Deshaunapolooza ****Official Deshaun Watson Speculation Megathread**** (Merged eleventy bajillion times)

[jgb]

16 minutes ago, dcJet said:

@jgb, @football guy

Thanks for the respectful, informed and passionate debate.

Ask 2 lawyers a question, get 3 different opinions  

[bla bla bla]

2 hours ago, flgreen said:

Yeah he's pissed.  If there is no hope between between them, why not just demand a trade? 

Have a feeling in two weeks if the Texans hire Bieniemy it will all be resolved.  As long as Watson gets everything he wants.  Otherwise there is no reason not to be screaming for a trade right now, and putting some REAL heat on them.

I suppose the trade could happen, but all I see so far is smoke, and media trying to fan it into fire. we've seen this kind of behavior from the media many times. 

We'll see, but getting all  excited at this point is just going to lead to frustration.  Like I said when Watson gets serious, then I start thinking of what could be.   

 

[bla bla bla]

54 minutes ago, football guy said:

Unless the owner explicitedly said, “hey Deshaun, I want you to choose”, I don’t understand Deshaun’s grevience. The owner asked for his opinion. Going out of the way to meet with him to discuss it is a sign of the utmost respect and at the very least consideration. Since when did asking for an opinion mean that Deshaun should be handed the keys? Since when does it mean that the Texans will take his input? Listening and acting are two entirely different things.
 

All this is nonsense. I feel bad for the fans who have convinced themselves that Deshaun is in the right and furthermore who think he’ll be traded. All this comes down to is Deshaun’s reps controlling Deshaun. Sad.

I'm not talking about choosing, we are talking about the Texans openly ignoring the input they asked their star QB for. If I ask you for your input and you say

"I would like to see Bieniemy or Saleh get an interview"

And then I turn around and ignore you, literally the only teams not to interview Saleh or Bieniemy (the Bieniemy interview happened only after the media blew everything thing up)

[Mogglez]

7 hours ago, oatmeal said:

Are you serious? Did I @ you ? Did I mention you or anyone else for that matter?  Talk about a hit dog hollering ?
 

Things that’s creepy to you.... Nice,

Well what’s creepy TO ME is grown “men” getting emotional because someone doesn’t believe in the BS their selling.  What’s also creepy to me is JetNation “insiders” that comment under every post as if they are more knowledgeable than verified media sources.

Something else I find extremely creepy is  this idea that; “The owner of this site agreed with me and said I’m legit, so now you must believe me” - Mega creepy Imo
 

AND THE MOST CREEPY THING TO ME IS  GROWN MEN BASICALLY BEGGING TO BE BELIEVED ON A FORUM. ???

Maybe I should’ve started a thread kissing you and the other guys behind instead of writing a post on a thread that has nothing to do with you ?
 

Now,
GO TAG MODS AND TELL ON ME LIKE THE OTHER DUDE OR @ ME AS THE REASON YOU WONT GIVE ANYMORE “INTEL” SO THE HIVE MIND BELIVERS ON THIS SITE CAN ATTACK AND DOWNVOTE ME INTO OBLIVION ?

All I’m waiting for now is the “because the people like _________” post that will trigger the wolf pack ???

BUT REMEMBER YOU STARTED THIS BY COMMENTING UNDER MY POST ?

Lol, there’s absolutely zero shot you are over the age of 15.

I’ve already said to you once before that I’m not going anywhere or stopping what I do, especially over you or anyone “not believing me”, especially since I’ve since proven myself to anyone with functioning eyeballs and the ability to read.  I just figured that if you want to be a passive aggressive little worm with your “sub-posts” that I would throw it back at you a little bit.

Don’t bother responding.  I’m done here.

[flgreen]

6 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

 

I've read it many times on here.  Media trying to present rumors to get hits.  Nothing new in that.

As I said, when Watson calls a press conference and demands a trade, it will have  credibility.  Until then, it's just internet gossip.

As I asked, why hasn't Watson called that presser if the situation is beyond repair?  Kind of sounds to me like he is waiting to see what happens with Bieniemy.  

If he demands a trade, OK I'm all for the Jets investigating what it will take to get him here.  Until then it's all noise.  

[DetroitRed]

2 minutes ago, flgreen said:

I've read it many times on here.  Media trying to present rumors to get hits.  Nothing new in that.

As I said, when Watson calls a press conference and demands a trade, it will have  credibility.  Until then, it's just internet gossip.

