JJ on Primetime

[horribilisfan8184]

p.r. may have a good grasp of the law, but he doesn't use it to explain what's going on with legal issues pertaining to the team. he just uses it to try to persuade everyone into believing there isn't a problem and its someone else's fault. i don't find him informative at all. he claims to be an insider, but he rarely has any inside info that ever gets verified or can be.

I have been correct in my assessments of every single UM legal matter I have spent time posting on (about 10 over the years). Most of those assessments included inside information of some type, at least eventually, although the information was not necessarily first hand. My comment on Donaldson was not a legal comment; it was my instinct based on knowing him--so please spare us any comment on that. I'll give you some examples. I started a thread, within weeks of him being charged, saying there was "no way JJ would be convicted". My prediction was correct. I said, within days of the publicity on Poole, that his matter would likely end with a plea deal with the charges dissolving after some period of time, and he would be able to play for UM again. My prediction was correct. I said, almost immediately, that Quinn's second dui charge was bogus and would go away. It was dropped within 10 days. Multiple posters have posted at various times that my claims on being right on all of these legal matters have been correct. Once again, gg doesn't know what he's talking about. Bellevue high isn't a UM pipeline. Now that's pretty funny.

Assuming your handle is based on some truth, I sure hope none of that "inside information" was gained as a result of your attorney-client relationships rendering disclosure of info potentially problematic, counselor. I'm sure you were careful not to disclose confidential info but being a braggart about your inside contacts as giving cred to your insights is terribly unbecoming to one in your profession.

 

[signedbewildered]

This thread is about what??? Your friend , yogi

Many of us are doing what we can to derail it. Let a sleeping dog lie. Not lie like not tell the truth, because dogs should always tell the truth but lie like leave it alone. No reason to bring skeletons out of the closet....Crap. What is it with me and idioms tonight?

Well there is your problem. Stick to idiots - not idioms.

sar·casm /ˈsärˌkazəm/
noun: sarcasm; plural noun: sarcasms
1. the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.
"his voice, hardened by sarcasm, could not hide his resentment"

synonyms: derision, mockery, ridicule, scorn, sneering, scoffing;

 

[PlayerRep]

p.r. may have a good grasp of the law, but he doesn't use it to explain what's going on with legal issues pertaining to the team. he just uses it to try to persuade everyone into believing there isn't a problem and its someone else's fault. i don't find him informative at all. he claims to be an insider, but he rarely has any inside info that ever gets verified or can be.

I have been correct in my assessments of every single UM legal matter I have spent time posting on (about 10 over the years). Most of those assessments included inside information of some type, at least eventually, although the information was not necessarily first hand. My comment on Donaldson was not a legal comment; it was my instinct based on knowing him--so please spare us any comment on that. I'll give you some examples. I started a thread, within weeks of him being charged, saying there was "no way JJ would be convicted". My prediction was correct. I said, within days of the publicity on Poole, that his matter would likely end with a plea deal with the charges dissolving after some period of time, and he would be able to play for UM again. My prediction was correct. I said, almost immediately, that Quinn's second dui charge was bogus and would go away. It was dropped within 10 days. Multiple posters have posted at various times that my claims on being right on all of these legal matters have been correct. Once again, gg doesn't know what he's talking about. Bellevue high isn't a UM pipeline. Now that's pretty funny.

Assuming your handle is based on some truth, I sure hope none of that "inside information" was gained as a result of your attorney-client relationships rendering disclosure of info potentially problematic, counselor. I'm sure you were careful not to disclose confidential info but being a braggart about your inside contacts as giving cred to your insights is terribly unbecoming to one in your profession.

I hope you are not as dumb and ill-informed as the post you just made. Oh, and I have never represented a UM athletic in a criminal matter. Also, feel free to explain your braggart comment. Hearing inside information around town is common and many people do. Many people hear it from one place or another. It's not unbecoming to the profession at all to make comments based on inside information. Doing that actually has nothing to do with the profession. It comes from living in town, knowing enough people, and having their respect. You obviously don't understand the difference between making a post based on inside information, and divulging inside information. You are both a dummie and an idiot.

 

[horribilisfan8184]

p.r. may have a good grasp of the law, but he doesn't use it to explain what's going on with legal issues pertaining to the team. he just uses it to try to persuade everyone into believing there isn't a problem and its someone else's fault. i don't find him informative at all. he claims to be an insider, but he rarely has any inside info that ever gets verified or can be.

