The Shawshank Redemption, which is not a good movie at all, but actually a bad one.

Barnwell had one talking point that was an introduction to regression for anyone with zero knowledge of how statistics worked.

and if you want a long, rambling article with no point that doesn’t make any sense and makes you feel bad for being white, Rembert is second to none

I’m more of an NBA guy than an NFL guy so I’ll say Lowe, but Barnwell is exceptional.

I don’t think he necessarily is “reconciling” the two, as much as just stating two strong opinions. He didn’t say that he WANTS him on the team, just that he has no doubt that he WILL be on the team, regardless of if 0% of fans support that.

By acknowledging that he’ll likely play (see, e.g., Greg Hardy and the Cowboys, Adrian Peterson, et al.), while commenting that they shouldn’t. Pretty straight forward, chief.

I think as a fan he knows how stupid the organization is.

These aren’t contradicting statements calm down. He’s not saying he approves of him being on the field, he’s saying he’s a cowboy fan and knows how that organization operates. Its not like they haven’t let domestic abusers play in the past (Greg Hardy).

I’m not sure you’re reading it right. First line is an indictment of the team (of which he happens to be a fan) that went out and signed Greg Hardy and what he thinks will happen, not should. Second line is what he thinks should happen.

“As a Cowboys fan”: Establishing that they are a fan of the team, guiding you to see where they are speaking from.

I think the first part of his statement should be read as “Being a fan, I know about the team’s ownership and what they stand for, and thus have no doubts that they would not hesitate to let someone accused of domestic violence play. After all, they signed Greg Hardy last year.”

With the first thing he said “being a Cowboys fan”. He has watched Jerry Jones repeatedly protect and sign guys exactly like this.

Because what should happen and what will actually happen are two different things?