DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Watson: Getcha Popcorn

The whole world wants Watson suspended forever, fined, stoned, and hobbled. It is mob mentality at its finest.

The only people who don't care are Browns fans (no, not all Browns fans).

Let me clear this up. 30 women filed civil suits against the Texans for only one reason, their employee Watson sexually assaulted/misconduct/harassed them allegedly and the Texans enabled it. That's 30 settlements to 30 women. 24 women have filed civil suits directly against Watson for sexually assaulted/misconduct/harassed them allegedly. 23 of those cases have been settled. All, some, few, or none of those women had already received a payment from the Texans for Watson's indiscretions. Surely you don't claim that because they received a Texans settlement that they didn't get the Watson settlement. I didn't think so, that means 23 more payments were made to women for Watson's predatory egregious behavior. No matter how you cut it, that's 53 civil suit payments paid so far because of Watson's scumbag activities. There's at least 6 women that settled with the Texans that have not filed against Watson directly as of yet. That still could be coming according to Buzbee. Do we not count those civil suits because they already received a payment from the Texans enabling Watson's behavior?

This is actually what Goodell is trying to say. The 4 women the NFL used were 4 separate incidents - not one. In each one of the incidents, Watson violated the PCP 3 times. The reason the NFL appealed Judge Robinson's suspension is because there were 12 infractions of the PCP in just the few cases that the NFL brought against Watson. Oh, with the strong possibility of more coming. I suspect Watson got a huge break when the NFL didn't bring the other 8 cases of the 12 they interviewed. He could have been looking at 36 PCP violations.

Thanks for the further explanation. This makes more sense.

Not really. He originally said 53 claimants. A claimant is an individual. He is just backtracking because he was called out for trying to deceive others yet again.

I agree. The way the media has portrayed this case, while ignoring others, has influenced the public. There are many people across the country wanting Watson to be punished and that is fueling the NFL to increase the suspension.

I do have to say my barber down here in SC said he thought the NFL was wrong and that he hopes Watson isn't punished more. But, people who are more rational tend to be more quiet. It's the complainers who shout the loudest in situations involving public figures. It's as if they think they look better while pushing for a harsh punishment.

You crack me up Vers, I will say one thing for you, you will spin any comment you can in an attempt to somehow show you're right or show your undying support for the worst sexual predator in the history of the NFL.

So, oh my gosh, I am guilty of misrepresenting 53 individual claimants instead of 53 claims. Since we have zero knowledge of the identities of the 30, it would appear very unlikely that there wasn't any crossover even without that knowledge. So Vers, you got me for inadvertently adding (ants) to the word claim instead of just an (s). That doesn't change the main narrative that the number is still 53 claims and counting, but you can pop the champagne bottle buddy as you count this as a significant win.

This is so laughable on a thread where you got called out for writing and stating Ben was charged with rape - twice.

As for your other comment that rationale people are quieter - a little ironic coming from the guy with 51,000 posts since 2013. No-one does more 'shouting down' than you.

I would imagine that vast majority of people outside of Cleveland that do have an opinion feel that the 6 game suspension was pretty light, especially if they read the full report.

I expect the announcement any moment

To be fair, the Times article stated the total # of massage therapists Watson saw was in the 60's, so it's not out of the realm of possibility that all the different claims were made by different women. The assumption, though, is that there is a lot of overlap between the Texans settlements and Watson settlements.

i agree and that's where the problem lies. Discounting the Cleveland area, the vast majority outside of Cleveland having the opinion that the current suspension as being pretty light casts a very dark cloud on the Browns and some of their fans that winning trumps all and paints us as very anti-woman. All you have to do is read the pro Watson posts in this forum. The ones that do not actually belittle the women only reference the effect all this is having on Watson, the Browns, and winning. Very little accountability is accepted by those posters for mistreatment of the women by Watson much less the Browns or Watson. Actually, the theme is a noncaring attitude as to what the women are going thru mentally or physically.

I'm also of the thought that if the NFLPA tries to sue after the decision comes down to expose the lack of consistency of the NFL, even more truths are going to be exposed as to Watson's predatory egregious behavior. I think there's a hell of a lot more to this story than what we know and if the NFLPA keeps this thing open, Watson is going to pay an even bigger price than what he's potentially looking at now with the 4 cases and 12 PCP violations.

How do you feel about the fact that the NFL letting the owners off the hook? Do you feel black players should be punished more harshly than white owners?

LOL........I'm watching First Take right now and the two black guys are mad as hell because the owners are not being punished and the white dude is arguing that the NFL is defending the NFL.

