Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 10 11
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
If this is anything drastically more punitive, this probably means Deshaun starts the season.

Unless Rog has the balls to exempt him.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
The whole thing is asinine. It should be resolved when a third party, well respected judge makes a decision.


"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
Originally Posted by FATE
Unless Rog has the balls to exempt him.

You and I both know this is going to happen. No way they let him see the field if it is not resolved by then.

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
Originally Posted by Dawgs4Life
The whole thing is asinine. It should be resolved when a third party, well respected judge makes a decision.

The NFLPA should never have allowed the loophole in the CBA that permitted this to go right back to Goodell. The owners continue to play the NFLPA like a fiddle. Unbelievably dumb to allow that in the CBA.

1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Originally Posted by Milk Man
Originally Posted by FATE
Unless Rog has the balls to exempt him.

You and I both know this is going to happen. No way they let him see the field if it is not resolved by then.

Doesn't the language of the Exemption list make that very unlikely? Who knows, maybe they will just do what they always do and bend the rules to fit their needs.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
I have a feeling he’s not going to be on the field all season


"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,558
Likes: 589
D
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,558
Likes: 589
Originally Posted by mgh888
Which is why - in my opinion only - the suspension itself is less important than the findings in the published report. And when Sue Robinson seems to imply (quite clearly) that Watson deserved a harsher penalty, but she was confined by the NFL's own policies .... it is serious and worth discussion.

That's fair. My "/thread" comment wasn't meant to imply we should shut down the discussion, although I could see it interpreted that way.


Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown

#gmstrong
1 member likes this: mgh888
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by Milk Man
Originally Posted by FATE
Unless Rog has the balls to exempt him.

You and I both know this is going to happen. No way they let him see the field if it is not resolved by then.

I assume you mean "isn't". "They" don't have a choice if a judge files an injunction while the process is sorted out.

Very similar circumstances here:

Sept. 8, 2017: Judge grants injunction, blocking Elliott’s suspension
Judge Amos Mazzant granted the NFLPA’s request for a preliminary injunction.

"Based upon preliminary injunction standard, the Court finds, that Elliott did not receive a fundamentally fair hearing, necessitating the Court grant the request for preliminary injunction,” Mazzant’s ruling read.

That means Elliott will be on the field for the Cowboys until this plays out in the court.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Meanwhile, Daniel Snyder who is being investigated by Congress for bribery, sexual exploitation, intimidating witnesses, running a shadow investigation, making porn videos, using their cheerleaders as escorts, unauthorized opening of texts and emails , etc, etc has received nothing more than a fine. Kraft, who frequented an establishment accused of having illegal sex traffic workers who could not even speak English receives nothing. Jones covers up a peeping Tom and receives nothing.

I'm pretty close to being at a breaking point w/the NFL. I walked away from MLB when they pulled their crap decades ago when they wouldn't open their books and the NBA recently. I love football, but man, this stinks. The discrepancies of how their members are treated reeks of good ol' boy political corruption.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,558
Likes: 589
D
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,558
Likes: 589
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Originally Posted by Milk Man
Originally Posted by FATE
Unless Rog has the balls to exempt him.

You and I both know this is going to happen. No way they let him see the field if it is not resolved by then.

Doesn't the language of the Exemption list make that very unlikely? Who knows, maybe they will just do what they always do and bend the rules to fit their needs.

Yep. I bet they use it as a platform to discuss how they are taking to heart the judge's opinion that they need to be forward-looking, starting now.

No matter where someone falls on the whole punishment that is deserved for Watson, you have to admit this whole thing is a giant clusterfuse now.


Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown

#gmstrong
1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
If this follows the Elliot timeline (his suspension didn't start 'til game 12), we're way more screwed now than we were ten minutes ago... We'd have to be at least 9-3 for the privilege of sneaking into the playoffs with an average QB.

Bengals
Ravens
Saints
Commanders
Steelers


And then Watson would also miss more time to start next season! Fun times!


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
I can see and understand your point of view. It's logical taken as a whole - but my point still stands, there is no need to even discuss a harsher penalty or suggest that it might be appropriate if not for the framework .... unless she felt that it was warranted and had meaning.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
Likes: 51
L
All Pro
Offline
All Pro
L
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
Likes: 51
The NFL cannot admit their own mistakes either. ffs

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
They are much like my own. Why even appoint her if you think you understand law better than she does?

That's not what Goodell is saying or suggesting - but, ahhhh, never mind.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Well, there is a chance that Goodell--or his appointed designee-- will side w/Judge Robinson's decision.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
The NFL is seeking an indefinite suspension. There’s really no stopping them from getting it. Watson might DELAY it with an appeal, but the NFL will get their amount of flesh.


