Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
PatternMaster

The Bengals vs. the NFL

167 posts in this topic

Many Bengals fans believe that the NFL has treated the Bengals unfairly in the past; whether it be an unfair call from the ref, a replay that didn't get overturned despite clear visual evidence to the contrary, no home openers for 5+ years, etc...

 

Joe Mixon is a player that the NFL tried everything it could to discourage teams from drafting due to an off the field incident that was caught on camera 3 years ago, even though he was suspended for a year, paid the victim an undisclosed amount of money, and completed 100 hours of community service work. They didn't invite him to the combine, despite the fact he was one of the best players at his position and was a star in CFB last season, clearly sending the message to the NFL franchises that the organization didn't want this guy associated with their brand. It was reported that 28 teams took Mixon completely off their draft board, so obviously there was some collusion in keeping Mixon out of the NFL, similar to Ray Rice.

 

The one thing the NFL hates is bad PR and Mixon and the Bengals are giving them plenty of that and the Bengals have a history of providing negative PR for the NFL brand, which doesn't endear them to the powers that be. From the losing of the 90's, to the 2006 offseason in which 9 players were arrested, to the Bengals consistently signing guys that have red flags and arrest records, to the recent Pacman Jones incident, and now the drafting of Joe Mixon..it's clear the Bengals don't care about negative PR and will employ a player regardless of the PR implications.

 

Also, consider that all replays and in-game communications will be coming from the league office in NYC then it's reasonable, in my mind at least, to assume there could be some situations in which the NFL could decide to not give the Bengals a favorable judgement call because they don't want a team with guys like Pacman Jones, Vontaze Burfict, and Joe Mixon to be in a highly visible game like the Super Bowl because of the negative PR.

 

At the end of the day the NFL is a business and all business do whatever they have to do to ensure their profit margins increase every year they are in operation, when you consider all of these factors then you could see why the NFL wouldn't want one of it's smaller market teams with players that are "bad for the brand" achieving a level of success that would ultimately be bad for business.  

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derision and drama are also good for ratings and, in turn, margins. 

 

Just look at television these days. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PatternMaster said:

At the end of the day the NFL is a business and all business do whatever they have to do to ensure their profit margins increase every year they are in operation, when you consider all of these factors then you could see why the NFL wouldn't want one of it's smaller market teams with players that are "bad for the brand" achieving a level of success that would ultimately be bad for business.  

 

 

 

 

6582db2b-5fc1-42dd-b194-3f2eb7faf5ab_tex

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, thezerawkid said:

Derision and drama are also good for ratings and, in turn, margins. 

 

Just look at television these days. 

 

True, but if came down to the Pats vs. Bengals and it's a close game when a subjective judgement call from the league office controlled refs could decide the game who do think is getting the benefit of the call...the NFL's golden boy with 5 SB rings or the lowly Bengals with more convicts than playoffs victories? 

 

It seems as if the Bengals have embraced their role as heel in the NFL's world of pro wrasslin.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what you're saying is, the outcome of any game is influenced on if the league front office likes you or not?  The "competition committee" may want to look into that.

 

I also don't believe for one second the report of "28 teams had him off their board".  All 32 teams showed up to his pro day, there was interest by every single last one of them, quite possibly even the one who used to employ Ray Rice.

 

The Raiders selected someone being accused of rape in the 1st round.  The Browns selected someone arrested for domestic violence two weeks prior to the draft.  The main difference?  Mixon was caught on video back on that day and had the video not existed my guess is he goes Top 15 (that's not me excusing the act).  This isn't an issue particular to the Cincinnati Bengals.  It's league wide and if they want it to stop, then don't make these players available to play in the league.  Otherwise they should expect players with these kinds of transgressions to continue being selected.

 

I also don't get why Vontaze gets lumped into this group.  He's never done anything off the field.  I don't remember an insane outrage / witch hunt on Suh.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "anti-Bengals bias" is something that Bengals fans see because we're emotionally invested in the team.

