geraltcloud9
geraltcloud9
geraltcloud9

I don’t understand what’s going on here. You’re consuming calories (440 according to the article). That’s nearly 50% MORE than an egg mcmuffin at McDonalds. OF COURSE your hunger will die down if you consume lots of calories. I don’t see how that’s fasting though, anymore than if you stopped by mcondalds and ate a

Sure, but he also provides argumentation for why certain aspects are non-essential. He argues that the Brady pissed off anecdote is an annual occurrence. He points out that some of the things that the author spent a lot of time on were things that have been widely reported elsewhere, some of it going back years. He’s

Sure, but it’s oddly inconsistent with the very point that Ley JUST presented. He says Simmons is denying the reporting solely because he doesn’t believe it could be true, then provides a quote that actually provides direct evidence to back up Simmons claim that Kraft didn’t do those things. It’s an odd about face

No he’s not. I just read it. He’s complaining that the article didn’t fully flesh out the actual arguments it presented. I didn’t see anything in there making a Trumpian style “anonymous sources are evil!” argument.

Eh, he’s not really saying that at all. He’s saying that it’s hard to tell if the essential aspects are accurate because the article glosses over them too quickly, without laying a proper foundation. And the reason why it had to do that was because it was making space to talk about less essential aspects. The article

I also don’t understand the “fuck you” over Simmons reporting that he knew someone with firsthand knowledge of Bob Kraft, and that Kraft disagreed with the story. I mean, the name-droppy way that he says it is a little obnoxious, but if he had written “a source close to the owner stated that Kraft disavowed crucial

Exactly. The likelihood that the people who make secretagentman’s claims are completely unaware that someone close to them (either colleagues, friends, family, etc.) is struggling with some crippling personal problem is about 100%, but they’re too oblivious to realize it. They then turn around and attack other people

I never understand people with this reaction. No matter how many times this sort of thing happens people will still jump in to judge the actions of people in a situation that they have no actual knowledge of. I struggled with alcohol abuse for a decade. Virtually nobody had any idea how bad it was. It’s remarkably

For the record, I am (unfortunately) a Skins fan. This is just an absurd hindsight bias argument. Yes, it didn’t work. No, that doesn’t mean it was pure idiocy at the time. And right, Butler did just what any other player would have done. Totally routine play. Sure thing.

“If you have a 3-2 count on a hitter and you throw a 102 mph fastball, the next pitch is going to be a fastball.”

For all of Deadspin’s bitching and moaning, they sure do get a shit-ton of traction out of ESPN milking Lavar for quotes. It reminds me of the schism between their “the NFL needs to care more about players brains!” and “look at this awesome hit!” articles.

Sooooo...ESPN isn’t a paragon of journalistic virtue? Most of what they bitch and moan about is meaningless nonsense? Good to know!

And, like I’ve said elsewhere, this “horrible, no-good, worst play call in the history of history that was designed just to screw over Seahawks fans and kill puppies” literally would have been a Super Bowl winning touchdown if not for one of the single greatest defensive plays in NFL history. It was a fine play. Tip

“And in my case, it’s not really hindsight, because I both predicted a pass and a slant and an incompletion to the people watching with me.”

And absent one of the greatest defensive plays in Super Bowl history it would have ended up being a Championship winning play call. C’mon man, you can do this with any play that doesn’t go your way ever. It was only because one player on the Patriots correctly predicted what they were doing and made an outrageously

Or Lynch runs and gets stuffed, they have to use their last timeout, and then New England just sits back in coverage on 3rd and 4th and easily shuts down Seattle and everyone bitches about the predictable play calling. The decision to throw was perfectly rational- it was just a poor decision on Wilson’s part and a

I will never understand people criticizing the decision to use one down to try and throw for a TD. People get so hung up on how it actually went down that they refuse to look at the analysis that went into the decision. It’s second down, so you assume if this play doesn’t work you’ll have at least two more shots at

I feel like for most people even asking the question is a sign. I haven’t drank in a decade, but I remember constantly having to defend my drinking habit to myself and others. I could always come up with arguments for why it wasn’t really an issue, when what I should have done was realize that the fact that I (and

As someone who quit drinking nearly a decade ago because he DEFINITELY had a problem, it seems to me that if you think you may have a drinking problem then you probably do. There are lots of people who definitely have problems who think their drinking is just fine, but if you’re someone who has this sensation in the

That man’s name?