DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Watson.... The Infection That Never seems To End

He shouldn't. He doesn't owe the public anything.

To some extent of course it is. But can you give me examples of players signing a four year contract then demanding a trade four months later? Looking at prior behavior tends to be something some wish to dismiss, ignore or brush off.

Let's hope the NFL agrees with you. At some point he's going to have to man up and say he's gotten help for his sexual proclivities. You seem to forget how this all works. See Kareem hunt for a reference. You man up, say you've sought help for what you did and apologize. That or you don't play. He owes a public apology to his victims. I understand you object to that.

New NFL scandal, Watson is old news

Not sure why you addressed this to me unless you somehow think I'll root for Watson from what I said in my last post. Wrong. But I'm going to watch and root for the team. And I'm not gonna stop being a Browns Fan because of Watson, you, god, or anybody else, period. You feel your way, I'll feel mine.

It was not intended to be directed to you. But please, wear it with pride Bud.

This is a Browns issue. And here you are. Tell me how old news it is when the opposing fans are calling him names and booing the team over watson when he returns.

I got your bud.

Actually he cannot publicly apologize for wrong doing. Steven A Smith brought this up a few weeks ago. He spoke with an attorney that is a friend of his and if Watson admits wrong doing 1) it effects his 1 open case and 2) opens him back up to the grand juries possibly. He can publicly own up for being responsible for his actions in the future, apologize for those that were impacted by this situation like he has, but he cannot admit to wrong doing in anyway shape or form.

Of course you do.

You may be right about possible future criminal prosecutions. Of course you're taking the word of Steven A. Smith here.

But as it pertains to the one remaining civil suit it is one of her demands to settle the suit. It's been posted at least twice on the board that I know of. She says that until he steps up and admits wrong doing he has done nothing to address it and she will not settle. So I guess he's between a real rock and a hard place here huh? At least he's the one in a hard place now instead of him forcing a hard place on women.

Accused Rapist Matt Araiza's Fate Proves Deshaun Watson Defenders Are Mostly Delusional

How else to explain caping for a guy who's allegedly done things that would get anyone else fired?

A wild but predictable thing happened last weekend: after the Buffalo Bills cut rookie punter Matt Araiza, who might be in steep legal trouble over allegations of a gang rape he allegedly participated in with his college teammates, fans of Deshaun Watson nutted up. Total silence. Not a peep.

Not that I expected Watson fans, who these days are generally synonymous with Cleveland Browns fans, to take to the streets over another team’s punter. It’s just that for months while the NFL litigated the length of Watson’s suspension over his alleged sexual harassment and assault of 24 massage therapists in Texas, his fans seemed to be standing in solidarity with him on the same principles that one would assume would have made them also empathetic to Araiza’s current situation.

Across social media, the excuse-making of Watson’s defenders seemed like a tell that many of them lacked a basic understanding of how employment works, or more specifically, how discipline works when somebody else signs your check every week. How else to explain the wave of folks who have argued that the NFL had no business suspending Watson just because he had faced a criminal investigation and two dozen lawsuits over accusations he did something terrible?

Forget for a moment that a man allegedly exposing his penis, masturbating and ejaculating during what were supposed to be routine massage therapy sessions is heinous behavior. The fact is that no nine-to-fiver would ever stand a chance in hell of reporting to work once they’ve been sued for such a thing—especially not after their current workplace found out that their former employer–in Watson’s case the Houston Texans–had been forced to settle lawsuits with his accusers, too. No employer wants those kind of problems and plenty of folks get fired for less. But for many of Watson’s fans, the NFL is unfairly persecuting him over unproven allegations.

Watson, his legal team and the NFL Players Association finally negotiated an 11-game suspension and $5 million fine from the NFL in early August. That’s getting off light considering the league wanted him gone at least a year and the Browns structured his record $230 million contract to blunt the impact of any missed time in his first season in Cleveland. I was once suspended from a gig for writing a freelance article without permission; I lost a week’s pay. (Luckily the freelance check was worth more than I would’ve made that week, and I hated the job, which was filled with some of the most evil people I’ve ever encountered).

