Love Gone as Well

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:

    Once again, BB thinks that rules don't apply to him, NFL or ADA.  Quote from Queenie "If BB does it, it isn't illegal" 

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/05/16/patriots-decision-to-cut-love-looks-like-disability-discrimination/

    Business decisions aside, this is just another example of the classlessness of the patsies and BB.




    Type II diabetes is not a disability troll.  More importantly the CBA doesn't recgonize disability laws precisely because it would give injured veterans who get released grounds to sue their team.  Learn the game.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Can't say I feel great about the DT position right now.  Sure, Kelly very likely will be better than either Love or Deaderick and Armstead has some potential.  But this was a position most of us felt needed more depth and quality and wanted to see addressed in the draft.  While Love and Deaderick may not have been great quality for starters, they provided decent depth.  With those two gone, that position is a lot more iffy feeling than it was  a week ago. Wilfork took an awful lot of snaps last year.  Will the same happen again?  Or will BB bring more tackles in or, alternatively, alter the scheme to use fewer big DTs and use some of those lighter linemen in the middle?

     




    Yes, I hate Vince at 3-4 NT and Tommy Kelly. Jusy terrible with Armstead. BB is releasing system players because he is drunk. LOL!

     

    Dude, really. Seek help. Our Run D will be superb with or without Deaderick and Love and Brady has to be better.

    We're waiting on Brady.  Trust me.  If he lays more eggs, we are not winning anything.



    It's more the wear and tear on Wilfork that concerns me.  As far as going to 3-4, it's getting less likely as more big linemen disappear unless BB is going to run a new kind of 3-4 rather than the old two-gap he liked in the past.  If we're 4-3, we need two tackles and back ups for both.  We now seem pretty thin there.  Of course, there's plenty of time to make moves and some of the rookies may work out well, but there are a lot of question marks. 

    BB's blown up positions in the offseason before  . . . and he's had mixed results rebuilding them in time for the season. 

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:



    Are you also claiming that becasue of the CBA that the NFL is EXEMPT from all federal laws?  



    Pointing out that Love could technically try and sue the Patriots is meaningless.  Every injured NFL player that gets cut could try and sue their team under the ADA.  The fact that the NFLPA allowed the CBA to be passed without any provisions about the ADA means they recognize the stupidity of such a lawsuit.  Once again you are a moron.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:


    Are you claiming that diabetes and other like diseases do not fall under the juristiction of the ADA?



    From the equal opportunites employment commission website (http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/diabetes.html)

    "Not everyone who has diabetes has a disability as defined by the ADA."

    "Diabetes is a disability when it substantially limits one or more of a person's major life activities. Major life activities are basic activities that an average person can perform with little or no difficulty, such as eating or caring for oneself. Diabetes also is a disability when it causes side effects or complications that substantially limit a major life activity."

    The fact that Love plans to still play in the NFL is evidence enough that it is not a disability under the ADA.  LMAO @ U.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:


    Are you now suggesting that diabetes would be looked at in the same light as a torn ACL? 



    No troll.  You aren't very bright.  Lots of players suffer injuries they never fully heal from or they develop degenerative conditions in their joints.  They get cut for this all the time.  LMAO @ U.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:

    And yet no answer.  Are you suggesting that the NFL is EXEMPT from federal laws?



    And yet I just demonstrated the ADA wouldn't consider Love's diabetes to be a disability.  Get owned much?

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:

    Seems like you don't know what the word demonstrated actually means.  You should look those big words up before using them.



    And you should read the EEOC's classifciation of diabetes.  LMAO @ U.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    First of all Deaderick played over Love because Love was injured.  He had a bad knee all year.  I am not saying that Love was some great player, but your argument about Wilfork and muscle mass is a non-sequitur.  If Love's weight is what is causing his condition then it is ridiculous for him to stay at that weight.  Why would you want to keep a guy whose playing weight is causing health problems?  Wilfork might be as strong as an ox, but he is most certainly not all muscle.  None of these guys are.  I'm not saying the Patriots are in the wrong for cutting him.  I'm also not saying that he was a roster lock, but I can't believe that his diagnosis had no impact on the decision to let him go this early in the process.



    A quote from Love's agent;

    "Prior to the diagnosis, Kyle recently experienced unexplained weight loss, but since being diagnosed and having altered his diet, Kyle has regained most of the weight he lost, is in good health and was not limited in any way during offseason workouts in which he was engaged up until being told he would be released."

    This was a football move, plenty of NFL players with diabetes continue to play football.  He wasn't drafted, wasn't talented, has a contract coming up, he wasn't very good and frankly another UDFA might actually be an improvement over him for less money.

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:

    I'm missing the link between your claim that the NFL is EXEMPT from federal laws and the EEOCs classification.  Go ahead and explain that one.



    Releasing Love was not in violation of the ADA because the EEOC would not classify Love's diabetes as a disability.  LMAO @ U.

    I never said the NFL was exempt from federal laws.  I said the NFLPA signed an agreement which specifically omits disability as a ground on which discrimination is prohibited meaning they think the issue is moot.  This whole thing is a non-story.

     

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:

    So, now you're saying that employees are not able to sue employers for being terminated for having diabetes because "EEOC would not classify diabetes as a disability"?



    http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/diabetes.html

    "Not everyone who has diabetes has a disability as defined by the ADA."

    "Diabetes is a disability when it substantially limits one or more of a person's major life activities. Major life activities are basic activities that an average person can perform with little or no difficulty, such as eating or caring for oneself. Diabetes also is a disability when it causes side effects or complications that substantially limit a major life activity."

    You think a guy who still plans on playing in the NFL is having difficulty eating or caring for himself?  PhatRex = brain dead  LMAO @ U.

     

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from crazyworldoftroybrown. Show crazyworldoftroybrown's posts

    Re: Love Gone as Well

    Disability-Discimination, go ahead, go to Court with that one. Love cant be that stupid.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share