Jump to content

That Aud Smell

Members
  • Posts

    24,540
  • Joined

Everything posted by That Aud Smell

  1. Not the person per se. But the harm alleged. The issues implicated. Lol - a bias is a bias, bruh. It’s no more the time to talk about suing Trotter for all he’s worth than it’s time to talk about Pegula being a racist SOB.
  2. I just glossed the complaint. That's some impressive looking work product. It was not "giving"* frivolous litigation. *This is the Gen Z phrase I just caught onto. "It's giving ... ."
  3. well, this is a civil matter so ... . but the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, to be sure.
  4. Whether it's allowed or permitted has little to do with what I'm driving at. Is it advisable for a person in his position to thusly react? It is not. I don't quite understand this sort of take when something like this is in the posture it is - early days. It seems to reveal a bias more than anything.
  5. There are hundreds of AP Lang teachers out there who'd redline the sh1t out of that sentence. Hire one of them, Terry! Why would you be shocked? I'm far more shocked that the statement wasn't simply: "I never said what Mr. Trotter claims I said. I never said it in an NFL meeting or anywhere else."
  6. I'm so far removed from this realm - I don't think my life experiences have much bearing on the matter. The tone-deaf aspect is what makes me think that he's not using a PR professional who charges $1000 an hour. Those cats are worth every penny when you have billions at stake. Matt Pegula's j1zz hats, fo sho.
  7. There's plenty wrong. They're tone deaf. Focus on the hurt being alleged. Stop feeling sorry for yourself, Mr. Billionaire. You spent your entire statement doing that. I wouldn't doubt this. Hence the golf clap.
  8. I'd be stunned if any decent PR professional was involved in preparing that statement. I think it's John Roth or someone who reports directly to him. Agreed 100% on efforts to sound lawyerly will doom any press release. Also, I don't know what he meant to say. The words he used are unclear. And a little weird.
  9. If the statements are demonstrably false and it can be shown that the plaintiff knew as much when he caused his complaint to be filed, then the lawsuit could be dismissed as frivolous. That could undo the privilege generally afforded to judicial statements. Just taking a break. Hard times, actually.
  10. Hoo boy. The butchery of language continues unabated under John Roth. (A pet theory I've developed: I think he pens these things.) Sentence the first: "The statement attributed to me in Mr. Trotter's complaint is absolutely false." It's false how? It's false that black athletes who push civil rights issues should go back to Africa? That's a thing that is untrue and should not be said? Or are you saying that "I did not say that." Because it's unclear, Terry. Also, Terry, are you preparing to throw someone else under the bus? The phrase "attributed to me" sounds an awful lot like you agree it was said, but you weren't the one to say it. "I am horrified that anyone would connect me to an allegation of this kind." Da fuq? There are so many words to pick here. Horrified? Hey, Terry. It's horrifying when mortifying truths come to light too. You did not want that word here. Oof. "Racism has no place in our society" [Golf clap.] "and I am personally disgusted that my name is associated with this complaint." Is there another way to be disgusted that plays here? From a professional standpoint, are you cool with this? Yowza. Also, we're again focused on how these allegations affect you, Terry. "I can't believe my name's attached to this thing." Not a whole lot of talk from Terry about how it's patently untrue that this thing was said in a forum where this plaintiff was present (Zoom or whatever). Just a lot of woe is me for having your name "associated" with the allegations. What an absolute and total cluster.
  11. ". . . some of my best friends are black." Dude. This one is rough. I've been mostly offline since late last week. I'm just hearing of this. I'll have a look now.
  12. More than fair, as I reflect on it.
  13. Lance Lysowski and another TBN writer (local hagiographer Tim O’Shei) did a good job providing some perspective on the dissolution of PSE, etc. https://buffalonews.com/news/buffalo-bills-buffalo-sabres-john-roth-terry-pegula-kim-pegula-ron-raccuia-changes/article_d3785084-4e50-11ee-9e20-3bd157f33e45.html
  14. Eh? No stronger indictment can be had. I heard some respected talking person remark that the guy just doesn’t have a route tree.
  15. The fact that the Chiefs put their eggs in the Kadarius Toney (sp?) basket is proof that every single franchise, even the great ones, will make horrendous personnel decisions based on the need to manage their money (i.e., the salary cap is mostly fake but is also sort of real). The Chiefs would have probably won if they played anyone else in Toney's place.
  16. This started last season as well. I no longer understand what's legal when it comes to where an OT lines up (like, practically in the back field?!) and what an OT is allowed to do pre-snap (like, apparently move and wiggle all he likes and then get off a beat before the snap?!).
  17. Selflishly, the Sabres. The Sabres and ice (and street) hockey were my first true sports love as a kid. But that's not the choice I'd make. The Bills are so much more important to so many more people in WNY and from WNY.
  18. Not for nothing, as reported in today's TBN: Now, the matter of spending money on the Bills is a horse of a different colour, I realize. The Bills make money. Even so, the Pegulas have not hesitated to throw money at the Sabres over the years. That changed, of course, when GM KA came in and engineered a tear down and true rebuild.
  19. No one is hanging onto anything. People are looking for credible information, which is in short supply here. Did you copy and paste this from some AI-generated aggregator site?
  20. the who now? Definitely a parody thread.
×
×
  • Create New...