 

Every team in the league has terrible calls go against them, every team has had negative PR when one of their players fuck up. The Bengals are looked at negatively because we had a record setting number of arrests in the mid 2000's and then we continue to employ people like Chris Henry, Smackman Jones, and then sign players like Joe Mixon. It's not like our negative PR is for no reason, we certainly deserve the attention when we get it.

 

People use conjecture around here all the time like "omg if #teamslikethepatriots took Mixon, we wouldn't have even seen the video!!1!!!!!", ummm, I'll call bullshit. I had to stop watching ESPN for a month long period because I was tired of seeing Ray Rice caveman dragging someone out of an elevator. I had to avoid all sports media for months because I was sick of hearing how the Patriots cheated since a football may or may not have been slightly over the PSI limit. Large scale incidents get exposure, it's not just a Bengals problem.

 

If the NFL didn't want a small market team like Cincinnati to be successful, they wouldn't have "let us" into the playoffs for 5 straight years. We've been losing in the playoffs because we're a good but not great team, not because the NFL fixed the games.

 

Between Benson's suspension in 2011 and Burfict's most recent 3 games off, a total of 45 players on rosters (+11 free agents) spanning most teams in the league have been suspended for various reasons, and yes this includes almost every other perennial playoff contender. What do these players have in common? They're shitheads that did shithead stuff, and that's the beginning and the end of it. Not that they're Bengals players because none of those 56 guys are, they just happened to do things to deserve being suspended. The NFL doesn't hate us, they just happen to discipline players that violate their policies. Sounds crazy, I know.

 

Patriots fans think the NFL is biased against them, Stealers fans think the NFL is biased against them, Lions fans think the NFL is biased against them, and our fanbase is the same way. There's a portion of guys from every NFL fanbase that has an excuse for their teams negative PR or their losing seasons. It's hard to believe, but maybe we just don't win Super Bowls because we don't put together a good enough team to do so.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the officiating and commentary during the last WC game vs Shitsburgh and the way the two meshed together so seamlessly wasn't enough to convince you IDK what would.   I can't say for sure what was going on, but something was going on.  Call it confirmation bias if you really trust the NFL that much.  Given their history I'm not sure how you could, but I won't argue the point.

 

Just gonna leave these here:

 

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2012/jul/04/citylights1-nfl-dirty-secret/#

 

http://gangsterreport.com/nfl-mafia-moldea-book-celebrates-silver-anniversary/

 

tumblr_inline_n7ljvqOugl1qkbee1.jpg

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well fuck, that solves it. The Bengals got their asses beat by a TJ Yates led team in the playoffs because Irving Fryar may have intentionally dropped a pass in the Rose Bowl back in 1984.

 

I'll now sleep better at night as I've been thinking this whole time that we lost that game because we were outclassed and outcoached at every angle. Whew.

 

Seriously though, there were bad calls on both sides in that playoff game (PITT/CIN). We got hosed on a couple more overall and, unfortunately, the biggest missed call of the game. It happens. We aren't the first nor will we be the last team that bad officiating affects. I've seen it happen from every team from the Patriots to the Browns. I will say that I see it less often with the Patriots, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that it could have something to do with them usually playing with comfortable leads where a bad call here and there doesn't drastically affect the outcome of their games.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, omgdrdoom said:

Well fuck, that solves it. The Bengals got their asses beat by a TJ Yates led team in the playoffs because Irving Fryar may have intentionally dropped a pass in the Rose Bowl back in 1984.

 

 

Don't be obtuse.  It shows the roots of the NFL and how it was organized.  You think that's fundamentally changed? Why, I wonder.  Must be all those integrities Goodell brought with him.

 

Quote

I'll now sleep better at night as I've been thinking this whole time that we lost that game because we were outclassed and outcoached at every angle. Whew.

 

How were we "outclassed and outcoached" in a game we by all rights should have won if not for, your words here (emphasis not added):

 

Quote

the biggest missed call of the game.

 

So aside from the utter bullshit call that cost us the game it was totally fair.  

 

Quote

Seen it happen from every team from the Patriots to the Browns. I will say that I see it less often with the Patriots, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that it could have something to do with them usually playing with comfortable leads where a bad call here and there doesn't drastically affect the outcome of their games.

