****The Tyreek Hill Thread***

[Dante84]

With the 165th pick, in the 5th round.

Nutt said that Toub felt Hill was like Devin Hester.

— Nick Jacobs (@Jacobs71) April 30, 2016

[DaneMcCloud]

The girl is asking for $1,400 a month.

If she was asking for $14k a month, which he could afford, you stupid, broke, uneducated, young and STUPID mother****ers would accuse her of being a "Gold Digger".

Good ****ing grief.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Nickhead

what i find silly about this debate. it's not like this woman is his wife and she is staying with him. she left him. did what she was supposed to do in these situations. it's unfortunate that hill is on camera because i can guarantee you we all work with or know someone who has done similar things, and we are friends with them. we just don't know about it.

Hill is on camera?

[Nickhead]

tv, media, spotlight, not working at subway.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Nickhead

tv, media, spotlight, not working at subway.

If you think that regular people are beating pregnant women, then you're far beyond ****ed up.

[kysirsoze]

Originally Posted by Easy 6

All of the legal bullshit that involves itself when money is at stake is exactly why I'm trying to see all sides and wait for the truth to come out

Just saying that if a judge has already decided on $1300 as the proper amount, and thats not being paid on time... then its a legit bitch

Too many here are taking a different angle than "just the facts, ma'am", theres too much emotion going on IMO

The judge hasn't decided anything. The case is pending. It wasn't even implied that he was skipping support payments. It WAS implied that he was awaiting a court decision before he starts paying. Even that, though, was not clear.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The girl is asking for $1,400 a month.

If she was asking for $14k a month, which he could afford, you stupid, broke, uneducated, young and STUPID mother****ers would accuse her of being a "Gold Digger".

Good ****ing grief.

Who called her a gold digger?
Posted via Mobile Device

[Nickhead]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

If you think that regular people are beating pregnant women, then you're far beyond ****ed up.

look, im not going to argue with you any longer, but my point goes like this:


i once worked with a guy that i considered a good friend. we even talked about going into business in computers in the mid 90's. he was a good person to talk to. i even once went to a bbq in his neighborhood with other coworkers. they all knew him longer than i did. i lost that job, went on to other things. about four years later i find out he was diddling his kids as they were homeschooled. not even his wife knew until the very end. he is still currently sitting in wyandotte county jail with many years to come.

so you can never say you aren't involved with someone that does really sick shit.

[kysirsoze]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

If you think that regular people are beating pregnant women, then you're far beyond ****ed up.

I'm sure there are people doing what he did, but they're in jail. Or at least they should be. He probably should be, too, but he's not. I don't think any reasonable person would claim he didn't get treated differently because of his abilities. That said, other than his leftover probation, he's done what the legal system asked of him. If a subway employee did that, I'd be pulling for them to turn things around as well, however unlikely I thought that was.

[Nickhead]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The girl is asking for $1,400 a month.

If she was asking for $14k a month, which he could afford, you stupid, broke, uneducated, young and STUPID mother****ers would accuse her of being a "Gold Digger".

Good ****ing grief.

in this instance even i would say 14000 a month is well within affordable to him and i would endorse that.

i have no problem with any amount of financial punishment he receives. but as long as he abides you should appreciate what he is doing on the field. it will only help in the future how that child is taken care of.

you should all be pulling for the guy. not lambasting him (yet)

not to mention the fact of, how much can a rookie trying to stay on a team, dedicate so much time DURING the season to battered wife shelters and the likes. i say lets see what he does during the offseason.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Nickhead

in this instance even i would say 14000 a month is well within affordable to him and i would endorse that.

i have no problem with any amount of financial punishment he receives. but as long as he abides you should appreciate what he is doing on the field. it will only help in the future how that child is taken care of.

you should all be pulling for the guy. not lambasting him (yet)

not to mention the fact of, how much can a rookie trying to stay on a team, dedicate so much time DURING the season to battered wife shelters and the likes. i say lets see what he does during the offseason.

I don't "pull" for men that beat women.

I don't "pull" for men that choke women within an inch of their lives

I don't "pull" for men that strike pregnant women multiple times in the stomach.

I'll leave that to people like you.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Easy 6

But an honest question would be... "why is she having to go to the courts for child support at all"

Because, as with any interaction between autonomous individuals, without a court order his continued provision is dependent entirely on his good will.

Maybe they have disputes regarding amount, or frequency, or escrow of funds, or any number of factors. Maybe they don't even have so much a dispute as an attitude that a judge/mediator can better determine the fairest apportionment and other details.

Absent evidence to the contrary, there is no reason to assume that the court filing is for any reason other than a formalization of enforceable transactions.

[Nickhead]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Because, as with any interaction between autonomous individuals, without a court order his continued provision is dependent entirely on his good will.

Maybe they have disputes regarding amount, or frequency, or escrow of funds, or any number of factors. Maybe they don't even have so much a dispute as an attitude that a judge/mediator can better determine the fairest apportionment and other details.

Absent evidence to the contrary, there is no reason to assume that the court filing is for any reason other than a formalization of enforceable transactions.

that's what i've been trying to say all along...

[kysirsoze]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Because, as with any interaction between autonomous individuals, without a court order his continued provision is dependent entirely on his good will.

Maybe they have disputes regarding amount, or frequency, or escrow of funds, or any number of factors. Maybe they don't even have so much a dispute as an attitude that a judge/mediator can better determine the fairest apportionment and other details.

Absent evidence to the contrary, there is no reason to assume that the court filing is for any reason other than a formalization of enforceable transactions.

More eloquently stated version of my point from 3 pages ago. Let's see how it goes.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Because, as with any interaction between autonomous individuals, without a court order his continued provision is dependent entirely on his good will.

Maybe they have disputes regarding amount, or frequency, or escrow of funds, or any number of factors. Maybe they don't even have so much a dispute as an attitude that a judge/mediator can better determine the fairest apportionment and other details.

Absent evidence to the contrary, there is no reason to assume that the court filing is for any reason other than a formalization of enforceable transactions.

Except for the fact that the child is 18 month old.

[Nickhead]

DaneMcCumBubbles reaction to BL's response