• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Adrian Peterson Indicted for Child Abuse

boobknightfan said:
Here's another old diary entry of mine:

February 12, 1982: Saw Bob Knight coach against Michigan tonight, was able to collect some of his sweat on a napkin, will take to the framers tomorrow.

(There aren't too many people in the world with Bob Knight's sweat on napkin famed on their wall)
Click to expand...


I swear to god I had to read this three times before I realized it was a parody.
 
cville deac said:
I think there's a decent chance he's found not guilty. (And that would put the league in a bad situation.) If this kid had been older, I would have said he'll prolly be found not guilty. Remember the 1st grand jury didn't indict him. If I'm Peterson's attorney, I try the case. If he loses, it's not like he's gonna see a lot of jail time on a child abuse 1st offense - maybe a few days and court mandated behavioral counseling. AP has a lot to gain and little to lose by trying it, so I doubt he pleas.

I also said on another thread a week or 2 back that, with the league's harsher penalties now, you'll see fewer NFL players taking 1st offender, diversionary program type pleas and making the prosecutor try the case. You take a deal and you lose 6 game checks. If you try it, the most you'll get is a few days in jail if you lose, and you're probably not suspended if you're found not guilty. And I think you're gonna see more victims bought off and uncooperative with the prosecution. Six game checks is a lot of $$. So by increasing the punishment for a 1st time offense, the league may have made it more difficult to impose suspensions in cases where victims don't cooperate with the prosecutions. There are precious few cases like the Rice case where there's video.
Click to expand...


This is an interesting point and begs some very important questions. First, does the NFL have to wait to suspend anyone until a criminal case is concluded? I'm pretty sure the answer is no. It's their business, and they don't have to wait until there's a plea deal or a conviction by a jury to suspend anymore. Their standard does not have to be beyond a reasonable doubt. Their standard can be much lower, like probable case. So, I think the NFL can easily say they don't care if a jury found them not guilty, based upon the material we reviewed we felt it was more likely than not he committed this offense and hence our suspension.

If they make some sort of rule that they have to wait until after the criminal proceeding is concluded, they can be faced with the difficult situation when there is a clear cut case like Rice. Let's say we're operating under the new rules of a 6 game suspension, the NFL has to wait until the criminal case runs its course, and all the videos are public. Now, you have the media and the entire country out for blood, but Rice still gets to play on Sundays. The NFL surely doesn't want that, either. Granted, the team can always step in and suspend the player themselves, but I really feel the onus should be on the league to be the disciplinary body.
 
bobknightfan said:
Doubt I'll make that one, but here's an old diary entry of mine:

MAY 09 - 1987 40:07:27 Anna & I went to the Greensboro Coliseum tonight to see a Cinderella & Bon Jovi concert .

(There weren't too many 40-year olds at that concert. :) )

ETA: Still have the "Night Songs" & "Long Cold Winter" CDs.
Click to expand...

Mayan calendar date, am I right????
 
bobknightfan said:
....except for the part where they are still going to pay a guy who beat up two 4-year old children $11.75 million this year.

Paying a professional athlete....any professional athlete....$11.75 million per year is a big part of the entire problem. When you pamper these guys and pay them that kind of money, they begin to feel like that are beyond reproach and can do anything that they damn well please. And many of them do not have the mental ability to handle that kind of situation. So it lead to all kinds of excesses in their personal lives. Just a sad, sad situation we have in this country today with a terribly misguided set of cumulative national priorities.
Click to expand...

you can't read this but i left a bag of dog poop in your mailbox
 
I guess that phone call with Jerry Jones was more prophetic than wishful.
 
The idea of writing a journal entry labeled with your age in year/month/day format reminds me of the title character in Rain Man.
 
bobknightfan said:
This is just one more example of what I am talking about. You don't have to look hard to find them. They're all over the place with today's entitled professional athletes.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-b...ns-10-red-lights--not-in-a-row-171440636.html


"Howard, who played for the NBA's Orlando Magic from 2004 to 2012, racked up 10 tickets for running red lights while in the Orlando area.


