Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

NFL OFF FIELD ISSUES


RIPPA

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, supremebve said:

Is been almost 2 whole years of people looking into his bedroom with a microscope and they decide to settle the lawsuits now... it doesn't make any sense. He knows what he did better than any of us,  and if paying to get this to go away was an option why wait? 

From what I remember, his side had been trying to settle, but the attorney for the victims loudly said they wouldn't settle under any circumstances. 

So now, however much longer later, they probably up the offer now, decide they've excised their pound of flesh and this is no longer worth the hassle.  Everyone leaves satisfied, but dissatisfied.   That'd be my hunch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, supremebve said:

Is been almost 2 whole years of people looking into his bedroom with a microscope and they decide to settle the lawsuits now... it doesn't make any sense. He knows what he did better than any of us,  and if paying to get this to go away was an option why wait? 

Yeah, but you settle all of them, not leave 4 accusations of sexual misconduct still set for trial a year from now.  Because those 4 women accusing him of sexual misconduct will still continue the slow drip of nasty perversity and deviancy until we go to trial and if he loses at trial what happens then?  Let's not forget that there were two more women about to file lawsuits on top of what was already there.  Seems kinda dumb.  But what do I know, I'm a criminal lawyer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dolfan in NYC said:

From what I remember, his side had been trying to settle, but the attorney for the victims loudly said they wouldn't settle under any circumstances. 

From what I remember...

Watson (and his attorney) loudly declared that he was innocent and all the charges were false and he wouldn't be settling any of them

Then their side tried to leak that none of the women would settle because they were big meanies and Tony Buzbee was like "Umm... you haven't even made an offer yet"

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lawful Metal said:

I don’t understand the strategy 

You're gonna need to do better than this when you do your lawyer reaction youtube channel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RIPPA said:

From what I remember...

Watson (and his attorney) loudly declared that he was innocent and all the charges were false and he wouldn't be settling any of them

Then their side tried to leak that none of the women would settle because they were big meanies and Tony Buzbee was like "Umm... you haven't even made an offer yet"

 

From what I remember from what he is remembering, there was a report that they offered settlements and some accepted the dollar amount (not all) but the NDA was so strict that they wouldn't agree to the final terms. So either they really really upped the money (very possible and likely) or they made the NDA softer (also possible, or they just gave so much money they didn't care).

I am assuming four either are refusing to settle period or are holding up for more money. Still, getting the number from 24 to 4 before the suspension is announced puts some pressure on NFL to make it shorter so I can understand on his attorney's side why they pushed to get as many settled as possible even if it wasn't all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Report: NFL seeks indefinite suspension of Deshaun Watson, lasting at least one year

Quote

And here we are. At 6:05 p.m. ET, the Wall Street Journal posted an item from Andrew Beaton that contains this extremely noteworthy nugget. The league “is pushing for an indefinite suspension that would last no shorter than one year for Watson.”

Watson and the NFL Players Association, which has a duty under federal law to defend Watson and all members of the union, will fight it. As PFT has reported, one of the tacks they will take is to argue that the proposed punishment does not mesh with discipline or lack thereof for multiple owners who allegedly have run afoul of the Personal Conduct Policy. Beaton’s article confirms this specific report.

By pushing for an indefinite suspension, the league would be protected against the possibility that more women will sue Watson between now and the middle of March 2023, when all relevant two-year statutes of limitations will expire — assuming that Watson ceased the practice of securing private massages through social-media after the first lawsuit was filed in March 2021.

The league’s case, per Beaton, will focus on five of the women who have sued Watson. Those cases have corroboration from text messages and other evidence. “League officials believe those allegations in particular are objectively provable and establish a clear and disturbing pattern of behavior from Watson,” Beaton writes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm already on record with my "throw him the fuck out of the league" stance... But how does the league already know what they are going to suggest three days before the disciplinary hearing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Brian Fowler said:

I'm already on record with my "throw him the fuck out of the league" stance... But how does the league already know what they are going to suggest three days before the disciplinary hearing?

Well it's not the kind if thing you come up with spontaneously, I wouldnt think. Theve done the prep work, and I dont it functions like a court of law.

 

6 hours ago, DangerMark said:

Throwing him out of the league sounds good, but I find that proposed line of defence extremely convincing.