Point being, Watson’s suspension is a much fairer shake than any of his fans would get for far lesser offenses, which seems remarkably lost on many of them. That brings us back to Araiza, who is being sued by an unidentified 18-year-old woman who alleges he and two former San Diego State University teammates raped her last October, while she was a minor. Araiza has yet to have a day in court and as of now hasn’t been charged with a crime, but his job and likely his hopes of ever playing in the NFL are gone. Watson sympathizers have been quiet as a church mouse snacking on a piece of holy cheese about Araiza’s fate.

“This is bigger than football,” said Bills General Manager Brandon Beane in a press conference last Saturday after the team cut Araiza. He’s exactly right: sexual assault is bigger than football, even when it’s only an allegation yet to be proven in court or charged by a prosecutor. The Bills weren’t wrong for cutting him under the circumstances, but that decision was made a lot easier by the fact that Araiza was a rookie punter hoping to make a roster as opposed to the newly-signed, highest-paid quarterback in NFL history. What the Bills and, by extension, the NFL have said is that Araiza’s position and level of talent made him more easily expendable than Watson, whose arm strength and potential to take the bad-news Browns to Super Bowl glory are what kept him in the league and not on the unemployment line. Apparently his talent also makes fans who would also be unemployed if they were in his shoes totally OK with that double standard.

https://www.theroot.com/accused-rapist-matt-araizas-fate-proves-deshaun-watson-1849476274

I would think that would be a "can I get that in writing?" type of situation.

That article is pretty dumb. I'll start from the end and work back.

The Bills knew about the Araiza allegation 1-2 weeks before they released him. They also released the punter that was competing with him AFTER they found out. So they did the right thing, but only after testing the waters. Not exactly the beacon of accountability Mr. theroot.com is making them out to be. Also, writer doesn't seem to understand the difference between a QB and a punter. You think Bills would release Josh Allen over an allegation? I don't.

Journo's really need to quit it with the "us normal folk would never get away with this" shtick. It rings hollow, because instead of an indictment against the person they're railing against (Watson, in this case) it's actually an indictment of the system so long as the readers are at least somewhat paying attention. NFL has a well-established track record of poor and inconsistent/biased discipline, and got taken to the woodshed by Robinson just as much as she did to Watson in her report.

In his rant, there's absolutely zero mention of the Texans and their involvement. I don't say that to try to take any spotlight away from Watson, but I am always so surprised how certain folks can be so passionate against the perpetrator (Watson) but have absolutely nothing to say of the people and orgs that intentionally looked the other way and actively enabled his actions. Texans have settled more cases than Watson has, but you don't hear a peep. Watson is a big problem, but THE problem is much bigger than Watson.

An early tipoff to garbage reporting is the line about how basically all Browns fans are Watson defenders. Dude CLEARLY didn't check in with Browns Twitter, much less Dawgtalkers before he wrote that article.

The article was trash. More witch hunting by the self righteous.

I don't disagree with the overall premise. Watson did stuff that puts him into 'human trash' level. At this point, there's a fair amount of willful ignorance involved in defending Watson the person.

It's just that, much like the Bills trying to look like they're guided by some lofty ethical standard, the article misses the mark if you've been paying any amount of attention. The argument against Watson the person, even at this point when him and the NFL are just checking boxes until he gets back on the field and it all blows over a short time after, would be so much better served if there was more information/truth in the place of slapped-on outrage.

Actually it appears that what they're saying is that it's only Browns fans that are defending watson. I didn't get that "all Browns fans" feel from it that you did. And I agree with you for the most part. I believe if the player in question had been Josh Allan things most likely would have been handled very differently. But then doesn't that pretty much provide the evidence that it's not about what you did but who you are?

And that works for some people. Not so much for others.

He said Watson fans are generally synonymous with Cleveland fans. My understanding of that phrase is that the two groups are the same as each other. I dunno... assuming the author knows and used that phrase accurately is more props than I'm prepared to give.


This is why I get so worked up about the NFL piece of this story. I agree wholeheartedly with what you're saying, and there is a very specific reason for it (the NFL allows/tolerates it as much as it feels it can get away with).