 

 

Yes, they make suspect game-changing calls quite often.  It's most predictable in games where the score gets lopsided early.  People start tuning out otherwise.

 

No sale on #teamslikethePatriots somehow deserving to play by their own set of rules.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said we were outclassed against TJ Yates. I then said the big missed call was in the Stealers game. Sorry, I can see where I jumped from one to the other real quick, but I was talking about 2 separate games. The part about being outmatched was supposed to go along with the first paragraph, not the 3rd. 

 

To get to the point with no joking or sarcasm, you can go with the NFL is rigged and I'll go with NFL officiating crews are extremely inconsistent from game to game and even play to play. I honestly don't believe the refs make certain calls in 2017 because of the mob and/or gambling. I think they just have a difficult time being consistent due to the fact that every single NFL snap is unique and most penalties are very subjective.

 

It's easy to play referee when you're sitting in front of a TV. Good luck trying to see a bang, bang play at NFL speed in front of you and knowing 100% if the guy made actual contact with the helmet or not. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dautcom08 said:

So what you're saying is, the outcome of any game is influenced on if the league front office likes you or not?  The "competition committee" may want to look into that.

 

I also don't believe for one second the report of "28 teams had him off their board".  All 32 teams showed up to his pro day, there was interest by every single last one of them, quite possibly even the one who used to employ Ray Rice.

 

The Raiders selected someone being accused of rape in the 1st round.  The Browns selected someone arrested for domestic violence two weeks prior to the draft.  The main difference?  Mixon was caught on video back on that day and had the video not existed my guess is he goes Top 15 (that's not me excusing the act).  This isn't an issue particular to the Cincinnati Bengals.  It's league wide and if they want it to stop, then don't make these players available to play in the league.  Otherwise they should expect players with these kinds of transgressions to continue being selected.

 

I also don't get why Vontaze gets lumped into this group.  He's never done anything off the field.  I don't remember an insane outrage / witch hunt on Suh.

 

I'm saying that NFL officials definitely influence the outcome of a game and that NFL officiating is very flawed and subjective, here is an article I found with more details:

 

 

Quote

 

An analysis by the statistics site 538 found that, while noise from the home crowd is thought to influence officials’ calls and non-calls, the side of the field a play flows toward may be a far more important factor.

 

Authors Noah Davis and Michael Lopez analyzed every regular-season play between 2010 and 2014 and found that defensive pass interference, and other aggressive penalties such as personal fouls, unsportsmanlike conduct and horse-collar tackles, were called significantly more often when plays were run toward the side of the field housing the offensive bench than the defense’s.

 

Conversely, on running plays, offensive holding penalties were called more frequently on plays run toward the defensive bench’s side of the field.

 

The hypothesis is simple — an official has more players and coaches screaming for a call on one side of the field or another — and the numbers hold that up: The difference was even more stark when the play happened between the 32-yard lines — the bench area where players and coaches are allowed to congregate. When the action was closer to one of the goal lines, without players and coaches offering — um, advice, the difference was less noticeable, and in some cases reversed.

http://wtop.com/nfl/2017/01/whose-side-nfl-referees-make-big-difference/


 

 

Vontaze gets lumped into this group because the media and the NFL has branded him as a dirty player, he's already been suspended multiple games for his on the field antics. He could easily get suspended again, for nothing more than his rep especially with the Odell Beckham rule in place.

 

If the an officiating crew goes into the game with a bias against certain players for whatever reason, maybe they are turned off by people that wish death upon police officers for doing their job and punch young girls in the face, they are in a position to make a call that will influence the outcome of the game against that player's team and their isn't much anyone can do about it. Also, if the NFL has an agenda to make as much money as they can, which I think we can all agree that they do, having a team full of PR nightmares being one of the marquee teams in the league isn't a good idea. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, T-Dub said:

 

Don't be obtuse.  It shows the roots of the NFL and how it was organized.  You think that's fundamentally changed? Why, I wonder.  Must be all those integrities Goodell brought with him.