"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459
Likes: 59
L
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
L
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459
Likes: 59
Seems like there are two possibilities:

1.) They will impose an indefinite suspension.

2.) They are mad that Watson and the Browns specifically designed his contract to avoid financial punishment (which is the type of thing the NFL would be angry about, ruling aside). They abide by the length of the suspension but increase the fine to ~$17.5M to represent the actual salary loss that Watson would have had if signing bonuses hadn't been used to avoid it.

Last edited by Lyuokdea; 08/03/22 04:39 PM.

~Lyuokdea
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Quote
2.) They are mad that Watson and the Browns specifically designed his contract to avoid financial punishment (which is the type of thing the NFL would be angry about, ruling aside). They abide by the ruling but increase the fine to ~$17.5M to represent the actual salary loss that Watson would have had if signing bonuses hadn't been used to avoid it.

I have considered this---not necessarily the same dollar figure--but was afraid to say it earlier.

I would find that acceptable.

Why punish other players on the team and the fans of the team? Punish the player where it hurts. The bank account.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Well, there is a chance that Goodell--or his appointed designee-- will side w/Judge Robinson's decision.

That pig ain't even gettin' off the ground.

[Linked Image from archive.org]


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
Originally Posted by Dawgs4Life
The NFL is seeking an indefinite suspension. There’s really no stopping them from getting it. Watson might DELAY it with an appeal, but the NFL will get their amount of flesh.

Some wanted to suggest the NFL would leave the decision well enough alone - many said that, reading Sue Robinson's ruling it was an open invitation for the NFL to do challenge the suspension and seek a harsher penalty. Putting aside what sort of individual DW is at this point - the NFL is really only interested in one thing which is OPTICS. Not the optics to the fans that pay attention and follow everything in detail .... optics for the casual fans and masses. 26 allegations - a "guilty" verdict by Sue Robinson and a six games suspension are not good Optics. Pointing fingers at the owners doesn't do any good what so ever.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 846
Likes: 98
K
All Pro
Offline
All Pro
K
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 846
Likes: 98
I am not sure re what the point of the third party arbitrator is if one of the parties can appeal her ruling to itself. If this judge is the permanent arbitrator and the nfl dramatically increases the penalty she gave, in futures cases she may be inclined to assign no penalty since that cannot be appealed.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Originally Posted by keithfromxenia
I am not sure re what the point of the third party arbitrator is if one of the parties can appeal her ruling to itself. If this judge is the permanent arbitrator and the nfl dramatically increases the penalty she gave, in futures cases she may be inclined to assign no penalty since that cannot be appealed.

I think Judge Robinson should resign. The NFL is using her as a figurehead. They have completely dismissed her legal expertise and decades of experience.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 210
Likes: 10
Practice Squad
Offline
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 210
Likes: 10
J/C What a complete SHAM process that says we hire a retired federal judge to rule over these things, she makes a judgement, the NFL sticks their toes in the pool after its over and now it appears they want to Re-neg on the process which was agreed to. I seriously hope they take Roger and the boys to federal court on this. Knowing a couple of Judges personally and working in the system that I do, the #1 thing Judges dont like is to be 2nd guessed and made to look insignificant in their rulings. This could BLOW up Bigtime to make the NFL look like Morons. I hope it does. Deep down I feel their are some Economic benefits to dragging this out even more, US/WE tune into the NFL network and then watch 15 minutes of commercials for every 5 minutes of programming! Just a Thought! They actually like the Soap Opera, it is profitable

2 members like this: FL_Dawg, Versatile Dog
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
Originally Posted by FATE
Originally Posted by Milk Man
Originally Posted by FATE
Unless Rog has the balls to exempt him.

You and I both know this is going to happen. No way they let him see the field if it is not resolved by then.

I assume you mean "isn't". "They" don't have a choice if a judge files an injunction while the process is sorted out. [/color]

No, I meant 'is.' I understand the Elliott case, but if the NFL doesn't want Watson on the field week 1, then he won't be on the field week 1.

This story has gotten much more attention nationally and dwarfs the Elliott case in the eyes of public opinion.

If (and I'm merely speculating) advertisers are threatening the NFL behind the scenes that they will pull ad dollars if Watson is on the field, the NFL will see to it he is not.

This will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Either way, it seems like the 2022 season is over before it began.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Likes: 234
D
Legend
Offline
Legend
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Likes: 234

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Quote
2.) They are mad that Watson and the Browns specifically designed his contract to avoid financial punishment (which is the type of thing the NFL would be angry about, ruling aside). They abide by the ruling but increase the fine to ~$17.5M to represent the actual salary loss that Watson would have had if signing bonuses hadn't been used to avoid it.