As I asked, why hasn't Watson called that presser if the situation is beyond repair?  Kind of sounds to me like he is waiting to see what happens with Bieniemy.  

If he demands a trade, OK I'm all for the Jets investigating what it will take to get him here.  Until then it's all noise.  

If Schefter had that reputation, he’d have a lot less credibility and followers

[bla bla bla]

2 minutes ago, flgreen said:

I've read it many times on here.  Media trying to present rumors to get hits.  Nothing new in that.

As I said, when Watson calls a press conference and demands a trade, it will have  credibility.  Until then, it's just internet gossip.

As I asked, why hasn't Watson called that presser if the situation is beyond repair?  Kind of sounds to me like he is waiting to see what happens with Bieniemy.  

If he demands a trade, OK I'm all for the Jets investigating what it will take to get him here.  Until then it's all noise.  

I get that stance, I just don't think you do all these things if you are happy with a situation. Going and interviewing a guy that I wanted after you exhausted all other options doesn't feel like you respect my input.

[bitonti]

7 minutes ago, DetroitRed said:

If Schefter had that reputation, he’d have a lot less credibility and followers

many say "Screw Schefter" meanwhile he's probably the most reliable source on twitter 

Schefter takes this stuff way more seriously than any of the expired supermarket ground beef in this forum, myself included 

[flgreen]

1 minute ago, DetroitRed said:

If Schefter had that reputation, he’d have a lot less credibility and followers

Are you kidding?  people love this stuff.  Schefter, and some  others, have a larger platform to shout from, so people accept it.  Not going to, but I'm willing to bet you, or I could find all kinds of things Schefter has predicted that never happened.

Some scribes are better then others, but they are all in the same business.   It's fun to speculate, and post about the gossip, but I'm not going to get all emotional about it, then in three weeks be posting "man Douglas really screwed that up, Watson was dying to come here, and the Jets screwed it up".

When Watson demands a trade publicly then I'll get excided   

[Doggin94it]

47 minutes ago, jgb said:

My friend, didn't want to get into this but so be it. You must have a different specialization. How courts interpret restraints on labor mobility is Employment Law 101:

All first-year law students learn the rule that “[a] promise to render personal service will not be specifically enforced,” and many of them learn that the Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition on “involuntary servitude” requires this per se rule. American courts, treatise writers, and commentators frequently justify it on these grounds.

https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1073&context=facpubs

And this is coming from a guy arguing that it should work like you suggest -- I chose the source most in favor of you. Every other I could find accepts my position as settled law and the bedrock of Employment Law (which, of course, it is). But even he does and must acknowledge that my interpretation is correct before spending 20 pages arguing for a change. He makes some interesting arguments, give it a read. You're clearly passionate about this. Maybe it'll give you some ideas for how to write your employees' contracts for your business.  

You disagree on principle -- I respect that. You think Watson is a malcontent. I disagree and that's fine. But legally he's well within his rights. And the Texans -- as any employer -- cannot constructively bar you from plying your chosen trade and force you to "go be a real estate agent" or anything else because you refuse to work for them. In a related well-known legal principle, a non-compete clause is only enforceable if it is narrowly-tailored in both time/geography and signed only with an exchange of bona fide consideration. A law firm -- for example -- can bar you from working for their competitor across the street for a year (depending on jurisdiction). They can't make you turn in your bar card at the door and never work as a lawyer again, no matter what the contract says. A Court will never uphold a threat of career annihilation unless you continue to work for your employer -- that's why it's a 13th Amendment issue -- yes the Amendment outlawing slavery and involuntary servitude (hey, SCOTUS "found" abortion rights in the 14th Amendment, lol). An illusory choice -- work for us or we vaporize your ability to continue being in this field -- is not a choice. And in fact, your position does a really nice job emphasizing how disparate the power levels are between the league and the union. The NFLPA basically exists to legitimate the league's actions like the Washington Generals to the Globetrotters.

Like I said, I've changed my views quite a lot on this topic. Basically a 180. I was once where you are now. You said in your first reply that I was being emotional by supporting players in these situations. I counter that my "a contract is a contract is a contract, get your ass on the field or GTFO" position (apologies to Gertrude Stein) was the emotional one.

Yeah, this is not a correct legal analysis at all. While a court won't specifically enforce a contract for personal services - that is, the Texans couldn't go to court and get an order compelling Watson to take the field for them - a court would find for them on a breach of contract claim and award damages for his failure to perform, and absolutely would enforce the period of exclusivity imposed by the contract, since it was supported by legal consideration. And since the contractual tolling during a holdout is a collectively bargained term of the agreement between the NFL and the union Watson is a part of and that governs his workplace, a court would enforce that, too.