I'm just glad that the NFL has finally realized they can't get away with treating it as mildly as they have in the past. I hope that trend continues moving forward. I agree with you that the reason they're doing so is pressure from the outside. I mean it's not in their best interest to have any of their top name players off the field. And let's face it, their bottom line is the main focus of their decisions. Only when they feel it is more detrimental to their bottom line not to act, will they act. And once again, we just see the synonymous thing differently. I see it more as closely associated with something. Which is actually pretty accurate here. Most of those supporting watson are associated with being Browns fans.

I haven't followed Pit's line of thinking and I did not get to read the article, but are all three of you equating the allegation of gang raping a minor while she was intoxicated to the allegation against Watson, where there was no force, violence, and coercion?

See, I'm not seeing that at all. They'll act as long as people yell long and loud enough to act. Ultimately, they'll continue to pick and choose which players they want to punish and do nothing about contributing/enabling causes, based on how this whole thing has unfolded.

We certainly see it differently. I look at it from a numbers standpoint. Over half of the American population are female. The NFL has been catering their efforts to draw more females to their fan base. So as it relates to sexual abuse against women I see it as a sign moving forward they will address the matter more severely. Not so much because it's the right thing to do but because they don't wish to alienate a large portion of the female audience they have been catering to. To think for a moment the NFL picked or chose to punish one of their top players this strictly I find would go against their own bottom line unless the price they paid for not doing it wasn't worse.

I guess we'll find out moving forward. But think of it this way, since they've given watson this type of punishment, how do you think they can get away with less in the future? It seems as if they sort of painted themselves into a corner moving forward with stiffer penalties for such actions. And I don't believe they didn't realize that when they did it.

Comparing the last 2 helmet-clubbing incidents should tell you that there's no corner the NFL can't get itself out of.

I know that seems like a point of contention with many. But what they don't seem to wish to consider is that there's fights during those same type of practices and preseason games that would get players suspended and throw out of regular season games. Yet the NFL never gets involved in those things during the preseason. Yet somehow they think this should be a special circumstance. And if it isn't, the NFL hates the Browns.

So do you agree or disagree that performing the same act in a preseason practice vs primetime game shifts the punishment from indefinite suspension to nothing? Are you buying what the NFL is selling in terms of the disparity in punishment for the same act? If you aren't, do you not think they'd use the same tactic (that being thinly-veiled BS) in other situations?

I think in this situation they handled it the way they always do in terms of the preseason. I don't think that's right nor do I think the same situation should be handled differently depending on whether or not it's the preseason. But that is their standard operating procedure whether we like it or not and was not changed or altered to suit the situation.

Agree, JMHO, and the real problem for the Browns.....Watson NEVER has to play a game and he gets paid. A poster mentioned he changed his mind after signing a contract- four months after.....SO!!! He was and is a multi-millionaire- he can do what he wants- if he's just a little sensible he's already set for life. We will see how important football is to him.....good luck to Browns!!!

Al Michaels ripped for 'insensitive' commentary during Deshaun Watson segment

Legendary broadcaster Al Michaels has come under criticism on social media for his coverage of the suspension of Cleveland Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson over allegations of sexual misconduct.

Michaels, calling the Steelers-Browns game on Thursday Night Football for Amazon, declined to explain why Watson had been suspended 11 games and fined $5 million during a brief segment on the case coming out of a commercial break late in the second quarter.

Then, after detailing the potential timeline for Watson's return, Michaels noted that many NFL owners weren't pleased with the fully guaranteed record contract Watson secured from the Browns.

“A tremendously controversial deal on so many levels obviously. A lot of the owners around the league weren’t happy about it. And a $230 million dollar fully guaranteed contract for the man who, they hope, is a franchise quarterback.”

Finally, after sideline reporter Kaylee Hartung outlined Watson's treatment plan as part of his suspension, Michaels quipped that the hefty guaranteed salary ought to be enough to ensure Watson "does the things he needs to do."

“Kaylee, if $230 million guaranteed doesn’t motivate you to do the things you need to do, I give up,”

Meanwhile, Michaels' broadcast partner, analyst Kirk Herbstreit, remained silent throughout the entire segment.

On social media, several tweets criticizing Michaels' handling of the segment saw high engagement.

ESPN senior reporter Don Van Natta Jr. criticized Michaels for not mentioning Watson's victims and instead centering the NFL's "billionaire" owners in the segment.

Ashley Colley, an associate producer for ESPN's SportsCenter, said Michaels' commentary was "truly insensitive."

