Perhaps not to the neck itself, but for an athlete that likely had to completely abandon his normal workout and exercise regime, it would certainly help him make up for some lost time to come back in 2012.
Brady vs. Manning: Media Comparison Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Brand Name
- Start date
It doesn't have to have actually helped - he just has to have thought it might help. People do all sorts of things without good reason. People take all sorts of treatments with no evidence to back them up.
Schlereth responds....
Just remember, when you point a finger there are three pointing back at you! And I'm rubber your glue, what bounces off me sticks to you! Neener neener.
Only fair to post what he followed up with
mark schlereth @markschlereth 4h4 hours ago
1/2) Here's the thing every team circumvents the rules. I respect the Pats I think they are the smartest & best coached team in the league
mark schlereth @markschlereth 4h4 hours ago
2/2) pats fans just bad winners & sensitive. Just enjoy the ride Brady won't play forever.
mark schlereth @markschlereth 4h4 hours ago
1/2) Here's the thing every team circumvents the rules. I respect the Pats I think they are the smartest & best coached team in the league
mark schlereth @markschlereth 4h4 hours ago
2/2) pats fans just bad winners & sensitive. Just enjoy the ride Brady won't play forever.
This. Deflategate was fueled by NFL front office personnel who hate the Pats. Not only did the Manning HGH story not come from the league office, but I suspect there is no one over there on Park Ave who will reinforce the story in any meaningful way.
The Manning family is football royalty. Mort et al are a PR firm for the Mannings much the way they were for the league during Deflategate.
Generally agreed, but I would go with possible. Plausible implies "likely", which I don't think is the case. You nailed it with "charlatan" in the next sentence.
What, really, have the Patriots done to "cheat"? That's a serious question. It's pretty clear that in deflate gate, nothing happened other than that the temperature went down and the laws of physics did what the laws of physics did.
The Pats did violate rules with respect to cameras in spygate. That's one. I wouldn't consider that to be anything big, but still, they broke the rules. What else? There's....nothing. That's it. Spygate.
Schlereth's Broncos twice violated salary cap rules which enabled them to put a better, Super Bowl winning, team together. And Schlereth, of course, was involved in putting vaseline on his arms to gain a competitive advantage (and was fined by the NFL for doing so).
For him to say what he said is utterly irresponsible.
But, sad to say, par for the course.
Umm, hello. The Dolphins hired extra staff to guard their equipment at Gillette, the Jets swept the locker room at Gillette for bugs, the Steelers once or twice had their radios go out momentarily, and I believe one team brings their own Gatorade to Gillette.
Chuck Pagano spends sleepless nights drafting decoy playbooks to place around the locker room. I'm pretty sure his special teams captain accidentally got hold of one and ran a fake play off of it.
I'm really going to be sad to see him go. Hopefully he gets a head coaching gig somewhere else so we still have the privilege of hearing emotional inspirational post game speeches after victories over Tennessee.
Someone up thread mentioned the capital Manning has banked with the media over the years and I have to say, I underestimated that by an extraordinary amount. As much as Americans love seeing falls from grace and as vulturous as the media is, I thought for sure this would be pounced on and run with by at least someone outside of AJ. I couldn't have been more wrong. Instead I hear all about the benefit of the doubt and his "unimpeachable character" as if he never gave a female trainer an atomic teabag in Tennessee, and then further disparaged her years later costing her livelihood.
If there is truth to Sly's allegations, and I believe there is, then this has to catch up with him eventually right?? Right?? Please God tell me I'm right.
If there is truth to Sly's allegations, and I believe there is, then this has to catch up with him eventually right?? Right?? Please God tell me I'm right.
Or the public really does not care about PED's when it comes to football, especially when most people have a lot more important things to focus on during the holiday season. This story is a bore. Joe Public thinks 99% of football players are on something anyway, so who cares?
Um...not sure what I'm supposed to say in response to this. I asked what have the Patriots ACTUALLY done other than spygate. Are you trying to say that the paranoia on the part of other clubs is evidence that the Patriots have actually done something else wrong?
Yeah, a Brady HGH story would have been covered much differently, which is why this thread exists. At the end of the day, only a Ray Rice level video could generate some real negative coverage for Manning. He really is Teflon when it comes to the media.
I am waiting for a random twitter personality to cook up a FAKE Brady HgH story and have the media run wild with it.