So yeah, if the Texans wanted to (and Watson was equally serious about never playing for them again) they could absolutely end his career and sue him for damages for his breach of contract. They won't, because that wouldn't be to their benefit either now or long term. But they absolutely could, as a legal matter

[JohnnyLV]

Has anyone thought about what Saleh would prefer?

Sure it is easy to say that he would want a Top 5 QB, but it might not be that simple.

Getting Watson leaves him with less other players and less cap to build a winning team. Watson did go 4-11 on a crappy team.

Getting Watson changes his personal narrative. Now there is added pressure. He is expected to win earlier. They have to develop the offense for Watson which might no align perfectly with what they do.

I am sure Saleh believes he can coach anyone up.

So getting say Wilson and developing him into the exact offense they want, with more draft capital and less "win now" pressure might be a much better alternative in his mind.

 

[flgreen]

8 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

I get that stance, I just don't think you do all these things if you are happy with a situation. Going and interviewing a guy that I wanted after you exhausted all other options doesn't feel like you respect my input.

What?  lol

Nothing to do with respect, I disagree with your conclusion.  

Yes, he's not happy, that's obivious.  He wants his way.  IMO odds are high that when he gets it, it will go away.  We'll see, but until he takes the next step, it's all just rumor.

 

[jgb]

8 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

Yeah, this is not a correct legal analysis at all. While a court won't specifically enforce a contract for personal services - that is, the Texans couldn't go to court and get an order compelling Watson to take the field for them - a court would find for them on a breach of contract claim and award damages for his failure to perform, and absolutely would enforce the period of exclusivity imposed by the contract, since it was supported by legal consideration. And since the contractual tolling during a holdout is a collectively bargained term of the agreement between the NFL and the union Watson is a part of and that governs his workplace, a court would enforce that, too.

So yeah, if the Texans wanted to (and Watson was equally serious about never playing for them again) they could absolutely end his career and sue him for damages for his breach of contract. They won't, because that wouldn't be to their benefit either now or long term. But they absolutely could, as a legal matter

I stand by the legal principle 100%. This is what I've been saying. The NFL has such a disparate power advantage and they have used money and influence to get exceptions to Anti Trust and Employment law and thus they are the bad guys and players should pull every lever they can without remorse to get what they believe is in their best interest.

People trying to turn this into a moral issue and make Watson out to be the bad guy are cheering for the movie villain.

But yes, due to this absurd power advantage and sweetheart legal exceptions, the NFL can destroy you. It's completely wrong morally, ethically, legally and constitutionally. They didn't write a check to Kaepernick because they are good guys -- they were petrified of exposing their practices to legal scrutiny.

 

 

[ZachEY]

Guys, I've been quiet, but I'm tired of seeing him take abuse.  I'm @Mogglez's source within the Jets.

AMA.

[RutgersJetFan]

Just now, TeddEY said:

Guys, I've been quiet, but I'm tired of seeing him take abuse.  I'm @Mogglez's source within the Jets.

AMA.

Symbolic penis: Still a thing or has humanity moved on?

[jgb]

1 minute ago, TeddEY said:

Guys, I've been quiet, but I'm tired of seeing him take abuse.  I'm @Mogglez's source within the Jets.

AMA.

Are the Jets ready for a FQB or should we just make the team awesome first then dial 1-800-FQB-TIME?

[ZachEY]

2 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Symbolic penis: Still a thing or has humanity moved on?

Still symbolic.  Still a thing.

[ZachEY]

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

Are the Jets ready for a FQB or should we just make the team awesome first then dial 1-800-FQB-TIME?

We are petitioning for a redo of the 2017 Draft.

Hoping Broadway Mitch falls to us.

[Jetsfan80]

5 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

Still symbolic.  Still a thing.

When is your book on the topic getting published?

[Waka Flocka Flacco]

5 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

Still symbolic.  Still a thing.

specific performance: still a thing or have courts of equity moved on

[Beerfish]

19 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

Has anyone thought about what Saleh would prefer?

Sure it is easy to say that he would want a Top 5 QB, but it might not be that simple.

Getting Watson leaves him with less other players and less cap to build a winning team. Watson did go 4-11 on a crappy team.

Getting Watson changes his personal narrative. Now there is added pressure. He is expected to win earlier. They have to develop the offense for Watson which might no align perfectly with what they do.

