If PM had done this to a friend or my sister, there would be no place he could hide.

Let's see... let me get this straight...

Something that happened 19 years ago, when Manning had just barely met the legal drinking age. Check.
A story that had been covered for a number of years by the media after it initially happened. Check.

The alleged victim settled, and by virtue of settling - this case was dropped. Check.
A mere week after what was likely Manning's swan song, 19-years later - this story gets regurgitated. Check.

I think I've got a pretty good idea now... a 21-yr-old male jock acted like a typical 21-yr-old male jock. The difference, perhaps, is nestled somewhere between allegations, exaggerations, agendas... and we certainly can't overlook the fact that playful, grab-assing flirtations that occurred 20 years ago, that were deemed "harmless" if not "expected" back in those days (been to many alcohol-induced parties myself back in my youth and know from experience) would, under today's standard, meet the requirements to be charged with sexual harassment.

What am I missing? Oh, Archie. That's right. The dad who didn't want his son's actions (which allegedly differ from what he was accused of) to bring embarrassment upon his family. I don't know the specifics, don't really care at this point. That was 20 years ago. Just like I don't give a rat's ass about Earl Woods and what he did or didn't know, or what he did or didn't do, regarding his attempt to nurture and maintain Tiger's marketable image, well into his pro career.

We are so easily outraged with attitudes, actions and behaviors of those who have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on our lives, yet we're too tired and "consumed" with day-to-day life to be bothered or concerned about the attitudes, actions and behaviors of those elected to serve public office. And the crimes/sins of the latter are much greater, much more significant to us than the former.

Our anger and outrage have never been more sorely displaced, and that is a sobering indictment of the society we live in today; that we would be more outraged over something Peyton Manning allegedly did nearly 20 years ago, as a kid basically... than we're concerned about what our elected officials are doing behind closed doors. And, sadly, in some cases - right before our very eyes.

$.02


I remember this story back when it had just happened. Peyton took no heat for this whatsoever. I never quite understood why but this was back during a time where women in a men's locker room was a very negatively perceived thing by men. Almost as if it was okay this happened because a woman shouldn't have been in that situation in the first place.

Had this happened in today's times it would've caused much more hubub but the issue of women around football players always skews the nature of shoddy treatment. Ask Lisa Olson about this...heck, even ask Ray Rice.

As to Lisa Olson, read this to refresh your memory...this happened over a quarter of a century ago and was perceived much differently than it would've today much like Peyton's situation:

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/11/28/sports/patriots-and-3-players-fined-in-olson-incident.html

I used to think Brett Favre had the best PR machine I'd ever seen. I think Peyton's is/was even better than Brett's.

The media just HAS to find something to get famous, sell news and credit for a scoop - ESPECIALLY if it is negative - drives me nuts. Don Henley, too. "Dirty Laundry" - dealing with people’s seemingly insatiable appetite for wanting others to fail. Just because EVERYONE has made mistakes doesn't mean their closet should have public access.

    Sorry about that ghost reply above but I agree with sdandrea1. It seems that the media loves to build someone up as superhuman and almost godlike, to a point that no man/woman can possibly live up to it and then look for]= -some reason to tear them down. Not really fair but I guess it sells papers, creates good ratings, etc.

    Manning's name is being brought up again because of a current lawsuit involving sexual assaults at Tennessee.
    Peyton originally settled with the woman trainer Jamie Ann Naughright, but was sued again a few years later when he defamed her in his book.

    The original accusation was he put his genitals and rectum on the woman trainers face while she was treating him. As his defense he said he was mooning another person, but that person denied his account.

    This isn't about his drinking age or some other boys will be boys bullshit that some are using to excuse his behavior. He sat naked on a woman trainers face while she was treating him.

    Teabagging this woman trainer by Manning was covered back then. USA Today's Christine Brennan covered it in an article on how well do we know our athletes. Then it basically went away. Now it's back in the news because of the lawsuit against Tennessee.

    Well,I don't know about you, other than your well written post, but I read the story and, quite frankly, it wasn't the
    normal behaviour of anyone" 21 year old jock " or not.The fact that Manning and his father chose to have a book
    published years later, in contravention of the agreement, smearing and telling lies about the woman that Manning had previously assaulted speaks very poorly about his character.He's obviously had a dream run with the media and the public and his fans (you included ?) won't hear a word against him.

