DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Deshaun Watson Legal Issues

j/c:

NFLPA’s defense of Deshaun Watson will take aim at NFL’s treatment of multiple owners

Eventually and inevitably, the NFL will take action in the Deshaun Watson case. If that action includes an unpaid suspension imposed under the Personal Conduct Policy, the NFL Players Association will mobilize with an aggressive defense on Watson’s behalf.

Per a source with knowledge of the intended strategy, the NFLPA currently is bracing for a recommendation by the league of “unprecedented” punishment of Watson. Whatever the specific penalty, the union will mobilize to defend Watson, as it is required to do by the federal duty of fair representation.

The source explains that the NFLPA would defend Watson in part by making an aggressive argument premised on the consequences, or lack thereof, imposed on a trio of owners who recently have found themselves embroiled in off-field controversy. The argument will be that the punishment of Watson is not proportional to the punishment of those owners, especially in light of this key line from the Personal Conduct Policy: “Ownership and club or league management have traditionally been held to a higher standard and will be subject to more significant discipline when violations of the Personal Conduct Policy occur.”

According to the source, the union’s defense of Deshaun Watson will take specific aim at the league’s handling of Commanders owner Daniel Snyder, Patriots owner Robert Kraft, and Cowboys owner Jerry Jones.

As to Snyder, the union will argue that his punishment in light of the findings and potential recommendations of attorney Beth Wilkinson was weak and not fully enforced. As to Kraft, the union will argue that Kraft received no punishment despite allegedly receiving a massage became a sexual encounter. (Although Kraft was charged with solicitation, the case was dismissed based on the fact that the video surveillance utilized by law enforcement violated the rights of the various persons who were secretly recorded.) As to Jones, the union will argue that the league failed to investigate the voyeurism scandal involving former Cowboys P.R. chief Rich Dalrymple, including but not limited to the key questions of what Jones knew, when he knew it, and whether he knew that Dalrymple was secretly recording multiple cheerleaders while they changed their clothes.

The union believes that these arguments will be more likely to find traction than in the past, given the adoption in 2020 of a new, independent process for assessing potential Personal Conduct Policy violations committed by players. With Commissioner Roger Goodell or his designee no longer presiding over the effort to evaluate the evidence and reach a decision, the Disciplinary Officer ( retired federal judge Sue L. Robinson) could decide to allow the union to fully explore the manner in which the league handled Snyder, Kraft, and Jones.

The union, for example, could get access to evidence from Wilkinson’s investigation, the league’s handling of the information, and the key question of what Wilkinson would have recommended, if the league had bothered to ask her for a recommendation. (As previously reported, she would have recommended that Snyder be forced to sell.) The union also could get access to internal communications regarding whether Kraft should be disciplined, and whether Jones and the Cowboys should be investigated.

This approach would be separate from defending Watson against any claim of wrongdoing. It would be based on whether, even if he violated the policy with a habit of arranging private massages and trying to make those massages become sexual encounters, any punishment of Watson must be justified by the punishment imposed on Snyder, the non-punishment imposed on Kraft, and the lack of even an investigation of Jones.

Whether and to what extent this defense will hold any real water — and will gather any real evidence — will depend on Judge Robinson, who was jointly hired by the league and the union. But if the league means what it says when it says that owners are held to a higher standard and will be subject to more significant discipline for violations of the Personal Conduct Policy, the manner in which Snyder, Kraft, and Jones were handled by the league becomes directly relevant to the manner in which Watson is handled, too.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...im-at-nfls-treatment-of-multiple-owners/

You must have different definition of "all day" than most of us do.

Absolutely he can. Most, if not all, of the people that would get called won't be Browns fans that are ingesting this story day in and day out.

And some of the stories include leaving at the moment the incidents happened. But sometimes things get ignored because people do not wish to see things as they are. It makes them feel better about their decisions.

Now all the union has to do is show when it comes to the owners that it was not consensual. That there were multiple cases over a long period of time. That's where they'll fall short. Does it make the incidents with the owners right? No, it doesn't. But trying to make a comparison isn't going to fly. I'm not sure what part of consensual people are missing.

I know. I have met every one of them several times....not sure of ONB...not even sure who you are mentioning...none of them have posted much in years. Jules several times a year she shows up a few times a year. I saw Michelle post maybe a year or two ago. The others, maybe not much since the board switched over.

It's this exact reason why I have the remaining skepticism that I do related to the Watson saga. Presenting a much larger portion of the deposition of that investigator paints a MUCH different picture than what the earlier Buzbee leaks do.