I am sure Saleh believes he can coach anyone up.

So getting say Wilson and developing him into the exact offense they want, with more draft capital and less "win now" pressure might be a much better alternative in his mind.

 

Yup and the Jets pitch to Saleh came before the whole Watson thing.  I'm sure his name never came up.

[DetroitRed]

25 minutes ago, flgreen said:

Are you kidding?  people love this stuff.  Schefter, and some  others, have a larger platform to shout from, so people accept it.  Not going to, but I'm willing to bet you, or I could find all kinds of things Schefter has predicted that never happened.

Some scribes are better then others, but they are all in the same business.   It's fun to speculate, and post about the gossip, but I'm not going to get all emotional about it, then in three weeks be posting "man Douglas really screwed that up, Watson was dying to come here, and the Jets screwed it up".

When Watson demands a trade publicly then I'll get excided   

Absolutely he has. ( not sure I’d call it his predictions)But he does not have a reputation of reporting outrageous stories.  There is a reason for his high regard.  His reporting is not the same as incarcerated Bob.  We can’t lump them all together

[hokiejetfan92]

I have a question about this that I couldn't find online if anyone here can help.

So leaving out the Jets in this scenario, I'm asking about the salary cap rules in regards to hold outs

In the case that either Watson or Rodgers sits out, and their respective team decides to play hardball... So we get to the regular season now.

I get if they are sitting out, so they are not gonna get paid, However since they technically could come back at any time, the Texans and Packers cannot reallocate their salary cap right?

So if Houston decides not to deal Watson and he holds out, they are technically going to have $25 million lesss than other teams on their roster? Or are they allowed to re allocate the money at some point? Thanks because this should give the players and hopefully the Jets a lot of leverage

[flgreen]

6 minutes ago, DetroitRed said:

Absolutely he has. ( not sure I’d call it his predictions)But he does not have a reputation of reporting outrageous stories.  There is a reason for his high regard.  His reporting is not the same as incarcerated Bob.  We can’t lump them all together

Didn't say that, but his reporting something doesn't make it so.

After a 15 second google search.

 

"This is nothing about smoke, this is nothing about leverage, this is nothing about them not getting the price they wanted. This is about one thing plain and simple: they really like Jimmy Garoppolo and they don't want to get rid of Jimmy Garoppolo.  They think that good, young quarterbacks in this league are tough to come by.  It is the most valuable commodity there is.  If you don't have a good young quarterback, you are doomed."

"Again, Tom Brady is 40 years old.  He's been able to do it for an awful long time and again, I think they would love to see him do it for 10 more years, but who knows how much longer he is going to play for?"

Then they moved on to trade rumors, which is the "it" Schefter's referring to below:

"You guys can keep it alive and keep talking about it and keep wondering, but I am just telling you Jimmy Garoppolo is going to be on the Patriots in 2017 no matter who calls them and what anybody offers.  He's going to be on their roster this summer."

That's pretty definitive.

[nycdan]

8 minutes ago, hokiejetfan92 said:

I have a question about this that I couldn't find online if anyone here can help.

So leaving out the Jets in this scenario, I'm asking about the salary cap rules in regards to hold outs

In the case that either Watson or Rodgers sits out, and their respective team decides to play hardball... So we get to the regular season now.

I get if they are sitting out, so they are not gonna get paid, However since they technically could come back at any time, the Texans and Packers cannot reallocate their salary cap right?

So if Houston decides not to deal Watson and he holds out, they are technically going to have $25 million lesss than other teams on their roster? Or are they allowed to re allocate the money at some point? Thanks because this should give the players and hopefully the Jets a lot of leverage

As I understand it, the salary is on a hold against the cap and released week by week as it isn't spent.  So if a player has a $17M salary for the year, for example, the team can't spend it before the season, but $1M becomes available every week which they can spend or roll over into the next season. 

So short answer, yes, it does hamper the Texans if he holds out, but as his 2021 salary isn't huge (I think around $10.5m), it's not a crippling issue.  The rest of the cap impact due to pro-rated signing bonus would apply no matter what since that cash has already been spent.  I don't know what happens if a team actually goes after paid signing bonus and gets some back but I assume it becomes a credit to the cap.

If anyone has a different take (perhaps a new rule I haven't seen) please do jump in.

[oatmeal]

1 hour ago, Mogglez said:

Lol, there’s absolutely zero shot you are over the age of 15.