I have been correct in my assessments of every single UM legal matter I have spent time posting on (about 10 over the years). Most of those assessments included inside information of some type, at least eventually, although the information was not necessarily first hand. My comment on Donaldson was not a legal comment; it was my instinct based on knowing him--so please spare us any comment on that. I'll give you some examples. I started a thread, within weeks of him being charged, saying there was "no way JJ would be convicted". My prediction was correct. I said, within days of the publicity on Poole, that his matter would likely end with a plea deal with the charges dissolving after some period of time, and he would be able to play for UM again. My prediction was correct. I said, almost immediately, that Quinn's second dui charge was bogus and would go away. It was dropped within 10 days. Multiple posters have posted at various times that my claims on being right on all of these legal matters have been correct. Once again, gg doesn't know what he's talking about. Bellevue high isn't a UM pipeline. Now that's pretty funny.

Assuming your handle is based on some truth, I sure hope none of that "inside information" was gained as a result of your attorney-client relationships rendering disclosure of info potentially problematic, counselor. I'm sure you were careful not to disclose confidential info but being a braggart about your inside contacts as giving cred to your insights is terribly unbecoming to one in your profession.

I hope you are not as dumb and ill-informed as the post you just made. Oh, and I have never represented a UM athletic in a criminal matter. Also, feel free to explain your braggart comment. Hearing inside information around town is common and many people do. Many people hear it from one place or another. It's not unbecoming to the profession at all to make comments based on inside information. Doing that actually has nothing to do with the profession. It comes from living in town, knowing enough people, and having their respect. You obviously don't understand the difference between making a post based on inside information, and divulging inside information. You are both a dummie and an idiot.

Wow! Hit a nerve! :shock: More truth to my post than I suspected.
You forgot to call me a poopiehead too.

 

[NLGrizFan]

So obviously nobody knows if the program is gonna get aired?

 

[JBS]

This thread is about what??? Your friend , yogi

Who's the best eGriz lawyer and verdicts are not real because maybe someone on here should have testified if they knew something.

CliffsNotes version.

PR is a dumbass.

CliffsNotes version.

 

[cclarkblues]

This thread is about what??? Your friend , yogi

Who's the best eGriz lawyer and verdicts are not real because maybe someone on here should have testified if they knew something.

CliffsNotes version.

PR is a dumbass.

CliffsNotes version.

Hey, leave me out of this...

 

[NLGrizFan]

rotesst: oke: :shit: :dead: :grenade: :fuel: :flash: :laugh: uke: :dead: :wtf: :argue: :whocares: :butt: rotesst:

 

[getgrizzy]

p.r. may have a good grasp of the law, but he doesn't use it to explain what's going on with legal issues pertaining to the team. he just uses it to try to persuade everyone into believing there isn't a problem and its someone else's fault. i don't find him informative at all. he claims to be an insider, but he rarely has any inside info that ever gets verified or can be.

I have been correct in my assessments of every single UM legal matter I have spent time posting on (about 10 over the years). Most of those assessments included inside information of some type, at least eventually, although the information was not necessarily first hand. My comment on Donaldson was not a legal comment; it was my instinct based on knowing him--so please spare us any comment on that. I'll give you some examples. I started a thread, within weeks of him being charged, saying there was "no way JJ would be convicted". My prediction was correct. I said, within days of the publicity on Poole, that his matter would likely end with a plea deal with the charges dissolving after some period of time, and he would be able to play for UM again. My prediction was correct. I said, almost immediately, that Quinn's second dui charge was bogus and would go away. It was dropped within 10 days. Multiple posters have posted at various times that my claims on being right on all of these legal matters have been correct. Once again, gg doesn't know what he's talking about. Bellevue high isn't a UM pipeline. Now that's pretty funny.

hilarious that you picked those three things as examples of your inside info. everyone thought j.j. would be found not guilty. everyone knew poole would be playing here again. a lot of people thought quinn's dui would get dropped. big deal. that isn't inside information. multiple posters agree with you because out of the hundreds of people posting here you're bound to have some that think like you do.

if you want to provide inside info, then post it here before it hits the newspaper or anyone else posts it. you probably do know when a player has gotten in trouble, but you never post it because you hope it doesn't find its way to the media or the grapevine. once it does, you try to minimize it, but your guesses are no more informative than what anyone could surmise.

 

[PlayerRep]

p.r. may have a good grasp of the law, but he doesn't use it to explain what's going on with legal issues pertaining to the team. he just uses it to try to persuade everyone into believing there isn't a problem and its someone else's fault. i don't find him informative at all. he claims to be an insider, but he rarely has any inside info that ever gets verified or can be.