If I'm convinced of anything, it's that Buzbee is a master in working the court of public opinion, and Hardin doesn't hold a candle to him there.


add: I just finished reading the part about the investigator's take on coercion and consent. I cannot wrap my brain around someone articulating that a women can't legally give Watson sexual consent because of who he is... and that person having such an influential position in the legal proceedings (both as an investigator and as an influential witness in pending civil cases). She said women can't give consent to someone who is famous and a big strong dude, and that during the investigation, the burden of proof is on Watson to prove his innocence.

Glad Watson's defense is implementing this as one of their strategies to their arsenal. The NFL has a long and poor history when they have played judge, jury, and sometimes executioner. This needs to be highlighted and used as a weapon by Watson's defense team. In fact, I have been calling for that in multiple threads. Although, I did leave out Jones and put some others in there. I would not limit it to just the owners, though. The NFL clearly screwed Ezekiel Elliot. The NFL's sorry history of how they treat the rich, white owners vs the black paid help is terrible and needs to be exposed.

consensual

relating to or involving consent or consensus.

"consensual sexual activity"

While agree with you about the overall perspective that rich people (read white NFL owners) is treated differently then people with less power and wealth I don’t think it’s purely based on what color you have on your skin. I can see Michael Jordan and several other rich and famous celebrities who’s not white having similar protection as Kraft and Jones. Money and having influential powerful friends is always a good insurance against stupid mistakes.

Having a half hearted union as NFLPA, Cleveland Browns and their supporters as your allies isn’t enough protection when Roger Goodell represent all owners and has to defend whatever decision he makes to the national media. Most members of the NFLPA is also in many way financially depending on these NFL owners so there is a limitation how much they are willing to fight. Remember that 26 female witnesses telling the same thing is a high mountain to climb even for a union.

Regarding Deshaun Watson I just hope he starts to understand what “consensual sexual activities” means. Just because he pays a women for a “service” doesn’t mean he can do whatever he want. This is what these civil law cases is all about and if he don’t have any intentions to make a economical settlement with all the plaintiffs then it will probably cost him (and the Browns) several years of wasted time.

Yeah watson is poor not rich. I mean if you consider a quarter of a billion dollars as being poor. I mean that makes you "the paid help" like maids from the late 1800's though, right? Standing up for women now seems to be a tool to use in claiming the NFL is anti black.

just my opinion, but the NFLPA argument is sound when you think about how they're going about this.

the NFL isn't a government entity, so the union have huge credibility to bring up the lack of punishment against the owners as it relates to the players, which speaks toward the wild inconsistency in which they handle punishments within the league.

we have to remember that Zeke got 6 games, even though the NFL investigator lied and was fired, and other investigators didn't deem the accusations credible. so Zeke got 6 games for nothing.

so that isn't a defense of DW's behavior, but from the union's perspective, you have 2 grand juries who didn't even bother to indict, and a bunch of lawsuits that will lead to no criminal charges regardless of outcome. so if the owners won't be held responsible for reprehensible behavior, then the NFL has no business holding some imaginary standard on the players that are paid by said owners.

You are absolutely correct, but that won't stop it from happening. The NFLPA will put up a fight, and the league - Goodell - will have a prepared excuse as to why this is different.

It comes down to the fact that Goodell works for the league owners, so Goodell will do what the collective owners tell him to do, and they aren't going to eat their own unless they're ready to destroy their own or run them out. The players are the employees, and the ownership and employees always play to a different set of rules... and, literally, this is the difference here. The CBA. Under the CBA, the league can and should suspend and punish for personal conduct. There is no such agreement between the league and the owners, or none that I know of... thus, ANY action against the owners is PURELY discretionary.

Agreed, and I have been saying that for awhile. I have even taken it a step further. If the NFL wants to come down hard on Watson, his defense team should launch a full-go onslaught against them. I'm talking about another major lawsuit levied against the NFL and their inconsistent and unfair decisions in regards to players [especially black players] and the white owners. I'd be bringing in all the info from the Flores lawsuit, the Snyder case, the Zeke case, etc, etc.

While the NFL can render their own decisions right now as we have been reminded about many times, that doesn't mean it's right that they get to play judge and jury and unfair labor practices could be a real issue here.

