buddha

why is sam gagner on the power play?

boo. 2-0. even if they didnt score, the pp looks so much better than last year.

bad goal. he was screened though....i guess.

yeah, you're probably right.

yeah, could be. hard to tell what he means. because a law firm uses the term "complicit" in an investigation document doesnt necessarily mean that's what toews understands it to mean. but you could be right. either way, bowman's his friend and he stuck up for him. dumb thing to do for all the reasons previously stated.

this is the problem with message boards. people take what you say a certain way and infer things from what you wrote that you never meant to imply. and then you get no benefit of the doubt when you say that's not what you meant. nobody here is blaming a victim or advocating for sexual assault. having a different idea for what the repercussions for a management decision (if there is any disagreement) might be, or what the appropriate thing for an athlete to say in an interview is not defending sexual assault.

as i understand it, they set some rules on what they would and would not allow that were more restrictive.

ummm...you just answered your own question with players and hookers. that's exactly what they do. the nil stuff gave michigan a legit way to funnel money to these kids through "legit" means and use their money cannon but they got all high and mighty on that and fucked it up too.

see sloth's post for the allegations.

i think there were reports of players calling each other names at practices and stuff after this, and homophonic slurs being directed at beech (and likely others considering these are professional athletes). i dont know if those slurs were being directed at beech because the players knew about this, but its certainly been implied that it was.

im pretty sure toews was saying bowman/mcissac didnt do it (as in, didnt do the assault), not that they werent involved in the decision not to immediately do something. but i could be wrong about that. again, that's why you just need to issue a statement and be done with it. throw em under the bus and move on. toews isnt a master at nuance, lol.

that's what i thought. he told him he would end his career.

is beech gay? he's got a girlfriend. did aldrich say he was going to out him as gay?

probably, but the impression people have about the economy matters too. i dont know if the democrats passing that bill would have done a lot to change the economy in a short time (and it might not actually help the problem areas), but we'll never know.

that's an unrealistic standard for what michigan thinks of itself. unless the university makes a decision to get in the gutter, they will not be ohio state. until they agree to have zero academic standards for transfers, they will not be this year's michigan state. that said, the best thing that could happen to michigan is that the playoff gets expanded. more teams in means recruits will go to other schools outside the big 4 or 5.

you're in illinois, so they'll probably adhere to the cdc guidelines. i'm pretty much at this level too. i find a lot of it annoying and unnecessary, but i've gotten used to it now. and i dont really like people anyway, so all of this distancing has been a god send in some ways. what i dont like is what its done to the kids. but it is what it is, i guess.

i see it as a restriction. i am fine doing it but its definitely a restriction. at what point would you be comfortable with removing the indoor mask restriction? i've been to a bunch of restaurants and been around people not wearing masks. its fine. im a little less comfortable in a bar, but ive done it once or twice. ive been to the movies. no masks. ive been on the subway multiple times and its usually all masked up. i always do it. would you ride the subway masked? as for the office, its usually only a few people there, but i never wear a mask when walking around. seems like overly cautious to me. some people have them on the whole time, even at their desk. i'm just wondering what people's risk tolerance level is right now. it seems like my tolerance is higher than others here.

message board 101: sometimes people make different points about different aspects of the same subject. in true message board fashion, the conversation goes from "i think toews shouldnt have talked without a pr guy to advise him" to "buddha supports sexual assault." i think I'M the one that needs a good pr guy right about now. lol.

wait, what did i say about the sexual assault and the cover up? i was talking about what toews said. also, you dont know me, so i dont really care what you think about me. and if youre going to be making character judgments on people based on a message board post, that says a lot more about you than me. people need to calm down.

jonathan toews is now hitler. see? that's why you need a good pr team. lol. Henry II had it right, all those years ago.

he didnt say enough politically correct tag lines of sorrow and remorse, so he gets dragged. again, he should have done what debrincat did and basically throw bowman and everyone else under the bus to save himself. that's what you do. and he should have had someone there to tell him to do it. that was my point. toews is a public figure, and to keep his reputation in tact, he needs to keep his public image. and that means throwing all the blame on bowman et al even if bowman is his friend. bowman would probably understand. that's how the game is played.

i read some stuff about pennsylvania the other day about how republicans have been very successful in getting voters signed up. theyre quite motivated. same may be true in virginia, but i dont know. these are off year elections next year, the party out of power usually does well. the democrats have time. they will have advantages in a lot of states due to their aggressive gerrymandering, and inflation may be coming down by then. if the stories on the economy are all about inflation still, they'll be in big trouble.

another thing is the organization around these guys. look at this last year. jacksonville, jets, bears take qbs with loads of talent and they all look god awful. mac jones has looked decent. why? cause he has a great organization around him. i bet fields wouldnt be the worst qb in football if he were in new england, and i bet mac jones would if he were in chicago. (also, mac jones has a good oline, which is another reason to draft a qb after you have the line somewhat in place)

there will still be multiple qbs taken high. it happens every year. its hard to generalize since all of these guys are individuals with their own developmental time line, but the evidence really suggests its 1st round or bust for qbs.

and they won last week despite washington spending most of the second half inside green bay's 20 yard line. football is a funny sport.