1. Hi Guest, Registrations are now open. See you on the inside.
    Dismiss Notice

Sorsby to enter supplemental draft

Discussion in 'Steelers Talk' started by Blast Furnace, Jun 15, 2026.

  1. Formerscribe

    Formerscribe Well-Known Member

    29,674
    4,942
    Dec 18, 2016
    No, but they could have simply owned the reason they weren't letting him in. I'm guessing that using the timing was a legal cover, not the actual reason they aren't holding the draft.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Blast Furnace

    Blast Furnace Staff Member Mod Team

    48,994
    12,416
    Oct 16, 2011
    Id have to go read it again but I believe they did cite the integrity of the game as well. They pretty much tore him a new *******.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. jeh1856

    jeh1856 Chilling by the pool

    40,766
    14,102
    Oct 26, 2011
    You are correct

    No fantasy conspiracy narrative here
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. Formerscribe

    Formerscribe Well-Known Member

    29,674
    4,942
    Dec 18, 2016
    They did, so why even bring up that he submitted his request close to the deadline? Do you actually buy the notion that they couldn't move fast enough? Of course not, but it does provide some legal cover for the tearing of the new *******.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. NorthernBlitz

    NorthernBlitz Well-Known Member

    2,268
    730
    Sep 5, 2025
    At the risk of making this a political thread...[MODS...feel free to delete this]

    Today is more evidence that the "6" on SCOTUS don't vote like a block, despite what the fear mongering talking heads say. I think the "3" are in lock step far more...maybe that wouldn't be the case if they were in the majority?

    FWIW, I think this was a bad result, but it might be more that the constitution says that states run the elections...so they're apparently allowed to do them in a way that's at best atrocious for public confidence in the results. As someone who moved here from another functional democracy (Canada), I think the way that the US does voting is insane.

    We should just adopt the Canadian system, which I think would satisfy basically everyone reasonable.
    • Significantly more polling stations. I don't know if the number of people / polling station is determined by law, but I think it should be.
    • Same number of "scrutineers" from each party are present when votes are physically counted.
    • You can mail absentee, but need to arrange it before hand (and show ID when you do).
    • You show your ID when you vote. For people who wear religious face coverings, you go into a private space with someone of the same gender to show your face.
    • If you don't have ID, you need someone from the district who does have ID to sign and vouch that you are who you say you are. There is a limit to how many people someone can vouch for (I think it's like 3-5).
    • Canada doesn't use voting machines because we only vote on one thing (you vote for your local representative and the leader of the party that gets the most reps - chosen by something like a primary before the election - becomes the prime minister (like the president).
    • We probably need something like voting machines in the US since (1) we have an elected senate (Canada just appoints them, which is very stupid IMO), and (2) the US does combine other questions into elections.
    The US should also adopt how Canada does elections IMO.
    • Very short campaigns (one to two months).
    • Very strict campaign contribution rules (no contributions from corporations or unions, max individual contribution is $1,750 / year (to each party...there are 4 main parties...but one of them only runs in Quebec)
    The problem is that Canada still has things like PACs, so the contribution limit thing gets worked around in the same way it would here. But at least shorter / cheaper campaigns would make politicians less indebted to their donors. And since those donation limits are still in play outside of elections, politicians probably wouldn't need to spend 75% (or whatever) of their time fundraising. As someone who moved here (and I'm happy that I did), the US system seems specifically designed to maximize corruption of elected officials.
     
  6. forgotten1

    forgotten1 Well-Known Member

    12,476
    3,098
    Mar 4, 2022
    why is this in
    STEELERS FORUM

    NFL GENERAL Forum be like
    "Damn, No Love."
     
    • Hilarious Hilarious x 1
  7. Formerscribe

    Formerscribe Well-Known Member

    29,674
    4,942
    Dec 18, 2016
    I don't agree with all of this, but it is well explained, and I appreciate the perspective. Unfortunately, it is very political because the voting process has become such a political battle, mostly because one side keeps crying about fraud despite never being able to prove it exists.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Karl

    Karl Well-Known Member

    3,316
    1,910
    Jan 19, 2022
    Sorsby is screwed, period.
    I have no idea what he does next.
     
  9. forgotten1

    forgotten1 Well-Known Member

    12,476
    3,098
    Mar 4, 2022
    [​IMG]
     
  10. Brice

    Brice

    8,815
    2,401
    Jul 18, 2018
    That is Funny.

    Since he is banned from all these leagues, would he be OK to sign a contract with one of the Gambling Websites to pay down some of his legal bills???
     
  11. NorthernBlitz

    NorthernBlitz Well-Known Member

    2,268
    730
    Sep 5, 2025
    Tough when even the Canadians won't take you.

    We loved Ben Johnson...when I left, he was the spokesperson for an energy drink called "Cheetah", which I thought was a great double-meaning. There's got to be a Canadian gambling outfit that could have given Soresby the same treatment if he was in the CFL

     

Share This Page

Welcome to the ultimate resource for Steelers fans. Sign Up Here!