Manning Legacy: Scrotal Recall

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
5,998
Yes. I am talking about Collins with the fraud conviction. The Huffpo article points this out and links to his legal troubles. Whether or not that tarnishes his veracity in this thing is up to individual opinion.
Well, if you WATCHED the doc, you would know that Al-Jazeera OUTLINES COLLINS' FRAUD CHARGES in the beginning and this makes him the perfect person to send undercover because the marks won't be expecting him to be undercover. IT'S ALL HIDDEN CAMERAS so he's got all of these people supplying, giving names and passing them up to the next doctor/supplier. The DOCTORS are on camera, some of the ATHLETES are on camera. Please watch the doc [EDITED to be less of a dick to Spike.]
 
Last edited:

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
EDIT: sorry about the bolding.. I can't figure out,where the formatting went wrong.

None of what you wrote is true. It's like the propoganda has already worked on you. The reporter does NOT have a history of fraud. WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY.

Not wasting my time watching it, sorry.

(And even if Sly is a legit PED source now out of TX, that doesn't mean everything he said is truthful.)

Did you watch the report? In the introduction they outline the fraud charges, it wasn't an unknown to them, it was actually a credibility inroad to the 'dark side' they sought to expose. The report did say they confirmed Sly was an internist at Guyer in 2011--doctor of pharmacology, not a hey you go get coffee intern--I don't know when or if that assertion was bunked or the timing of Sly's employment. Al Jazeera wasn't looking to burn Manning here, they were setting out to expose the system of doping and using an already dirty UK hurdler was the way in; it was loose lipped name dropping pharmacists that gave them more than expected.
The owner of the Guyer Institute is on record today asserting that Sly was never a paid employee of his company and that he worked their as an unpaid intern in 2013, 2 years after he claims to have been a part of the "medical team" who treated Manning in 2011.

Here's PFT with the statement:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/12/27/dale-guyer-chimes-in-with-a-peyton-manning-statement-too/

“I would emphasize that Mr. Sly was never an employee of the Guyer Institute and his brief three-month internship occurred in 2013 during which time Peyton was not even being treated or present in the office,”

Unless Guyer is lying through his teeth, Al Jazeera ought to address this huge hole in their reporting.

Like I said earlier, I'm not watching that piece given there is a massive inconsistency right there.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,365
Los Angeles, CA
Yes. I am talking about Collins with the fraud conviction. The Huffpo article points this out and links to his legal troubles. Whether or not that tarnishes his veracity in this thing is up to individual opinion.
I'm not sure how that changes what's on the video.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
Well, if you WATCHED the doc, you would know that Al-Jazeera OUTLINES COLLINS' FRAUD CHARGES in the beginning and this makes him the perfect person to send undercover because the marks won't be expecting him to be undercover. IT'S ALL HIDDEN CAMERAS so he's got all of these people supplying, giving names and passing them up to the next doctor/supplier. The DOCTORS are on camera, some of the ATHLETES are on camera. Please watch the doc and don't spread B.S. tweets that are pure propaganda to try to bury the story.
See above.

And park your tone. I am only pointing out a giant inconsistency in AJ's reporting.
 
Last edited:

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
5,998
HGH is highly regulated and CANNOT BE PRESCRIBED off-label. According to one of the leading American experts who has treated children for growth hormone defiency, HGH can only be prescribed to ADULTS for three medical conditions: 1. Growth hormone deficiency. 2. short-bowel syndrome. 3. HIV wasting.

If Manning's wife got HGH sent to her, and she doesn't have any of those conditions, that's a HUGE smoking gun.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
50,339
Haha man, you got a thousand bucks and feeling a bit tired? Spend 5 minutes googling and you can get an Hgh prescription by the end of the week.
 
May 30, 2009
17,395
in my pants...
HGH is highly regulated and CANNOT BE PRESCRIBED off-label. According to one of the leading American experts who has treated children for growth hormone defiency, HGH can only be prescribed to ADULTS for three medical conditions: 1. Growth hormone deficiency. 2. short-bowel syndrome. 3. HIV wasting.

If Manning's wife got HGH sent to her, and she doesn't have any of those conditions, that's a HUGE smoking gun.
And it seemed that in Manning's statement in the piece he pretty admitted his wife received them. Which means he just incriminated the Doc, right?

See above.

And park your tone.
Spike, c'mon. You can't just dismiss it's credibility while refusing to watch it. At the very least you can't really be stating anything credible about it as if you have.
And as far as your issue above. Al Jazeera does state in no uncertain terms that they have confirmed that Sly worked there in 2011. They don't say specifically how they did, tax records or however you do that, but I really doubt they'd say that if they hadn't.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
And it seemed that in Manning's statement in the piece he pretty admitted his wife received them. Which means he just incriminated the Doc, right?


