Cleveland Browns players embracing Deshaun Watson while putting QB's legal situation aside

Nate Ulrich

Akron Beacon Journal
April 20, 2022
link

BEREA, Ohio — For Cleveland Browns players, the first rule of Deshaun Watson's legal situation woes is you don't talk about Deshaun Watson's legal situation.

Watson's new teammates who addressed media Wednesday at CrossCountry Mortgage Campus complimented the $230 million quarterback and steered clear of any conversation about the 22 active lawsuits he's facing from women accusing him of sexual misconduct during massage appointments.

None of the players would disclose whether Watson has broached the subject of the allegations since the Browns began their voluntary offseason workout program Tuesday with what coach Kevin Stefanski deemed “good” attendance.

“Obviously, we're going to keep that between us,” backup quarterback Jacoby Brissett said. “But, yeah, I'll leave it at that.”

Stefanski sidestepped the question, too.

“I'm not going to get into what guys are talking about necessarily,” Stefanski said. “I'll tell you [Watson] has done a nice job of being around the guys.”

Stefanski said he considers the offseason program valuable because it allows coaches to teach schemes and the team to bond.

“Putting people around each other and starting to develop those relationships, it is really important,” Stefanksi said.

Watson has denied all wrongdoing, and two Texas grand juries declined last month to indict him on 10 criminal complaints.

“Obviously I’m getting to know him now that we’re on the same team. The relationship is growing,” Brissett said. “I wouldn’t say we’re best friends, but I can see why people gravitate to him. He seems like a really good kid, good dude.

“He’s very upbeat, a very joyful guy to be around, so I‘m excited to see where the relationship goes and obviously being on the same team and being able to compete and play alongside each other.”

In the case of cornerback Denzel Ward, he is giving Watson the benefit of doubt and placing all of his faith into Browns brass. Ward said he trusts general manager Andrew Berry and owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam along with the moves they have made.

“I feel [Berry] and those guys, they did their due diligence and they took care of the responsibility of looking into everything they needed to look into with Deshaun and everything that's going on,” Ward said. “So I mean, I trust those guys. I trust what they did.

“Meeting Deshaun, he seems like a nice guy, and he's obviously a great talent, and I’m looking forward to continuing to build our relationship on and off the field.”

Ward said Watson and All-Pro defensive end Myles Garrett are planning trips the players can take together this offseason to foster camaraderie.

But at some point, Watson's legal trouble may interfere with his plans.

Attorneys for Watson and the plaintiffs reached an agreement last month to not schedule trials from Aug. 1 through March 1, 2023, ensuring hearings won't force him to miss football next season.

Yet Watson will likely receive an NFL suspension under the personal conduct policy, and he could miss parts of the offseason program due to court dates.

Stefanski said he had no answer for whether the Browns have gained a better understanding about when a decision on a suspension will be made. Last month at the owners meetings in Palm Beach, Florida, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said there was "no time frame" on a ruling.

As for Watson potentially missing a portion of the offseason program because of legal obligations, Stefanski said, “There are ongoing proceedings, and we'll make sure that we work through those.”

Has Stefanski encouraged Watson to address such matters with his fellow Browns players?


“I'm not going to get into specifics there, but I would tell you, with all of our new players, when you are first around your teammates, there is a process that you go through in getting to understand people, and you can’t do that all at once and have lunch with the entire team type of thing,” Stefanski said. “Over time, I think Deshaun, like all of our new players, understands that you have to spend time at it when you are talking about developing relationships.”

In the meantime, Browns players are thinking about football, even though they're not totally sure when Watson will be available to play.

Wide receiver Amari Cooper was vacationing in Dubai when he awoke to text messages informing him the Browns had traded for Watson on March 18.

“I was happy,” Cooper said. “I was elated.”

Cooper said he didn't know Watson well because they had only met once or twice prior to this year. But Cooper is very familiar with the quarterback's abilities on the field and a resume highlighted by three Pro Bowls.

“Certainly,” Stefanski said, “I think he's being embraced by his teammates.”

Watson embraced by teammates in Browns’ offseason program

BY TOM WITHERS AP SPORTS WRITER
APRIL 20, 2022 7:48 PM
link



BEREA, OHIO Deshaun Watson made a strong impression on his new teammates long ago, scrambling for first downs and rifling touchdown passes while becoming an elite quarterback playing in Houston. Now in Cleveland, the one he makes off the field may matter more. Acquired from the Texans in a trade last month, Watson is getting to know the Browns better — and vice versa — during the team's voluntary offseason program, which will allow the three-time Pro Bowler to focus on football while legally fighting to clear his name.


