not.

It'll be interesting to see what happens as a result of this though because Harbaugh painted himself in a corner with his statements about domestic violence. I'm not saying McDonald even necessarily deserves it, but if Harbaugh doesn't get McDonald cut he's going to prove himself to be a guy who only talks a good game about what he expects which paints all his statements regarding right and wrong with a brush of hypocrisy.

It's also amusing watching you twist and turn and trying to hold onto the technicality of context with what Harbaugh said but then when guys you don't like i.e. Richard Sherman approaching Tom Brady after Brady said "see me after the game" then it's time to read all between the lines and completely throw out context. Funny how that works huh?

by **Futureite** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:19 pm

kalibane wrote:Future I don't know why you fight this thing so much. I mean I actually agree with you on the one aspect. Harbaugh was directly answering a question about PEDs.

That doesn't mean his words don't smack of of self-righteous douchebaggary. You simply can't walk around using buzz phrases like "above reproach" when your own front yard isn't in order. You can argue the technicalities of whether his words should be taken literally until the cows come home. Doesn't make a difference. You can't take the position of looking down your nose at someone morally speaking while you're presiding over an eruption of imorality without looking a fool whether it's the exact same moral principal or not.

It'll be interesting to see what happens as a result of this though because Harbaugh painted himself in a corner with his statements about domestic violence. I'm not saying McDonald even necessarily deserves it, but if Harbaugh doesn't get McDonald cut he's going to prove himself to be a guy who only talks a good game about what he expects which paints all his statements regarding right and wrong with a brush of hypocrisy.

It's also amusing watching you twist and turn and trying to hold onto the technicality of context with what Harbaugh said but then when guys you don't like i.e. Richard Sherman approaching Tom Brady after Brady said "see me after the game" then it's time to read all between the lines and completely throw out context. Funny how that works huh?

That is interesting because I view this 180 degrees opposite. I see a lot of people twisting to expand the definition of a phrase to fit their argument. They are applying an overly technical or "literal" definition of the statement. Most positions which argue technical interpretation over substance fail. Everyone knows the context in which the question was asked. Everyone knows a coach can only vet players to a certain degree and then respond appropriately to a legal issue. When the substance of this exchange is analyxed OR even taken at face value, it's clear that JH asserted nothing remotely close to what River (and others) claim.

As far as Sherman goes, yes, the context matters. Everyone knows trash talk goes on during a game. Screaming in a man's face and sharing it on social media is not part of the game. "Technically" Brady did tell Sherman to see him after the game. I am sure that's been said 1,000 times during a game, but only a handful of times do you see a player take it to the extreme level of actually doing it. And when they do, they do not intentionally make a public spectacle out of it.

To me, this is all common sense. I can see your point of view though and I understand how you view it all differently. Especially as a Hawk fan.

by **NorthHawk** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:29 pm

Re: Sherman
Part of Sherman's actions were to create a name for himself. How better than to call out one of the best QBs in the game after beating him?
It's obviously worked out quite well. I doubt he would have as high a profile being from here in the PNW without these antics. Had he just wandered off after the Brady incident, not spouted off during the year, and after the NFC Championship game last year, he wouldn't have nearly the notoriety and maybe not be considered one of the top 2 CBs in the league by the national media.
We would know what we had, and probably the NFC West as well, but there would still be a debate about his abilities.

The Harbaugh quote
Wasn't the exact quote "We want to be beyond reproach in everything we do"?
If it is, then it cannot be limited to PEDs regardless if the conversation was about that.
It's an honorable goal for every team, but action must follow words if he's going to put it out there.

by **Anthony** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:42 pm

Futureite wrote:
kalibane wrote:Future I don't know why you fight this thing so much. I mean I actually agree with you on the one aspect. Harbaugh was directly answering a question about PEDs.

That doesn't mean his words don't smack of of self-righteous douchebaggary. You simply can't walk around using buzz phrases like "above reproach" when your own front yard isn't in order. You can argue the technicalities of whether his words should be taken literally until the cows come home. Doesn't make a difference. You can't take the position of looking down your nose at someone morally speaking while you're presiding over an eruption of imorality without looking a fool whether it's the exact same moral principal or not.

It'll be interesting to see what happens as a result of this though because Harbaugh painted himself in a corner with his statements about domestic violence. I'm not saying McDonald even necessarily deserves it, but if Harbaugh doesn't get McDonald cut he's going to prove himself to be a guy who only talks a good game about what he expects which paints all his statements regarding right and wrong with a brush of hypocrisy.