 

 

How were we "outclassed and outcoached" in a game we by all rights should have won if not for, your words here (emphasis not added):

 

 

So aside from the utter bullshit call that cost us the game it was totally fair.  

 

 

 

Yes, they make suspect game-changing calls quite often.  It's most predictable in games where the score gets lopsided early.  People start tuning out otherwise.

 

No sale on #teamslikethePatriots somehow deserving to play by their own set of rules.

We lost that game because OUR running back couldn't hold onto the ball near the end of the game.  3 runs and a FG and the Stealers have 80 yards to go with 1 min left, no timeouts and needing a TD with a hurt Jen throwing ducks.  The team choked.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, SF2 said:

We lost that game because OUR running back couldn't hold onto the ball near the end of the game.  3 runs and a FG and the Stealers have 80 yards to go with 1 min left, no timeouts and needing a TD with a hurt Jen throwing ducks.  The team choked.

 

 

 

The fumble doesn't even matter if they get the calls right.  Hill's not on the field if it wasn't open season on Gio and anyone else not wearing Piss & Black.    

 

That game was more than Hill's fumble.  Much more.  Sick of this "they would've won anyway" BS when the cheating gets too blatant to ignore. Everything the Bengals did in that game after Gio got speared was self-defense IMHO.  It's up to the refs to see it doesn't get to that point and they failed. They sent us the exact same crew for the rematch last season, WTF is that?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, SF2 said:

We lost that game because OUR running back couldn't hold onto the ball near the end of the game.  3 runs and a FG and the Stealers have 80 yards to go with 1 min left, no timeouts and needing a TD with a hurt Jen throwing ducks.  The team choked.

 

 

Most certainly choked. This teams wilts under the big lights. Nothing worse than listening to responsibility being alleviated. 

 

Burfict is a tremendous player. Had that fumble not occurred, he would have been talked about as the player of the game. As it turns out, it did happen, and he committed a penalty. Do I believe it was as malicious of a hit as it could have been, hell no, but it was reasonable to call. Also as it turns out, because of that penalty, the national media piled on as much as possible. Not because they hate the fucking Bengals. It's because he earned the reputation and allowed for that piling on due to his other inexcusable transgressions....on the field. It dues upset me when they lump him in with off the field trouble, I think thry include him mainly because they are looking at a locker room that may or may not be conducive to Joe Mixon's success. Anyway, thats another discussion. 

Edited by SouthPaw
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one don't think the league will make any more or less calls against the Bengals, they do it selectively and they have for years - and it's a lot easier to "miss" calls than make questionable ones (see any of our games against the Stealers in the past few years, and the absolutely absurd level of holding that is allowed on their end).  

 

As bad as the NFL is, the NBA is worse and the pattern speaks for itself - tilt the games toward whichever team is losing *unless* that team is an unpopular one (or far less popular than the team that is winning).  The Bengals just happen to be of the unpopular variety, so they are an easy target with both the owners and fans on the league's side.  Someone else said it, but indeed this always and from every angle comes down to one thing - $.  That's why they try to keep the games close (avoid losing viewers), that's why they let the teams with the biggest fan bases "get calls" (majority of the $ comes from them), and that's why they care a LOT more about Joe Mixon (awful crime on video - committed three years ago for which he was punished already) than they do than, say, oh I don't know... DeDe Westbrook??? (multiple domestic abuse issues, a number of recent run-ins with the law, a complete and utter lack of remorse, and downright arrogance about it all - but no video and no record).  The league cares about perception, that's it.  It probably actually behooves them more that Mixon is on the Bengals than one of their "golden" teams because the Bengals are already considered a den of scum, and thus they absorb a lot of the backlash that the league itself would otherwise take.  You know, like "well, the NFL tried to black ball Mixon, but those damned criminal-loving Bengals did it again..".