    Fellas, believe what you want to believe. It's your prerogative. This story clearly represents what is wrong with society today - that some can't possibly enjoy a level of success without someone else with an ulterior motive searching endlessly through a closet that extends all the way back to the last century... to degrade and downplay his success all these years later. You might as well subpoena his elementary school teachers and make an informal query about his life not much after he was weened from his mother's teet, for Christ's sake.

    The rest of us will look at this as what it most likely is... And if I need to explain that further, then there's really no reason to continue debating this.

    The facts stand: this basically "allegedly" happened 20 years ago.

    The case was riddled with here-say and he-said, she-said.

    The "plaintiff" settled, undoubtedly because she was encouraged to do so by an attorney who understood the difficult nature of achieving a successful prosecution based on evidence, which is was the Gold standard then, and the Gold standard still today.

    And 20 years later, this non story of a story pathetically finds itself in the headlines, not even a week after the biggest moment of the "alleged" perpetrator's career. Why? Because this same woman is named in a lawsuit, once again, 20-years after the fact for seeking additional compensatory damages for something that most likely couldn't have been proven the first time around 20 years ago.

    The real shame here in all of this is that stories like this do a TREMENDOUS disservice to the real cases that exist... the real women who are exploited, the real victims, who aren't looking for lucrative "settlements" but for real justice.

    This $hit almost meets the modern-day standard of extortion.

    So spare me the political correctness, all the hoopla, all of the sensationalism. It's not going to change my perspective of what is obviously happening here.

    It is as plain as day.

    But you guys continue to have fun with this at your disposal. Like I said - it's your prerogative. My mind was made up based on the timing of all this alone, and I'm not gonna change my opinion.


      That says it - thanks PaPlaya.

      This is not newsworthy to me. Our society used to have some sense of respect and decency for the lives of others. Now certain people will attack those with lots of money looking for a free pay day. It's all about, greed and how much money can be extorted from celebrities.

      We all make mistakes in life. I know I wouldn't want someone to examine some of my questionable behavior when I was in my 20's and stupid. Let's bury this one and move along.

        PIGDivot It's quite obviously "newsworthy" and the fact that you (or I for that matter ) may have behaved poorly in our 20's has no bearing on the relevance of Manning's alleged behaviour.Unless, of course, you've managed to make 10's of millions of dollars based, in part, on your "whiter than white" reputation.I can only assume that Manning normally plays much better than he did in your Super Bowl 2016, btw :-) .

          Toulon
          How do you equate one incident at age 19 with a pattern of behavior occurring over decades?

              MidwayJ This story clearly represents what is wrong with society today - that some can't possibly enjoy a level of success without someone else with an ulterior motive searching endlessly through a closet that extends all the way back to the last century... to degrade and downplay his success all these years later.

              Easily. I was responding to this from PA Playa:

              This story clearly represents what is wrong with society today - that some can't possibly enjoy a level of success without someone else with an ulterior motive searching endlessly through a closet that extends all the way back to the last century... to degrade and downplay his success all these years later.

              ---Has not Bill Cosby and Darren Sharper been "downgraded" years later after women came forward well after the events took place? Whether 1 or 100, I was referring to time lapse. As to reputation, time lapse is irrelevant. If Bill Cosby raped women 40 years ago, he's still a rapist today regardless of those who want to point to how long ago it was.

              If Peyton put his genitals on a woman's head/face against her will when she was trying to perform work duties for UT that's horrific whether it was yesterday or 20 years ago. Time lapse does nothing to soften the horrific nature of the event.

              Oh, PA did refer to "ulterior" motives. He has no idea whether they are ulterior or not but has judged the motive in this case as ulterior. The same exact thing could be said of Bill Cosby by a Bill Cosby supporter.

                  Toulon

                  People should be held accountable sooner or later for their misdoings, yes. That doesn't necessarily mean it has to be publicized. The insatiable appetite for dirty laundry and the exposing of it may only be one ethical/moral step above the acts.

                    Opportunism at its finest. Save the trump card, folks. Sooner or later - it will reap dividends. Even if the claims are contested, inconsistent and therefore ruled unfounded.

                    And I have no idea how Bill Cosby entered into the discussion. Used to be somewhat of a fan, but not any longer. The difference, you ask? A history of wrongdoing. When he wasn't still a kid in school, at that.

                    Yes, in my wold there is a difference. For those that can't or refuse to discern - you have my pity.