The Ray Rice Elevator Video

Your argument doesn't add up. If the source was indeed in the room, then the source would know what she said.

If the source wasn't in the room, then maybe they did believe it was what she said.

And, this is a problem with all anonymous sourcing.

We usually get something like, "according to a source familiar with the contents of the meeting/conversion/memo.

This doesn't give us enough context.

Here's how King reported it:

Rice's wife, a source said, made a moving and apparently convincing case to Goodell during a June 16 hearing at Goodell's office...

We don't get any information at all about the source. Was the source in the room? Was the source a staffer who was told what was said in the room?

And, let's be honest, this is Peter King. Even if his original source was not someone in the room, he could have reached out to every single person who was in the room to seek confirmation of what his original source relayed to him.

Did he do this? There's no indication that he did. If it was true, why couldn't he get a second source to confirm it?

King is a hack. His source was Goodell, and he was carrying Goodell's water.

He should be ashamed. But, he won't be.

 

WELCOME TO THE Oop Playbook:

1. See something someone else has posted in a conversation you were not previously involved in.
2. Launch an attack on this person's opinion. Be sure to insult this person for their "arrogant assumptions" and "lack of facts."
3. Wait for this person to respond while furiously masturbating in your wookie costume. "Goddamn it, I'll be up in a sec, MOM! I'm sure the litterbox doesn't need cleaning RIGHT NOW!"
4. Read that person's response.
5. Act aggrieved that you have been unfairly attacked for no reason other than your pursuit of the truth, and ethics.
6. PM a moderator with a hysterical complaint someone has violated the board's vague rules. Is Kenny Tran on Facebook? Seems like it should be easier to reach him.
7. Furiously google things to help form a counter argument.
8. Lie on the floor trembling, stroking your cheek with a Franco Harris jersey. It's OK, you probably just blacked out for a sec. What would Chuck Knoll say? Fight through it, big guy.
9. Publicly congratulate yourself for having the courage to stand up to the SportsJournalists.com mob by yourself. You are basically the Tank Man of Tienammen Square, when you think about it.
10. PM two more moderators, demanding an intervention. Why aren't they responding? Did they block me? Maybe Ragu is out for a run. Send another message, just to be safe. Email Tom Verducci to see if he has Moddy's cell number. You can't resist throwing in a dig about his Clemens/steroids reporting. "You should really be ashamed of yourself."
11. Were you just lecturing a lawyer about constitutional law or a baseball beat writer about free agency rules? Maybe you have some thoughts about science you'd like to lecture a scientist about? Irrelevant! They need to hear this, as they are probably just terrible at reading comprehension.
12. Repeat the same argument three times, spewing insults along the way implying how difficult it is to argue with such simpletons.
13. Express disappointment that someone would resort to personal attacks. "I thought you were better than that. It's clear you are an insecure person who is very unhappy. I feel sorry for you."
14. "I'm Vizzini? No, you're Vizzini!" (Note to self: You nailed that one.)
15. Make certain no one but you has the last word, even if it takes hours. Continue to recite an old Apache creed while rocking in your chair: Some battles are won with superior firepower and intelligence, others with sheer persistence.
16. Ignore pleas from your mom to come get personal pizza out of the toaster oven that's been smoking for two hours. God, can't you see I'm righting wrongs on the Internet, mom? Who has time to eat pizza with so much at stake?
17. PM person that has been arguing with you, expressing how disappointing it is that they'd resort to personal insults when all you were doing is pointing out how stupid and misinformed they were.
18. Get a post in right before the thread is locked.
19. Declare victory.
20. See something someone else has posted in a conversation you were not previously involved in.

 

All great points. But, to be fair to OOP, I think the first one was me -- and on another board.

But, I was right!

 

It seems logical that his source was Goodell or an intermediary. And I think he should have reached out to Janay Rice or someone else in the room, if only to get a no comment. But I think it is plausible, even likely, that memory of the source is consistent with what they remember.

I still don't understand why off the field issues are a matter of league, as opposed to club, discipline, but that's another story.

 

I'm guessing the Colts are dying to sign Rice, but won't given the PR hit that will follow, which would be pretty huge given everything that's already happened to them this season.

What is often lost in this Rice issue is that he really wasn't any good last year, and while it might be understandable to take a chance on someone like Adrian Peterson, Rice is tougher to justify.

 

Pro Football Focus (sub required) currently grades the Ravens as having the second best offensive line blocking this year in the NFL. PFF had them graded 26th in 2013.

 

Pro Football Focus clearly has never watched the Ravens play.

 

Look at DD hinting at more insider information.

Ooh. Big shot has a subscription to Pro Football Focus! (That's PFF to insiders like DD.)

Well, I read on on some site that I can't link to that you're wrong, and don't know anything.

 

Double Down, I woke the dog from his turkey-fart-addled nap laughing with that one. Well done, sir.

 

It truly was inspired. I hope it was all one stream-of-consciousness take.

 

I had to Google Kenny Tram's name to make sure I didn't insult the boss by misspelling it. Other than that, yes.

 

YF, I've never cared who anybody's real identity is on this board. This place is anonymous and I have respected that and expected the same about everybody else. I've always respected DD for what he posted here and never bothered to pay attention to who he might be.

My comment about not watching 2013 was sarcastic, as if somebody with that evaluation might have missed the decline in skills and health in 2013. I'm sorry that sailed over your head and LTL's. I really didn't think it needed explaining, but apparently, I overestimated quite a few people who posted on this thread.

I have since acknowledged and addressed all of the things you mentioned, YF, but you were too busy piling on to read it. Please go back and read that before the next time you post from ignorance. I would have phrased my first response a little differently had I known who DD was in real life, but I would have made the same argument and I would have still disagreed with him. As I mentioned, questioning insiders and beat writers is a big part of what we do here. You should know that more than anybody. You do it more than anybody. For you to criticize me for doing the same thing you do so often is the height of hypocrisy.

I would add more to address my thoughts on DD, but I see he has a response below and haven't read it yet.