Spike, c'mon. You can't just dismiss it's credibility while refusing to watch it. At the very least you can't really be stating anything credible about it as if you have.
And as far as your issue above. Al Jazeera does state in no uncertain terms that they have confirmed that Sly worked there in 2011. They don't say specifically how they did, tax records or however you do that, but I really doubt they'd say that if they hadn't.
So AJ needs to show their work and prove how they know Sly worked at Guyer when Guyer says he did not.

If they can do that, the report vis a vis Manning might be worth watching.

If they don't show their work, I think it's a fatal flaw and renders the entire Manning angle horseshit and not worth my time.

The burden is on AJ.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
Well, that's Guyer's response to the video, not something omitted in it originally. I assume if pressed they can provide what their evidence is.
Remember, Sly has also said that he was lying to Collins about Manning and the other athletes.

AJ has a lot to explain before anyone should believe their reporting on this.
 
May 30, 2009
17,395
in my pants...
What exactly do you expect him to do, after being recorded talking about various felonies he's committed?
I think you're attacking the messenger here. Al Jazeera is a worldwide news organisation that has a solid reputation.
 

I12XU

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2003
3,445
Brooklyn
Remember, Sly has also said that he was lying to Collins about Manning and the other athletes.

AJ has a lot to explain before anyone should believe their reporting on this.
Seriously, watch the report. Collins encounters Teagarden at Sly's apartment, they all have a talk about G2 and Teagarden gets his reup. Sly had no idea he was dealing with a reporter and was dropping half the Green Bay Packers names as his clients, talking about hooking up Dustin Keller in high school and through college, etc. of course he's saying he made it all up, he's in a world of shit if a fed investigation lands on him.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
What exactly do you expect him to do, after being recorded talking about various felonies he's committed?
I think you're attacking the messenger here. Al Jazeera is a worldwide news organisation that has a solid reputation.
I have no beef with AJ in a vacuum.

I have a huge glaring massive neon-sign problem with the inconsistency I have mentioned specific to the Manning angle in this particular reporting. If AJ Cannot prove that Sly was a part of the medical team that treated Manning at Guyer in 2011, everything said about Manning in this report (note, not the entire report, just the.Manning stuff) is not to be taken seriously.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
Seriously, watch the report. Collins encounters Teagarden at Sly's apartment, they all have a talk about G2 and Teagarden gets his reup. Sly had no idea he was dealing with a reporter and was dropping half the Green Bay Packers names as his clients, talking about hooking up Dustin Keller in high school and through college, etc. of course he's saying he made it all up, he's in a world of shit if a fed investigation lands on him.
That shit could all be totally true.

But that doesn't mean the Manning stuff is.

I can't believe I have to argue this very simple point.
 

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
5,998
Collins isn't a reporter. He's the confidential informant (C.I.) Spike, I don't know what more you want - admittance on tape, supplying and selling of drugs, phone calls and text messages from players asking for stuff, a referral to and from other suppliers that lead to Sly. And the Taylor Teagarden exchange proves that he supplies athletes with untraceable steroids. Not to mention the mountain of steroids, HGH and drugs that Al Jazeera collects during the investigation (ALL ON CAMERA). You wanting more evidence is ridiculous when you haven't even watched the doc. Watch it and be more specific about what they need to do to win your infidel heart (that's a joke).

Another interesting story in the doc is the guy who investigated for MLB basically saying that they are a corporation and don't really want anyone getting caught because it will hurt their product. That's a huge story that no one is talking about yet.

EDIT: OK Spike, I see you're just referring to the Manning stuff. It all comes down to whether the wife was sent boxes of HGH and if she has one of those 3 conditions. It's heavily regulated and pretty dumb if she got it sent to her and we're supposed to believe it wasn't for Manning.
 

Tony C

Dope
Dope
Apr 13, 2000
13,075
So AJ needs to show their work and prove how they know Sly worked at Guyer when Guyer says he did not.

If they can do that, the report vis a vis Manning might be worth watching.

If they don't show their work, I think it's a fatal flaw and renders the entire Manning angle horseshit and not worth my time.

