Mike Florio, the lowest scumbag in sports journalism

Mike Florio is liar. I'm not just talking about any kind of a liar either. I am talking about a liar for hire. I am talking about goddamnable liar. I'm talking about a fork-tonged lying asshole. I'm talking about a guy who manufactures false sports stories and publishes them because he knows he can get a rise out of the fans. His street cred is 0.000. I mean to tell you that he has no street-cred at all. He is certainly the child-product of pair of alcoholics, as he lies when it would be easier to tell the truth.

Regrettably, Mike Florio's handers at NBC sports are complicit in the deception. Florio's lies makes great copy, and good money. They increase traffic and interest in the NFL during off-peak periods, such during the NCAA Men's Basketball tournament. Mike is good for business, goddamnable liar though he may be.

I have done a bit of research over the course of the past 8 or 9 hours, and it seems more and more abundantly clear that most of false Donovan McNabb trade rumors propgated over the past 4 years have erupted from one geyser of lies and deception: Mike Florio and Profootballtalk.com. We should note that Donovan McNabb has been the subject of 1,000 trade rumors over the past 4 years. All Donovan McNabb trade rumors have been proven false. McNabb has played for Philly and nobody else but Philly for the past 4 years. Ergo the reports of an immanent trade have always been false.

So far, Florio is 0-for-6 in trade rumors regarding McNabb in the year 2010. He's already floated the St. Louis lie twice, and both Devaney and Spagnuolo have done everything short of falling him a fool. Consider the last lie Florio told: McNabb was going to St. Louis in exchange for the #33 pick and O.J. Atogwe.

Anybody who knows the Rams, and some of the basic bylaws of the NFL, instantly knew that this report is a bloody lie. Atogwe is not under contract at the moment. He is a restricted free agent. He has not signed his tender. This means the Rams do not have him under contract in any way. According to the NFL bylaws, you cannot trade a player who is not under contract. Why? Because you don't trade in human flesh, as in slavery, you trade contracts. If you don't have a contract to trade, you can't trade a contract. Does this make sense to you? I hope it does.

A simple knowledge of the facts exposes the latest Florio lie as the invented falsehood it is.

Does Florio understand the bylaws of the league regarding trades? Does Florio even care? If he does, it doesn't show. He wanted to float the rumor anyway.

Interestingly enough, while researching the history of false reports from Florio, I stumbled upon this underground gem. Florio reported that before the Wonderlic test at the 2010 NFL Combine, Tim Tebow asked the players to bow their heads and pray for God's blessings in taking the test. Florio reported that one unnamed player told Tebow to "Shut the fuck up." Of course, this is a fairly sensational rumor for anybody who doesn't like Tebow's evangelical fire.

There's only one problem with the report: The events never happened. Tebow never asked players to bow their heads and pray. Nobody had the opportunity to tell him to "Shut the fuck up." So far, every player tested that day has manifested a quizzical look when asked about these events. We're even having some trouble confirming that the players take the Wonderlic in class room groups. One report maintains that players take the test in private booths on computers.

Still, Florio draws the inference that these events show the difficulties and resistance Tebow may encounter on the next level. What events? The events never happened. It is interesting that most mainstream sports authorities chose not to report this story. They knew it was sketchy at best. They would have known about it before Florio, had the events actually taken place.

Why Florio is not a pariah inside the sports journalism community, I will never understand. When this fraud clearly invents stories ex nillo and reports them as fact, how can you treat this guy as a fellow-journalist?

Blu-Ray leads HD-DVD 16-13: Why the Harris Poll is a fucked up lying bitch whore

Alright Mr. Harris, I'm calling you out. I'm calling you a low-down, fork-tongued lying asshole, and the son of a whore. I'm slapping you in the face, and spitting in your eye. Pistols at 10 paces in 10 minutes unless you are a yellow-belied coward.

Why? Because you continue to differentiate between Blu-Ray players and the PS3, that's why. It is absolutely pointless distortion of the key fact, unless you have a hidden agenda. It is the implementation and use of a false distinction. It must be intentional, outright intellectual dishonesty that drives the use of this false distinction. The objective must to distort the facts and show the Blu-Ray is doing poorly. You continue to manifest a clear-cut agenda to undermine Blu-ray's success.

I have said for many moons now that there is absolutely no reason to believe that the dedicated disk player will survive in the next generation of media systems. To insist that there will be dedicated disk players, or that they will lead the way is curmudgeon-thinking. You are thinking like a caveman if you think this thought. It is tantamount to insisting on reel-to-reel audio playback in your stereo system. You pattern of though is antiquated, outdated and obsolete.

The PS3 is the best damn media device ever invented in any category. There is no reason to presume that any moderately informed consumer should ever prefer a dedicated disk player over a PS3. You don't even have to play video games to think so. The PS3 does DVD Audio, SACD, DVD-Upscaling, computer media, networking to local libraries, USB2 key files, downloads, etc. Feature for feature, it is a devastating landslide in favor of the PS3. It is also amazingly fast. Dedicated players, with far weaker processors, are very slow footed by comparison.

For the entire first year of Blu-Rays existence, PS3 was not only the best player on the market, it was also the cheapest. Why pay more for a lesser machine? Why would you pay the same amount for a lesser machine? Why would save $100 are buy an inferior machine? Very few people did. Those who did often returned it in exchange for a PS3 later. It was a stupid mistake to buy a dedicated Blu-Ray player when you could have bought a PS3.

I believe it remains a stupid mistake to buy a dedicated Blu-Ray player when you can buy a PS3. The PS3 is the reference system for Blu-Ray, period. Any denial of fudging of this fact constitutes a pure lie. All facts quoted regarding Blu-Ray must, of necessity, include the PS3.

To lead any story with a headline like "Blu-Ray sales are tepid" and then (later on in the piece) explain that you aren't including PS3 players in the basis facts for this story is 100% pure, outright intellectual dishonesty and distortion of the key facts. This key-fact distortion must speak of bias. You have a liar's agenda at heart.

When the facts are totalled, 16% of US homes are now equipped for Blu-Ray. 13% are equipped for HD-DVD. 90+% are equipped for DVD. This is the forthright honest way to state your research findings.