Then we can really laugh at them.
Not to me, it doesn't--plausible means within the realm of possible, and not completely outlandish. If anything I hear it more often used of things that are unlikely (but still not completely ridiculous) than of likely cases.
Webster's says: "possibly true : believable or realistic".
Dictionary dot com says: "having an appearance of truth or reason; seemingly worthy of approval or acceptance; credible; believable:"
I suppose the "having the appearance" aspect implies deception, in which case this would be true.
No. Plausible merely means "reasonably likely". It's what most people mean when they say "possible" in casual conversation, like "It's possible that I'll go to the movies later, want to come?"
Of course that's possible. It's also possible that you will go to the movies, sit next to Daisy Ridley, and she'll fall in love with you. The original scenario, however, is more than merely "possible" (which is a binary distinction), because it has a reasonable chance of actually happening, which makes it *plausible* while the latter possibility is so outlandish as to render it *implausible*.
Of course that's possible. It's also possible that you will go to the movies, sit next to Daisy Ridley, and she'll fall in love with you. The original scenario, however, is more than merely "possible" (which is a binary distinction), because it has a reasonable chance of actually happening, which makes it *plausible* while the latter possibility is so outlandish as to render it *implausible*.
Cross posting from the HGH story thread. So according to Boomer, Kravitz and Doyle are more legitimate sources of journalism than Al Jazeera.
“I was disappointed, because here is Al Jazeera for 25-30 years, however long they’ve been around, spewing anti-American propaganda all across the Middle East and now I have think they have all the answers on who is taking HGH and who isn’t taking HGH because of a disgruntledemployee
? I hate it and I can’t stand it. I don’t consider them as a legitimate source and I hate that we have to have these discussions,” said Esiason. “I would like to see it from another source before we get into a conversation about it.”
Esiason said he doesn’t feel comfortable talking about such accusations given the source.
“I don’t like the whole thing around it. People can make all sorts of accusations and ruin people’s lives. I just don’t like it and I don’t feel comfortable about it. I sit behind a microphone for four hours every day, and can spew whatever I want. I take that responsibility very seriously,” he said.
“I’m not going to get myself caught up in a secondary, disgruntled employee, somebody who recanted his story, and try to connect the dots – that’s not my job,” he continued. “Until I get a factual and better reporter it doesn’t make sense to even discuss it"
“I was disappointed, because here is Al Jazeera for 25-30 years, however long they’ve been around, spewing anti-American propaganda all across the Middle East and now I have think they have all the answers on who is taking HGH and who isn’t taking HGH because of a disgruntledemployee
? I hate it and I can’t stand it. I don’t consider them as a legitimate source and I hate that we have to have these discussions,” said Esiason. “I would like to see it from another source before we get into a conversation about it.”Esiason said he doesn’t feel comfortable talking about such accusations given the source.
“I don’t like the whole thing around it. People can make all sorts of accusations and ruin people’s lives. I just don’t like it and I don’t feel comfortable about it. I sit behind a microphone for four hours every day, and can spew whatever I want. I take that responsibility very seriously,” he said.
“I’m not going to get myself caught up in a secondary, disgruntled employee, somebody who recanted his story, and try to connect the dots – that’s not my job,” he continued. “Until I get a factual and better reporter it doesn’t make sense to even discuss it"
I love this. So, Boomer needs to see the story come from a source he approves of which, by the way, won't touch this story with a 10 foot pole because $$$. I am really rooting for Ms. Davies here. Hope she keeps digging to the point where the Feds get involved and these lemmings will have no choice but to discuss the story.
Do you think that point of view is more than a sideshow in the comparative media treatments of Brady and Manning's respective brouhahas? (brous-haha?)
I guess Mortensen and the NFL's official statement that they were looking into ball irregularities after the AFCCG were enough credibility to get the media's wheels turning. The sports talking-head universe doesn't really allow for much debating room between "they've gotten a credible accusation" and "they're clearly guilty", at least in the tone of coverage. So maybe your'e right, actually... maybe the difference really is just that people don't think the AJA report is credible, and its detractors can cite Sly's "retraction" to give them a fact to latch onto in that belief.