I have considered this---not necessarily the same dollar figure--but was afraid to say it earlier.

I would find that acceptable.

Why punish other players on the team and the fans of the team? Punish the player where it hurts. The bank account.

I thought the same thing before Robinson's ruling, wondering if a fine would be assessed. The largest fine in NFL history was to Jamal Lewis – $760,000. And he was found guilty in a court of law with a prison term. Not sure she would have given herself much more liberty when the rest of her conversation centered around "precedence". In other words, no fine would have been big enough to preempt the NFL's response.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
If I’m Sue Robinson right now I’d feel used


"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Quote
Not sure she would have given herself much more liberty when the rest of her conversation centered around "precedence". In other words, no fine would have been big enough to preempt the NFL's response.

I think I am getting you, but you clarify a bit?

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Originally Posted by Dawgs4Life
If I’m Sue Robinson right now I’d feel used

She is a woman. So what if she was a Federal Judge? She isn't capable of interpreting legalese like real men can.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 17,266
Likes: 1330
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 17,266
Likes: 1330
j/c:



Tackles are tackles.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Quote
Not sure she would have given herself much more liberty when the rest of her conversation centered around "precedence". In other words, no fine would have been big enough to preempt the NFL's response.

I think I am getting you, but you clarify a bit?

Yeah, I left out the middle part of the thought process.

I'm saying she refused to go outside the boundaries of "precedence" with punishment; she wasn't going to ignore previous precedence with a fine.

And then I'm jumping to "if/then"... even if she did, would a 1M fine cause Rog to stand down? 2M, 3M? Probably not.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Gotcha. Thanks.

1 member likes this: FATE
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
But don't worry, looks like the executioner will levy the fine instead.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
I don't know how I feel about the NFL trying to amend the suspension - it makes a bit of a mockery out of the proceedings, but Sue Robinson knew going in that the NFL can change any suspension she hands out. What any change to the suspension really points out is how piss-poor the policy that was in place is/was.

Again - personally I feel that all the NFL is concerned with is optics - that's why I am unsure how I feel about any challenge they make to the current suspension. But the question is, if someone were to believe the case is actually worthy of a penalty (financial or suspension) greater than currently specified by current policy .... is it better to challenge the penalty as is and hand out a penalty fitting of what Sue Robinson found Watson guilty of (regards conduct governed by the NFL - not "court of law") .... or leave as is and then re-write the policies? I don't have a an answer for you from my side.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,931
Likes: 1778
Browns fans be like...

[Linked Image from c.tenor.com]


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,298
Likes: 987
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,298
Likes: 987
This is a general question for anyone who may have an answer.

When the appeal is made and it is reported as "the nfl is going to appeal".

Who is the NFL? Who is representing the NFL? Does this mean Goodell?

Is the NFL a group? Is it the owners?

Is Goodell appealing to Goodell?

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
Originally Posted by bonefish
This is a general question for anyone who may have an answer.

When the appeal is made and it is reported as "the nfl is going to appeal".

Who is the NFL? Who is representing the NFL? Does this mean Goodell?

Is the NFL a group? Is it the owners?

Is Goodell appealing to Goodell?


Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459
Likes: 59
L
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
L
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459
Likes: 59
People bringing up the Ezekiel Elliot situation are missing the fact that it occurred under the old CBA. The new CBA has corrected the ambiguities, and is extremely clear about the fact that Goodell (or somebody he chooses) can determine any punishment they want.

Sure, Watson can sue - but any reasonable judge would toss out that suit in a day -- because there is already a bargaining agreement in place, and it is extremely clear.


Last edited by Lyuokdea; 08/03/22 05:23 PM.

~Lyuokdea
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
Likewise - Sue Robinson was entirely, 100% crystal clear her finding and suspension may get altered. In fact - it appears to many as if she wrote the finding in such a way as that it seems probable/natural to amend her ruling.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
Likes: 51
L
All Pro
Offline
All Pro
L
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
Likes: 51
Originally Posted by Lyuokdea
People bringing up the Ezekiel Elliot situation are missing the fact that it occurred under the old CBA. The new CBA has corrected the ambiguities, and is extremely clear about the fact that Goodell (or somebody he chooses) can determine any punishment they want.

Sure, Watson can sue - but any reasonable judge would toss out that suit in a day -- because there is already a bargaining agreement in place, and it is extremely clear.


If speculating on the odds of Watson's lawsuit I'd say the findings of the Judge will give them some ammunition for a stronger punishment. Maybe Watson calls for "the owners" treatments, maybe the NFL responds by bringing the treatment of all the players. We will see sadly.

Page 3 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 10 11
DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum watson-suspended-6-games 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5