OK....coming in late on a couple of these points...but here goes.
1) The number of accusations against Watson has ZERO bearing on whether he is considered a "repeat offender". It is the same situation with the serial killer example. Until the person has been convicted, lost a civil suit, been suspended for the same crime/accusation...Until they have endured "official" repercussions from the accusations, they cannot be considered as a "repeat offender" Until a "new" accusation/investigation/trial begins. PERIOD. There is no "two ways" to interpret it.
2) Concerning the Goodell's involvement. As I read it. IF the investigation sees grounds and suggests a suspension. Goodell as the Commissioner can change that suspension to whatever he wants...including no suspension. He can raise or lower as he sees fit. However...if the investigation recommends no suspension...Goodell can't do a thing about it. There will be no suspension...
3) Just as the accusations against Watson are disturbing, so too are the accusations against Friel. And in both cases neither has been convicted, nor criminally charged in their accusations. And both should be treated as such...
I do think the inclusion of Friel increases the chance of a suspension. But that is an opinion and not a fact.
| 