I guess Mortensen and the NFL's official statement that they were looking into ball irregularities after the AFCCG were enough credibility to get the media's wheels turning. The sports talking-head universe doesn't really allow for much debating room between "they've gotten a credible accusation" and "they're clearly guilty", at least in the tone of coverage. So maybe your'e right, actually... maybe the difference really is just that people don't think the AJA report is credible, and its detractors can cite Sly's "retraction" to give them a fact to latch onto in that belief.
And for the record, I use "plausible" to mean "likely enough to be strongly considered", for events both past and future. It's not merely "theoretically possible" that Guerrero has a better preventative regimen for pro athletes; the testimonials and descriptions of it by a number of people, Brady (and Tom Curran) chief among them, make it worthy of serious consideration in a way that, say, Russell Wilson's "concussion water" simply doesn't merit. It's also plausible that:
50%: Effective & semi-groundbreaking
40%: Ineffective but benign
10%: Con man
Whereas, if I had to handicap the HGH situation with Manning in particular, based on an informed opinion of AJA's credibility, documentary, and statements thus far by all sides, I'd go:
50%: Manning took it and is lying through his teeth to protect his reputation
20%: Sly's statements were all lies, at least those about Manning, and his retraction is truthful
15%: There is a benign medical explanation for Ashley Manning's usage, which may or may not be sketchy but is nevertheless the truth (e.g., Peyton mentioned offhand during a PT session about some problem Ashley was having, and in an attempt to impress him, Sly or Guyer sent her something with, at most, only vague consent/approval). Peyton is sincere in his attempt to shield her from public scrutiny.
5%: He took it, but was convinced it was something else / part of something totally legal and is unaware of his guilt
10%: Something in the middle of all the above, as there's a lot of gray area here, whereas there really isn't with Ballghazi (at least as far as McNally / Jastremski are concerned)
- Guerrero is a serial con man who has conned not just Brady and Curran but other members of the Patriots as well, but given the number of people who would have to all be conned, or all choose not to speak up and call BS, I think that's unlikely.
- Guerrero sincerely believes in his techniques and has done no harm, but has no insights or abilities greater than that of an average physical therapist. Just better PR, because he's gained the trust of a very insular, suspicious, and highly prominent pro athlete.
50%: Effective & semi-groundbreaking
40%: Ineffective but benign
10%: Con man
Whereas, if I had to handicap the HGH situation with Manning in particular, based on an informed opinion of AJA's credibility, documentary, and statements thus far by all sides, I'd go:
50%: Manning took it and is lying through his teeth to protect his reputation
20%: Sly's statements were all lies, at least those about Manning, and his retraction is truthful
15%: There is a benign medical explanation for Ashley Manning's usage, which may or may not be sketchy but is nevertheless the truth (e.g., Peyton mentioned offhand during a PT session about some problem Ashley was having, and in an attempt to impress him, Sly or Guyer sent her something with, at most, only vague consent/approval). Peyton is sincere in his attempt to shield her from public scrutiny.
5%: He took it, but was convinced it was something else / part of something totally legal and is unaware of his guilt
10%: Something in the middle of all the above, as there's a lot of gray area here, whereas there really isn't with Ballghazi (at least as far as McNally / Jastremski are concerned)
The difference is very simple, the NFL pushed the Brady story, the Terrorist news paper pushed the Manning story. That's all that you will hear from the vast majority of the people out there, ALJ for most is that newspaper from the middle east so most fans are perfectly content with sweeping this under the rug. I actually think many of the media learned from the Brady debacle are afraid of throwing another living NFL legend under the bus also as they don't want to be the "Chris Mortenson" of this story.
Pre-Brady I actually think this story goes viral and explodes, but in the Post Brady world I think the media is terrified of exposing any league issue unless directed to by the league. It's all about cash flow and I'm not surprised that CBS, NBC or FOX want no part of this as I'm sure the behind the scenes NFL league office conversations are crystal clear on the message to be delivered.
It's unfortunate but expected and I personally think this will track much closer to the Armstrong story than the Brady story, and may blow up the same way in the end. Brady was league driven, the Armstrong story was perceived by most to be driven by foreigners trying to destroy an American Legend and the parallels to Manning are much closer. NOTHING will come of this until he is retired, if he's smart he walks after this super bowl run and this story will completely hit the life support phase.
I want to be clear I don't perceive ALJ as a terrorist paper, nor agree with how this has gone down - but expecting anything different after watching the NFL for the past year is bordering on insanity. Someday the truth will emerge, but it will be so far down the road that like the Armstrong case those shouting the loudest will receive little to no vindication as the American public will be long gone looking at the next shiny object.