I have been correct in my assessments of every single UM legal matter I have spent time posting on (about 10 over the years). Most of those assessments included inside information of some type, at least eventually, although the information was not necessarily first hand. My comment on Donaldson was not a legal comment; it was my instinct based on knowing him--so please spare us any comment on that. I'll give you some examples. I started a thread, within weeks of him being charged, saying there was "no way JJ would be convicted". My prediction was correct. I said, within days of the publicity on Poole, that his matter would likely end with a plea deal with the charges dissolving after some period of time, and he would be able to play for UM again. My prediction was correct. I said, almost immediately, that Quinn's second dui charge was bogus and would go away. It was dropped within 10 days. Multiple posters have posted at various times that my claims on being right on all of these legal matters have been correct. Once again, gg doesn't know what he's talking about. Bellevue high isn't a UM pipeline. Now that's pretty funny.

hilarious that you picked those three things as examples of your inside info. everyone thought j.j. would be found not guilty. everyone knew poole would be playing here again. a lot of people thought quinn's dui would get dropped. big deal. that isn't inside information. multiple posters agree with you because out of the hundreds of people posting here you're bound to have some that think like you do.

if you want to provide inside info, then post it here before it hits the newspaper or anyone else posts it. you probably do know when a player has gotten in trouble, but you never post it because you hope it doesn't find its way to the media or the grapevine. once it does, you try to minimize it, but your guesses are no more informative than what anyone could surmise.

I didn't say those things had anything to do with inside information. It's not true that lots of people were saying, early on, that these matters would turn out the way they did. In any event, I was among the first saying that. I also got Wilson's two matters correct, the taser guys correct, Montana's dui, Tru's dui correct, the frosh fight was overcharged, and the list could go on. Correct or largely correct on every single legal assessment that I made. Said little or nothing on others.

 

[NLGrizFan]

:fuel: :finger: :woo: :shit: :rule: ics: :rip: :argue: unch: :liar: :hijack: :new: :troll: rotesst: :fuel: :fuel: :fuel: :flame: :birth: :agree: :rant: ics: rotesst: :ghetto: :twocents: :wtf: :shock: hat: :laugh: :dance: ray: :lol: arty: :egriz: :loser: :jack: :flash: :bad: :beer: :bs: oke: rotesst: rotesst: rotesst: rotesst: :tounge: uke: :hater: :werd: :shocker: :birth:

 

[getgrizzy]

p.r. may have a good grasp of the law, but he doesn't use it to explain what's going on with legal issues pertaining to the team. he just uses it to try to persuade everyone into believing there isn't a problem and its someone else's fault. i don't find him informative at all. he claims to be an insider, but he rarely has any inside info that ever gets verified or can be.

I have been correct in my assessments of every single UM legal matter I have spent time posting on (about 10 over the years). Most of those assessments included inside information of some type, at least eventually, although the information was not necessarily first hand. My comment on Donaldson was not a legal comment; it was my instinct based on knowing him--so please spare us any comment on that. I'll give you some examples. I started a thread, within weeks of him being charged, saying there was "no way JJ would be convicted". My prediction was correct. I said, within days of the publicity on Poole, that his matter would likely end with a plea deal with the charges dissolving after some period of time, and he would be able to play for UM again. My prediction was correct. I said, almost immediately, that Quinn's second dui charge was bogus and would go away. It was dropped within 10 days. Multiple posters have posted at various times that my claims on being right on all of these legal matters have been correct. Once again, gg doesn't know what he's talking about. Bellevue high isn't a UM pipeline. Now that's pretty funny.

hilarious that you picked those three things as examples of your inside info. everyone thought j.j. would be found not guilty. everyone knew poole would be playing here again. a lot of people thought quinn's dui would get dropped. big deal. that isn't inside information. multiple posters agree with you because out of the hundreds of people posting here you're bound to have some that think like you do.

if you want to provide inside info, then post it here before it hits the newspaper or anyone else posts it. you probably do know when a player has gotten in trouble, but you never post it because you hope it doesn't find its way to the media or the grapevine. once it does, you try to minimize it, but your guesses are no more informative than what anyone could surmise.

I didn't say those things had anything to do with inside information. It's not true that lots of people were saying, early on, that these matters would turn out the way they did. In any event, I was among the first saying that. I also got Wilson's two matters correct, the taser guys correct, Montana's dui, Tru's dui correct, the frosh fight was overcharged, and the list could go on. Correct or largely correct on every single legal assessment that I made. Said little or nothing on others.

yes, but you just tried to play it off as such otherwise you would've prefaced your response. just about everyone following those cases guessed the same things. you're no legal expert based on any of that. is this seriously the best you got? please start bringing info to the board. or quit acting like you have any.