 

Now, for the conspiracy side of things.  Here we sit and STILL we haven't seen Joe Mixon's introductory press conference or any video of him since being drafted except for one ESPN interview in the locker room afterward (if anyone has seen another please do tell us here).  Instead we're seeing a whole lot of commentary from a whole lot of sports outlets, most of them incredibly negative.  I suspect the league has told the Bengals to hold off any kind of press of their own until "the dust has settled", but lord knows what that might mean for the NFL - maybe they'll let the torches and pitchforks come out, maybe they'll wait for the Bengals to slip; either way we sure as hell know they don't care about the Bengals or Joe Mixon.  

 

Just a few minutes ago I saw that Stephen A. Smith finally gave his "insightful" take on all of this and he first obfuscates the Bengals' situation - he cites the Bengals' arrest numbers from 2005-2014... then brays and honks that it's "not even taking into account the recent Adam Jones arrest, or Vontaze Burfict and his situation with the Stealers two years ago!!", which is of course convenient because a) the Bengals have been very clean since 2014 (one arrest - the Adam Jones arrest) and b) Vontaze and the Stealers *isn't an arrest at all* - then he goes on to say he believes Mixon deserves a second chance, has paid his debt, but... the Bengals shouldn't be the ones to take him because... they don't demonstrate that they're trying to win hard enough?  WTF?!?!?   So since the Cowboys are always talking about winning it all, and will spend and make excuses all day to get there, it would have been ok for them?  Or how about this - one team has more arrests since 2000 than the Bengals - the Minnesota Vikings.  Gee, I guess them taking "character risk" Dalvin Cook is ok because what, they look like they want to win more?  And I mean it's not like they had a child beater on their team, or that the child beater is still in the- wait, nevermind.

 

See, this kind of bullshit has me looking at it differently.  If Mike Brown says he wants to give guys a second chance, great, do it.  If it helps the team get better and says fuck you to Roger Goodell and the talking heads *do it*.  As long as he stops giving the third and fourth chances, continues to not pick serious scumbags like Dede Westbrook and Caleb Brantley - yeah, so much for the Bengals "not caring" about character concerns, huh? - I don't care anymore.  If the league wants us to be Raiders 2.0, own it and win with it, but do it on your own terms.  You don't have to be dirty, you don't have to employ serious criminals, you just have to stick to your guns and shut out the naysayers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

The fumble doesn't even matter if they get the calls right.  Hill's not on the field if it wasn't open season on Gio and anyone else not wearing Piss & Black.    

 

That game was more than Hill's fumble.  Much more.  Sick of this "they would've won anyway" BS when the cheating gets too blatant to ignore. Everything the Bengals did in that game after Gio got speared was self-defense IMHO.  It's up to the refs to see it doesn't get to that point and they failed. They sent us the exact same crew for the rematch last season, WTF is that?

A healthy Gio was not carrying the ball at the end of the game between the tackles.  You give that job to your Thumper. The cold hard fact is Gio was thrown a text book hospital pass by McCarron.

 

Burfict's hit was NOT self defense, it's laughable to describe it as such.  It ended Brown's season.  

 

If they really had it out for us they would have flagged Burfict on his mean shoulder crushing sack of Jen.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Don't be obtuse.  

 

 

 

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SF2 said:

A healthy Gio was not carrying the ball at the end of the game between the tackles.  You give that job to your Thumper. The cold hard fact is Gio was thrown a text book hospital pass by McCarron.

 

Burfict's hit was NOT self defense, it's laughable to describe it as such.  It ended Brown's season.  

 

If they really had it out for us they would have flagged Burfict on his mean shoulder crushing sack of Jen.

 

"Here we go, Stealers, here we go" clap clap. 

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After Spygate and then Deflategate most of the other powerful owners hate Kraft and the Patriots. And Jerry Jones is one of those.

If there was collusion on the part of the NFL then the Patriots would not be winning Super Bowls and Dallas would have played in at least one Super Bowl in the last 20 years.
And if there was collusion wouldn't Mike Brown be part of that? If he is standing by and not saying anything isn't he just as guilty?

Might have happened in the "old days" but now we live in the age where TV viewers are calling in penalties on golfers during tournaments.
I am sure there are some football hating media types that would love to create a scandal about the NFL picking winners and losers if that was really going on.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, westside bengal said:

After Spygate and then Deflategate most of the other powerful owners hate Kraft and the Patriots. And Jerry Jones is one of those.