So, our only choice is to non-stop slam Deshaun and the organization or we're "anti-women"? WE are not discipline officers. WE are not grief counselors. We're Browns fans.

I get that - just as a Browns fan you have no problem calling out the poor play of, for example, a Hooper, Mayfield, Hill or Mclaughlin - you should also be taking a step back and saying "whoooooo," the NFL just proved that Watson was a predator with egregious behavior toward 4 women with 3 PCP violations on each and come to the conclusion that morally "that isn't right treating women like that!" Instead, we get defense of Watson because we're not grief counselors and winning is more important. Could be the exact reason why the public outside of Cleveland wants a significantly stricter punishment because of just that type of an uncaring attitude.

Well said.

I know I am not anti-women. Not even close. In fact, I think most of you who have viewed my posts over the decades know that I champion the rights of women and minorities. The recent posts about anti-women is yet another attempt to shame those who disagree w/a few others.

I want to reiterate a point that I have made multiple times. I have zero problem w/those who are uncomfortable w/the allegations levied against Watson. I would not blame those folks for not supporting the team and Watson. It's a freaking game for entertainment purposes. They are not hurting anyone by not rooting for the Browns. However, I don't like the constant shaming and attacks by those trying to get others to feel the same way about the Browns. I refuse to feel guilty for not condemning a man who has not even been charged w/a crime, nevermind convicted of a crime. Watson's case w/the NFL was not a court of law. It was not like a real trial. It was about whether or not he violated the Personal Conduct Policy. Judge Robinson ruled that he did. She handed down a punishment and the NFL succumbed to public/media pressure and appealed her decision. Meanwhile, owners are being left off the hook. So yeah, I'm going to talk about the hypocrisy and bias of the NFL.

I watched it too Vers. You are 100% right that they are calling out for equal treatment. What you left out though was every one of them, 3 gentleman and a lady, all agreed that Watson's suspension by Judge Robinson was extremely light and that he should be suspended for 12 games to the whole season with a hefty fine. That the NFL has to set an example that this type of conduct is not to be tolerated. They also need to address the owner's situations immediately after passing judgement on Watson. Though you are right, you left out the part of the story you don't want to admit is the basis for the whole issue. You're welcome.

I've said before it's total BS. I think we all know how the NFL appeal is going to go (NFL is going to get what it wants), and while I'll probably agree with the end result, the process that got us there is rotten to the core. Part of that is the total lack of consistency that you're pointing out, but it's also much more than that. This new discipline process was supposed to be more fair and transparent (and therefore less Goodell), but we see that it's really just the same old process with a couple more people (Robinson, Harvey) that are just along for the ride. The fact that the discipline process is still a clownshow headed up by Goodell is a failure by both the NFL and the NFLPA.

At this point, for me, there are now 2 separate conversations going on. Watson and what he did, and the NFL and what they're doing right now. I think with the clarity given from the Robinson report, we can talk about both those topics idependently.

Thanks for answering.

Thanks, I didn't see the segment and I would never have got that takeaway from the original post.

Being older doesn't make you more rational. Being raised during a time where the abuse of women was more acceptable doesn't make you more rational. The fact the NFL realizes they have gone too lightly on those who have abused women in the past doesn't make you more rational. You and some other watson supporters have been just as vocal as those of us who want a punishment that represents the proper response for the transgressions watson perpetrated on these women.

It seems that would be the logical conclusion reached if one reads the report in full by non bias eyes.

Right up and until it involves the 230 million dollar man.

What's "fair" is the contractual obligation and agreed upon process in the collective bargaining agreement that was signed by both parties. It was written in plain English which is often times not the case in contractual language. There is no misrepresentation in that wording.

Are you surprised by that?

I've already explained this to you, and I'm not going to do it again just because you want to argue.

I'm simply stating the facts of the matter. There is nothing ambiguous in the wording of their agreement on this topic. The entire "Yeah but they tried to say" has nothing to do with the facts included in the contract. I understand your point. I just don't see how it has anything to do with this. They're 100% acting within their rights plainly spelled out in the agreement.

As a response, are you saying the only two options are "belittle the women" and "non-stop slam Deshaun"? Granted it seems like that is the stance of those that support him, but that isnt the only two options.

When it started I was more critical of the Browns for risking everything they did on a complete question mark. After the decision I was critical of the NFL for downplaying their lack of stricter punishments available to the Judge. But Watson does need to be accountable for what he kicked off too. As NFL fans that have tossed aside the character of QBs for speeding tickets and goodbye letters it seems really plausible to have issues with actions that led to 53 lawsuit settlements, doesnt it?