 

[NLGrizFan]

I have been correct in my assessments of every single UM legal matter I have spent time posting on (about 10 over the years). Most of those assessments included inside information of some type, at least eventually, although the information was not necessarily first hand. My comment on Donaldson was not a legal comment; it was my instinct based on knowing him--so please spare us any comment on that. I'll give you some examples. I started a thread, within weeks of him being charged, saying there was "no way JJ would be convicted". My prediction was correct. I said, within days of the publicity on Poole, that his matter would likely end with a plea deal with the charges dissolving after some period of time, and he would be able to play for UM again. My prediction was correct. I said, almost immediately, that Quinn's second dui charge was bogus and would go away. It was dropped within 10 days. Multiple posters have posted at various times that my claims on being right on all of these legal matters have been correct. Once again, gg doesn't know what he's talking about. Bellevue high isn't a UM pipeline. Now that's pretty funny.

hilarious that you picked those three things as examples of your inside info. everyone thought j.j. would be found not guilty. everyone knew poole would be playing here again. a lot of people thought quinn's dui would get dropped. big deal. that isn't inside information. multiple posters agree with you because out of the hundreds of people posting here you're bound to have some that think like you do.

if you want to provide inside info, then post it here before it hits the newspaper or anyone else posts it. you probably do know when a player has gotten in trouble, but you never post it because you hope it doesn't find its way to the media or the grapevine. once it does, you try to minimize it, but your guesses are no more informative than what anyone could surmise.

I didn't say those things had anything to do with inside information. It's not true that lots of people were saying, early on, that these matters would turn out the way they did. In any event, I was among the first saying that. I also got Wilson's two matters correct, the taser guys correct, Montana's dui, Tru's dui correct, the frosh fight was overcharged, and the list could go on. Correct or largely correct on every single legal assessment that I made. Said little or nothing on others.

yes, but you just tried to play it off as such otherwise you would've prefaced your response. just about everyone following those cases guessed the same things. you're no legal expert based on any of that. is this seriously the best you got? please start bringing info to the board. or quit acting like you have any.

Who gives a shit? Like any of this is relevant to anything today. I was hoping SOMEONE would posr some valuable info on the time the program was gonna be aired so I could mark it but I see that is a lost cause now.

 

[NLGrizFan]

I have been correct in my assessments of every single UM legal matter I have spent time posting on (about 10 over the years). Most of those assessments included inside information of some type, at least eventually, although the information was not necessarily first hand. My comment on Donaldson was not a legal comment; it was my instinct based on knowing him--so please spare us any comment on that. I'll give you some examples. I started a thread, within weeks of him being charged, saying there was "no way JJ would be convicted". My prediction was correct. I said, within days of the publicity on Poole, that his matter would likely end with a plea deal with the charges dissolving after some period of time, and he would be able to play for UM again. My prediction was correct. I said, almost immediately, that Quinn's second dui charge was bogus and would go away. It was dropped within 10 days. Multiple posters have posted at various times that my claims on being right on all of these legal matters have been correct. Once again, gg doesn't know what he's talking about. Bellevue high isn't a UM pipeline. Now that's pretty funny.

hilarious that you picked those three things as examples of your inside info. everyone thought j.j. would be found not guilty. everyone knew poole would be playing here again. a lot of people thought quinn's dui would get dropped. big deal. that isn't inside information. multiple posters agree with you because out of the hundreds of people posting here you're bound to have some that think like you do.

if you want to provide inside info, then post it here before it hits the newspaper or anyone else posts it. you probably do know when a player has gotten in trouble, but you never post it because you hope it doesn't find its way to the media or the grapevine. once it does, you try to minimize it, but your guesses are no more informative than what anyone could surmise.

I didn't say those things had anything to do with inside information. It's not true that lots of people were saying, early on, that these matters would turn out the way they did. In any event, I was among the first saying that. I also got Wilson's two matters correct, the taser guys correct, Montana's dui, Tru's dui correct, the frosh fight was overcharged, and the list could go on. Correct or largely correct on every single legal assessment that I made. Said little or nothing on others.

yes, but you just tried to play it off as such otherwise you would've prefaced your response. just about everyone following those cases guessed the same things. you're no legal expert based on any of that. is this seriously the best you got? please start bringing info to the board. or quit acting like you have any.

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0[/youtube]

 

[EverettGriz]

I'm curious: for those of you posting under more than one name, is it a pain in the ass to log off as one poster and then log in as the other? I would think that would get really old.

 

[jodcon]

I'm curious: for those of you posting under more than one name, is it a pain in the ass to log off as one poster and then log in as the other? I would think that would get really old.

I think some guys on here must have a cheat sheet to keep them all straight.

 

[NLGrizFan]

This thread is outta control. I was really hoping someone would say "Yes, January __ at _ o'clock." Guess thats just to much to ask.