DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Will Watson be the Browns Starting QB...continued

Ben R. raped. Twice. He stationed his bodyguards at the entrance of the bathroom, if memory serves, so that he could rape. He got 6 games reduced down to 4, if memory serves. I also don't recall any sort of apology tour after that situation was resolved. Since then, we've come a long way (or maybe we haven't), and the landscape has certainly changed, but I don't think it's so much so that DW won't be able to recover from this. We still trot Jim Brown out there to wave to the fans and stuff, and nobody has pulled down the Ray Lewis statue. I think any talk of permanent damage is getting ahead of ourselves.

I'll also add that I'm speaking only about the national attention/attitude about this situation right now. I'm not trying to put words in your or anyone's mouth about how they should/will feel about this.

I get all of that oober. And I hope it goes just the way some of these guys think it will. I want to root for the team and not have this BS over our heads. I'm only saying, I think it will be worse than any 4, 6, or 10 games. And I base that on a lot of things the talking heads are saying and where we are as a nation regarding this kind of stuff. I will be shocked if the suspension is less than a year. And I don't think the NFL will let him play this year at all. That's where I think the paid leave will come in first because the NFL won't under-punish this like others in the past, IMO. What did they give Kareem Hunt? 8 games. That was not a good look at all and yet was nothing like the scale of what is alleged here.

It wasn't just the Browns organization that wanted Watson. And remember, there are a lot of things from the defense's arsenal that have not come out yet.

Jeez, I totally forgot about Ridley. It makes no sense, but that would be totally the MO of the NFL to give Watson less time for his issue than Ridley got for betting on a game.

Quoting the above in its own post because you and I appear to be in the same space on this. My skepticism has more to do with hope than anything else. If he's guilty of everything they say he is, I have a really hard decision to make.

And then beyond that, I'm actually ok if we ("we" being the NFL, its fans, etc) decide that we're setting a new bar for this type of stuff and effectively saying that the days where athletes can get away with anything are over... so long as the powers that be decide that's really what they want and all it entails. What I see as more likely is that the NFL decides they "have" to make a bunch of noise here and then do nothing the next time it happens because it's taking a big name off the field at an inopportune time.

This is what’ going to happen, sooner or later. No way the NFL will let him play in season 2022 or maybe not even until he has solved all his law suits.

[video:youtube][/video]

Well, I guess since he probably won't go to prison that makes this entire thing so much better.

Sure, they're just holding on to it for a rainy day in the middle of the current hurricane.

Yes, a grand total of three other teams bidding on him besides the Browns. We just "outstupided" the rest of them with an almost one quarter of a billion dollar, fully guaranteed contract.

I'm not sure how anyone considers that a positive thing.

Whatever they're holding onto would be... for the trial???

I'm certainly not a lawyer and I don't know all the details of the case but, and it's just a thought, maybe DW should get together with his lawyer sit down with the defendants and try and work out some type of a solution to all this if it's still possible. JMO

That's certainly a possibility if you think they're sitting there taking an onslaught by the press and NFL fans without making any serious attempt to do damage control. I mean they're certainly willing to speak to the press as we've seen of late. But I can't for the life of me believe that as more and more cases come out, as information comes out that you were having massage therapists sign DNA's, that you would keep all of this vital evidence some seem to claim they have all hidden away. Sure I could see them keeping some of it hidden for trial, but you have 24 cases to pick from and you're not using anything to try and defend your client?

And I know what the standard comeback will be from some and how this works. "Well watson and his lawyer are classy and those massage therapists and their lawyer are low life's!"

Yeah, that's not how any of this works.

You're right. The defense will present their evidence and findings during the trial[s.] I didn't think that was unknown to people. Oh well...

I think at one point that would have been his best path forward. I'm not sure what legal advice he was given or if he actually followed the legal advice he was given. But the problem here is that he's been very vocal about his innocence over and over again and continues to so in public and through the media. He continued to do so when these latest cases were filed just last week.

I'm sure we've all seen the standard statement attorney's give their clients. They all go pretty much like this... "On the advice of counsel I can not comment concerning the ongoing litigation". Then your lawyer or legal team becomes your spokesperson. It's much more rare that people in watson's situation speak out on such matters themselves.

At some point your own words sort of paint you into a corner. You have reached the point of no return. It's not your attorney's word or reputation on the line at that point, it's your own. Sort of like the old saying about how people keep digging the hole deeper. I'm not sure where that point comes. I'm also not sure at this point, as much as he's said he's innocent and how long he's proclaimed his innocence that if he settles with them now, he won't be throwing himself into the hole he's dug.

He wasn't saying that at all Pit, scroll up and read the convo we had.

For example, in the Zeke case, text messages that the alleged victim had sent to her friend about blackmailing Zeke were discovered. It was also found out that she asked her friend to lie for her. I have tried to bring up that the defense and the teams that wanted to trade for Watson have their own Private Investigators. Both the defense and the Browns have addressed that they are confident of what will transpire once all the facts come out. Those facts are not going to come out now. The defense will present their evidence [provided they have any] at the trials.