Pre-Brady I actually think this story goes viral and explodes, but in the Post Brady world I think the media is terrified of exposing any league issue unless directed to by the league. It's all about cash flow and I'm not surprised that CBS, NBC or FOX want no part of this as I'm sure the behind the scenes NFL league office conversations are crystal clear on the message to be delivered.
It's unfortunate but expected and I personally think this will track much closer to the Armstrong story than the Brady story, and may blow up the same way in the end. Brady was league driven, the Armstrong story was perceived by most to be driven by foreigners trying to destroy an American Legend and the parallels to Manning are much closer. NOTHING will come of this until he is retired, if he's smart he walks after this super bowl run and this story will completely hit the life support phase.
I want to be clear I don't perceive ALJ as a terrorist paper, nor agree with how this has gone down - but expecting anything different after watching the NFL for the past year is bordering on insanity. Someday the truth will emerge, but it will be so far down the road that like the Armstrong case those shouting the loudest will receive little to no vindication as the American public will be long gone looking at the next shiny object.
It's certainly convenient for Boomer to ignore Taylor Teagarden's appearance in the videos and go with the disgruntled employee angle.
http://thebiglead.com/2016/01/04/jim-nantz-peyton-manning-hgh/
Nantz was on the radio with Francesa yesterday morning. Had some interesting comments about the Manning HGH story.
Jim Nantz, who called the Broncos/Chargers game, decided to completely ignore the story. He went on the radio with Mike Francesa Sunday morning to discuss … why he wouldn’t discuss Manning and HGH.
“No, why would we? If we talk about it we would only continue to breathe life into a story that on all levels is a non-story,” Nantz said. “Why add another layer to it?”
Nantz is the absolute worst.
Nantz was on the radio with Francesa yesterday morning. Had some interesting comments about the Manning HGH story.
Jim Nantz, who called the Broncos/Chargers game, decided to completely ignore the story. He went on the radio with Mike Francesa Sunday morning to discuss … why he wouldn’t discuss Manning and HGH.
“No, why would we? If we talk about it we would only continue to breathe life into a story that on all levels is a non-story,” Nantz said. “Why add another layer to it?”
Nantz is the absolute worst.
I take the responsibility to spew whatever I want seriously.Cross posting from the HGH story thread. So according to Boomer, Kravitz and Doyle are more legitimate sources of journalism than Al Jazeera.
“I was disappointed, because here is Al Jazeera for 25-30 years, however long they’ve been around, spewing anti-American propaganda all across the Middle East and now I have think they have all the answers on who is taking HGH and who isn’t taking HGH because of a disgruntledemployee
Esiason said he doesn’t feel comfortable talking about such accusations given the source.
“I don’t like the whole thing around it. People can make all sorts of accusations and ruin people’s lives. I just don’t like it and I don’t feel comfortable about it. I sit behind a microphone for four hours every day, and can spew whatever I want. I take that responsibility very seriously,” he said.
“I’m not going to get myself caught up in a secondary, disgruntled employee, somebody who recanted his story, and try to connect the dots – that’s not my job,” he continued. “Until I get a factual and better reporter it doesn’t make sense to even discuss it"
At this point, you really have to have your head buried in the sand if you don't see the tremendous bias with which this story is being covered. Night and day compared to Brady and the best part is, not only is the national media not willing to look into it they completely dismiss it when both AJ and CNN claim to have 2 reliable sources. (I recall smear pieces written where Brady was definitely guilty when there was basically a half a source)
Really makes you wonder if Big Pizza and that damn Papa John are controlling the media...
Really makes you wonder if Big Pizza and that damn Papa John are controlling the media...
It amazes me that in a league full owners that think the Patriots' operation is shady and full of cheaters, those very same owners never hesitate to come knocking on Robert Kraft's door every offseason to interview his coaching staff and front office personnel for GM/coaching vacancies.
If they're a bunch of cheaters who you say skew the integrity of the league - so much that you dock them first round picks - why do you want them to be a part of your organization?
Such frauds.
If they're a bunch of cheaters who you say skew the integrity of the league - so much that you dock them first round picks - why do you want them to be a part of your organization?
Such frauds.