The burden is on AJ.
I'm not clear how you can simultaneously say the burden is on AJ and say you refuse to watch/listen to their reporting. How could they possibly meet the burden you say they have if you're going to put your fingers in your ears and scream LALALALA if ? You're basically making points here to which people are responding by making direct reference to the AJ piece. You wouldn't be so easily refuted if you just watched the piece you're choosing to argue about. I have no problem if you don't care about it enough to argue, but if you care enough to argue about a report, you think you'd watch it, no?
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
EDIT: OK Spike, I see you're just referring to the Manning stuff. It all comes down to whether the wife was sent boxes of HGH and if she has one of those 3 conditions. It's heavily regulated and pretty dumb if she got it sent to her and we're supposed to believe it wasn't for Manning.
No, it all comes down to,whether or not Al Jazeera can show proof that Sly worked at Guyer in 2011 and was a part of. Manning's medical team the way he claimed on tape. The Guyer Institute claims he was an unpaid intern in 2013 only. If AJ cannot show us how their claims are all true wrt Sly's role at Guyer, the whole Manning thing is bunk.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
I'm not clear how you can simultaneously say the burden is on AJ and say you refuse to watch/listen to their reporting. How could they possibly meet the burden you say they have if you're going to put your fingers in your ears and scream LALALALA if ? You're basically making points here to which people are responding by making direct reference to the AJ piece. You wouldn't be so easily refuted if you just watched the piece you're choosing to argue about. I have no problem if you don't care about it enough to argue, but if you care enough to argue about a report, you think you'd watch it, no?
There is one key disputed fact related to Manning. Show me where AJ proves Sly worked at Guyer in 2011. No one responding to me in this thread has been able to provide that information.

Until then, it's a fatal flaw. This is like high school journalism club stuff.
 
May 30, 2009
17,395
in my pants...
I have no beef with AJ in a vacuum.

I have a huge glaring massive neon-sign problem with the inconsistency I have mentioned specific to the Manning angle in this particular reporting. If AJ Cannot prove that Sly was a part of the medical team that treated Manning at Guyer in 2011, everything said about Manning in this report (note, not the entire report, just the.Manning stuff) is not to be taken seriously.
And now you're moving the goalposts. It wouldn't be just good enough to prove Sly was at the clinic in 2011, but they have to prove he particularly worked on/ with Manning, otherwise its not proven. You are a step away from asking for Sly's long form birth certificate.
Look, there is no evidence other than Sly's self incriminating statements against Manning, or any athlete other than Teagarden, because he was in the videos himself admitting to his use. Fine. I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. At least I am not.
But what we are doing is saying that its really suspicious for his name to come up unprovoked, and that the excuse that the HGH was for his wife is even worse. As far as I know she doesn't have any of the three medical issues it can be legally proscribed for, and if she does, why did she need to obtain it illegally from a doctor who is not allowed to prescribe it?
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
And now you're moving the goalposts. It wouldn't be just good enough to prove Sly was at the clinic in 2011, but they have to prove he particularly worked on/ with Manning, otherwise its not proven. You are a step away from asking for Sly's long form birth certificate.
Look, there is no evidence other than Sly's self incriminating statements against Manning, or any athlete other than Teagarden, because he was in the videos himself admitting to his use. Fine. I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. At least I am not.
But what we are doing is saying that its really suspicious for his name to come up unprovoked, and that the excuse that the HGH was for his wife is even worse. As far as I know she doesn't have any of the three medical issues it can be legally proscribed for, and if she does, why did she need to obtain it illegally from a doctor who is not allowed to prescribe it?
Dude, it's not my responsibility to independently confirm The details of Sly's claims before publishing. It's the responsibility of AJ.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
50,339
Tell me more. I'm getting a little older, some HGH might be the ticket.
Well, yeah you can pay a lot for a bogus script and it'll run a thousand plus a month, or I can give you a number and you can have it by the end of the week for $300.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
10,034
Washington, DC
HGH is highly regulated and CANNOT BE PRESCRIBED off-label. According to one of the leading American experts who has treated children for growth hormone defiency, HGH can only be prescribed to ADULTS for three medical conditions: 1. Growth hormone deficiency. 2. short-bowel syndrome. 3. HIV wasting.

If Manning's wife got HGH sent to her, and she doesn't have any of those conditions, that's a HUGE smoking gun.
HGH is also "fairly common in the treatment of infertility" apparently, if this Atlantic article is to be believed. http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/08/in-defense-of-human-growth-hormone/278709/

Given that the Mannings had twins in 2011, it wouldn't shock me if Manning's wife had IVF treatments involving the not-FDA-approved but reasonably common use of HGH.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,405
Twin Bridges, Mt.
Slygate is not going to go away as quickly as some people would like it to. AJ has a lot on the line with this. They seem to be very thorough and I wouldn't be surprised if they've held a few things back that will help to the credibility of the story.

