Jump to content

Deshaun Watson suspended 6 games


Rhg1084
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, playtowinthegame said:

 

So you think all 24 cases were equal in strength? More like they chose the best ones. I guess there wasn't enough time for let's say at least a ⅓ of the cases. 🤨

They picked their best 4. But no, having actually tried cases, putting on more than they did in the time allotted would have basically been impossible. At best you're getting diminishing returns, at worst you're short-changing one case to put on a bad presentation of another. These things take real time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doggin94it said:

They picked their best 4. But no, having actually tried cases, putting on more than they did in the time allotted would have basically been impossible. At best you're getting diminishing returns, at worst you're short-changing one case to put on a bad presentation of another. These things take real time

Volume of offenses actually means something.  I know the legal system does not give a spit but it does. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Larz said:

Reports now that goodell is expected to appeal by Thursday for a significantly longer suspension and a fine 

So he is going to play to start the season.  I think that is a bigger disaster. Especially if they lose in court.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DetroitRed said:

So he is going to play to start the season.  I think that is a bigger disaster. Especially if they lose in court.  

Curious how that works, because Roger would be increasing the penalty for the four cases Robinson presided over, Watson has settled with three of those, and Buzbee said the other day that the fourth might be open to settling. Presuming Watson settles with Solis, and the PA sues Roger, what does that case look like in court if all the alleged victims are under NDAs? I get that it would be Roger vs Watson, but what are they arguing? That Roger, via the CBA, has unchecked powers to decide discipline? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Naive? Sure. But I figured that those staunch Texas defenders of both women and minorities would at least split the difference between the two, especially in service of influential wealthy members of the local establishment. 
 

I’ve done some reflecting on my opinion on this and I think what happened is that I conflated what I *thought* would happen with what I *wanted to* happen, and I ended up defending a scumbag position because of my native interest in  being right online. Gross, but it’s been a learning experience.

Personally I think you jinxed the whole thing. 

  • Sympathy 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dbatesman said:

I think he does, doesn’t he?

So, I’ve read and heard opinion pieces stating that either Goodell is contractually empowered to lower the hammer however he wants and, if brought before a judge, the judge would simply point to that clause as a binding agreement and Watson would be cooked in no time at all. But I’ve read/heard other opinions saying that Goodell would have some difficulty eliding Robinson’s decision based solely on public response, and it may simply not be worth going to the mattresses over it. Then there’s the factor that Goodell allegedly try to settle with Watson’s camp on a 12-game suspension with a $9- or $10 million dollar fine, meaning it’s possible that Goodell would invite this sh*tstorm down upon the league to ensure Watson comes back in December instead of October, which seems arbitrary. I’d think that if he appeals it at all, he has to go for the full season and they have to see it through, no matter what, because simply tacking on a few more games as part of a what is now a public relations push seems nonsensical. And I think if he goes for the year, the PA—as Robinson stated—can argue that it’s so far beyond the existing precedent that it weakens the league’s hand considerably. 

2 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Personally I think you jinxed the whole thing. 

Jinxing is within my talent swatch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"tacking on a few more games as part of a what is now a public relations push seems nonsensical."

Dude this is the NFL, this is exactly what is going to happen, bump it up a few games to say 'we fought the good fight!'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

"tacking on a few more games as part of a what is now a public relations push seems nonsensical."

Dude this is the NFL, this is exactly what is going to happen, bump it up a few games to say 'we fought the good fight!'

I mean “nonsensical“ in that how does a few extra games satisfy anyone out there who is pissed about Watson seemingly getting away with actual sexual assault? How can the Mina Kimes’ and Lindsay Jones’s and Rich Eisens of the media world go out and say that six games was a grievous insult, but ten/twelve games is good enough? That’s why I think Roger has to try for the year, but if he tries for the year, doesn’t that make them vulnerable, before a judge, to have them conclude as Sue L Robinson did—that it’s wildly overreaching based on precedent?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

I mean “nonsensical“ in that how does a few extra games satisfy anyone out there who is pissed about Watson seemingly getting away with actual sexual assault? How can the Mina Kimes’ and Lindsay Jones’s and Rich Eisens of the media world go out and say that six games was a grievous insult, but ten/twelve games is good enough? That’s why I think Roger has to try for the year, but if he tries for the year, doesn’t that make them vulnerable, before a judge, to have them conclude as Sue L Robinson did—that it’s wildly overreaching based on precedent?

Oh I agree but the NFL is caught between hey look at our nice new arbitrator!  She is swell.  Then seeing she seems to have no clue how to approach this and making her look totally irrelevant by going for a year.

One of the more annoying sidelights of these shenanigans is the browns paying him only 1 mill this year knowing full well he is getting suspended so his actual loss of money will be minimal.   All the money he saved on that little tactic is what he used to pay off the woman.

The whole damn thing is so seedy.

  • Upvote 4
  • Sympathy 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Browns and Watson knew a suspension was inevitable so they structured his deal with a joke 1M base salary.

