"Glad you think it's funny. I'm here all week, Don't forget to tip your waitress." Shecky (KC) recommends the veal.
preliminarily, wanted to acknowledge i thought kalamazoo's summation was maybe the best in the entire thread. some would say it was slanted (everything is, i can tell from the caliber and quality of thinking that resonated behind and around and through those words he wouldn't be insulted by a platitude that nobody is objective in a post-modern sense, or any sense, for that matter - even documentaries reveal subjectivity at the level of subject/editorial choice levels). some would say it SHOULD be slanted (if only so the voice of the assaulted golf volunteer and harrassed team employee may be heard, even if we think the exchange between the principals themselves was petty and insconsequential - the ones they had to endure weren't)...
Sounds like based on reports cited above (post #s 3767 & 3768) by the tireless, underappreciated fatness...
if those reports are accurate...
1 - Some were saying neither player would lose their job, both would, just ingonito or just martin... so anybody that said both would (not many i think), winner winner chicken dinner. With respect to the accuracy among the two sides on the divide that said either Martin would not lose his job but Incognito would, or vice verce, respectively... both sides were right in one of the things they affirmed, and both sides were wrong in the other. tie. i think my position was it was hard to see how incognito could come back given reports of an assult at the team/sponsor golf event, as well as the outrage expressed by the owner at the presser about language (whether from a place of love or not)... to do so would make him come off as a hypocrite. About Martin, I said I preferred to wait until we heard his side post independent investigation findings. i think i was right about richie, i hedged and didn't participate with martin (whether he would be fired - i haven't emphasized his possible role and maybe inwardly cringed at not wanting even a small chance of being subsequently viewed as victim blamer, even if i were to concede that at times he looked like he may have had more than his fair share of responsibility for the events and possible misunderstandings/miscommunications, if that is what they prove to be in the end).
2 - This story has a lot of layers and levels, it is nuanced and complex, and there been reports from numerous sources spread across different times of this story. A partial reminder and summation of what may be some points germane and salient to the discussion. It has been said nothing came up from the locker, lending credence to the nothing happened interpretation. The context of that, though, was that many/all players refused to talk or cooperate in the investigation. A few players like Tannehill, Hartline, etc. did talk, so several players did publicly support incognito's version and not martin's in media interviews. That could have some bearing on the truth that may come out later (though, those of the something happened inclination have stated examples in which the LAST thing one should conclude from a group of some kind [[even a football team-sized quantity]] adhering to and being rigidly undeviating from the company line doesn't always and necessarily mean what the nothing happened side has said - as an example, we don't have to strain our memory for a recent historical exemplar, look back no further than last year with BOUNTYGATE for clear evidence of watergate like coverup and team-wide conscious image/message disinformation and investigative obstruction - this is probably the least likely explantion in this case, imo, but clearly it can and does happen, it is far from unlikely to think it might have happened in this case [[in other words, the chances that it happened might be a lot closer to 50/50 than 100/1]]).
3 - Related to the above - Even if we isolate out and compartmentalize what we know of martin's behavior that could be construed as suspect (the dog meme?), like snapping over a petty gag such as the cafeteria flashpoint, that he had recently participated in himself, along with other gags, pranks (like moving the car) and stunts seemingly on the more benign and innocuous part of the continuum and spectrum... it would seem incognito allegedly did some bad things. Golfing. possible harrassment of a non-player team employee. racial and cultural mocking with language and clothes. sexual jokes about a wife. we don't know the full story behind the allegations. maybe the other party knew it was from a place of love and replied in kind. maybe not. it is one thing for incognito to allegedly harrass a player. but a team employee is not on a level playing field. a complaint as a whisteblower could lead to reprisal up to and including termination (maybe they were the source of the report?). if the actions and words were unwanted, than obviously that is cowardly and despicable. and for every report by a player and ex-teammate that seemed to side with incognito (murtha claimed to be unbiased, which nobody ever is, except for maybe gandhi, MLK, mother teresa and saints like that... murtha clearly liked incognito better, and was a former collegiate teammate, so went back together further), there was a matching one that contradicted it, like Cam Cleeland's devastating indictment of incognito as a violently psychotic lunatic specifically and the NFL's old school hazing culture in general.
4 - re: Martin not cooperating with request for phone records, admittedly on the initial bull#### detector level sounds like he has something to hide. maybe he does. it is true that he could have still used them in a trial later, even if he surrendered them at this time. not sure if retaining them might have a legal purpose we aren't currently understanding or accounting for, it would be great to get legal perspective here (of course, we will find out some of this stuff eventually, but i mean in the interim, before the expected post super bowl release). i'm thinking in terms of leverage. there still isn't a law suit (and may never be). but what if the independent investigation reveals that some of level of harrassment and beyond the pale hazing did in fact take place (the golf volunteer and team employee might agree with this, as well as cam cleeland, who was a former teammate, and was also partially blinded with a sock of coins smashing into his orbital socket ala kermit washington's fist into rudy tomjanovich's face - where he could taste his own spinal fluid, due to the violence of the skull fracture). would the team and possibly league to some extent be liable to legal action? what if martin is ostracized by nobody signing him as a free agent (would commish ask a team to do it so there is no stigma or hint of impropriety, and to attempt heading off an impasse that has no other recourse but civil trial or potentially costly settlement?). If there is a later suit, holding potential evidence doesn't do the league a favor by giving them advance notice in how to craft a potential rebuttal.
5 - At this point, my interest has shifted beyond the players to the larger league institution and dolphins organization. mort already said don't expect systemic NFL changes (my paraphrase

), if only because to do so would be admission of sorts that they didn't already have sufficient codes in place (and they can put it on richie, a human embodiment of aberration if there ever was one). they took it seriously, but things would be codified (if not already), reminders given, exhortations made, on a TEAM-BY-TEAM basis (the dolphins have tasked no less than TWO committees to enact changes going forward, new charters, at the player/coach level and an administrative level). Regarding the dolphins, when the report finally comes out -
a) Did ireland and philbin have a role (if any) in creating the culture and conditions that led to the allegations?
b) Did they actively contribute to and exacerbate them (code red, why didn't you punch richie)?
c) Did they know about them?
d) What will be the implications for their future based on the above... if the answer to any of the three is yes (and they are interrelated and connected), lets say with and in the case of ireland for instance, than allowing him to keep his job would give the resolution to the whole tawdry and sordid affair an aura of a superficial, cosmetic band-aid (like the kind with mickey mouse patterns on it for kids

).
* some other consequences or larger, more enduring repercussions. incognito has been exposed (AGAIN!). to some degree, martin may also be (again, i want to hear the findings - incognito's background and history has voluminous elements too well documented to credibly ignore, of a chronic and habitual nature - i feel less obligated with the old innocent until proven guilty injunction in his case, and it is a misnomer in the court of public opinions anways - but guilty as charged on the basis of methodological asymmetry, i am conscious of it and OK with that correct perception for the stated reasons). also, incognito and martin will now alway be linked and their fates intertwined, no matter the result and outcome. ironically, martin's legacy may continue to be stalked and haunted by incognito in history as much or more and long after the events that precipitated their recognition and memory.