The 26-year-old has been accused by 22 women of sexual misconduct or sexual assault in massage therapy sessions Watson set up via social media. And while he's not been charged with any criminal wrongdoing, Watson faces 22 civil lawsuits that could impact his availability with the Browns. There's also possible discipline from the NFL, now conducting its own inquiry to determine if Watson violated the league's personal-conduct policy.

On Wednesday, coach Kevin Stefanski acknowledged Watson's legal schedule could intersect with the team's. “We will work through those types of things,” Stefanski said. "As you know, there are ongoing proceedings, and we will make sure that we work through those.” The Browns did not make Watson available to the media Wednesday, leaving Stefanski and three players to address questions about what the QB's arrival means to a team that went all in to add him to its roster. Stefanski said Watson is fitting in fine. “He's being embraced by his teammates,’’ Stefanski said. “We’re in Day 2 of the offseason program so I think it’s like any player on your team that’s new, it takes time to develop relationships. Now is that time.”


Stefanski declined to say whether Watson addressed the Browns about his legal issues or if he was encouraged to do so. “I am not going to get into specifics there, but I would tell you, with all of our new players when you are first around your teammates, there is a process that you go through in getting to understand people, and you can’t do that all at once and have lunch with the entire team type of thing,” Stefanski said. “I think Deshaun, like all of our new players, understands that you have to spend time at it when you are talking about developing relationships. He has done a nice job of being around the guys.” Cornerback Denzel Ward, who officially signed his record-setting five-year, $100 million contract extension Tuesday, didn't have any prior relationship with Watson other than playing against him. “He seems like a great guy,” Ward said.


The Browns' decision to pursue Watson and ultimately give him a fully guaranteed $230 million contract has angered some fans. The optics are certainly questionable given the accusations against Watson, who sat out last season. While not speaking for all his teammates, Ward said he's confident general manager Andrew Berry and the club's front office did its research before bringing in a player with character questions. “I trust those guys. I trust what they did," Ward said. "Meeting Deshaun, he seems like a nice guy, and he’s obviously a great talent and I’m looking forward to continuing to build our relationship on and off the field.” Quarterback Jacoby Brissett will get to know Watson better than most. Signed as a free agent to be Cleveland's backup, Brissett could be the starter depending on whether Watson gets suspended. It's a familiar role for the veteran, who has made 30 career starts during stints with New England, Indianapolis and Miami.


Like Ward, Brissett had little personal background with Watson. They faced off twice a year in the AFC South, but Brissett said those interactions were limited to a postgame handshake and a few words. They'll share a room in Cleveland with Josh Dobbs. Brissett said his early interactions with Watson have been positive. “The relationship is growing,” he said. “I wouldn’t say we’re best friends, but I can see why people gravitate to him. He seems like a really good dude. He’s very upbeat, a very joyful guy to be around.” Along with staying ready, Brissett said he'll also be another level of support for Watson.


“I’ve been around this league to know that players, we deal with real life things, and it goes deeper than football,’’ Brissett said. Amari Cooper never imagined his trade to Cleveland this winter would be followed by a bigger one. Just days after the Browns acquired the four-time Pro Bowler from Dallas, Cooper was vacationing in Dubai when word reached him that Watson would be his teammate. “I was asleep,” Cooper said. “I woke up and saw a whole bunch of text messages and stuff like that. Guys were like, ‘Man, you are lucky.’ It was some of my former teammates, and I was like, ‘What?’ It was cool. I was happy about it.” Cooper has no doubt he and Watson will connect.


“He’s a great player. I’m a great player,” Cooper said. “We’re going to make it work by any means necessary.”

Curious that there is no mention of Baker in either article. I wonder if he showed up? Saw a pic on Twitter of them shaking hands, figured it was photoshopped. I'd love to read how Baker feels about DW. And Chubb too. He's quiet, but just because of the kind of man he seems to be, I can't imagine he doesn't have an opinion. These rah-rah articles, written to try to smooth things over with fans, shouldn't be titled, “Cleveland Browns players embracing Deshaun Watson while putting QB's legal situation aside”. The last thing I want to hear is they are giving him a pass. Unless and until he proves his innocents, I don't see how anyone can just blindly accept his word.

ocd...Hopefully folks will keep Baker out of the thread..I wouldn't want to a good thread hy-jacked by someone holding a grudge against Baker.