What a truly insensitive comment from Al Michaels about the Deshaun Watson situation. And yet it won't be the last. Educate yourselves or just don't talk. It's so exhausting all the time.
— Ashley Colley (@ashleycolley) September 23, 2022

Tyler Greever, a local sports reporter in Louisville, Kentucky, called the segment "garbage."

Many other journalists and fans struck a similar chord:





https://www.audacy.com/937thefan/sp...NSV1yvzBCzfe_YLp8v7IXsCSsiUdhA9UOfaw0CzE

Load of crap. It's not his job to educate everyone on a subject the whole planet has been aware of for a year+. Love how everybody wants to jump on their soapbox and condemn anyone that doesn't attach PC disclaimers to everything they talk about. We live in a world where you can't even say "I'm not gay" unless you follow with "not that there's anything wrong with that" or else a bunch of vultures jump on your case and call you "the problem". What a joke.

And Herbstreit is supposed to call him out, or he's not doing his job?? 🤣 GTHOH. "His silence speaks volumes." Bunch of pansies.

No kidding. Anybody that's watching the game already knows what's going on with Watson. The only "infection that never seems to end" is the non fan trying to instigate in multiple threads.

It seemed like he wanted to avoid throwing it in Browns fans' faces yet again. That was my take. And the bit about the owners is true, we all know it. That's why this is a story. He irked a bunch of Billionaires. Twitter will be pissed every time the Browns play this year. Just the way it is with DW on the roster.

yea i thought it was clear his comments about the 230 mill was in regards to the treatment outlined for him to get back on the field. i think any of us would say the same thing in response to that; a version of "yea, if thats the treatment he has to seek, 230 mill should be more than a motivating factor to fulfill that treatment."

#snowflake

I don't make the news, I just report it.

You also spin it into something else and gaslight it.

I posted an article. I didn't add anything or detract anything that was included in the article. Try again. Previously I have used the findings of a retired judge and her conclusions based on the totality of the evidence.. Someone with experience who studied and saw witnesses that included every facet of this case. Which nobody else on this board has done. Gaslighting seems to be a popular term with you which does not apply here.

You posted an opinion piece that you call news.

Of course I was speaking in more of a general sense, but you use spin to point at this one post. You are not some guardian of truth that has had you good name besmirched. You will spin a story, you will gaslight us about it and then you will insult us when you ge called on it.

"Just" report the news? Not even close.

You have spun what the former judge said, you have disregarded anything that doesn't play your narrative, and you have continued to be the infection.

"Just" report the news? You don't even understand what news is, and what spun opinion is.

Why did you decide to come here and whine? This will be talked about every time the Browns are on national TV. It will be talked about right before and the entire season after watson's return. Just so we're straight here. The judge said watson was a liar. She also stated he acted in a predatory manner involving his conduct which was most certainly of a sexual nature. Nothing about that is twisted or made up.

If you and others wish to whine about that, have at it. But I will be posting it. If anyone is twisting anything here, it's you and others in your never ending refusal to accept the truth. The judge made that all very clear. So continue your rant and whining.

Yet your post is nothing but whining because it wasn't.

Well of course it was. You do understand that I'm going to post articles I see about watson, right? Or have you missed that? And yes, in case you also missed it, it was talked about on a nationally broadcast NFL game. It did bother many people because it didn't speak about the actual details of the incident what was referred to. I posted an article that pointed that out. All anyone has done since then is complain about it. You are no different. You can either deal with the fact I will post such articles or you can whine about it. That choice is up to you.

This is what spin looks like.


It was mentioned It was not harped on. It was not the major topic of discussion.

They also mentioned Ben Roethlisberger, but that doesn't mean it was noteworthy point of discussion that consumed anything more than a negligible amount air time. Much like the Watson discussions, it was a minor point during the broadcast.

How many people did it bother? The few that were included in the twitter responses you included? Quantify.

Constantly using words like many or phrases like "it was talked about" are merely words spin doctors use to inflate the impact of things because, in reality, the subject they want us to believe isn't really as big a deal as they want it to be.

You accuse anyone that doesn't agree with your spin and trolling to be whiners. Do you realize that just because you cannot stop doesn't not make you right?