This and a lot of the owners are pissed about the contract. I could see them handing down a brutal suspension just to teach Jimmy a lesson. Between this whole thing making the NFL look bad, Jimmy handing out that contract, and the fact that the Browns get treated like the league's unwanted relative at the cookout... It could be damn near anything coming. Fair or not. I expect paid leave until the cases are resolved. The NFLPA can argue that all day, but the league will site protecting the brand, and DW will be getting paid. The browns will get punished by that, so the owners will back it. It's all speculation until it happens, but they are under pressure to do something. Then when it's all resolved, the suspension will happen, and probably a fine. Also, because of the number of women, if DW starts losing these cases, I think they'll make an example out of him to silence the anti-women vibes of this case and the past cases that they were too light on. But he may not get anything at all...

Agreed, as much as their is Watson backlash for the situation the Browns tossed fuel on the fire and will be paying for it too.

j/c:

Let's be real just for a minute. The owner who is really upset is Baltimore's owner because he was in the process of having to negotiate Lamar's new contract and now everyone who knows the situation is talking about how Baltimore is going to have to pay Lamar more than we did Watson or risk him sitting out. That is actually a good thing. Not a bad thing for the Browns.

Owners can be upset all they want but someone was going to get the first fully guaranteed contract sooner or later. I think it was inevitable. And it was inevitable to be a QB. Next will likely be some EDGE if I had to guess.

You and FrankZ could be 100% right about the owners, but all I know is the talking heads made a very big deal out of it like it was egg on the Brown's face. All I'm saying is be prepared for anything, we're the Browns.

Report: Browns Owners Unpopular at League Meetings MAR 29, 2022

Cleveland Browns owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam recently attended the NFL owner’s meetings last Sunday. The meetings actually interfered with their biggest acquisition, maybe ever. That exact transaction was a reason that other owners were not fond of the Cleveland owners at the meeting.

Peter King described Jimmy and Dee Haslam as “not the most popular people at the league meetings on Sunday” in King’s most recent Football Morning in America piece. King said he heard “lots of grumbling” from people around the league.

Browns gave Deshaun Watson a fully guaranteed contract over the length of five years. The contract was worth a total of $230 million dollars. With Cleveland signing Watson to such deal, other quarterbacks in the league will want something similar.

Essentially the deal reset the market in a way, with how deals actually work. Players will now want a fully guaranteed contract just like Watson got. It is going to the the new standard likely.

This means there will be less money going into the owners pockets. Owners can’t cut players and owe them no money anymore. Players will have contracts that are fully guaranteed across, when it gets to that point.

At the end of the day the Haslams were willing to risk that with the acquisition of Watson. The team believes this is the best path for them to get to where they want to go. Andrew Berry has said they believe you must have top-10 quarterback play. Cleveland believes they have that.

Yeah, but it's not just him; he's just the first big one coming up. Haslam reset the bar for ALL QB DEALS going forward with this.... and, like Frank pointed out, this will soon cascade to other premier position groups like Edge and Cornerback. It's the whole "the Genie is out of the bottle" aspect, not the myopic short-term view.

I get what you are saying - and maybe you are right. Maybe this was inevitable.

But - just like the flack the Browns are facing over Watson ... it does no good to say "Someone was going to get him" - or "Someone was going to pay a guaranteed contract" .... In both cases it was the Browns. The Browns will bear the brunt of the scrutiny - not the other's that 'nearly' signed him, not the next team to offer a fully guaranteed contract .... those arguments to me seem more about deflection than dealing with what the Browns chose to do and the scrutiny they are now receiving.

And I firmly believe it was inevitable.

Owners can be mad, but someone was going to be the first. We'll see how bad it is for them the next time the CBA is renegotiated.

It's not Watson at all, it is purely on the shoulders of the Browns to be the ones to push this envelope.

The fact that they did it with a guy that had 22 unresolved lawsuits for SA and it's an unknown when he will see the game field is just the cherry on the turd sundae.

j/c:


Now, let's see who is really upset w/the Browns and why.


Folks can look at all of this how they want, but personally, I am happy that the Rats owner is mad and it's hurting his negotiations w/Lamar.

Btw----I have not personally seen quotes from other owners saying they are mad at the Browns and want to make things difficult for them. I may have missed it.

So are you suggesting the Ravens are the only team now or in the future that will have a QB or other Star on their team that will demand a fully guaranteed contract? And if so, then that's why the rest of the NFL doesn't care - it's only the Ravens? And that's a good thing?

You probably aren't saying that ... and because that's not what you are saying the idea the other teams int he NFL aren't pissed at the Haslam's doesn't seem to hold water. Any team with a franchise / difference maker is going to face this same issue at some point.

j/c:

j/c...

