Second seed on the court, but first seed in the belly.

This was my first thought when I heard the news this morning!

OK. Although the legal implications of using one word over the other may be similar, there is a difference in the moral implications; “innocent” is clearly defined, while “not guilty” leaves some wiggle room.

Well, I understand the reason they use “not guilty” instead of “innocent,” but it’s a political one. It makes people who disagree with the finding feel better about it and recognizes that the system can make mistakes. There is no procedural difference.

But in a court of law, a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. So if you can’t prove guilt, he’s innocent. What is the difference?

[Turns on Hamilton]

[Turns on Autotune]

Lance’s late lackluster lay-up leaves losers languishing, lacking LeBron’s look, laugh

You must be a woofer too.

I feel like Mussburgers would do really well in Utah.

Who loses a shoe? Honestly!

Looks like Mater Dei’s Bol is Maitre D’Ball.

Reporter: Can you describe how you felt when you were offered the scholarship and then when they rescinded it just two weeks before signing day?

He sees stars now, at least.

He’s a real Payne in the grass.

In his masterpiece A Plague On Words: “Yeoman’s Work,” some guy named Tim Kowel says “Other than scoring some points for employing obscure language to convey simple ideas, “yeoman’s work” is not a useful term. In the aim of clearly conveying meaning, the term should probably be avoided altogether.”

I see what you did there!

Let him go, let him go
And he’ll rise like the break of dawn
Let him go, let him go
The time to foul is gone
Here I stand
In the light of day
Let the game play on...