Owners are different than players though, and aren't subject to the cba.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, dogwelder said:

Good.  Indefinite suspension.  Make him reapply every year.  Hope them girls can force him to go to trial.  Hope more girls come forward.  Hope our DA, who apparently is considering prosecuting abortions of all things, grows some balls and reconsiders criminal charges.  A no bill is not an exoneration.  I've had cases that have been to multiple grand juries before they indicted.  I hope it's at least 5 years before he sets foot on a real football field. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DangerMark said:

Should not be exempt from being able to get away with some of the shit they have, though.

Oh i agree, I'm not sure if it's a defense for watson though. . . .

Edited by Kuetsar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kevin Wilson said:

That contract that the Browns gave Watson still lives rent-free in my brain. Every time I think about it or I see a bit about it on TV my mind melts, I still can't believe they'd be that stupid.

Haslam(sp?) Still owns them right? I can believe he is. . .  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've read, people familiar with the NFL's case think it's not as strong as league hopes it is.  Apparently, NFL was only able to talk to five of the women.  Rest refused to cooperate (guessing they had already signed nda's or were afraid to jeopardize civil settlement?).  So, yeah, one-year seems reasonable to me from a pragmatic standpoint.  If it's an indefinite suspension, you can at least sweat him with the idea it might be longer.  Given lack of precedent and the fact that the NFLPA is backing Watson strongly and pushing for a much shorter ban, anything longer than one year seems likely to provoke a court fight.

More interested in what the Browns do if he'd suspended for a year.  Try to make up with Baker?  I don't see that going well, but it might be their best option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Tarheel Moneghetti said:

From what I've read, people familiar with the NFL's case think it's not as strong as league hopes it is.  Apparently, NFL was only able to talk to five of the women.  Rest refused to cooperate (guessing they had already signed nda's or were afraid to jeopardize civil settlement?).  So, yeah, one-year seems reasonable to me from a pragmatic standpoint.  If it's an indefinite suspension, you can at least sweat him with the idea it might be longer.  Given lack of precedent and the fact that the NFLPA is backing Watson strongly and pushing for a much shorter ban, anything longer than one year seems likely to provoke a court fight.

More interested in what the Browns do if he'd suspended for a year.  Try to make up with Baker?  I don't see that going well, but it might be their best option.

Its going to be interesting. I read an article that as this is the first suspension decision of this type under the new CBA with the new "agreed upon" arbitrator process, that neither side would be quick to escalate it as that would immediately show that the new system failed. Keep in mind that the arbitrator was chosen jointly by the NFLPA and NFL as someone they had faith in, and this is the first case going before her so if either side challenged it, it would be a bad look. Plus even though the NFLPA is required to strongly back the players, they rarely have taken issues further than the CBA-specified process in regards to player suspensions.

I don't think talking to only five women is an issue and may even be an advantage, as they can really focus the evidence on the cases most easy to prove instead of just throwing all of them in with some no doubt not having as much evidence. Five is still enough to show a pattern of behavior and its hard to defend if they interviewed ones with written evidence.

I think the mostly likely result is the arbitrator says between 10 games and the whole season, both sides go *grumble grumble not exactly what we wanted but we trust the arbitrator* and everyone goes about their business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There may be up to six more lawsuits to be filed.  I think the only thing they can do is an indefinite suspension for one year, wait for things to shake out.  Remember, him paying out money to settle those 20 cases isn't an exoneration. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Lawful Metal said:

There may be up to six more lawsuits to be filed.  I think the only thing they can do is an indefinite suspension for one year, wait for things to shake out.  Remember, him paying out money to settle those 20 cases isn't an exoneration. 

Its not an exoneration, but I think the most the league has ever suspended someone for off-field conduct that didn't involve official charges was... six games? Peterson got an indefinite but only missed about that number before being re-instated, Elliot got 6, Ben got 6 (reduced to 4), Josh Brown got 6, so that seems to be their magic number. And some that actually were found criminally guilty of a charge never got more than a year. I'm not saying if these things are good or bad but if the arbitrator is looking at how past incidences were handled I don't know if she will go for an indefinite suspension.

What Goodell probably should do is put him on the commissioner list, of whatever NFL calls it, until the new accusations are sorted out as we don't know yet if any of those will lead to charges. Its still a fluid situation so any decision made today may not make sense in a month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...