Roger Goodell says NFL's evidence calls for full-season Deshaun Watson ban, calls QB's behavior 'predatory'

The league is appealing Watson's six-game ban

An investigation by former U.S. District Judge Sue L. Robinson resulted in a recommended six-game ban for Cleveland Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson, who was accused by 24 women of sexual assault and misconduct. The NFL is appealing and looks to impose a harsher penalty on Watson. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell explained the league's stance on pursuing a longer suspension, saying Watson's actions were "egregious" and "predatory behavior."

Goodell says the behavior warrants a full-season ban for the 26-year-old.

"We've seen the evidence. [Disciplinary officer Sue L. Robinson] was very clear about the evidence, should we enforce the evidence. That there was multiple violations here, and they were egregious, and it was predatory behavior," he said Tuesday following a special league meeting in Minneapolis, via NFL.com. "Those are things that we always felt were important for us to address in a way that's responsible."

The commissioner explained that both sides have the right to appeal the suspension as part of the CBA. "So we decided it was the right thing to do," Goodell said.

When recommending the six-game appeal, Robinson wrote that Watson engaged in "sexual assault; conduct that poses a genuine danger to the safety and well-being of another person; and conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity of the NFL."

In giving reasoning for keeping the suspension at six game, she said, she was bound "by standards of fairness and consistency of treatment among players similarly situated."

In the report she wrote that the NFL was seeking a suspension for the entire regular season and postseason.

The appeal hearing will be overseen by New Jersey Attorney General Peter C. Harvey. Goodell could have heard the appeal himself, but the league designated Harvey instead.

As for when a decision will come, Goodell said he does not have a timeline from Harvey.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...watson-ban-calls-qbs-behavior-predatory/

j/c:

Here is the video steve and I were discussing earlier. The segment is over 10 minutes. While steve is correct, there were multiple topics were discussed. Watch for yourself to see where things get heated. Unfortunately, the video doesn't run the full length of the conversation, but it's pretty close. Canty ended w/something along the lines of how he wants to see equitable treatment for all.

Btw----not sure who posted and titled the video, but Stephen A Smith was not present.

That post aged well. lmao

NO, I'm not saying that at all. Quite the contrary. My reaction is to the endless signaling that any positive reaction to "Deshaun the player" means that I'm ignoring my own accountability (see above) to the new "guardrails" I must stay between as a Browns fan. Also, I don't give a crap about what the rest of the country thinks of those fans they want to lump together as "anti-women", because they choose to root for their team as opposed to picketing outside the stadium.

This is no different than anything else in the age of "social mob media". Those that scream loudest drown out all other voices. Mostly because those voices don't care to make themselves heard amidst the din. Now we're using "noise" as some mysterious gauge that says "Browns fans are scum, all they care about is winning". Who cares?

You think I'm going to act differently to try and move the needle? What should I do, just attach qualifiers to every statement? "Man he throws a nice ball, despite his sexual dysfunction, which I am in no way endorsing."

To your last question... my answer is much the same. Tell me which part I have wrong -- If I root for a player, root for my team, I am "tossing aside the character" of certain players? Sounds to me like any person with that point of view is doing more to quantify "fandom" than to champion women's/ victim's rights.

To each his own. I'm disgusted with this whole situation. I really hope there is a point in our future when Deshaun "makes amends". I think he's a pig. But there is no way for me to throw away football, throw away a lifetime of bleeding the colors, throw away the annual childlike optimism for a great season (which is already all-but-ruined this season)... and then try to tiptoe around my enthusiasm for sport? Probably not. I come to sport to avoid all that bs.

Sorry for the rant.

.

What it boils down to is that it's quite obvious how people emotionally involved in a situation have a totally different thought process than those who aren't. That's why "what non browns fans think" is vitally important to the topic. When someone is emotionally invested in a situation it makes them naturally defensive and much harder to look at things from an objective viewpoint. Does it work that way with everyone? No. But it certainly does with most.

I think you should consider what we've witnessed on this board since this all began. The accusers were called money grabbers. That their attorney was some kind of scum bag. That by being in the massage therapy business they should expect what they got. That they were likely prostitutes using massage therapy as some type of cover. The list goes on and on. And it wasn't by just a few posters by any means. It was despicable behavior to put it mildly and obviously a total lack of respect for these victims.

I'm not singling you out as having done such things but it seemed to be a pretty popular theme on here.