Things could get dicey for the NFL if they try to suppress evidence in Watson's case like they did in the Elliot case. The precedence has been set and that is why I have suggested the defense go on the attack if the NFL wants to act unfairly. What is fair and unfair is beyond my scope of knowledge and that is why I have maintained that I am willing to wait until all the facts are presented before I condemn either side.

Yeah, well this time there's 24 women. I guess they must all be lying according to some. And those investigators couldn't see into the future. They had no way of knowing more cases were coming and that the Texans had provided watson NDA's for these women to sign at massage sessions. Unless of course you think they could have seen into the future. I'm thinking not.

Let's face it, there were 22 known cases at the time. Here is how much time the Browns themselves say they investigated this.....

Browns spent five months looking into Deshaun Watson in process of pursuing him

https://www.cleveland.com/browns/20...atson-before-deciding-to-pursue-him.html

With a total of 22 cases, at the time, that averages out to just slightly less than one week per case. Hmmmm.....

j/c:

I wonder what would happen if an investigation discovered that the opposing attorney acted unethically while composing his case? For example, one or more of the things that are discussed here: https://www.alabar.org/office-of-general-counsel/formal-opinions/2009-01/

Who knows what will happen between now and April 2023? Not I. Nor you.

Tony Buzbee Wins Texas Lawyer's 2015 Attorney of the Year Award

https://www.law.com/texaslawyer/almID/1202741511436/

Was your comment concerning watson's attorney, Hardin? Come on man, the guy is 80 years old. How tough would you think they'll be on him?

*YAWN* Somebody please wake me up when a suspension is handed down. I'm sick of wasting my time watching others fight about the same crap over, and over, and over, and over, and over, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, over, and over, and over, and over, and over.

Exactly, no one knows, which is why the most logical short term outcome is either Commissioners Exempt list or an indefinite suspension pending legal outcome. That is really the only thing that saves the Shield from further scrutiny. Deshaun Watson didn't play in 2021 and it didn't hurt profitability for the league. The one thing that COULD hurt that profitability is to dismiss these issues with a defined suspension which cannot take future events into consideration. That is what happened with Ray Rice and the league vowed to never make that mistake again.

[video:youtube][/video]

There is no such thing as "normal." Or perhaps, his situation isn't "normal."

jc...

Just how definitive this information is, we can't be sure but it does seem that the Browns and Browns fans might be closer to knowing how the NFL might rule on the issue of suspension. Will the NFL try to get ahead of the Watson issue before Goodell testifies before Congress this coming week..? It might be a good decision, rather than waiting until after Goodell sits down before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform to answer questions on various subjects, that might include Watson's situation.


Report: NFL to “probably” seek a one-year suspension for Deshaun Watson

Posted by Mike Florio on June 17, 2022, 4:01 PM EDT
link


When Major League Baseball suspended Trevor Bauer for two years due to allegations that, at their core, involve sexual consent and the violation of it, we asked whether this meant the NFL will suspend Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson for a full year. Reportedly, the league will try to impose something along those lines.

Mark Maske of the Washington Post reports that the NFL will argue that Watson should receive a “significant” suspension, and that the league “probably” will ask for a one-year banishment.

The Disciplinary Officer jointly hired and paid by the NFL and the NFL Players Association, retired federal judge Sue L. Robinson, would then determine whether she should impose a suspension of that magnitude, something less than that, or no suspension at all. If the end result is no discipline of any kind, the case ends. If any discipline is imposed, Commissioner Roger Goodell would have jurisdiction over an appeal by either or both sides. He could reduce it, or he could increase it.

Some think that the league will deliberately overshoot its preferred suspension, assuming that Judge Robinson will reduce whatever is imposed. Thus, if the league asks for a year, she could potentially cut it to eight or 10 games. If the ultimate goal is to have Watson suspended for a full year, the league may need to propose something more than that.

Per Maske, NFLPA outside counsel Jeffrey Kessler has become involved in the case. The league reportedly is concerned that Kessler will push for no discipline at all.

Maske confirms our report that, in defending Watson, the NFLPA will point to the punishments imposed (or not) on Commanders owner Daniel Snyder, Patriots owner Robert Kraft, and Cowboys owner Jerry Jones to support the argument that Watson’s punishment, if any, should reflect the consequences those owners received — especially since the Personal Conduct Policy warns that owners are held to a higher standard than players.

Maske adds that the league would like to have the situation fully resolved before training camp opens, but that the approach taken by Watson and the NFLPA could delay the outcome. Don’t blame Watson if that happens, NFL. You’ve had months to investigate the situation and to make a decision. When the time comes for Watson and the NFLPA to present a defense, it should take whatever amount of time it needs to take. And that should have been factored into the timing of the initiation of the process.