I will say that initial reports of how teammates are treating Watson sound favorable. Best thing Watson could do is settle all the cases so everyone can focus on football.

There’s a new sense of excitement amongst our players IMO. Watson is a legit franchise QB, which brings hope and legitimacy. If he remains on the field we will be much better.

jc...

This is why I wish Watson and his team of legal advisers would try to get his legal matters settled. Along with the good news about Watson seeming to settle in with his new teammates comes the news from the legal situation he continues to face. In the article below comes a news that Watson might not have been using the message therapy that the Texans were providing to him and the entire team. That might help to explain why the clients lawyer is seeking information and records from the Texans.

Again, the sooner Watson takes care of the messy baggage he came to Cleveland with, the better it will be for everyone.


QB Deshaun Watson’s legal woes far from over as he reports to Browns

By JUAN A. LOZANO
Associated Press
Published: 4/20/2022 5:31:25 PM
Modified: 4/20/2022 5:30:09 PM
link


HOUSTON — While Deshaun Watson’s NFL career has resumed with the Cleveland Browns after grand juries declined to indict him on any criminal charges over sexual misconduct allegations, his legal problems remain far from over.

Lawsuits filed in Houston by 22 women who have accused him of sexual assault and harassment remain unresolved, with no trial date set. Watson has denied any wrongdoing, saying last month he has “never assaulted, disrespected or harassed any woman in my life.”

Tony Buzbee, the attorney for the 22 women, said while his clients have been disheartened that Watson is able to participate in NFL activities amid his legal troubles, the attorney is focused on collecting evidence, including depositions of the quarterback, in anticipation of going to trial in civil court.

“All this other stuff surrounding is just a bunch of noise because my singular focus is preparing the cases to be tried and I intend to win them,” Buzbee said.

But Rusty Hardin, Watson’s attorney, said it would be “ludicrous” for Watson to not be allowed to resume playing when criminal charges were declined by two grand juries and the civil cases are still going through the normal legal channels.

“What they want is for him to be punished without process and to be unemployed without process and that’s crazy,” Hardin said.

The women allege in their lawsuits that Watson exposed himself, touched them with his penis or kissed them against their will during massage appointments. One woman alleged Watson forced her to perform oral sex.

Two separate Texas grand juries last month declined to indict Watson on criminal complaints stemming from the allegations.

David Ring, a California-based attorney not connected to the lawsuits and who has represented victims of sexual assault, said while it was a “big victory” for Watson that he wasn’t indicted, negative information from the lawsuits could still be made public that might impact his eligibility to play and whether NFL fans fully embrace him.

“I think there’s a large segment of the NFL fan base out there that’s still very interested in the outcome of the civil cases and again the more information that comes out about him, the more damaging it could be,” said Ring.

Watson was set to be deposed for about 50 hours and Buzbee said he still has another 30 hours to go. Watson’s depositions, which are being done on separate days, could stretch into the summer.

Buzbee and Hardin have different views of how Watson’s depositions have gone so far.

Buzbee said that in the depositions, Watson has offered no reasons for why he contacted people on Instagram for massages and didn’t use professional services offered by the Houston Texans, his former team.

“He literally has no explanation as to why he went about his business this way,” Buzbee said.

Hardin said he is concerned the depositions are only being done so that certain information that’s seen as damaging can be made public and create pressure to get Watson to settle the cases.

“At the end of the day, they don’t shed much light on anything,” Hardin said of Watson’s depositions by Buzbee.

No civil trials were set to happen during the upcoming NFL season as both sides last month agreed to not schedule any trials between Aug. 1 and March 1.

Buzbee said he tried to have the first civil trial in July but Watson’s attorneys weren’t interested.

Hardin said there were some discussions about a possible July trial for one or two of the lawsuits but issues related to scheduling among the lawyers and the judge haven’t been resolved.

Ring said he expects that as the ongoing discovery process in the case, in which depositions, documents and other evidence is gathered, winds down, “serious settlement talks” will likely start. He said 95% of civil lawsuits end up being settled before trial.

