Vrabel and Russini

[Justafan]

3 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

 

I completely believe you because your posts since I shared the article have shown exactly zero acknowledgment or understanding of what the article actually said and that's exactly what people who agree with articles tend to do. Again, I fully and completely believe you and don't hold out your own statements as evidence that this is a nonsense attempt to sidestep the fact that you complained posted dumb accusations about grievance politics in response to it.

 

Regardless, would I be correct to assume "the reason I posted it" is something other than the description and explanation I posted before and afterwards?

Jamal, buddy. Just stop.

 

You're triggered because you had a dumb take and EVERYONE called you out on it. Instead of just owning it and moving on, you tried to twist it into this virtuous defense of women thing. Then your politics started seeping in. The worst part is, it's completely hollow. Just look at the way you talk to people and about people. That's not virtue, that's judgment, smug arrogance, and contempt for your fellow man. 

 

You didn't care about waiting, or you just would have waited. You wanted to come in here and be the smarter-than-thou contrarian, and it backfired. You don't care about how women are cast, and you aren't mad that women get a bad rap in here, but it's a hell of a lot easier to argue that than to try and fight off the entire board calling you a dumb mother fucker over and over while pointing and laughing. 

[Jamalisms]

10 minutes ago, Justafan said:

Jamal, buddy. Just stop.

 

You're triggered because you had a dumb take and EVERYONE called you out on it. Instead of just owning it and moving on, you tried to twist it into this virtuous defense of women thing. Then your politics started seeping in. The worst part is, it's completely hollow. Just look at the way you talk to people and about people. That's not virtue, that's judgment, smug arrogance, and contempt for your fellow man. 

 

You didn't care about waiting, or you just would have waited. You wanted to come in here and be the smarter-than-thou contrarian, and it backfired. You don't care about how women are cast, and you aren't mad that women get a bad rap in here, but it's a hell of a lot easier to argue that than to try and fight off the entire board calling you a dumb mother fucker over and over while pointing and laughing. 

 

Something something, fronting weakly, not an answer. For obvious reasons. 

 

I shared an article and expressed thoughts, neither of which had anything to do with your response(s) because you're a brain dead loser who doesn't read anything yet refuses to simply admit it and is now stuck having to change the subject.

 

It's unfortunate but it's where you're at and I refuse to meet you there. Read and comprehend, talk about what was actually said or fuck off.

 

Table stakes for morons.

[TF_Titan]

10 hours ago, ctm said:

Mike Vrabel is also a whore.  He was getting more out of the relationship than just sex.

 

Another kid?

[TitansFan23]

2 minutes ago, TF_Titan said:

 

Another kid?

That’s not a win

[Alcibiades]

Idk...if Glazer WERE a gay man and were sleeping with a coach, I think that would probably be worse than inviting them over for a BBQ. I mean, sure, all (or a lot..most?) journalists suck up to players and coaches, for sure. And they do that to get scoops. And that's problematic when it leads to quid pro quo exchanges. But actually having sex with them seems a bit further.

 

But I'm still not fully convinced that's what happened here. I mean, maybe it STARTED that way (or maybe not). I think they were actually having a loving relationship of some sort. However, the Julio stuff sure makes it seem like part of that relationship included some favoritism that I'm not sure a coach that wasn't having an affair would have gotten. 

 

Russini, from her own comments elsewhere, including the "My mom wanted me to marry Jimmy Garrapollo!" comment, seems into athletes. So, it would not at all surprise me if she initially just wanted a fling with Vrabel, and then it became more. 

[Mythos27]

The puritanical attitudes in this country make it so hard for people to see reason when sex gets involved. If an insider kills a story because a source sucked his dick vs because a source had a player/client go to his kid's 6th birthday party and sign autographs the audience that the journalist is supposed to be beholden to still got cheated and journalistic integrity was violated just as badly. The fact that some of you see it as so vastly different goes to the point @Jamalisms is making. No one is saying they're the same but to act as if one is SO much worse than the other when the outcome of both actions is the same is wild. The story here isn't the infidelity; half of you mofos have either cheated or been cheated on. The story is the way that this illicit sexual relationship possibly affected the agenda of her reporting, which is why it becomes necessary to ask how compromised are her male counterparts given the cozy relationships they have with their sources. 

Edited May 9 by Mythos27

[TitansFan23]

1 minute ago, Mythos27 said:

The puritanical attitudes in this country make it so hard for people to see reason when sex gets involved. If an insider kills a story because a source sucked his dick vs because a source had a player/client go to his kid's 6th birthday party and sign autographs the audience that the journalist is supposed to be beholden to still got cheated and journalistic integrity was violated just as badly. The fact that some of you see it as do vastly different goes to the point @Jamalisms is making. No one is saying they're the same but to as act as one is SO much worse than the other when the outcome of both actions is the same is wild. The story here isn't the infidelity; half of you mofos have either cheated or been cheated on. The story is the way that this illicit sexual relationship possibly affected the agenda of her reporting, which is why it becomes necessary to ask how compromised are her male counterparts given the cozy relationships they have with their sources. 

 Breathe… And paragraphs.

[Mythos27]

9 minutes ago, Alcibiades said:

Idk...if Glazer WERE a gay man and were sleeping with a coach, I think that would probably be worse than inviting them over for a BBQ. I mean, sure, all (or a lot..most?) journalists suck up to players and coaches, for sure. And they do that to get scoops. And that's problematic when it leads to quid pro quo exchanges. But actually having sex with them seems a bit further.