I'm not sure how big the impact of Haslam's deal will be, it's easy to see that it can't possibly be a positive though. Anyone else notice our only trades in the first five rounds were with Houston and Minny? Not a real indicator, but I bet there were a few teams simply not answering the phone, or answering to laugh in our face. Bottom line, all that cash has to go in an escrow account, and there a more than a few owners who are way too cash poor to even entertain the idea. That "un-levels" the playing field... and rich men don't like that.

Let me ask you two questions. Now in the first place don't think what I'm asking you means that I think it's right. I don't. But the facts don't always line up with what's right.

Here is a fact people seem to be avoiding....

The NFL owners have no conduct policy nor are they under a contractual obligation to answer to a conduct policy. The players on the other do and are.

So the players union can say anything they like. They can claim, and it is a double standard. The problem comes when you get to the legal issue here.

They voted, signed and voluntarily agreed to a contract that holds them responsible for their conduct. It is a part of the collective agreement contract.

The owners did not.

So first are the players obligated to the standards they agreed to in their contracts? Are the owners to be held to a standard that they did not contractually agree to and sign? As much as it's a terrible fact, it is a fact none the less.

I saw some info and decided I wanted to verify by checking out the Draft Report on Watson.

Some of his Strengths:
Big, strong hands to pump fake and manipulate
Keeps ball tucked near his chest when scanning
Has traits to operate out of boot-action attack


Seriously though, here is the full version:
Overview
Teams will have to weigh the inconsistent field vision and decision-making against his size, athleticism, leadership and production. While not perfect, teams can add checks to both arm and accuracy boxes for Watson. However, discussions about whether or not his areas of improvement can be corrected will likely determine whether a team will view him as a high-upside prospect or a franchise quarterback. Watson's transition from Clemson's offense to a pro-style attack will obviously take time, but his combination of intangibles and athletic ability make him worth a first-round selection.

Strengths
Tremendous leader and winner
Good pocket posture with quiet upper body
Good pocket mobility and doesn't show much panic when pocket gets noisy
Sacked just 32 times over his last 1,181 drop-backs
Willing to stand in and deliver the ball against rib-wreckers on a clear path for him
Has history of clutch play in big games and big moments
Averaged 472 yards of total offense with eight total touchdowns and one interception in his two championship appearances against Alabama
Throws with anticipation and touch
Fires hips through throws for improved drive velocity into tight windows
Arm strength currently limited by mechanical issues that are correctable
Big, strong hands to pump fake and manipulate
Keeps ball tucked near his chest when scanning
Has compact, over-the-top release that uncorks a tight, pretty spiral
Throws with adequate accuracy on the move
Has traits to operate out of boot-action attack
Tremendous athlete who has ability to pick up chunks of yardage on ground
Has called running plays could ignite a stagnant offense
Has instant juice out of pocket to make defense pay if rush lanes are vacated
Does a good job of sliding or eluding square collisions in space as a runner
Dual-threat weapon near end zone who will create additional preparation time for coaching staffs looking to limit his effectiveness in the red area
Every meaningful passing stat improved in close-and-late situations in 2016.

Weaknesses
Frame is a little more slender than teams typically like
Accuracy runs hot and cold
Tends to over-stride on drive throws, causing release point to drop and balls to sail
Ball placement on crossing routes and slants needs to improve
Will leave throws behind intended targets
Deep-ball accuracy has been scatter-shot over his last two seasons at Clemson, with throws sailing well beyond his target
Design of offense limited his need to make full-field reads
Has to become adept at working through progressions and playing chess against safeties
Needs to let routes develop rather than rushing anticipatory throws
Too many interceptions due to lack of vision, placement or decision-making
Threw interception vs
Troy against bracketed coverage he didn't see
Baited into bad-decision interceptions twice by Florida State cornerbacks
Has issues improvising away from initial, pre-snap plan even when pathway to target becomes muddy
Shotgun quarterback who, like Jared Goff, could take time getting used to huddling, pace of play-calling and drop-backs from under center

Prospect Info

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...subject-to-nfls-personal-conduct-policy/


add: I should highlight that this article was from back when Kraft was in the news with the happy ending massages. IIRC, the latest CBA was signed after this. I'd be surprised if they struck something like this out of the latest agreement, but I supposed that's a possibility.

Good read, thanks alot!

I edited that post to make sure you notice the date on that article.

Thanks for the info.

Per a source in Watson's defense team, the NFL will push for a full season suspension, with additional suspension possible pending any new information.

"Everyone"

Again none of it is good.

So, in the language Kraft or Jerry Jones is no different than DW.

"Personal Conduct Policy"

JMO, but I fail to see the equivalence between what Robert Kraft did, and the charges alleged by Watson's 26 (and counting) accusers. The issue is consent.