People outside of the Browns community aren't emotionally invested. They've heard both sides and without any vested interest have come to what they feel is a logical conclusion. I think that holds more importance than listening to those with a vested interest and emotional involvement in the situation. An outside voice of reason as it were.

I can't think of a single poster who hasn't openly stated that watson is the better QB. Not one. That has never been in contention or disputed. Although some would like to make that a point that simply doesn't exist. These are two totally different topics all together.

I think the final paragraph of your post points out exactly what I'm saying. It seems there's nothing the Browns could ever do, no matter who they bring in, no matter how disturbing or disgusting it happens to be to ever cause you to, "throw away a lifetime of bleeding the colors". As many of us have stated, that's what happens when football is more important to people than the victims of sexual abuse. Because it's a very clear choice. And it's why people who are not emotionally involved in a situation set limits and boundaries while those who are emotionally involved tend to not do the same as much.

Your contention is not true. Most non-Browns fans are not educated in the details of what is going on with Watson. They are simply caught up in the mob. They don't seek information or try to learn both sides. That would take work and why would anyone invest in that amount of work when it will have little impact on them. And there are a ton of fans who want Watson punished simply because it allows them to scream to the top of their virtue signaling mountain about how happy they are their team didn't pursue him and how they wouldn't have rooted for him even if they acquired him. Which we all know isn't true.

The mob mentality is en vogue when it comes to Watson.

The only thing I’m certain of is that there’s no winner when this is finished and the verdict is set in stone.

If I only look at it from a Browns fan perspective I’m irritated and angry that when we finally find and paid franchise money to our new great (from a sports perspective) QB he probably can’t play this season. I’m also pissed off that many of our better players getting older and older and when we finally has our golden boy ready maybe the Super Bowl train has left the station.

We as supporters must also learn from all this.

I need to calm down and don’t let my personal feelings take the better out of me. A general apology is in place and I admits that sometimes being to intense in this subject. It’s not worth it for any of us to go bananas on internet when we all has the same interest to see our team play good and attractive football.

I honestly also think that our GM needs to be more “frank and honest” against the Browns owners.

I refuse to believe that all members of the Browns FO was content with how this scenario panned out. Bad ownership don’t need anxious yes sayers, a healthy organization needs a steady counter weight with backbone and integrity that can bring common sense and sanity to eventual impulsive decisions.

I really hope young Andrew Berry learn from this adventure and next time take a more firm control over how we act when his organization is under pressure and fast decisions is necessary.

Nice non factual based theory. So you don't think the people in this country read any of the assorted articles that outlined Sue Robinson's account of watson's wrong doing? Yeah, those damned people caught up in the mob mentality. The only mob mentality I see are those on this very board who excuse her findings and try try to downplay the punishment he should receive that is going through the very process the NFLPA agreed to. Any objective observer of this board could see where the mob mentality is. And you're a part of it.

Imagine how bad it would be if you had a positive angle on a QB who wrote a probable farewell note to the fans. You are no longer a Browns fan, to start with. I can appreciate how hard it must be to be supportive of a player who was accused of a score of unacceptable encounters with women and having your team give away their future to bring him here, as we share that experience to an extent. I just think it also shows some character concerns for the player too.


I'd imagine people that root for their team but don't make unfounded accusations, or aren't dismissive against women, probably don't get much flack. It's quite possible for people to speak out against Watson's actions and still be Browns fans, despite what many of his defenders claim. Some people won't support the team at all, thats their choice too. Tom Brady mentions online bring up Deflategate comments quite often, it's reasonable to expect the same here going forward Id imagine.


In my opinion you should act the way you want to act, but people need to at least own it. Hell, if someone thinks it's more important that he's a good player and could not care less how he treats women, own it. He was not found guilty in a criminal court, but he was found responsible for it in a civil action. For many the fact that he shows no responsibility for any role in this speaks volumes though. Because we crucify players for a lot less than that. But people also should own their own actions and statements too.


Remember your comment was "So, our only choice is to non-stop slam Deshaun and the organization or we're "anti-women"? ". There is, or should be, a whole range of options other than just those two. But it sounds like you are overexaggerating to me to try and win your point. While we paid handsomely to be center seat in this shitshow we have to put up with it, and probably shouldn't act like it inconveniences us.[/quote]


This part is probably where most Browns fans should be, with the fringes being small on either side of it. But that kind of means owning the actions of the guy we just paid handsomely for when it is brought up, or at least not downplaying it. While I may feel that the NFL messing with the punishment spelled out is bad form, I also realize in the greater scheme of things he probably deserves more anyway. So I am not gonna defend it beyond pointing out that the NFL made a bad decision on top of Watson's.