Deshaun Watson suspended 6 games

[section314]

14 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

 

 

Good Lord.

[The Crusher]

27 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

 

 

 

[Doggin94it]

2 hours ago, section314 said:

So Harvey can shorten, lengthen or leave the original decision unchanged and that's it?

Yep. That's it.

[JohnnyLV]

1 hour ago, Doggin94it said:

Yep. That's it.

The important bit is Watson was found guilty. An easy out would be to make the suspension indefinite  and handle each case as separate infraction so he can reapply after 24 games. Personally I would just ban him for life.

[Dwight Englewood]

On 8/1/2022 at 3:45 PM, Doggin94it said:

Where are my sexual assault defender friends?  @Dwight Englewood? Anything to say?

Is this an objection you learned about from watching reruns of Matlock?  “Objection your honor, Andrew Brandt tweeted.”

[Dwight Englewood]

On 8/1/2022 at 3:47 PM, bgivs21 said:

Then why 6 games my guy. 

Also go **** yourself. I never defended sexual assault but made my opinions based off of what was presented. Also 6 games for sexual assault, hmmm. 

Two grand juries and a female judge said the case and evidence against Watson were weak

 

But yeah, Andrew Brandt’s tweets?

 

[Dwight Englewood]

On 8/4/2022 at 10:27 AM, PorP said:

Well I can't speak to civil law. So with a grain of salt but.... But that is the opposite of the legal system. 

If I get 5 speeding tickets in a day,  they don't group them together and assess fine / points based on the group. Each is individual with its own fine / points....

Hence why I asked the question in the first place. 

Each alleged incident is listed as a specification of misconduct in the notice of proposed discipline letter to Watson that kicks off the litigation.  Thats how labor law works. 

[Doggin94it]

21 minutes ago, Dwight Englewood said:

Two grand juries and a female judge said the case and evidence against Watson were weak

 

But yeah, Andrew Brandt’s tweets?

 

Oh, Jamie. Did ... did you not read the judge's decision? 

You understand that you could just stop digging at any time, right?

[Doggin94it]

28 minutes ago, Dwight Englewood said:

Is this an objection you learned about from watching reruns of Matlock?  “Objection your honor, Andrew Brandt tweeted.”

I know that you've got mental deficiencies but you recognize that Brandt was quoting from Robinson's decision finding that the NFL had proven that Watson sexually assaulted 4 women, right?

[Doggin94it]

How pathetic does a man have to be to come in here defending Watson after a judge found he was a sexual predator who'd repeatedly sexually assaulted women?

[playtowinthegame]

What an absolute waste of time it was hiring a retired federal judge as a neutral discipline officer to determine if a player needs to be disciplined with a suspension and/or fine only to just make up whatever suspension the league (Goodell) feels will satisfy public outcry. 

[Butterfield]

The league is going to end up losing a lawsuit over this one.  

[Butterfield]

16 hours ago, playtowinthegame said:

What an absolute waste of time it was hiring a retired federal judge as a neutral discipline officer to determine if a player needs to be disciplined with a suspension and/or fine only to just make up whatever suspension the league (Goodell) feels will satisfy public outcry. 

What public outcry.  Outside of this message board, I don’t hear anyone talking about this story.  

[JohnnyLV]

1 hour ago, Butterfield said:

The league is going to end up losing a lawsuit over this one.  

There is basically zero chance the NFL will lose a lawsuit. The language is very clear, the judicial system does not like to overrule CBAs and there is also precedent.

[Butterfield]

1 hour ago, johnnysd said:

There is basically zero chance the NFL will lose a lawsuit. The language is very clear, the judicial system does not like to overrule CBAs and there is also precedent.

Says the same people who thought he would get an indefinite suspension by an impartial judge.  Lol.  

[Mogglez]

3 hours ago, Butterfield said:

The league is going to end up losing a lawsuit over this one.  

Not they won’t.  The precedent was set by the deflategate case.  The NFLPA has no one to blame but themselves for that.

3 hours ago, Butterfield said:

What public outcry.  Outside of this message board, I don’t hear anyone talking about this story.  

Do you listen to sports radio, sports TV, or read Twitter?  It’s all I’ve heard about since the initial ruling.

8 minutes ago, Butterfield said:

Says the same people who thought he would get an indefinite suspension by an impartial judge.  Lol.  

Absolutely no one thought Sue Robinson was giving him an indefinite suspension.  Pretty much everyone assumed it was going to go to an appeal.

[Dunnie]

"Hey DeSean... There is an entire cheerleading team needing new work."



Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[T0mShane]

26 minutes ago, Mogglez said:

Not they won’t.  The precedent was set by the deflategate case.  The NFLPA has no one to blame but themselves for that.

Do you listen to sports radio, sports TV, or read Twitter?  It’s all I’ve heard about since the initial ruling.

Absolutely no one thought Sue Robinson was giving him an indefinite suspension.  Pretty much everyone assumed it was going to go to an appeal.

Robinson’s decision absolutely changed the tone of the public conversation, imo. On the one hand, it ended any debate about Watson’s degree of guilt in the matter(s), but it also put into hard focus how ridiculous the NFL’s disciplinary process has been for decades. The flip side is that those who were advocating for a lifetime ban or even a year-long suspension (Kimes, Battista, Lindsay Jones, etc) were a lot less strident this week when discussing the future of this case, because of the six games baseline that Robinson set. Obviously, Robinson thought that six games was unsatisfactory, but she put the onus on Roger to get his sh*t together. Judy Battista—who has a direct line to Goodell—talked yesterday about where the case goes from here, and she said that the arbitrator will likely “decide” by the middle of next week, and the time between then and now is a negotiating window for Watson’s people to just eat the 12-game/$10 mil fine/counseling option or risk having his contract pushed a year into the future. Cynically, Robinson gives everyone a win because the league gets to look tough by turning six games into twelve, and Watson gets back on the field in time to make make a playoff push and collect his $40+ mil 2023 salary on time.

[TuscanyTile2]

22 hours ago, Dwight Englewood said:

Is this an objection you learned about from watching reruns of Matlock?  “Objection your honor, Andrew Brandt tweeted.”

 

 

[JohnnyLV]

17 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Robinson’s decision absolutely changed the tone of the public conversation, imo. On the one hand, it ended any debate about Watson’s degree of guilt in the matter(s), but it also put into hard focus how ridiculous the NFL’s disciplinary process has been for decades. The flip side is that those who were advocating for a lifetime ban or even a year-long suspension (Kimes, Battista, Lindsay Jones, etc) were a lot less strident this week when discussing the future of this case, because of the six games baseline that Robinson set. Obviously, Robinson thought that six games was unsatisfactory, but she put the onus on Roger to get his sh*t together. Judy Battista—who has a direct line to Goodell—talked yesterday about where the case goes from here, and she said that the arbitrator will likely “decide” by the middle of next week, and the time between then and now is a negotiating window for Watson’s people to just eat the 12-game/$10 mil fine/counseling option or risk having his contract pushed a year into the future. Cynically, Robinson gives everyone a win because the league gets to look tough by turning six games into twelve, and Watson gets back on the field in time to make make a playoff push and collect his $40+ mil 2023 salary on time.

Great summary. Goodell has been amazingly inconsistent. There really should be established baselines for things so its not so arbitrary. 12 games seems just so insufficient especially since they established strong likelihood of guilt. He is a serial sexual predator. That is way up there in severity of violations IMO

[T0mShane]

17 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

Great summary. Goodell has been amazingly inconsistent. There really should be established baselines for things so its not so arbitrary. 12 games seems just so insufficient especially since they established strong likelihood of guilt. He is a serial sexual predator. That is way up there in severity of violations IMO

The league should drag the PA back to the table next week and make DV and sexual assault year-plus-indefinite suspensions. Make a big show of it. Even if it’s largely symbolic, at least put it out there that they agree that crimes of violence against women is unacceptable.

[Mogglez]

52 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Robinson’s decision absolutely changed the tone of the public conversation, imo. On the one hand, it ended any debate about Watson’s degree of guilt in the matter(s), but it also put into hard focus how ridiculous the NFL’s disciplinary process has been for decades. The flip side is that those who were advocating for a lifetime ban or even a year-long suspension (Kimes, Battista, Lindsay Jones, etc) were a lot less strident this week when discussing the future of this case, because of the six games baseline that Robinson set. Obviously, Robinson thought that six games was unsatisfactory, but she put the onus on Roger to get his sh*t together. Judy Battista—who has a direct line to Goodell—talked yesterday about where the case goes from here, and she said that the arbitrator will likely “decide” by the middle of next week, and the time between then and now is a negotiating window for Watson’s people to just eat the 12-game/$10 mil fine/counseling option or risk having his contract pushed a year into the future. Cynically, Robinson gives everyone a win because the league gets to look tough by turning six games into twelve, and Watson gets back on the field in time to make make a playoff push and collect his $40+ mil 2023 salary on time.

Nailed it entirely.  The only thing is that I have my doubts that Watson will settle.  Just call it a hunch.