“The odds are it’s going to be a settlement at some point,” Ring said.

Buzbee said he’s still planning on having a separate trial for each of the 22 lawsuits.

Hardin said there are no current settlement conversations, but added “a trial is not going to go well for” Buzbee.

You mean to tell me that watson and his attorney are professing his innocence? Imagine that.

I pointed out two weeks ago that the whole season will be like this until this is over, one way or the other. If he settles, it looks very bad. Not sure how I would feel about that other than I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT HIM.

You would.

There comes a point in these cases where settling is the best course of action. Peace of mind come in to play. Settling doesn't mean you are guilty. It just means you aren't willing to fight the battle any longer.

ocd...no doubt there will be some who believe Watson will look "guilty" if he settles but if he allows this to continue and more and more information becomes public, we end up with a drawn out episode that drips and drips information. I'm not a follower of statistics on how many civil cases end in settlement, but I would believe putting an end to Watson's case and settle would be a relief to many.

IMO, it would be best for the Browns franchise to put this matter behind them so some healing can begin.

Once the law decided there will not be any criminal charges I think a settlement in this case then became the most likely out come. Then after the settlement what punishment the NFL decides is warranted will be the final conclusion. My guess is the matter will get settled over the summer for an undisclosed $$$ per each of the 22 women. Then a 4 to 6 game suspension by the league.

I'm predicting no suspension.

That's easy to say, but morally bankrupt. NOPE. I'm going to be like a dog after a bone on him if he doesn't clear his name. I already want him out of Cleveland, just because of the shadow of this crap over his head, and I think there is a fair chance he is innocent. Don't give a damn about a dirty tainted SB. Would rather keep losing than quit being a decent person and root for a predator. But you do you, it's what everyone expects from you anyway.

A settlement isn’t the same as declare yourself guilty and escaping legal consequences isn’t the same as being innocent. If Watson accept these two conclusions he will also find the solution to move forward.

I say this again. Nobody cares if you drive a little bit too fast one time, continue do it 21 times more in a span of 24 months and you’re someone very few trust behind the wheel. The key word is 22.

I do agree that often times settling is the best option. But often times people paint themselves into a corner just like watson did. I've never heard of an attorney who likes the idea of a client speaking out in public in a case where they ara facing accusations like these. Lawyers like for their clients to be quiet.

There's a reason for that. Watson has publicly stated that he refuses to settle because he wants to face all of his accusers in court to prove his innocence. Once you go out and say that, settling doesn't look so good.

Baker isn't the only QB under contract with the Browns that needs to learn to shut the hell up.

I think there is quite a difference between Baker and his need to talk about his feelings ... which I loath ... and DW proclaiming his innocence. I think DW needs to put that out there and I have zero doubt it was discussed with his legal team AND the Browns. No idea how it plays out. I'd love for DW not to settle and to be exonerated - that would make me feel much, much better.

All I can say is this: Watson is now the QB of my team, and thus all I can do is hope that he didn't do the things he has been accused of.

j/c: I asked a question on the last thread, but it was locked afterwards. I'll ask again because I don't know all the details like some folks do.

Did the 22 women all go to the authorities first and file criminal complaints and then later hooked up w/the attorney and file the civil suits afterwards? Or were these filed as civil cases first and more and more women came forward as the civil cases gained momentum?

First question: No. Second question: Yes

Thank you.

Specifics have a lot of meaning in the long run

I think when we made the trade we had a pretty good idea this was the case, as the NFL could just say “last year was his suspension, now we will fine him”

There may be a difference in the subject matter but otherwise there's no difference. When you say things for public consumption you should consider the consequences. DW stated he was innocent, would prove it in court and would refuse to settle with any of those women. Now if he does not measure up to those standards it will be used against him as it should be. However it won't be by many since we now live in a society where a person isn't held to the standards of honesty and accountability anymore.

It's impossible to have a legitimate conversation with you on this topic given your sig.

Yeah, I wouldn't go there. The kid deserves his day in court, a chance to clear his name. But the predator thing is still pretty heavily used in the Browns twitter-verse. So this ain't going away until he clears his name, no matter how posters on the board feel.

I get it, and it wasn't intended as a put down...just more as a matter of fact.

Another example of why Watson and the Browns need to put this issue behind them..the sooner, the better.


