DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Watson Suspended 6 Games

Teams will stack the box and force Brissett to throw. With our questions at WR, the TEs will really have to step up.

The short pass, executing time consuming drives, not being down in the 4th quarter, and the defense staying healthy will make the difference.

Brissett doesn't have to win games for us, just don't lose them. It'll be interesting to see how Stefanski calls them.

3-3 wouldn't be disastrous. Just don't want to see Rosen or Dobbs.

Let's consider a few things if the NFL appeals:

---How does it look if the NFL overrules a former Federal Judge on the very first case she is presiding over? How are they legally more capable than she is?

---How does the NFL lose their appeal? Thus, is it really an appeal or are they just overruling her ruling? Does that make sense? I'm saying if the NFL appeals her ruling, what chance is there of the NFL ruling against their own appeal?

---Will the NFLPA's promise of a lawsuit that will drag the NFL's name through the mud make the NFL hesitant to go forward w/an appeal?

---Contrarily, will the threat of public outrage coerce the NFL to appeal?

if brissett can manage a 3-3 record, thats still so much time to win the division, never mind getting into the playoffs!

#BadTakesExposed
https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.php/topics/1957335/4

Did teh NFL choose Judge Robinson or was made in conjunction with NFLPA? To me, the NFL will look pretty stupid if the very first case she hears, and the NFL comes out with a "we are not happy with what she decided so her decision is out the window" it will make them look like buffoons. Also, there will be people pointing out that overruling a female experienced judge will not have a great "look".

NFL, NFLPA must publish Judge Robinson’s decision in the Deshaun Watson case

Posted by Mike Florio on August 1, 2022, 10:25 AM EDT
link


So why did Judge Sue L. Robinson suspend Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson for six games? Great question. And it’s impossible to answer that question without reading her ruling.

We’re told that it’s a 16-page document. But we haven’t seen it yet.

For now, the NFL and the NFL Players Association have not published the decision. The union responded to our question as to whether the decision will be released by saying that it doesn’t know. The league has not yet responded to an email and a text message raising the question.

The decision needs to be released. Freely and publicly and openly. Not as a commodity slipped to an reporter who is either on the NFL’s payroll (literally) or who has put someone at 345 Park Avenue on the Christmas chocolate list. It need to be posted by the NFL and the NFLPA at their websites, now.

That’s how it had always been, before the Washington investigation was brushed under the rug. Full transparency. How else can anyone understand why Judge Robinson did what she did? To the extent that the league needs the general public to buy in to the decision, people need to be able to read it. To understand it. To see what the evidence was. What it wasn’t. And how she came to the conclusion that Watson violated the policy and should miss six games for it.

Obviously, the names of the four accusers whose claims triggered the suspension would have to be redacted from the ruling. (And maybe they already are.) It would be unfortunate, but not surprising, if the league doesn’t want to do that.

Concealing the names of the accusers would expose the stupidity of that NFL’s position that it wasn’t good enough to simply change the names of the cooperating employees in the Washington case, and that the only way to protect the witnesses was to hide all of the evidence. If the league releases Judge Robinson’s ruling with the names of the accusers omitted, the league will face a renewed call to do the same thing with Beth Wilkinson’s report in the Washington case.

you know florio is ticked off. he wanted watson to burn at the stake.

Most of the media does. Kyle Brandt, Jamie Erdahl, and Judy Battista on GMFB were outraged. Jamie almost couldn't keep doing the show. I just shake my head.

Mac I know you are just publishing this, so this is not pointed at you...


What a freaking crock....
We do not "NEED" this to be public. We want it to be public. This, essentially, is an internal business matter. What other company in the US has to publicize the results and happenings of their internal disciplinary process??? If Joe factory worker in the UAW was brought up on charges and had a disciplinary process...is the UAW or the Auto Company posting everything for the whole world to see? No...

Yes, I want to know too...but "need"??? Seriously??? I am most interested in her document and conclusions...And her document will give me a better picture as to how to handle this situation....that doesn't mean I am entitled to them.

Take a step back Florio...you are not that important.

If Goodell goes against this ruling on the first opportunity to use a non partial arbiter, especially one a experienced as Robinson, this will not bode well for future negotiations with NFLPA. NFL/NFLPA are already on shaky ground on several issues, and player vs owner punishment has always been an issue. I think Goodell and NFL just let this stand and everyone moves on. Nothing gained really by either party by dragging this out, On the flip side though if Goodell tries to increase it and the NFLPA take to federal court, I think they would win. There just isn't enough evidence to support what NFL is wanting. Public opinion isn't evidence. They words of accusers arent exactly damnable evidence without some corroborating evidence. The NFLPA/Watson have more on their side with the criminal investigations producing no fruit than the NFL have. Lets just hope this is over and everyone moves on... It won't be long until someone else in the NFL screws up and creates a story for the 24 hour news cycle

Of course a media member wants it published. I understand why many citizens want it published. However, we don't need anything. It could lead to unintended results.

I think it is up to the NFL and NFLPA as to whether it should be public knowledge...For what reason does it "need" to be public. Wanting it to be public is not the same as "should" be public. In what way is this the public's business? If the document NEVER comes out...How are you in the public affected? You aren't. We are not entitled to the information. Not too mention I don't expect the document to be available until after the 3 day appeal period passes, if it ever does become public.

i dont know, but i dont really care either way. as a fan, im more concerned about whether goodell will attempt to appeal. this is like zeke, nothing in court but chalk it up to the player conduct policy for reasons of suspension.

6 games in a 17 game season is the best scenario possible, short of no suspension. other than to keep the drama up, the reasons behind the decision is secondary. now i just wanna have watson go through TC and play the most in preseason, as well as getting brissett ready to keep this team in the playoff race for the first 6 games.

Consider the financial impact of her decision. If his suspension is without pay, his "loss" should be larger overall on a per game calculation than say a league minimum player. The precedent, which some may consider hypocritical compared to owners outcomes, is in place tentatively for now. Glad we are most of the way over this mountain.

If Watson's side is unhappy because they think it's too much and Goodell isn't happy because he thinks it's too little, then it's probably right about where it should be.

Starting with the Panthers, Jets, Steelers, Falcons... run the ball, play defense and get to the Chargers/Patriots games 4-0... just get it done.

Then Watson comes back for the Ravens and Bengals...

The Bengals and 49ers started 3 and 3 last year and both made it to the conference championship games. So, I guess there is hope. I was thinking a 4 game suspension was doable, but nothing above that. I don't know.....maybe we can make the playoffs w/him missing 6 games, but he didn't even play last year and will miss 6 more games this upcoming year. There is bound to be some rust.

I think the cause of their outrage is due to the fact they actually expected some type of justice in the suspension. Which they nor these women got. I'm not surprised there wasn't justice. Same old same old.

If the NFL apeals for a longer suspension, and then the NFLPA contests, this could take considerable time. Would Watson's suspension not start until everything is settled?

I agree with this.

Brissett has to go at least 4-2. One of the losses cannot be against divisional opponent Pittsburgh. 3-3 and I think the season is likely dead. Those AFC losses come back to haunt teams when it comes to tiebreakers for playoff purposes.

I also agree that not only is it reasonable to assume Watson will have some rust, but the lack of getting 100% of the reps in TC with the receivers/TEs. Couple that with facing a very tough schedule coming out of the suspension and it will be a challenge.

I think the majority of us felt it was going to be a 4-6 game suspension.

I would bet the NFL and NFLPA came to a handshake agreement not to appeal on this one and let it disappear into the past.

it's not a good look for the brand.

Which is why some people advocate it remain private. Hopefully someone will get their hands on it and publish it. We already know he can only get massages from team appointed massage therapists and that Robinson said his conduct was egregious. So yeah, I can see why some propose it stay private.

Good question. I don't know the answer and I am just guessing.

If the NFL appeals and increases the number of games, the suspension would begin once they make their final ruling on the appeal. I think the NFLPA would have to win in Federal Court in order to overturn that suspension. I could be dead wrong, though.

I think the best thing to do is to look at Elliot's case... this is a short read of the timeline, and on-again off-again suspension.



The Ezekiel Elliott suspension explained in a 2-minute read
Why isn’t the Cowboys’ star running back on the field? We’ve got a quick breakdown for you.

By Jeanna Kelley@jeannathomas Updated Dec 24, 2017, 4:37pm EST

The Cowboys welcome the Eagles to AT&T Stadium on Sunday Night Football, but running back Ezekiel Elliott won’t be on the field. If you haven’t kept up with all of the twists and turns of Elliott’s six-game suspension, we’ve put together a thorough overview of the situation and a complete timeline of events.

But for those of you just want the basics, we’ve got you covered, too.

Elliott was investigated. The NFL spent over a year investigating domestic violence allegations raised by Elliott’s former girlfriend in Columbus, Ohio. She filed police reports and went to the Columbus City Attorney’s office to pursue charges in July 2016. Elliott was never charged with a crime.

Elliott was suspended. The NFL’s disciplinary process does not carry the same burden of proof as the legal system. The league’s investigation determined that Elliott was violent toward the woman on three separate occasions.

In August of this year, Roger Goodell issued a six-game suspension to Elliott. That’s the baseline number of games for a first-time domestic violence offender.