He also has on his Orlando court record four speeding tickets, 12 citations for failing to pay highway tolls and one for failing to change his address on his license, all civil traffic infractions.

Howard’s fine? It was for $285. That’s a chunk of change, a car payment to most of us, but one that is more than reasonable enough to pay for those even working with a car that owes monthly payments along those lines. Dwight Howard made over $20 million last season.

Running that many (or any) red lights, though, is an indication of character. It’s the work of someone that thinks they know better, that the road ahead and to the side is safe even with that person breaking the law. People that think they’re just fine to run a red light, roll through a stop sign or fail to use turn signals – just because they think nobody is around, and that these are safe practices – are the worst kind of drivers. They’re entitled misanthropes who think no harm can come from their guesswork.

Or, most likely more specifically, that no harm can come to them, because it’s all about them.

Or, if we can get even more specific, that no police officers are around. Because if you t-bone some peasant in a smaller car, you can just write out a check. You’re Dwight Howard. You’re untouchable, at the top of that SUV."
Click to expand...

If he only he had the guiding hand of coach knight.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
If he only he had the guiding hand of coach knight.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Dwight Howard would've already won an NBA title if he had been coached in college by Bob Knight. However, this system of letting High School kids got straight to the NBA and make obscene amounts of money, when what they need is to go to college and get coached by guys like Bob Knight. It should be like the old days where most professional athletes had to work jobs in the offseason because they didn't make enough money just from playing a stupid sport. Money ruins all this stuff and that's why even though Bob Knight could've gone to the NBA and won more titles the Red Auerbach, he stayed in college when he could mold and guide young men to be constructive members of society and not these overpaid prima-donna criminals in the NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL, etc.
 
Does bkf realize that the money has to go somewhere - if not to the players, then to the mega-wealthy, R-voting, OWG's that own the team.
 
bobknightfan said:
I understand that's the common argument...but I don't buy it. As I've said a zillion times, I dislike the owners as much as I do the players...and I'm certainly not for having them make more money. (I'm also for a drastically steeper income tax code, too, so that if they somehow get greedy and decide to keep that extra money from paying players a more reasonable (read: much smaller) salary, it will just be taxed away from them. (I'd much rather for the government to have it than a bunch of obscenely wealthy owners or players, because, unlike most people on this board, I trust the government to look out for the well-being of the greatest number of American citizens more than I trust wealthy individuals or corporations.)

However, there is a 3rd element to this discussion: The fans who are paying for all this obscene money going to owners & players. That's where the "found money" from reducing these god-awful salaries & excess profits should go....in the form of "lower everything"....tickets, concessions, parking, etc., etc.

Bottom line: We need more socialism and less greedy capitalism in this country.
Click to expand...

That means fewer jobs for concessions workers, ticket takers, parking people, of course.
 
As I "life planner" BKF just also realize that a majority of professional football players will make under $2 million over a 3-4 year period and that's it. That's all they'll ever make off an occupational talent that they have spent decades developing.
 
bobknightfan said:
I understand that's the common argument...but I don't buy it. As I've said a zillion times, I dislike the owners as much as I do the players...and I'm certainly not for having them make more money. (I'm also for a drastically steeper income tax code, too, so that if they somehow get greedy and decide to keep that extra money from paying players a more reasonable (read: much smaller) salary, it will just be taxed away from them. There should be several more income tax brackets than we have now, after the Republicans have basically gutted taxes on the ultra wealthy...and tax rates on incomes above $1, $3, or $5 million, say, should be more than double what they are now.) But what's the difference between a wealthy old, white Republican and Dwight Howard? Nothing much, other than the color of his skin. (I'd much rather for the government to have this extra money than a bunch of obscenely wealthy owners or players, because, unlike most people on this board, I trust the government to look out for the well-being of the greatest number of American citizens more than I trust wealthy individuals or corporations.)

However, there is a 3rd element to this discussion: The fans who are paying for all this obscene money going to owners & players. That's where the "found money" from reducing these god-awful salaries & excess profits should go....in the form of "lower everything"....tickets, concessions, parking, etc., etc.

Bottom line: We need more socialism and less greedy capitalism in this country.
Click to expand...

