Explosive Brian Flores lawsuit against NFL

#77
#77
n_huffhines said:
OK. Call it out when you see me calling a victim of discrimination a whiner.
Click to expand...
It would depend on your own definition of “victim”. You have a limited view in my experience.
 
#82
#82
LOL. He's spiking the football for beating the tampering allegations when they got punished for tampering? And just because they couldn't prove tanking doesn't mean it's disproved. I can't see that Flores has been discredited in any way.

 
#84
#84
Seems like a light penalty for tampering. Wonder if it would have been worse if they actually landed Payton and Brady.
 
#90
#90
YankeeVol said:
Except they didn't substantiate anything Flores said. It's all because of tampering.
Click to expand...

You're 100% wrong about this. He made wildass claims about tampering that they substantiated with punishment.

They also validated the quote about $100k per game tanking, they just didn't think it was meant to be taken seriously. They also found other evidence of tanking that substantiates what Flores claimed, they just didn't think it was strong enough to punish, particularly because Flores refused to tank.
 
Last edited:
#91
#91
n_huffhines said:
Except he did make a wildass claim about tampering.

They also validated the quote about $100k per game tanking, they just didn't think it was meant to be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
So…they didn’t SUBSTANTIATE it.
 
#92
#92
Ross repeatedly said that the Dolphins’ 2020 draft position should take precedence over its 2019 win-loss record, and that yes, Ross may have offered Flores $100,000 per loss as Flores claimed. Yet the NFL said it wasn’t intended to be a serious offer. A mere joke. A ha-ha. A little funny from Ross because who doesn’t joke about giving people money to fail?

And yet what did the statement attributed to Ross and distributed by the Dolphins after this announcement say? Did it say “I’m sorry for embarrassing the team’s fans”? Did it say, “In pursuit of winning, I clearly went too far”?

“The independent investigation cleared our organization on any issues related to tanking and all of Brian Flores’ other allegations,” it began. “As I have said all along, these allegations were false, malicious and defamatory.”

"Malicious," you say?

Like firing the winningest coach your franchise has had under your ownership, and then making sure to tell the media he was “very difficult to work with” as you kicked him out the door? And then on Tuesday roping that same man into your statement when you were punished for your many misdeeds?

That sounds "malicious."

Flores’ integrity probably kept Ross from getting in even more trouble.

In Goodell’s words, “Coach Flores is to be commended for not allowing any comments about the relative importance of draft position to affect his commitment to win throughout the season.”

Brian Flores saved Ross's tail.

Dolphins owner Stephen Ross should be thanking Brian Flores, not further lambasting him
 
Last edited:
#94
#94
n_huffhines said:
You will literally argue anything, if it suits you.

Why did Goodell commend Flores for ignoring his bosses and his refusal to tank?
Click to expand...
Birds of a feather.

Flores himself:
Following the NFL’s imposition of discipline, the former head coach and his attorneys released statements. In his, the former head coach stated he was “thankful” that the NFL’s investigator found that his factual allegations were true, but Flores also noted his “disappointment” to see that the behavior he alleged from Ross was minimized:
Click to expand...

Methinks SocialActivistHuff has way too much personal stock invested in this outcome. 😎
 
#95
#95
butchna said:
Birds of a feather.

Flores himself:

Methinks SocialActivistHuff has way too much personal stock invested in this outcome. 😎
Click to expand...

You're moving the goalposts. The question was whether or not anything Flores claimed was substantiated.

Tampering was substantiated by the investigation and with punishment.

The FO's attempts at leading Flores to tank were substantiated by the investigation, but not punished because the attempts were not strong enough and/or the team didn't actually tank because Flores refused.

A specific quote about $100k per game was substantiated, but interpreted differently.

Now you're taking a Flores quote about the league minimizing what happened and trying to argue that proves it didn't happen at all?....an article quote that also says "his factual allegations were found true." Do you even know what we're arguing about? Because you just supported my case.
 
#96
#96
If I had to guess, the conversation went like this:

FO: And don't worry about losing in season 1 too much. We just want you to build a foundation. That's how we'll measure success.

Flores: OK.

FO: In fact, we don't mind losing at all. The better the draft pick, the better off we are.

Flores: OK, but I'll do my best to prepare the team.

FO: Hell, we'll pay you $100k/game to lose.

Everybody laughs, but Flores is left wondering if they were serious. After more conversations about tanking and then falling on the hotseat for winning too much, I think it's easy to see why that Flores would think this conversation was serious, in hindsight.
 
#97
#97
n_huffhines said:
You're moving the goalposts. The question was whether or not anything Flores claimed was substantiated.

Tampering was substantiated by the investigation and with punishment.

The FO's attempts at leading Flores to tank were substantiated by the investigation, but not punished because the attempts were not strong enough and/or the team didn't actually tank because Flores refused.

A specific quote about $100k per game was substantiated, but interpreted differently.

Now you're taking a Flores quote about the league minimizing what happened and trying to argue that proves it didn't happen at all?....an article quote that also says "his factual allegations were found true." Do you even know what we're arguing about? Because you just supported my case.
Click to expand...
They didn’t substantiate it…they MINIMIZED it. By your guy’s own words.
 
#98
#98
butchna said:
They didn’t substantiate it…they MINIMIZED it. By your guy’s own words.
Click to expand...

The words are not mutually exclusive, especially in this context. You can't minimize something that doesn't exist, therefore minimization proves its existence. They found that it existed, and then they minimized it. His claims were found to have truth....especially the one that they didn't minimize. The one that they harshly punished. I can't believe you are still going. This is embarrassing.
 
#99
#99
n_huffhines said:
The words are not mutually exclusive, especially in this context. I can't believe you are still going. This is embarrassing.
Click to expand...
You can quit with the whole sanctimonious spiel…and save yourself. But do you. 😏
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top