Even more than that, let's imagine a scenario where BB's contract was up at the end of this year and he was on the open market. How many of these teams, that universally, apparently, believe he is a cheater, would NOT want to go after him for their HC position? How many wound not prefer BB over their current head coach?
Teams would be lining up to hire him.
Oh he's a cheater, yeah sure, but we wouldn't care, because now he'd be OUR cheater!
For those who missed it, Chad Finn weighed in during a SI.com roundtable discussion of ESPN:
... As a New England proxy here, I’m fascinated to see whether ESPN dedicates the resources to the Peyton Manning/HGH story as it did Tom Brady and Deflategate—whether it investigates it as deeply (get on this, Don Van Natta), whether it seeks the truth or supports Roger Goodell’s version of the truth and whether it accountably acknowledges and corrects its mistakes should there be reporting missteps along the way, as there were with Deflategate. ...
http://www.si.com/more-sports/2016/01/04/espn-image-future-2016-john-skipper
... As a New England proxy here, I’m fascinated to see whether ESPN dedicates the resources to the Peyton Manning/HGH story as it did Tom Brady and Deflategate—whether it investigates it as deeply (get on this, Don Van Natta), whether it seeks the truth or supports Roger Goodell’s version of the truth and whether it accountably acknowledges and corrects its mistakes should there be reporting missteps along the way, as there were with Deflategate. ...
http://www.si.com/more-sports/2016/01/04/espn-image-future-2016-john-skipper
Gloriously cranky Bob Ryan goes off on the Brady-Manning comparison:
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=14514771
As a bonus, Ryan just destroys former Warriors coach Mark Jackson
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=14514771
As a bonus, Ryan just destroys former Warriors coach Mark Jackson
Listening to Klosterman on this topic on the latest Simmons podcast was BRUTAL. His point was essentially that Peyton seems like a nice guy so we should cut him some slack. So lazy and judgmental. Bill should have tore him a new one on that.
Not to defend Klosterman but that was not my interpretation. He wasn't saying what anyone "should cut him some slack." He was explaining why the stories are being treated differently. He's right about the why.
He really was not even remotely controversial in that podcast about the Brady Manning difference. I think ifman missed that one.
Perhaps I heard it wrong. Could have sworn I heard Chuck say Peyton seemed like a good guy so he (Chuck) cut him some slack but I guess Chuck was saying that the press made this assumption, which is correct. Sorry for the false alarm.
Mad Dog was on D&C today. Dennis started him off with do you think it was more likely than not that Manning did the HGH. His answer was at first he thought yes but that he and Manning share the same agent Sandy Montag and after talking to Montag he now believes he didn't do it. And even if he did so what. And still said Brady should have just admitted that he likes the ball on the low end and they went a little too low.
You heard it right but he was more or less just stating reasons why he thinks they are covered differently, I don't think they were 100% his opinions. They were bad enough themselves though (Peyton is a good guy but Tom isn't? Peyton is smart but Tom isn't? Peyton using HGH illegally is somehow more noble than Brady coming up with a scheme to deflate the balls 0.2 PSI because he's just trying to extend his career?)
My issue with Klosterman was how smarmy he sounded when Simmons said that Patriots fans may be crazy and over the top but in this case they're right. He kind of just scoffed at it. It shocks me that someone supposedly that intellectually curious can't entertain the thought of Brady being innocent just because he wouldn't answer his dumb questions about a dumb situation when they have been answered 100 times and the appeal is still ongoing.
Our old friend Bob Kravitz actually had an interesting discussion about this on Tony Kornheiser's radio show. Kravitz said he went to the Guyer Institute himself and was prescribed HGH, so he thought it was plausible Manning may have taken it. He added that you can't take any of these denials at face value because they all protest like this (Lance, Braun, Marion Jones, etc).
At least twice, Kornheiser tried to get Kravitz to say that he didn't believe that Manning used, but Kravitz really wouldn't commit either way.
Listen to the 1-06-16 Hour 2 episode in about the 10th minute.
http://www.espn980.com/audio-vault/
At least twice, Kornheiser tried to get Kravitz to say that he didn't believe that Manning used, but Kravitz really wouldn't commit either way.
Listen to the 1-06-16 Hour 2 episode in about the 10th minute.
http://www.espn980.com/audio-vault/
Interesting...kind of puts a dent in my theory from about a week ago in the other Manning HGH thread: