DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum watson-suspended-6-games 2

Why are they exclusive to Watson?

Because of the jump-off-the-edge decision to sign him at all costs. And some false assumption that there are only (and will only ever be, apparently) two QBs for the Browns... Baker, who is selfish, a terrible teammate, and sucks at football... or Deshaun Watson -- all-world elite QB, savior, future Super Bowl winner.

And then every argument (argument meaning anything with any grain of doubt) against the signing is met with this same fallible non-fact.

"There goes the cap!"
"That's a lot of draft capital!"
"240M guaranteed???"
"Those are some strong allegations!"
"This is going to be a PR nightmare!"
"I'm not sure I can cheer for this guy!"
"What if he's suspended for the whole year?!"

The poster is pat on the head like they "don't get it" and told... "That's the price to have a FQB for the next ten years."

Give me the line on Watson resigning in five years, maybe we can place a little wager... Maybe $50 -- or a loaf of bread -- whichever comes first.

Okie dokie.

I'm surprised something so sad garnered a response. You have like 85 other arguments going I'm surprised you even noticed that.

I can totally get on board with this. We have a pretty good football team without Watson....there will be exciting games and players to watch. Meanwhile, the NFL fighting not to implode will be an entertaining side show. I'm ready for the season to start!

So you don't care how the NFL goes about handing out punishment as long as the final result is something you agree with?

So you have a problem with a defense attorney saying their client is innocent as the cases are working their way through the courts?


Yikes.

Like I said, this is uncharted territory. With 53 civil claims settled with Watson's name attached combined with the detail Judge Robison provided with her writeup of Watson's predatory behavior, the punishment should meet the level of the action. There is no precedent that comes close the level of Watson's activities. I don't believe you can look at this lightly and expect the players to understand the severity the league takes with respect to women. With 53 civil claims settled, 1 unsettled, lack of remorse, refusal to negotiate or admit any guilt, and the possibility of criminal charges still on the table; Watson has to be the example to show that this type of behavior is totally unacceptable for a member of the NFL.

That said, this is what I consider a fair punishment:

1) As stated by Judge Robinson, Watson should be restricted from any outside massage therapy not approved by the team or league for the rest of his career. Any violation would be cause for a lifetime ban if investigated and found to being a violation.

2) Due to Watson's consistent and current lying about the facts in the case and denial of responsibility, Watson needs to undergo and complete a comprehensive league approved phycological medical treatment for his abuse of women before requesting a reinstatement to the league.

3) Due to the way the Browns structured Watson's contract whether for salary cap reasons or as a suspension protection, rather than picking an arbitrary amount, Watson should be fined 50% of his year 1 and 2 base salaries (1.035M plus 46M equals 47.035M divided by 2 = $23,517,500) to be donate to women crisis centers in his name by the NFL as restitution for his mistreatment of women.

4) Watson receives an indefinite suspension with a minimum of 12 games at which time he can request reinstatement if the following is met:

a) Successfully complete the phycological medical treatment as detailed in the agreement.
b) The Browns contract with Watson is amended to include the massage therapy clause with automatic forfeiture of any future contracted money from the date of any violation.
c) A letter from the Texas DA confirming that criminal charges are off the table.
d) The final open civil suit has been settled.
e) An open letter of apology to the women combined with the donation to the women crisis centers (the amount can be reduced 25% if reinstated for week 12, 10% if reinstated for week 15, or no reduction if completed after week 15)
f) Any future criminal or civil actions concerning women is grounds for an immediate lifetime ban.

5) If Watson and the NFLPA sue in Federal Court, all the above is off the table and the NFL will institute the indefinite suspension with an open reinstatement date of their choosing should they win in Federal Court due to Watson's non remorse.

And maybe that's true for some. But just a suggestion. Read back through this thread and try to gauge how much and how many of the posts have no mention of what watson did and only focus on the process, how terrible the NFL is for trying to increase the punishment, how it's a witch hunt and every other method if deflection you can think of to take the focus away from watson's actions and his victims.

I'm certainly not a mind reader. But what I was taught is you can gauge one's intent by their actions. And the intentions seem pretty clear by most posters on this board from reading this thread.


So a contractually agreed upon process is a "sham process"? The NFL exercising their contractually guaranteed right to appeal the decision is a sham process? See, this is another example of what I am referring to. The NFL isn't breaking their contract. They aren't pulling some surprise move here. This isn't some sneaky back door loophole. The very definition of the word sham simply doesn't apply here though it continues to be used.

Can't really disagree with you there, but I think it's less pervasive than you might think. Not even trying to convince you or anything. Just a thought.

NFLPA is run by morons. We knew this already. Yes, it's a sham.

Considering the NFL is using a contractually agreed upon process, which they are, to arrive at that conclusion, no.


Lawyer speak is a common occurrence. Claims often exaggerated and sometimes even false get thrown around. This would then apply to both attorney's, would it not? Buzzbee still has an ongoing case against watson. Hardin also said they would fight every case in court.

You see, you can't have a different set of standards between these two attorney's. If you plan to excuse one attorney for things he said in defense of his client/clients, that has to work in both directions. As I pointed out, that has obviously not been the case here.

Sham means a thing that is not as it is reported to be. Bogus or false. To falsely present something as the truth.

The contractual agreement is clear. It has not been falsely reported. The NFL has the right to handle this appeal exactly the way they are. Nothing involved in this process meets the definition of a sham.

Both the NFLPA and the league have attorney's who go over these contracts with a fine tooth comb. If you wish to blame this process on the assertion that the NFLPA are morons, them being morons must be preventing them from hiring good attorney's. People can sit and make excuses about how or why they don't agree with the contract between the league and the players, but it is the binding contract agreed upon whether one like the parameters of that contract or not.

Your statement requires the assumption that he signs here again after not having wanted to be here to begin with.
I think, barring a year or two of franchising him, there is every reason to suspect that he'll leave in free agency to the highest bidder, especially if they have lots of sunshine and beaches.

Given that, this becomes a mega trade to only have the guy for a handful of years, and that doesn't look nearly as good.