[T0mShane]

5 minutes ago, Mogglez said:

Nailed it entirely.  The only thing is that I have my doubts that Watson will settle.  Just call it a hunch.

I’d be stunned if they didn’t settle at this point. Florio had it that they didn’t settle prior to Robinson because Robinson effectively told the league she wasn’t going to agree to the year-plus based on precedent, so Watson had that hand to play. But now? It’s either take the settlement or try your luck in the courts, where those precedents are absolutely not in your favor. If Watson gets the season-long suspension, his contract gets kicked forward a year, and he makes $1 mil in 2023 instead of $40+. It’d be insane to risk that over taking the extra six games, imo

[Butterfield]

2 hours ago, Mogglez said:

Not they won’t.  The precedent was set by the deflategate case.  The NFLPA has no one to blame but themselves for that.

Do you listen to sports radio, sports TV, or read Twitter?  It’s all I’ve heard about since the initial ruling.

Absolutely no one thought Sue Robinson was giving him an indefinite suspension.  Pretty much everyone assumed it was going to go to an appeal.

Compared to something like anthem kneeling, this is a non story.  No one at work or anywhere else even realizes this is going on.  Is it a story on sports talk radio?  Maybe.  Ive heard it mentioned a few times.  But compared to the entire public, very few people even listen to that. 

[Dwight Englewood]

3 minutes ago, Butterfield said:

Compared to something like anthem kneeling, this is a non story.  No one at work or anywhere else even realizes this is going on.  Is it a story on sports talk radio?  Maybe.  Ive heard it mentioned a few times.  But compared to the entire public, very few people even listen to that. 

Kaep got a lifetime ban for sitting at the incorrect time.  Seems fair

[Dwight Englewood]

1 hour ago, johnnysd said:

Great summary. Goodell has been amazingly inconsistent. There really should be established baselines for things so its not so arbitrary. 12 games seems just so insufficient especially since they established strong likelihood of guilt. He is a serial sexual predator. That is way up there in severity of violations IMO

Has to have a table of penalties negotiated into the CBA. 
 

 

The issue is the people calling for Watson’s head have been wrong about everything so far.  2 grand juries refused to indict him on anything and the female judge gave about as light a suspension as possible.  Watson should file a grievance and/or file suit in district court if the suspension is increased same way Tom Brady did in 2015

[Mogglez]

2 hours ago, Butterfield said:

Compared to something like anthem kneeling, this is a non story.  No one at work or anywhere else even realizes this is going on.  Is it a story on sports talk radio?  Maybe.  Ive heard it mentioned a few times.  But compared to the entire public, very few people even listen to that. 

Buddy, if you think sexual assault by a high profile QB is a non-story compared to a bunch of kneeling nonsense that absolutely nobody gave a real f*ck about, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

The story has been everywhere that sports are discussed; unless you’ve had your head in the sand the last week.

[Mogglez]

3 hours ago, T0mShane said:

I’d be stunned if they didn’t settle at this point. Florio had it that they didn’t settle prior to Robinson because Robinson effectively told the league she wasn’t going to agree to the year-plus based on precedent, so Watson had that hand to play. But now? It’s either take the settlement or try your luck in the courts, where those precedents are absolutely not in your favor. If Watson gets the season-long suspension, his contract gets kicked forward a year, and he makes $1 mil in 2023 instead of $40+. It’d be insane to risk that over taking the extra six games, imo

We’ll see.  Watson genuinely appears to have zero remorse for what he did and I think he might actually be crazy enough to fight it.  It’s gonna be interesting as anything to see.  If Watson doesn’t settle, I think Peter Harvey is going to lay the hammer on him. 

[Grandy]

3 hours ago, T0mShane said:

I’d be stunned if they didn’t settle at this point. Florio had it that they didn’t settle prior to Robinson because Robinson effectively told the league she wasn’t going to agree to the year-plus based on precedent, so Watson had that hand to play. But now? It’s either take the settlement or try your luck in the courts, where those precedents are absolutely not in your favor. If Watson gets the season-long suspension, his contract gets kicked forward a year, and he makes $1 mil in 2023 instead of $40+. It’d be insane to risk that over taking the extra six games, imo

I read that Watson still maintains his complete innocence and that's why he didn't take the deal with the NFL. At this point from what I've read I'm not so sure the NFL wants to compromise anymore, and even if they did Watson may still be stubborn and willing to fight it out. He got too cocky and should've taken the plea deal immediately.