After assaulting 26+ women, Watson will forfeit just 350K in salary.

Ridley lost all 11M of his ‘22 salary for placing a $1500 bet on his own team from his living room.

In Goodell’s (if he doesn’t “appeal”) eyes, a player placing a nominal bet on a game is a million times worse than sexually assaulting 26+ women.

Interesting priorities and messaging.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Curious how that works, because Roger would be increasing the penalty for the four cases Robinson presided over, Watson has settled with three of those, and Buzbee said the other day that the fourth might be open to settling. Presuming Watson settles with Solis, and the PA sues Roger, what does that case look like in court if all the alleged victims are under NDAs? I get that it would be Roger vs Watson, but what are they arguing? That Roger, via the CBA, has unchecked powers to decide discipline? 

First of all they would not need to retry the cases rhe arbitrator ruled that he was guilty of sexual assault

 Second burden in the NFL is preponderance of evidence or *more likely than not"

Third, Bill Polian said that the CBA is ironclad and courts are  very reluctant to overrule the language of a CBA, so in the end Goddell can do whatever he wants and ultimately the NFLPA will lose. Interesting thing is if Watson does sue it could cost him an a real fortune.

NFLPA will want to sue because of perception and the extreme outside chance of strengthening their position.

The NFL was brilliant in the last negotiations to tailor things to the average player so even though  all the big names and the vast majority of player reps were vehemently against it it still passed

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Oh I agree but the NFL is caught between hey look at our nice new arbitrator!  She is swell.  Then seeing she seems to have no clue how to approach this and making her look totally irrelevant by going for a year.

One of the more annoying sidelights of these shenanigans is the browns paying him only 1 mill this year knowing full well he is getting suspended so his actual loss of money will be minimal.   All the money he saved on that little tactic is what he used to pay off the woman.

The whole damn thing is so seedy.

I think her whole opinion boiled down to “Watson is guilty, the evidence is clear, and this is how Roger Goodell’s NFL has historically punished players who are guilty of these lurid crimes: a mere six games. Fix your system, Goodell, you vile piece of sh*t, and don’t try to make this a one-time carveout just because you’re getting bodied by Mina Kimes on First Take.” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

First of all they would not need to retry the cases rhe arbitrator ruled that he was guilty of sexual assault

 Second burden in the NFL is preponderance of evidence or *more likely than not"

Third, Bill Polian said that the CBA is ironclad and courts are  very reluctant to overrule the language of a CBA, so in the end Goddell can do whatever he wants and ultimately the NFLPA will lose. Interesting thing is if Watson does sue it could cost him an a real fortune.

NFLPA will want to sue because of perception and the extreme outside chance of strengthening their position.

The NFL was brilliant in the last negotiations to tailor things to the average player so even though  all the big names and the vast majority of player reps were vehemently against it it still passed

 

 

 

I think Bill Polian eats soup through a straw, so anything he says has to be looked at through that prism. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

The Browns and Watson knew a suspension was inevitable so they structured his deal with a joke 1M base salary.

After assaulting 26+ women, Watson will forfeit just 350K in salary.

Ridley lost all 11M of his ‘22 salary for placing a $1500 bet on his own team from his living room.

In Goodell’s (if he doesn’t “appeal”) eyes, a player placing a nominal bet on a game is a million times worse than sexually assaulting 26+ women.

Interesting priorities and messaging.

I think there’s more to the Ridley suspension that we may not know about. There were some clips from when played last year where it looked liked he may have been shaving points (which the NFL would do their best to hide ). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

The Browns and Watson knew a suspension was inevitable so they structured his deal with a joke 1M base salary.

After assaulting 26+ women, Watson will forfeit just 350K in salary.

Ridley lost all 11M of his ‘22 salary for placing a $1500 bet on his own team from his living room.

In Goodell’s (if he doesn’t “appeal”) eyes, a player placing a nominal bet on a game is a million times worse than sexually assaulting 26+ women.

Interesting priorities and messaging.

The league can survive harboring twenty rapists in it. It wouldn’t survive if gamblers got spooked and walked away.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, T0mShane said:

I mean “nonsensical“ in that how does a few extra games satisfy anyone out there who is pissed about Watson seemingly getting away with actual sexual assault? How can the Mina Kimes’ and Lindsay Jones’s and Rich Eisens of the media world go out and say that six games was a grievous insult, but ten/twelve games is good enough? That’s why I think Roger has to try for the year, but if he tries for the year, doesn’t that make them vulnerable, before a judge, to have them conclude as Sue L Robinson did—that it’s wildly overreaching based on precedent?

