Started By
Message
re: Sheridan on PF at 5:30 to update Cam Story
Posted on 7/28/11 at 10:39 pm to CFBFAN1121
Posted on 7/28/11 at 10:39 pm to CFBFAN1121
quote:
it's amazing what some people blindly believe
I know, right? I've been thinking this the whole time this T-Town Menswear story has been making the rounds on Clay Travis' blog, BAMBI and NtY.
This post was edited on 7/28/11 at 10:40 pm
1
Posted on 7/28/11 at 10:42 pm to TTsTowel
quote:
See how easy it is to make up a blatent lie?
No, but I see how hard it is to spell "blatant".
Posted on 7/28/11 at 10:44 pm to cyde
quote:
I know, right? I've been thinking this the whole time this T-Town Menswear story has been making the rounds on Clay Travis' blog, BAMBI and NtY.
Big difference IMO. Blindly believing something is being told something and believing it without anything to back it up
Looking at those pics, it's not unreasonable to believe some of those players were getting improper benefits
Just like it's not unreasonable to think Cam knew about his father's actions.
JMO
Posted on 7/28/11 at 10:45 pm to RollDatRoll
quote:
I can't wait for the hammer to fall.
Posted on 7/28/11 at 10:55 pm to CFBFAN1121
quote:
Big difference IMO. Blindly believing something is being told something and believing it without anything to back it up
Brotherman, let's drop all pretenses for a few seconds.
It's like I said in a thread earlier this afternoon. Clay Travis, like Sports by Brooks (and their prototype - the Drudge Report) don't have to be right. They don't need to vet the things the print or fact check them or anything (obviously, since Clay ran with several things not knowing exactly what they even were).
They aren't big name news sources; they have no credibility to protect. They won't look like Dan Rather if they get it wrong. They'll move on to the next story. They don't care that they just tarnished someone's reputation
All they care about is breaking the news first and generating page hits and ad revenue, which will happen whether they come out looking like Woodward and Bernstein or like a bunch of arse clowns.
They'll do it at Alabama's expense just as readily as they would Auburn's. It's kind of sickening, but that's what happens when the way we, as a people, change the way we receive our news to the degree that we have, what with the Internet and all.
That's the game now, for better or for worse. (hint, it's the second one.)
Posted on 7/28/11 at 10:58 pm to cyde
Well written Cyde and I agree. 
Posted on 7/28/11 at 11:06 pm to cyde
Serious talk for a second. I've listened to his interview 3 times now and I'm still a bit confused so correct me if I'm wrong anywhere.
He has been told by his source that a source inside the NCAA has said that a witness has come forward claiming to know that Cecil Newton recieved a large sum of money from someone connected to Auburn. He did not know if the witness was being truthful but that is what was told to him by his source.
He has been told by his source that a source inside the NCAA has said that a witness has come forward claiming to know that Cecil Newton recieved a large sum of money from someone connected to Auburn. He did not know if the witness was being truthful but that is what was told to him by his source.
Posted on 7/28/11 at 11:08 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
Well written Cyde and I agree
As far as Sheridan is concerned, let us be pragmatic.
I don't really know much about him because I neither gamble or follow sports odds.
What I do know about handicappers is that they make their living on their reputations and the quality and accuracy of their info. They, unlike a sports blogger, have a lot to lose by going public with bad information. If they sacrifice the trust of their clients by coming out with bogus info just to smear a team, they're cutting their noses off to spite their faces.
What we have to remember is that there are a lot of handicappers and odds-makers out there. How do you compete? You gain a competitive advantage. You find someone who you can trust to give you inside info on injuries, drug habits, marriage breakups, etc. Anything which could affect the game of a star player and, possibly, change the outcome of a game. Someone in the locker room, someone in the front office. Someone somewhere.
The book Wiseguy, on which the movie Goodfellas is based gives a very interesting insight into how handicappers think. They live for the angle, and the good ones are consummate professionals (again, for better or for worse; hit men are often considered 'professionals' as well.)
Does this mean that Sheridan has an inside source at the NCAA? It's entirely possible. Pragmatically speaking, it would be his business to. He seems to be staking his reputation and, by extension, his ability to make money, on the accuracy of what he's saying.
Do I believe it personally? I'm going to take a page from you guys' book over there on the plains. As it stands, I don't know what to believe, so I'm just going to wait and see what happens like the rest of us pubs.
This post was edited on 7/28/11 at 11:11 pm
Posted on 7/28/11 at 11:10 pm to marshallcotiger
quote:
He has been told by his source that a source inside the NCAA has said that a witness has come forward claiming to know that Cecil Newton recieved a large sum of money from someone connected to Auburn. He did not know if the witness was being truthful but that is what was told to him by his source.
I've listened to him as I've been able to while working. He's definitely not the world's most articulate guy, but then again, locution isn't his business. Oddsmaking is.