It's also amusing watching you twist and turn and trying to hold onto the technicality of context with what Harbaugh said but then when guys you don't like i.e. Richard Sherman approaching Tom Brady after Brady said "see me after the game" then it's time to read all between the lines and completely throw out context. Funny how that works huh?

That is interesting because I view this 180 degrees opposite. I see a lot of people twisting to expand the definition of a phrase to fit their argument. They are applying an overly technical or "literal" definition of the statement. Most positions which argue technical interpretation over substance fail. Everyone knows the context in which the question was asked. Everyone knows a coach can only vet players to a certain degree and then respond appropriately to a legal issue. When the substance of this exchange is analyxed OR even taken at face value, it's clear that JH asserted nothing remotely close to what River (and others) claim.

As far as Sherman goes, yes, the context matters. Everyone knows trash talk goes on during a game. Screaming in a man's face and sharing it on social media is not part of the game. "Technically" Brady did tell Sherman to see him after the game. I am sure that's been said 1,000 times during a game, but only a handful of times do you see a player take it to the extreme level of actually doing it. And when they do, they do not intentionally make a public spectacle out of it.

To me, this is all common sense. I can see your point of view though and I understand how you view it all differently. Especially as a Hawk fan.

Isn't it amazing how context matters when it suite Future but not when it does not, Hypocrite but we all know that already. Future nothing Sherman has done is any place near as bad as what Smith, McDonald has done, so get off the soap box, and stop with the excuses Harbaugh said what he said and it was not limited to PEDs it was about being above reproach period. Add to that one of your own players coming out and saying Harbaugh said he can forgive anything but abuse to a woman, and you have several issues, one a hyprocite coach, and 2 abuse to a woman. Either way way worse than aything Sherman has done.

by **Futureite** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:38 pm

So does the resodding of the field and abysmal state of the turf fall on JH too? We're talking about being above reproach in "everything", right?

Since we are all technically defining the word "everything".

by **Hawktown** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:48 pm

i would think the grounds keeper would have notified the team that the sod was not yet taking and they failed to lay it soon enough. and yes JH should have made a decision to not even try to play on it. JH should have known the state of his field. I mean after all the coach is the one on the hook for everything right?

by **HumanCockroach** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:49 pm

NorthHawk wrote:Re: Sherman
Part of Sherman's actions were to create a name for himself. How better than to call out one of the best QBs in the game after beating him?
It's obviously worked out quite well. I doubt he would have as high a profile being from here in the PNW without these antics. Had he just wandered off after the Brady incident, not spouted off during the year, and after the NFC Championship game last year, he wouldn't have nearly the notoriety and maybe not be considered one of the top 2 CBs in the league by the national media.
We would know what we had, and probably the NFC West as well, but there would still be a debate about his abilities.

The Harbaugh quote
Wasn't the exact quote "We want to be beyond reproach in everything we do"?
If it is, then it cannot be limited to PEDs regardless if the conversation was about that.
It's an honorable goal for every team, but action must follow words if he's going to put it out there.

"We want to be beyond reproach in everything we do"

Why yes, yes it was.... those are the exact words he chose to use, which honestly, really is irrelevant. The bigger question should be WHY he chose to throw mud at another team, ESPECIALLY when his team was ALREADY far from innocent. Whether it was directed at the PED situation ( which again gets blown out of proportion considering there was ONE player that played regularly suspended, one player that HAD authorization to use adder all but didn't file the paperwork, and ONE player I guess somehow physically somehow knew a cup would be broken, and therefore wasn't worried about testing positive and therefore took PED's LMFAO) doesn't change that at that time Crabtree had been accused of sexual assault, Smith was already on his way down the path of stupidity, and then he SIGNED a CB ( after trading for him first) that had JUST come off a season in which he was suspended for the use of them ( not to mention DUI and other various infractions). So WTF would he feel he needed to talk about it in the first place?

Future at the time claimed he was "Phil Jacksoning" Carroll ( no I AM being serious here, that was his excuse, and he used the words "genius" describing him discussing it) and now it is somehow something entirely different. Really, it boils down to Future using whatever argument fits him at the time, and suits his aim ( which is basically to air his grievance about Sherman or profess his undying love for Kap and Crabs), ultimately, he isn't consistent, hypocritical, and profess' his superior..... well everything, just like any "faithful" seems to do.

by **HumanCockroach** » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:51 pm

Futureite wrote:So does the resodding of the field and abysmal state of the turf fall on JH too? We're talking about being above reproach in "everything", right?

Since we are all technically defining the word "everything".

It would if those that did so were under his direction, since they weren't, this would fall in the lap of Baalke, smart of him not to aimlessly, classlessly and pointlessly throw mud at another franchise, good for him.

HawkShack.com

Who is online