If there was collusion on the part of the NFL then the Patriots would not be winning Super Bowls and Dallas would have played in at least one Super Bowl in the last 20 years.
And if there was collusion wouldn't Mike Brown be part of that? If he is standing by and not saying anything isn't he just as guilty?

Might have happened in the "old days" but now we live in the age where TV viewers are calling in penalties on golfers during tournaments.
I am sure there are some football hating media types that would love to create a scandal about the NFL picking winners and losers if that was really going on.
 

 

Yeeeeeeep.

 

I can't get behind a lot of arguments made on this board that I don't really see much elsewhere. I've never seen another group of people argue that they're so entirely sure that NFL players are constantly getting drunk during games and how the NFL is essentially run behind the scenes by gambling organizations.

 

A conspiracy theorist's article or two citing stuff that may have happened in the 50s-80s doesn't really prove jack shit.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why does everyone keep pretending mixon did some crazy thing? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ITT:

 

  • Well-known mobsters and their affiliates created an entertainment monopoly but it's all completely above-board and not in any way shady because that would be a Conspiracy Theory and those don't exist
  • Even if there was a conspiracy proving that theory you can just say Conspiracy Theory three times and it will go away
  • The NFL doesn't target their most profitable franchises even though some people don't like them so that proves everything is ok and not some crazy Conspiracy Theory
  • Even if it wasn't ok those teams are just better than everyone so they deserve preferential treatment but that's not a conspiracy
  • But there isn't any preferential treatment because Conspiracy Theory LOL 
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just reading decades old books like Paper Lion, Ball Four, and Eight Men Out, should be an indication that organized manipulation of professional contests have always been around.

 

I don't know how many times I can say this: but the NFL is not "fixing" games. Neither does the NBA. They are however, unmistakably manipulated--not by direct effect, but rather by a forged dynamic. In the NFL, it is actually two-fold: create so many rules and regulations that it is not humanly possible to enforce without subjectivity; plus make those rules "star power" friendly, where the money-makers (offense primarily) get that hands off/hands on favoritism. How do the non-favored franchises overcome this dynamic: score more points. 

 

A lot lot easier said than done, but it does happen.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, T-Dub said:

ITT:

 

  • Well-known mobsters and their affiliates created an entertainment monopoly but it's all completely above-board and not in any way shady because that would be a Conspiracy Theory and those don't exist
  • Even if there was a conspiracy proving that theory you can just say Conspiracy Theory three times and it will go away
  • The NFL doesn't target their most profitable franchises even though some people don't like them so that proves everything is ok and not some crazy Conspiracy Theory
  • Even if it wasn't ok those teams are just better than everyone so they deserve preferential treatment but that's not a conspiracy
  • But there isn't any preferential treatment because Conspiracy Theory LOL 

 

What evidence do you have that any gambling organization is affecting the NFL in 2017? It's a conspiracy theory because all you have is some guy's opinion of what was going on 50 years ago as "proof". Sure thing man, I'll just believe whatever you say because of that sweet article!

 

Teams become profitable when they've been consistent winners for decade after decade. You seem to be under the belief that the NFL is making these profitable teams win when I'm seeing it as winning teams in large cities happen to become profitable. I know, I know, it's totally crazy to think a team located in a region with a huge football fanbase that wins a lot could be profitable without help from the mob.

 

No one has said that any team deserves preferential treatment. The closest thing that you tried to twist into that was when I said the Patriots are less affected than say, the Rams by a "bad call" because they're likely leading blowout wins more often so a bad call against them doesn't really hurt as much as it would a team consistently enduring close scores. Not a single person that I've seen has said that any team deserves preferential treatment. I've said that bad calls happen to every team, they just affect certain teams more and people that are fans of a specific team notice them more when it affects the team they're emotionally invested in.

 

Your arguments are lacking any evidence at all but we're all the dumb ones for calling them as they are, conspiracy theories.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0