My brain is too dumb to comprehend the legalities of this but I'm 100% in agreement with you here.  I really dont understand how does a few extra games suddenly satisfy everyone.  Just bizarre.  And I'm not advocating one way or the other but the idea that if the league dropped a 10 or 12 game suspension would make everyone happy is just weird.  Very weird. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Why shouldn't the NFL take a seperate action for each victim?  Why should Watson effectively be punished as if this was a one off?

because he would be 56 before he saw the field and the Browns would be bankrupt then the city of Cleveland would unleash dogs from their pound on the rest of us.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SickJetFan said:

because he would be 56 before he saw the field and the Browns would be bankrupt then the city of Cleveland would unleash dogs from their pound on the rest of us.

The Browns being bad for 10 years is survivable.  See the NY Jets as an example. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, JiFapono said:

Why is this surprising to you?  Nobody cares or remembers or gives a flying **** about this stuff as long as they're scoring TD's on Sunday and helping their fantasy football team win.  Look at Mixon and Hill, these dudes are literally celebrated and they have smoking gun evidence they physically abused a woman.  Ray Lewis held a man down in a limo while his buddy stabbed him death and he's celebrated as the greatest leader/motivator/MLB of all time.

And guess what?  Same thing will happen with Watson.  This will all be a fleeting memory. 

 

sadly - this sums it up perfectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, JiFapono said:

Why is this surprising to you?  Nobody cares or remembers or gives a flying **** about this stuff as long as they're scoring TD's on Sunday and helping their fantasy football team win.  Look at Mixon and Hill, these dudes are literally celebrated and they have smoking gun evidence they physically abused a woman.  Ray Lewis held a man down in a limo while his buddy stabbed him death and he's celebrated as the greatest leader/motivator/MLB of all time.

And guess what?  Same thing will happen with Watson.  This will all be a fleeting memory. 

 

Normally would agree with this.  Watson isn't done abusing women.  This isn't a one off or done.   He doesn't think he did anything wrong and he's going to continue to abuse women and likely get outed again in the future.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Normally would agree with this.  Watson isn't done abusing women.  This isn't a one off or done.   He doesn't think he did anything wrong and he's going to continue to abuse women and likely get outed again in the future.  

Meh, I cant speculate on what Watson will or wont do, I have no idea what impact this has had on him and his character, that said, you might hold this over him for his career but by in large, like the picture posted, most people really dont care and I think the casual fan, probably isnt following this all that closely.  As soon as he's back out there, throwing TD passes, he's a hero again.  Could be wrong but we have a precedence here, this will run it's cycle and be done with, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, T0mShane said:

I think Bill Polian eats soup through a straw, so anything he says has to be looked at through that prism. 

I thought that was Geno Smith, at least for awhile. 

  • Sympathy 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/2/2022 at 9:56 AM, Doggin94it said:

"The past standard was 3 games for molesting one woman. I find he molested 4. 6 games"

NFL will be appealing this, and the idea that Watson somehow didn't have fair notice that touching women with his penis when he knew they didn't want it might subject him to discipline is a joke.

"I mean, if he knew there would be consequences to his actions, he wouldn't have done it. It's just not fair to expect him to expect consequences!"

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/2/2022 at 10:12 AM, T0mShane said:

Naive? Sure. But I figured that those staunch Texas defenders of both women and minorities would at least split the difference between the two, especially in service of influential wealthy members of the local establishment. 
 

I’ve done some reflecting on my opinion on this and I think what happened is that I conflated what I *thought* would happen with what I *wanted to* happen, and I ended up defending a scumbag position because of my native interest in  being right online. Gross, but it’s been a learning experience.

I forgive you, T0m.

zach braff scrubs GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JiFapono said:

Why is this surprising to you?  Nobody cares or remembers or gives a flying **** about this stuff as long as they're scoring TD's on Sunday and helping their fantasy football team win.  Look at Mixon and Hill, these dudes are literally celebrated and they have smoking gun evidence they physically abused a woman.  Ray Lewis held a man down in a limo while his buddy stabbed him death and he's celebrated as the greatest leader/motivator/MLB of all time.

And guess what?  Same thing will happen with Watson.  This will all be a fleeting memory.

^^This.

And that is why I root for Global Warming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Biggs said:

Why shouldn't the NFL take a seperate action for each victim?  Why should Watson effectively be punished as if this was a one off?

Yeah, that's what really got me in the decision, when the judge referred to him as a "first time offender."

Like, what? There's two dozen women accusing him. Just because we discovered it all at about the same time doesn't make him a first time offender. That's like saying Jeffrey Dahmer was a first time offender because they found all the bodies in his fridge at once.

"Mr. Dahmer has never been accused before of killing and eating people, and I really think we should take that into account. People around him also said he was 'a nice guy'."

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Biggs said:

Normally would agree with this.  Watson isn't done abusing women.  This isn't a one off or done.   He doesn't think he did anything wrong and he's going to continue to abuse women and likely get outed again in the future.  

He certainly hasn't shown any inkling that he believes he did anything wrong, and the Browns even rewarded him with a fat, fully guaranteed contract that was constructed to protect him.

People who don't face real consequences have no incentive to change.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...