The curious case of Deshaun Watson and the swanky hotel in Houston

USA TODAY
April 21, 2022, 5:01 AM
link

NFL quarterback Deshaun Watson liked to go somewhere special when he wanted to relax as a player for the Houston Texans.

It’s called The Houstonian, an upscale hotel and club that once served as the residence of former President George H.W. Bush. According to court records, Watson had an account there, liked to get massages there in his room and had his marketing manager arrange those rooms in advance.

But it’s also where at least two women say he exposed himself to them and touched them with his genitals during massage sessions in 2020.

And now it’s part of the fight for pretrial evidence after 22 women sued him last year and accused him of sexual misconduct during massage sessions, including the two at The Houstonian, according to court documents filed recently in Houston.

“He takes women in some of these cases to The Houstonian, which (offers luxury massage services to customers), but he’s bringing in women who aren’t even licensed in massage?” the attorney for the women, Tony Buzbee, said to USA TODAY Sports earlier month.

Watson's activity there has been subject to increased scrutiny in recent weeks as the pretrial discovery process has intensified. In one case, two weeks after meeting a woman on Instagram, he flew her in from Atlanta to give him a massage in his suite at The Houstonian, where she said he exposed himself and caused his genitals to touch her inappropriately on Aug. 28, 2020, according to her lawsuit against him.


NFL quarterback Deshaun Watson liked to go somewhere special when he wanted to relax as a player for the Houston Texans.

It’s called The Houstonian, an upscale hotel and club that once served as the residence of former President George H.W. Bush. According to court records, Watson had an account there, liked to get massages there in his room and had his marketing manager arrange those rooms in advance.

But it’s also where at least two women say he exposed himself to them and touched them with his genitals during massage sessions in 2020.

And now it’s part of the fight for pretrial evidence after 22 women sued him last year and accused him of sexual misconduct during massage sessions, including the two at The Houstonian, according to court documents filed recently in Houston.

“He takes women in some of these cases to The Houstonian, which (offers luxury massage services to customers), but he’s bringing in women who aren’t even licensed in massage?” the attorney for the women, Tony Buzbee, said to USA TODAY Sports earlier month.

Watson's activity there has been subject to increased scrutiny in recent weeks as the pretrial discovery process has intensified. In one case, two weeks after meeting a woman on Instagram, he flew her in from Atlanta to give him a massage in his suite at The Houstonian, where she said he exposed himself and caused his genitals to touch her inappropriately on Aug. 28, 2020, according to her lawsuit against him.


Instead of arranging to have this unlicensed therapist come all the way to Houston, there were easier massage options available to him that day, when his team, the Houston Texans, did not practice after holding a scrimmage the day before. The Houstonian offered professional luxury massage spa services at the Solaya Spa & Salon by The Houstonian, just three miles away from the hotel. The hotel even provided a free shuttle to get there and back, plus discounts to all guests in 2020 and gifts with treatments to hotel guests, according to the hotel.

In another case, Watson suggested another unlicensed therapist come to his suite at The Houstonian in July 2020, weeks before Texans training camp opened on Aug. 14, 2020. He first contacted this woman on Snapchat and saw the women for four sessions from July to September 2020, with Watson’s behavior getting “progressively worse,” including exposing himself, touching her with his genitals and ejaculating in front of her, according to her lawsuit.

Watson, 26, denies any wrongdoing, and two grand juries declined to indict him on criminal charges in 10 cases that were reported to police. But the 22 civil lawsuits march on separately and have proceeded to dig for evidence that still could affect his future even after getting a record contract with the Cleveland Browns worth $230 million guaranteed over five years. The NFL has said it is monitoring developments and could suspend him for a violation of it personal conduct policy.

“The fact that he went to such lengths to obtain massages tends to bolster the credibility of the plaintiffs,” said Kenneth Williams, professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. “The plaintiffs probably want the jury to think that a star NFL quarterback wouldn't have to go to such lengths to obtain a massage unless the massages were a pretext for something else.”

His attorney, Rusty Hardin, said Watson took to Instagram and social media to find massages because of his busy schedule and because “spas shut down” during the pandemic. In the case of The Houstonian, the famed spa there called Trellis Spa did shut down for much of that year because of a renovation project starting Feb. 2, 2020 – before the pandemic. But The Houstonian still wanted to make sure its guests and members could access these services. So it opened its sister spa, Solaya, that same month three miles away.

