Dark Side of the Moon remains the top choice IMO. Though "Manning Legacy: Taint" is a razor close second.
She jumped the route: pick 6Is there any speculation around what occurred in '94 that was the "Genesis for Peyton Manning's dislike for Dr. Naughright"?
This is pretty good.Peyton Manning: He Knows it's Naughtright.
That's the essential SoSH question, in a nutshellWho, uhhh, gives a shit about the thread title?
Okay, we're going to need those names. I am far more interested in who has known about this and not reported it than I ever was about the names in the Mitchell Report, and I REALLY wanted to see the names in the Mitchell Report.5. I have now learned of at least 6 journalists who've had the documents I received last week for years and pretty much refused to release them or reveal the full weight of what they revealed. The machine put in place to protect Peyton Manning is incredible. It's not just reverence though, it's fear. He and his family will attempt to ruin you if you cross him.
ESPN can't help itself.
Newton never once raised his voice and did not verbally attack the assembled press -- in a time when Bill Belichick and Gregg Popovich unprofessionally make daily sport out of belittling professional journalists and it's laughed off as curmudgeonly genius.
In what sense?Being talked about on ESPN's Mike & Mike this morning.
Can't believe I'm agreeing with SAS, but he's 100% right.Steven A Smith on Mike and Mike just now saying this needs to be talked about and looked into. Says he didn't know about any of this and if this was Ray Rice or Cam Newton, media would be all over it and it should be with Peyton.
Mike Greenburg wasn't there, but Golic agreed with him. Said he never had heard of this either, and the fact that it was not only the incident, but smearing the reputation of the trainer, made it like Lance Amstrong. Shouldn't be swept aside.How did Mike and Mike respond to SAS's position?
I actually liked the Daily Beast article a lot more than this one simply because it was better writing. King comes forward with new details (the fact it was a University cover-up, etc) but he injects himself into the article too much (like the line about the moon landing and BoB believing the world is flat). Don't think it was bad reporting just bad writingI am as dismissive of Shaun King as you can get, but I think this was good work. He shows the appropriate amount of restraint, sticks to what is in the court filing and allows the reader to generate their own outrage based on the facts. It is good journalism and, shockingly high quality work by King.
This is so spot on and a parallel I tried to make earlier. What's so interesting to me is that Manning is following the exact playbook for this HGH allegation as he used for the Nautright. Bully the accuser, use outside forces to investigate/attack the accuser, while St. Peyton takes pot shots at the accuser through the media.Except that it's not Shaun King making the allegations - the details of his court case are a matter of public record. I mean, I alluded to the case upthread and the details are something I've known about for years.
I actually told the story to someone at a Super Bowl party in response to the question "Why do you have something against Peyton Manning?" Like most people, they just waved it off, because it's apparently too difficult to reconcile Peyton's image with the reality of what a scumbag he is.
And to repeat, the damaging thing here is not the act itself, it's the intentional infliction of damage - many times over - on a woman who simply wanted to be able to do her job.
This is why early on when the HGH story broke, I knew that Peyton would do anything and everything to discredit the story. I expected the media to roll over, but it may very well be that we're at a tipping point and people will start to examing St. Peyton in a more critical light. Here's hoping.
This is brilliant. Definitely the best suggestion I have seen in this thread"Papa's Johns's Special: HGH, Teabags, and Moon Pies (Delivery Only)"
Having Men in Black doing your bidding explains the forehead. Manning is an alien.How long before a couple of "agents" dressed in long black coats show up at King's door?
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14778342/reaction-peyton-manning-allegations-cam-newton-press-conference-nflIn New England, still wounded and enraged by Deflategate, it concludes the NFL will go after the Patriots, that the league was willing to sacrifice Tom Brady. It has concluded the NFL will go after everyone and anyone but Peyton Manning, who has created a narrative of football royalty -- born a prince of a football family, embedded with NFL business partners and rumored as potential Tennessee Titans owner someday. It concludes that the NFL machine will not only avoid investigating him, but it also will trip over itself to protect him. And thus, Manning is insulated from sexual assault and PED allegations and anything else that would diminish his currency, and by extension, theirs.
I get that, but it fascinates me that it was a non-issue for the last 20 years as this guy was the face of the league and like 50 different corporate ad campaigns when anyone with access to google could figure out something pretty disgusting happened here. I guess it shouldn't, the Cosby allegations stayed under the radar for decades too, but it just seems crazy that now we get talking heads wagging their fingers and talking disapprovingly. Its been public information for almost two decades!I believe the recent lawsuit by the 6 women also helped bring this to the front.
Bryant also adds:Front page of ESPN, Howard Bryant (I know, I know) compare Manning's treatment to Cam's...
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14778342/reaction-peyton-manning-allegations-cam-newton-press-conference-nfl
"No-thing beats that new taint smell."How long before Nationwide and others suspend relationships with PM? Given the nature of these allegations, I can see it happening sooner rather than later.
It depends on how the morals clause in his contract was written. Both the sexual assault allegations and his alleged involvement in a cover-up have been a matter of public record for more than a decade. If I were the judge or arbitrator, I would be reluctant to allow a company to avoid its contractual obligations based on conduct that occurred prior to the signing of the contract, and which the company had constructive notice* of at the time it signed, unless the contract unambiguously gives the company the right to terminate in such circumstances (which I suspect it does not).How long before Nationwide and others suspend relationships with PM? Given the nature of these allegations, I can see it happening sooner rather than later.
I wish I was Eli nowHaven't been this fucked in years [emoji445][emoji445]