I’ve already said to you once before that I’m not going anywhere or stopping what I do, especially over you or anyone “not believing me”, especially since I’ve since proven myself to anyone with functioning eyeballs and the ability to read.  I just figured that if you want to be a passive aggressive little worm with your “sub-posts” that I would throw it back at you a little bit.

Don’t bother responding.  I’m done here.

Again why are you @‘in me I’m the first place? 

[Columbia Jet Fan]

For those wondering about why Watson isn't doing a major press conference demanding a trade - I thought this article from Mike Sando from the Athletic did a pretty good job of showing the strategy he's probably going after: 

 

5. The latest reports suggest Watson wants out of Houston no matter who the Texans hire as head coach. Now is a good time for a refresher on who represents Watson.

Watson’s agent, David Mulugheta, also represents Los Angeles Rams cornerback Jalen Ramsey, which is instructive for what is happening with Watson in Houston. Ramsey forced his way out of Jacksonville at a time when players were pushing back against a rigid culture put in place there by then-executive Tom Coughlin. Ramsey made clear his desire for a trade and was unwavering without ever saying anything especially inflammatory to the public. The public understood the Jaguars had issues. There was no real backlash against Ramsey. He got his way, landed with the Rams and eventually signed the contract extension he coveted.

Watson could be playing the long game as well. He is pushing back against a culture and structure he finds objectionable in Houston. He has gotten his message out without wavering and without saying anything especially inflammatory. The public can see the Texans have issues. There is no backlash against Watson. That could change depending upon who the Texans hire as head coach and what the coach says publicly, but so far, Houston hasn’t demonstrated an effective public strategy.

The agent’s job in these situations is to make sure the player understands the big picture, that in order to force a trade, the player must be prepared to lose money in the short term. For Watson, that means being prepared to sit out the 2021 season if necessary. For the agent, conveying a consistent message to the team in a professional manner can be more effective than making frequent demands. That would seem to be Watson’s approach.

[Guilhermezmc]

Wtf is this thread becoming

[UntouchableCrew]

49 minutes ago, flgreen said:

Are you kidding?  people love this stuff.  Schefter, and some  others, have a larger platform to shout from, so people accept it.  Not going to, but I'm willing to bet you, or I could find all kinds of things Schefter has predicted that never happened.

Some scribes are better then others, but they are all in the same business.   It's fun to speculate, and post about the gossip, but I'm not going to get all emotional about it, then in three weeks be posting "man Douglas really screwed that up, Watson was dying to come here, and the Jets screwed it up".

When Watson demands a trade publicly then I'll get excided   

I mean, there's a big difference between a Schefter/Rapoport/Woj types and your general talking heads. Not saying it's gospel, but those are "breaking news" guys who have reputations and not just media types who throw stuff out there.

[UntouchableCrew]

15 minutes ago, flgreen said:

Didn't say that, but his reporting something doesn't make it so.

After a 15 second google search.

 

"This is nothing about smoke, this is nothing about leverage, this is nothing about them not getting the price they wanted. This is about one thing plain and simple: they really like Jimmy Garoppolo and they don't want to get rid of Jimmy Garoppolo.  They think that good, young quarterbacks in this league are tough to come by.  It is the most valuable commodity there is.  If you don't have a good young quarterback, you are doomed."

"Again, Tom Brady is 40 years old.  He's been able to do it for an awful long time and again, I think they would love to see him do it for 10 more years, but who knows how much longer he is going to play for?"

Then they moved on to trade rumors, which is the "it" Schefter's referring to below:

"You guys can keep it alive and keep talking about it and keep wondering, but I am just telling you Jimmy Garoppolo is going to be on the Patriots in 2017 no matter who calls them and what anybody offers.  He's going to be on their roster this summer."

That's pretty definitive.

I mean, most indications were that Brady made a power play and went directly to Kraft. So my guess is his sources were correct, Brady just went over the head of the traditional decision makers.

[Sonny Werblin]

[ZachEY]

53 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

When is your book on the topic getting published?

Dropped by Simon and Schuster.

[ZachEY]

55 minutes ago, Waka Flocka Flacco said:

specific performance: still a thing or have courts of equity moved on

Moved on, it seems.

[T0mShane]

7 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

Dropped by Simon and Schuster.

Have you tried moving your title to a Simon and Schuster affiliate that caters to the penis and sedition market? 

[Pac]

Today on The Watson Chronicles:

Deshauns girlfriends mom confronts McNairs wife