Um. No.
 
bobknightfan said:
I understand that's the common argument...but I don't buy it. As I've said a zillion times, I dislike the owners as much as I do the players...and I'm certainly not for having them make more money. (I'm also for a drastically steeper income tax code, too, so that if they somehow get greedy and decide to keep that extra money from paying players a more reasonable (read: much smaller) salary, it will just be taxed away from them. There should be several more income tax brackets than we have now, after the Republicans have basically gutted taxes on the ultra wealthy...and tax rates on incomes above $1, $3, or $5 million, say, should be more than double what they are now.) But what's the difference between a wealthy old, white Republican and Dwight Howard? Nothing much, other than the color of his skin. (I'd much rather for the government to have this extra money than a bunch of obscenely wealthy owners or players, because, unlike most people on this board, I trust the government to look out for the well-being of the greatest number of American citizens more than I trust wealthy individuals or corporations.)

However, there is a 3rd element to this discussion: The fans who are paying for all this obscene money going to owners & players. That's where the "found money" from reducing these god-awful salaries & excess profits should go....in the form of "lower everything"....tickets, concessions, parking, etc., etc.

Bottom line: We need more socialism and less greedy capitalism in this country.
Click to expand...

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-athletes/richest-coaches/bobby-knight-net-worth/

Greedy sons of bitches.
 
bobknightfan said:
I understand that's the common argument...but I don't buy it. As I've said a zillion times, I dislike the owners as much as I do the players...and I'm certainly not for having them make more money. (I'm also for a drastically steeper income tax code, too, so that if they somehow get greedy and decide to keep that extra money from paying players a more reasonable (read: much smaller) salary, it will just be taxed away from them. There should be several more income tax brackets than we have now, after the Republicans have basically gutted taxes on the ultra wealthy...and tax rates on incomes above $1, $3, or $5 million, say, should be more than double what they are now.) But what's the difference between a wealthy old, white Republican and Dwight Howard? Nothing much, other than the color of his skin. (I'd much rather for the government to have this extra money than a bunch of obscenely wealthy owners or players, because, unlike most people on this board, I trust the government to look out for the well-being of the greatest number of American citizens more than I trust wealthy individuals or corporations.)

However, there is a 3rd element to this discussion: The fans who are paying for all this obscene money going to owners & players. That's where the "found money" from reducing these god-awful salaries & excess profits should go....in the form of "lower everything"....tickets, concessions, parking, etc., etc.

Bottom line: We need more socialism and less greedy capitalism in this country.
Click to expand...

So true. Politicians aren't greedy or corrupt and the government is much more efficient than private enterprise! We should just give the government all of our money and let them use it as they see fit - they are much smarter than we are. I mean look how successful all the hard-core socialist and communist countries have been in history - they have pretty much left us in the dust.
 
bobknightfan said:
Bob Knight has been in the work force for more than 50 years. I'm fairly certain that during that entire 50-year period he never had a job where his salary was even close to $1 million per year. Some of you guys who like to research Coach Knight can look that up. I'm sure that somewhere there is a listing of Bob Knight's annual salaries over the years. (I think it was $250,000 when he took the Texas Tech job....and he gave every dollar of that back to the school one year when he didn't think his team performed as it should have. And I know he probably had income from TV shows, etc...but that, too, was probably no more than a low 6-figure amount each year.)

So he has saved & invested those $300-$500,000 salaries over the years and accumulated $15 million. So what? I've never argued against a person having money....even $15 million...accumulated over a 50-year period like that with those kinds of salaries. What does that have to do with paying Dwight Howard $20 million in one year? Or paying Adrian Peterson or that Hardy guy from the Panthers $12 or $13 million in one year....to not even play due to pending domestic violence crimes?

There is a hell of a difference between a person accumulating $15 million over 50 years with annual incomes around $300-$500,000 and a person being paid $10 million plus for playing ball (if he can stay out of trouble) for one year.

Anyone who cannot understand the difference here is a total dumbass....and we evidently have a lot of them on this board.
Click to expand...

hahahahaha you're so weird

never ever change
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top