Looks like the NFL wants to give him the Trevor Bauer treatment which would tank him. Still think this settles at a year with a fine, but sources say the NFL want more than that and I'm not sure Watson has much ground left to negotiate it down. 

[Ron Rico]

The one thing about sex offenders, they never stop. He's going to do it again. 

[T0mShane]

5 minutes ago, Mogglez said:

We’ll see.  Watson genuinely appears to have zero remorse for what he did and I think he might actually be crazy enough to fight it.  It’s gonna be interesting as anything to see.  If Watson doesn’t settle, I think Peter Harvey is going to lay the hammer on him. 

I would imagine it’s all about the money for Watson right now. His guilt or innocence is baked in and is past the point of relevance. Hardin got him to settle with the victims, so it appears Watson isn’t too dug in on it.

4 minutes ago, Grandy said:

I read that Watson still maintains his complete innocence and that's why he didn't take the deal with the NFL. At this point from what I've read I'm not so sure the NFL wants to compromise anymore, and even if they did Watson may still be stubborn and willing to fight it out. He got too cocky and should've taken the plea deal immediately.

Looks like the NFL wants to give him the Trevor Bauer treatment which would tank him. Still think this settles at a year with a fine, but sources say the NFL want more than that and I'm not sure Watson has much ground left to negotiate it down. 

Florio had it that when Watson and the league presented in front of Robinson, she was hostile to the league regarding its process and indicated that she would absolutely not come down with a year+ suspension for Watson based on the existing precedent. At that point, the league presented Watson with a compromise of twelve games. Watson’s team (and the PA) bet on Robinson coming back with a light suspension, and felt no need to bargain with the league at that point. IIRC, if Robinson found that Watson should be suspended for zero games, Goodell would have had to eat that as there would be no recourse beyond it. Bottom line, because Robinson gave him the six games, Goodell has the upper hand in that he could drop the year+ on Watson next week and make Watson take it to federal court, which nobody wants to go through. Twelve games, plus the fine, plus therapy is a hedge that avoids all that. 

[Doggin94it]

6 hours ago, Mogglez said:

Buddy, if you think sexual assault by a high profile QB is a non-story compared to a bunch of kneeling nonsense that absolutely nobody gave a real f*ck about, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

The story has been everywhere that sports are discussed; unless you’ve had your head in the sand the last week.

What you're missing is that Butterfield doesn't give a **** about sexual assault

[doitny]

3 hours ago, Doggin94it said:

What you're missing is that Butterfield doesn't give a **** about sexual assault

sexual assault as defined by the NFL, not what we know it to be. 

she did not find evidence that he touch any women in a sexual way, or had sex or forced sex, no rape. he was found guilty of having his penis touch a body part which under the NFL is consider sexual assault. and then she states that this is a common in massages. 

just thought i would point this out since neither the media or anyone on this board has done. since the report came out i have been hearing about sexual assault. i read the report last night expecting to find evidence of some horrific stuff but nope, its just penis touching the body. which is bad until you find out it happens all the time.

the appeal will stay at 6 games with a big fine. 

 

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

1 hour ago, doitny said:

sexual assault as defined by the NFL, not what we know it to be. 

she did not find evidence that he touch any women in a sexual way, or had sex or forced sex, no rape. he was found guilty of having his penis touch a body part which under the NFL is consider sexual assault. and then she states that this is a common in massages. 

just thought i would point this out since neither the media or anyone on this board has done. since the report came out i have been hearing about sexual assault. i read the report last night expecting to find evidence of some horrific stuff but nope, its just penis touching the body. which is bad until you find out it happens all the time.

the appeal will stay at 6 games with a big fine. 

 

There is only one way for your penis to touch a massage therapist without her consent, and that is sexual assault. 

[Doggin94it]

6 hours ago, doitny said:

sexual assault as defined by the NFL, not what we know it to be. 

she did not find evidence that he touch any women in a sexual way, or had sex or forced sex, no rape. he was found guilty of having his penis touch a body part which under the NFL is consider sexual assault. and then she states that this is a common in massages. 

just thought i would point this out since neither the media or anyone on this board has done. since the report came out i have been hearing about sexual assault. i read the report last night expecting to find evidence of some horrific stuff but nope, its just penis touching the body. which is bad until you find out it happens all the time.

the appeal will stay at 6 games with a big fine. 

 

She found that he deliberately and intentionally exposed himself to women he knew didn't want him to and deliberately and intentionally touched them with his penis knowing they didn't want him to. 

That you don't think that's particularly bad just says that you're a piece of human garbage who shouldn't be allowed around women without supervision (or better yet, handcuffs). But thanks for at least saying it out loud.