 

But I'm still not fully convinced that's what happened here. I mean, maybe it STARTED that way (or maybe not). I think they were actually having a loving relationship of some sort. However, the Julio stuff sure makes it seem like part of that relationship included some favoritism that I'm not sure a coach that wasn't having an affair would have gotten. 

 

Russini, from her own comments elsewhere, including the "My mom wanted me to marry Jimmy Garrapollo!" comment, seems into athletes. So, it would not at all surprise me if she initially just wanted a fling with Vrabel, and then it became more. 

Right. The sex makes it worse. But many in this thread aren't engaging with WHY the sex makes it worse which is because of the lengths people will go to protect/help sexual partners. People are seeing a woman behaving sluttily and going no deeper. And this isn't even what happened here given this seems closer to a conflict of interest than the quid pro quo framework people want to apply. 

[Mythos27]

5 minutes ago, TitansFan23 said:

 Breathe… And paragraphs.

Thanks for the very substantive response. 

[Jamalisms]

8 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

The puritanical attitudes in this country make it so hard for people to see reason when sex gets involved. If an insider kills a story because a source sucked his dick vs because a source had a player/client go to his kid's 6th birthday party and sign autographs the audience that the journalist is supposed to be beholden to still got cheated and journalistic integrity was violated just as badly. The fact that some of you see it as do vastly different goes to the point @Jamalisms is making. No one is saying they're the same but to as act as one is SO much worse than the other when the outcome of both actions is the same is wild. The story here isn't the infidelity; half of you mofos have either cheated or been cheated on. The story is the way that this illicit sexual relationship possibly affected the agenda of her reporting, which is why it becomes necessary to ask how compromised are her male counterparts given the cozy relationships they have with their sources. 

 

As always, stop being so reasonable.

[Justafan]

8 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

Right. The sex makes it worse. But many in this thread aren't engaging with WHY the sex makes it worse which is because of the lengths people will go to protect/help sexual partners. People are seeing a woman behaving sluttily and going no deeper. And this isn't even what happened here given this seems closer to a conflict of interest than the quid pro quo framework people want to apply. 

It’s not really fair to attack people for not going deeper on a message board. It’s hard to convey deep thoughts and keep posts reasonable in length. 
 

Also, the difference IS big. Certainly larger than you are insinuating here and what the author of the article was insinuating as well. 
 

It’s like comparing one of your buddies going to a party without you versus sleeping with your sister. I mean, what the heck are we talking about here? 

[rns90]

7 minutes ago, Justafan said:

It’s not really fair to attack people for not going deeper on a message board. It’s hard to convey deep thoughts and keep posts reasonable in length. 
 

Also, the difference IS big. Certainly larger than you are insinuating here and what the author of the article was insinuating as well. 
 

It’s like comparing one of your buddies going to a party without you versus sleeping with your sister. I mean, what the heck are we talking about here? 

There’s a boundary crossed/broken when you sleep with a source vs guys hanging out together .

 

One , is the physical intimacy aspect that makes it really personal and impossible to be objective . The other event is rather extremely casual in comparison.

 

I really wish there were an easier way to explain this.

[SleepingTitan]

I don't know what, but this kerfuffle reminds me of the scene in Menace II Society where Cain says, "We supposed to fight over a bitch?" And proceeds to beat the absolute shit out of the guy only to be later murdered by the same crew for said stomping. 

 

Looking forward to the Netflix special with Jamal & Justa

[Jamalisms]

14 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

The puritanical attitudes in this country make it so hard for people to see reason when sex gets involved. If an insider kills a story because a source sucked his dick vs because a source had a player/client go to his kid's 6th birthday party and sign autographs the audience that the journalist is supposed to be beholden to still got cheated and journalistic integrity was violated just as badly. The fact that some of you see it as so vastly different goes to the point @Jamalisms is making. No one is saying they're the same but to act as if one is SO much worse than the other when the outcome of both actions is the same is wild. The story here isn't the infidelity; half of you mofos have either cheated or been cheated on. The story is the way that this illicit sexual relationship possibly affected the agenda of her reporting, which is why it becomes necessary to ask how compromised are her male counterparts given the cozy relationships they have with their sources. 

 

I'm going to separately add, because even if you believed it I doubt you would say it:

 

You've got a situation where someone said A is being punished appropriately and B is not being punished, which is bad. And that's being stated to people who have already argued that the conduct of B, when associated with A, deserves firing. (And yes, the conduct is an absence of journalistic integrity and independence and engaging in transactional reporting. Because that's exactly what they said repeatedly.)

 

Multiple responses immediately decried this as a defense of A and once again excused or completely ignored the conduct of B - again, conduct which they have already argued for pages and pages deserves firing. 

 

And if that doesn't expose what they're fixated on and the biases they're bringing to the table, nothing does.

[SleepingTitan]

1 minute ago, rns90 said:

There’s a boundary crossed/broken when you sleep with a source vs guys hanging out together .

 

One , is the physical intimacy aspect that makes it really personal and impossible to be objective . The other event is rather extremely casual in comparison.

 

I really wish there were an easier way to explain this.

No doubt she was gobbling wood for access, and she got splintered w/Vrabel love. I think he did too. 

 

If they don't each divorce and get married to each other, she's gonna need to be paid a handsome sum to go away. Otherwise, she's got a huge story to tell about sex for stories, sexual harassment, and how she went down the wrong path because of the sexism in the NFL. I would think Netflix might be interested in something like a tell-all. Publishers will be chomping. Vrabel better not fuck this up anymore than he already has.