My impression is that he's trying like hell to cover his own arse by qualifying, re-qualifying and re-re-qualifying everything he says so that it can't be taken out of context and used against him. Viewed from that perspective, his reputation is obviously extremely important to him.
Again, I don't know what the frick to believe anymore.
THESE PEOPLE ARE PLAYING GAMES WITH MY EMOTIONS!
Posted on 7/28/11 at 11:30 pm to cyde
No offense to anyone who posted in here, but this thread blows.. I've never seen so many people listen to the same interview and not have a fricking clue what the guy was talking about. That's not a knock on you guys, it's an indictment of Danny Sheridan and his never consistent stories.
Why the hell is he suddenly the bearer of all Cam Newton news? When he opens his mouth about this subject, he sounds about as credible as the Bleacher Report.
Why the hell is he suddenly the bearer of all Cam Newton news? When he opens his mouth about this subject, he sounds about as credible as the Bleacher Report.
Posted on 7/28/11 at 11:42 pm to The ChizMan Cometh
quote:
Why the hell is he suddenly the bearer of all Cam Newton news? When he opens his mouth about this subject, he sounds about as credible as the Bleacher Report.
Oh, he's not credible. In fact, the word I've heard is that this whole thing is Sheridan's attempt to drag Auburn's perception in the court of public opinion through the mud.
I shouldn't be telling you all of this because it's honestly protected Bammer Nation info and I could get my arse whipped or something if word gets out that I spilled the beans.
See, what happened is that Sheridan had an uncle who was an inveterate Auburn fan. During several incidents while being potty trained, Sheridan was touched by said uncle in a few places which were... well, shall we say not quite PG-13.
Sheridan learned that the only way to stave his glad-handed uncle off was to have his hair cut like that. As a result of all of these things, Sheridan has an abiding hatred for all things Auburn, has a tendency to shite the bed literally, as well as in his predictions, and won't stop until he sees the entire Auburn Family brought to its knees.
That, or until he goes through some pretty intense therapy sessions.
This post was edited on 7/28/11 at 11:48 pm
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:10 am to The ChizMan Cometh
quote:
Why the hell is he suddenly the bearer of all Cam Newton news? When he opens his mouth about this subject, he sounds about as credible as the Bleacher Report.
FWIW, I disagree. He sounds pretty credible and truthful to me. Is he? I dunno. But I do know that he at least SOUNDS sincere to me.
As an outsider simply hearing his words, I believe he indeed has a connected source and that his information - while incomplete due to the nature of the ongoing investigation - is accurate.
He actually sounds kind of pissed that people are doubting him and his source.
ETA: The only thing I find strange is the comment that he could have a name within 2-3 weeks. Why can't he call his source tomorrow and get a name? The timing of that definitely intrigues me given the rampart rumors of the August bombshell story to be released by Yahoo. Could the timing be connected??
This post was edited on 7/29/11 at 12:24 am
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:12 am to cyde
I've listened again and I now believe Danny Sheridan to be telling the truth. I apologize to Danny for ever doubting him and would encourage others to do likewise. May God have mercy on my soul.
ETA The witness
ETA The witness
This post was edited on 7/29/11 at 12:15 am
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:17 am to marshallcotiger
quote:
I've listened again and I now believe Danny Sheridan to be telling the truth. I apologize to Danny for ever doubting him and would encourage others to do likewise. May God have mercy on my soul.
He tells the Bammer truth.
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:25 am to cyde
$1 to NBama
It made it move for these 2.
It made it move for these 2.
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:30 am to marshallcotiger
Im still leaning this way. IF Sheridan isnt full of shite and IF all of this is true, IMO if the NCAA knows the Bagman, has a witness, knows that X amount went to Cecil's church and knows that X went to Cecil, they should know now without a confession. You dont get that far into an investigation without knowing what happened. One of my friends threw up the option that if it was a booster of the program, they may be giving him the chance to talk before they go with everything because if it's a booster that is not cooperating, is that not lack of institutional control? I really dont know.
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:34 am to chilld28
quote:
they may be giving him the chance to talk before they go with everything
Very well could be the case. Or give him a chance to squirm, do something stupid, and/or back himself into a corner.
This post was edited on 7/29/11 at 12:36 am
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:41 am to JPLSU1981
Maybe he's got to firm something up, and he's trying not to end up like Joe Schad...
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:44 am to Bellabama
That is why I dont what to believe. As far as I know, he is on the up and up. I just dont know why the NCAA would say "Well, we have everything figured out but we need the witness to talk. If not, the case is over". That is just laying out for them and saying we got you but here is how you get out of it
Posted on 7/29/11 at 12:50 am to chilld28
I can't remember how the USC stuff came out, and how they ultimately didn't need the court testimony from Reggie Bush's trial. I have been meaning to go back and see how they connected the dots.
Page 10 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News