Elliott appealed to the NFL, but the suspension was upheld. Goodell appointed an arbitrator, Harold Henderson, to hear Elliott’s appeal. Henderson upheld the suspension, despite issues raised by Elliott’s side that the NFL’s lead investigator, Kia Roberts, recommended that he should not be suspended based on her interviews with Elliott’s accuser.

Meanwhile, the NFL Players Association was moving forward outside of the league’s jurisdiction.

Elliott’s suspension was put on hold for the first time. The NFLPA filed a lawsuit against the NFL, but it was not about whether Elliott was guilty or not of committing domestic violence. Rather, the union alleged the NFL’s disciplinary process was fundamentally unfair. The union asked for a preliminary injunction to keep Elliott on the field. In the U.S. District Court of Eastern Texas, Judge Amos Mazzant granted the injunction in early September. Elliott was allowed to play.

Elliott’s suspension was back on for the second time. The NFL appealed to the 5th Circuit Court, where a panel of three judges overturned the district court’s ruling in a split decision due to lack of jurisdiction. They also ordered the U.S. District Court of Eastern Texas to dismiss the case. Elliott’s suspension was in effect again after the Cowboys’ bye in Week 6.

Elliott’s suspension was put on hold for the second time. The NFLPA re-filed in the New York Southern District Court. Katherine Polk Failla, the judge who was supposed to hear the case, was on vacation. The court gave Elliott a temporary administrative stay, which allowed him to play until the judge returned and could issue a ruling.

Elliott’s suspension was back on for the third time. When she returned, Judge Failla ruled against Elliott. The court also applied a 24-hour emergency stay to Failla’s decision to give the NFLPA time to file an emergency appeal. That appeal was denied, too. Elliott’s suspension was on again starting in Week 9.

Elliott’s suspension was put on hold for the third time. The NFLPA appealed to the 2nd Circuit Court. A panel of judges issued an emergency stay while they considered the appeal. That kept Elliott on the field in Week 9.

Elliott’s suspension was back on for the final time. The NFLPA’s motion for an injunction to delay Elliott’s suspension further was denied. His six-game suspension officially began in Week 10.

However, oral arguments for his next appeal to the 2nd Circuit Court was set for Dec. 1, four games into his suspension.

It finally ended. Elliott dropped his appeal entirely, while the NFLPA withdrew its lawsuit. Elliott will serve his entire-six game suspension, and he’ll be eligible to return to the field in Week 16 against the Seahawks.


https://www.sbnation.com/2017/11/19/16666714/ezekiel-elliott-nfl-suspension-cowboys-ex

Just Clickin
And just like I thought... 6-8 games... I wish I could pick 7 digits that well. ... WHY... because out of all those cases, the NFL only had 4 strong ones. And of those, there was no physical contact, coersion..etc... Thats when i knew this was going to be 6-8. The NFL case was weak. Now of course Goodell could come in and say screw that, 10 games plus fine. BUT... Goodell cannot over reach because if I was the NFLPA and Watson's legal team, I would be telling the NFL we can go to court and you can explain your prior decisions, especially on the owners!!.. Remember, Goodell has to protect the owners.

Goodell will talk tuff for 3 few days and then go along with the ruling!!

The wording was not physical contact. It was that there was "no violence". And nothing was mentioned about coercion either way. Try again.

That 6 game stretch could decide the season plus the Ravens
And Bengals games 7 and 8.
6 of the 1st 8 games are vs AFC teams.
5 are at home.
Those AFC games are not automatic Ws for the Browns.

Your quoting the source from the judge.. mine was from the NFL's case which did not show any " violence, threat, force or coercion". So at the end of the day, the NFL out of all those so called women had a case with 4 women and had NONE of the things above... they had weak cards going in....

Now the like I said, the NFLPA/Watson's team can drag the NFL back into court.. Goodell dont want that.

Florio is full of it !

Absolutely, the NFL/owners can't throw Robinson under the bus- if they do, maybe the players strike- wonder who'd give in. I'd be very surprised if the 6 games gets changed. Legal action AT LEAST by players association. Go Browns!!!

j/c...

No it's not. This was something someone said to Florio. Other than the violence component nothing in the judges decision claims any of that and all you're going on and posted came from what someone said to Florio. If all of the things you said were actually accurate, watson probably wouldn't have been suspended at all.

If none of those things above happened, what do you think it is Robinson is calling egregious and why would she not allow watson to see any other massage therapists other than the teams appointed ones? You can't be serious here.

Do you love being WRONG ALL THE TIME!!!...
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...at-the-nfls-case-against-deshaun-watson/

This was WIDELY reported by everyone!!... the NFL did not have a good case.. right now, we dont have the written ruling from the judge yet. But when we do, we will get the full explanation and It will show the NFLs prior handling of suspensions plus the FACTS of the case. Not some B.S that Pit dawg is trying to say are the facts.

and yea, the NFL will go with that ruling