Per Maske, the league could impose discipline against Watson based on currently available information, with the understanding that further discipline could be imposed if new information surfaces. That could get tricky for the league. If, for example, he’s suspended eight games and proceeds to lose any, some, or all of the 24 (soon to be 26) lawsuits pending against him, the NFL surely wouldn’t be able to suspend him again simply because juries believe the testimony of the plaintiffs and impose verdicts against Watson. There would have to be something truly new — new claims, new evidence. Something that the league didn’t already know or that it shouldn’t have known, through reasonable investigative steps.

Although Maske’s story doesn’t mention paid leave, that remains a viable alternative. First, that process doesn’t involve Judge Robinson. Second, it defers a final decision until all litigation ends. Third, it gives Watson a clear incentive to settle the cases pending against him.

Whatever happens, the clock keeps ticking more and more loudly. Presumably, a decision is coming soon. It should happen be no later than Friday, July 1 — the one-year anniversary of the epic, four-day weekend bad-news dump regarding the Commanders, a woefully inadequate (and sloppily enforced) penalty against Snyder, and a blatant effort by the league to hide the specific facts that, if disclosed, quite possibly would have made it untenable for Snyder to continue owning the team.

I'm glad that we're not the only ones trying to figure out how this new system works, lol

At this point, I think a suspension of less than a year would surprise me more than a full year.

I hear you. And just so everyone knows, I was not comparing the attorneys. I am simply saying that the there are a plethora of possible scenarios that the defense could present. We are not privy to that information and to say this or that will be the outcome is premature. If the cases get to trial, the defense will undoubtably have some ammunition that they have not yet revealed to the public.

Irish, I hear you on the Rice situation and it is a HUGE factor. No doubt. As is the public and media outrage if they don't punish Watson. On the other hand, the Zeke case, the cases w/the owners, the racial discrimination suit, etc also have to be considered. While it is a fact that the NFL has their policies in place, there is a lot of talk, especially in the black community, about how the NFL is riding a dangerous and steep slope in putting themselves in the position where they are the judge, jury, and executioner. This is especially true given their poor decisions and biased rulings in the past.

I hear you, GM. I posted the Clowney news. No one responded. I have posted numerous football posts on Watson. They are ignored. It is what it is.

What did the NFL do when they investigated Snyder and all the corruption and indecency w/in Washington's organization?

I'll tell you what................they made some of Grudin's emails public. The public was outraged because he "talked" about racism, sexual preferences, etc. He was a sacrificial lamb handed by the NFL on a silver platter for the media and public to stab w/their bloody forks while Snyder and his organization who actually was racist and committed secusal misconduct walked free.

Once again, Watson's defense team needs to be very aggressive if the NFL wants to play hardball.

That's probably because the majority is either staying silent OR you are clearly in the minority supporting Watson at this point. Nobody is saying you're wrong, because you should be a fan your way. But maybe you should stop bashing others for not feeling like you feel about DW, or follow the people staying silent. This constant complaining that many don't feel the hype is BS on your part. That's all I have to say about that. Have a great weekend Vers, and keep up the good fight brother.

vers...I responded to your post...guess you missed it because you might not have gotten the response you wanted to hear.

Go back and look..!

As a NFL owner the Haslams family (and also GM Andrew Berry) has to be careful with making too much enemies inside the NFL community.

That’s why I think both the NFLPA and the Haslams probably are careful with publicly supporting Team Watson in a legal battle against 26 women who also seems to have the backing of the media and he majority of the public opinion.

What’s the best way forward for Deshaun Watson can easily come in conflict with what’s best for the Cleveland Browns.

Just read on PFT that the nfl is likely recommending a year. To be completely honest I think that would be a bargain and all parties should be happy with it. The way things are going I would’ve have expected something open ended and/or potentially considerably longer.

I don’t expect him and his legal team to start doing smart things out of the blue but he goes away for a year maybe they can either get serious about settlements or pull up the trial schedule… in order to get serious about settlements. Reality is this is and always was going to be a slew of settlements. No lawyer in their right mind would let a celeb athlete client perp walk in front of the cameras 26 times (and counting) no matter how slam dunk they think it is. And he said she said trails have every chance of going every kind of sideways. That might be the only way to make all this exponentially, hilariously worse. I mean, oh my god.

Anyway, my money is on a year. That’s manageable and it sates the blood thirst. And I actually wouldn’t be super surprised if Brissett lit it up. Funny things happen when basically all pressure and attention is removed.

Bro, I've given a lot of thought to the Clowney comments. I'm convinced Watson must be an incredible teammate... much better than Baker could ever aspire to be. I'm sure a lot of other posters share my sentiments.

We good now?

When I say "Watson's team," I am talking about his attorneys. The Browns could--and should--stand by their player during the process that leads up to the conclusion of the actual trials.

Is that snark?

And I wasn't whining as SB suggests. Just stating a fact. I have tried to interject some football conversation into these threads in the PFF and people are not responding. Not sure what is wrong w/me saying that??????

More LO frikken L !!!! THAT IS ALL.