Edit: and I'm not talking about Manning. There are a lot of people called out in this report. I don't see how this story doesn't have legs.
 
Last edited:

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
73,183
Oregon
We'll see how worried the NFL is about this by how quickly ESPN does an "investigative report" on Brady's strength coach
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,365
Los Angeles, CA
Slygate is not going to go away as quickly as some people would like it to. AJ has a lot on the line with this. They seem to be very thorough and I wouldn't be surprised if they've held a few things back that will help to the credibility of the story.
I would love it if you were right, but do we ever see news organizations actually do this? Why wouldn't they just put all of the evidence out there so that the story is as credible as possible from the get-go?
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
12,711
Michigan
HGH is also "fairly common in the treatment of infertility" apparently, if this Atlantic article is to be believed. http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/08/in-defense-of-human-growth-hormone/278709/

Given that the Mannings had twins in 2011, it wouldn't shock me if Manning's wife had IVF treatments involving the not-FDA-approved but reasonably common use of HGH.
If Manning's wife needed HGH as a part of IVF treatment, she'd get it from an infertility doctor, not an anti-aging clinic that also allegedly supplies drugs to pro athletes.

Again, who cares whether Manning used HGH in 2011 to recover from a neck injury? What will be interesting is how Roger "Integrity" Goodell handles this. Some of you may remember that the NFL is currently arguing in court that letting 1 psi of air out of footballs is equal to, ahem, using banned substances like HGH.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
16,228
Love Rodney coming out and saying flat out he used HGH, it fixed his groin, never had issues with it again, but its a black cloud over his career and he regrets it.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
8,255
NOVA
Honestly, the story here seems do sketchy, it's likely to make
#optics.

As anyone knows a public figure like Manning's chances of ever winning or even having this case heard are like 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
29,581
Here
Manning has basically no chance in a defamation lawsuit. The guy he'd have to go after is Sly, who had no idea the information was going to be made public, so that's a failed defamation element right off the bat. Al Jazeera is just reporting what the guy said, so good luck winning against them with an actual malice standard. This would probably get tossed out quickly.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
15,379
Somewhere
HGH is also "fairly common in the treatment of infertility" apparently, if this Atlantic article is to be believed. http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/08/in-defense-of-human-growth-hormone/278709/

Given that the Mannings had twins in 2011, it wouldn't shock me if Manning's wife had IVF treatments involving the not-FDA-approved but reasonably common use of HGH.
I'm not an endocrinologist, but why would HGH be used for infertility treatments? As it stands, the benefits to athletic performance w/re to hGH are questionable. I would imagine that much of the benefit that people ascribe to hGH is probably due to the steroids that they are also illegally using.

Here's one study that supports off-label use, but it's old and didn't seem particularly impactful.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,745
where I was last at

k-factory

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2005
1,398
seattle, wa
I'm not sure why Manning gets total benefit of the doubt here with these "he sounded totally believable."
In the end that may be true and innocent until proven guilty etc. etc. but this guy isn't exactly a paragon of honesty and integrity. Remember the whole trainer episode at Tennessee? In a dick move he voided the settlement and buried the trainer in his book causing her to get fired.
The guy is an ass and knows how to manipulate the narrative and the media.

I don't really give a shit about whether he did or didn't but if hes full of shit and AJZ has the balls to back up their journalists (if indeed they did their job) i will hardly shed a tear for this asshole or for the NFL that will be twisting itself into knots reconciling this crisis with the one they manufactured in the post-season last year.
 
May 30, 2009
17,395
in my pants...
HGH is also "fairly common in the treatment of infertility" apparently, if this Atlantic article is to be believed. http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/08/in-defense-of-human-growth-hormone/278709/

Given that the Mannings had twins in 2011, it wouldn't shock me if Manning's wife had IVF treatments involving the not-FDA-approved but reasonably common use of HGH.
Sure, that could be the origin of it, although why she got the drugs the way she did is still odd.
But for it to really make sense then the timeline is off by a year- his twins were born in March 2011, nearly two months before he had neck surgery. Which means his wife was pregnant from June 2010 or so on.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
12,711
Michigan
ESPN's coverage of this story today has been really awful, and lacks a ton of information of that other news sites have.

For instance, in the article up on ESPN.com there is no mention of Taylor Teagarden at all:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14441114/documentary-links-peyton-manning-other-pro-athletes-use-peds
Wow. For some reason the whole tone of their coverage seems so completely different from when Brady was accused of maybe knowing that somebody maybe deflated footballs by 1 psi. ESPN must have learned its lesson. Snark.