That spa and others were ordered closed during a pandemic shutdown ordered by the state governor in March 2020 but reopened in May 2020, after which all but only a few of the alleged incidents took place among the 22 women. In pretrial testimony, Watson “couldn’t say any place was shut down because of COVID,” Buzbee previously told USA TODAY Sports. “He didn’t reach out to any place that shut down. He didn’t even ask.”

Another attorney for the plaintiffs, Cornelia Brandfield-Harvey, recently told a judge at a hearing in Houston they were seeking evidence that shows Watson had a pattern and motive when scheduling these massages through social media – that it was to get sex and not just a massage, even if that desire wasn’t mutual. Brandfield-Harvey sought documentation from Watson of where he got massages in 2019 and 2020, how they were paid and any excerpts from his Texans contract in which obtaining massages was discussed.

“The burning question in the jury’s mind, I believe, will be why did he not use the facilities that were available” to him instead of looking for massages with people he didn’t know on social media, Brandfield-Harvey told the judge.

NFL DRAFT: Nine players for whom teams could trade up with early picks

MOCK DRAFT: Projecting more trades that could create first-round chaos

Despite an objection from one of Watson’s attorneys, the judge agreed to compel Watson to provide massage location history and payment information from late March 2019 to late March 2020, as well the massage information sought from his Texans contract.

Another recent court filing shows the plaintiffs also are seeking other documentation involving The Houstonian and another hotel. They filed a notice in court that shows they are seeking information from the Texans, including records of payments to The Houstonian for Watson, records of rooms at the Houstonian for use by players and any correspondence between the Texans and The Houstonian regarding Watson from 2019-2021.
It was not the only place this alleged misconduct occurred, according to the lawsuits. Other locations describe incidents at Watson’s house, the house of a woman’s mother and other incidents in California, Georgia and Arizona. Most happened in or near Houston from early 2020 to March 2021.

Hardin has said the women are lying, out for money and there were “sometimes consensual encounters.”

Citing hotel policy, The Houstonian said it does not provide information on customers and declined comment on Watson.

“Watson can argue he simply wanted a private place for a massage (and) did not want to go to a spa,’ said David Ring, a Los Angeles attorney who has represented sexual assault victims but is not involved in the Watson case. On the other hand, Ring called it “highly suspicious conduct.”

“This evidence could be used to show that Watson’s plan was to lure a masseuse to the hotel under the guise of a massage, when his real intention was to engage in sexual activities,” Ring said.

The hotel also came up several times during a pretrial deposition in February for Watson’s marketing manager, Bryan Burney, who testified he sometimes arranged to get hotel rooms for Watson to have massages.

“Where would you get these rooms for him?” Buzbee asked him. “Were they all at The Houstonian or different places?

“Mostly at The Houstonian,” Burney answered.

Buzbee circled back to it.

“When Deshaun Watson asks you, 'Hey, man, get me a room at The Houstonian; I want a massage,' how do you bill him for that, or do you?” Buzbee asked.

“I don't bill him because he had an account with The Houstonian, so there was nothing to bill him on,” Burney said.

Buzbee then asked if he knew how Watson found the women who provided him with massages on those occasions.

Burney said he didn’t know.

Watson is required to provide the massage history and location information by about May 6, according to the judge's ruling this month. Meanwhile, the cases might not go to trial until after February 2023 unless they are settled out of court before then.

That is a problem to me..why, oh why are these women going up to a mans hotel to give a massage if they aren't professionals...well, professionals in massage.

There was nothing illegitimate about my last post....


You of course found some excuse to avoid discussing it as I thought you might. He made a public statement about his course of action. He made it public that he felt fighting all of these cases would prove his innocence. He'll either follow through with that or his actions will be viewed in the context of the statements he made public. He opened his mouth and inserted his foot. You know that's exactly how that will play out in the press and everywhere outside of blindly loyal Browns fans. You don't need to try and twist it into somehow being my fault or my sig. for a situation that watson created when he should have just been quiet about it. But I understand why you would attempt to do that.

j/c:

I have always wondered why you would not first try to get the case tried in Criminal Court if you were truly the victim of an illegal crime. I always understood that going the route of Civil Court making sense after your case was either tried or rejected by a Criminal Court. Similarly, I have been somewhat skeptical if one chose to pursue their legal cases in Civil Court first.

I'm wondering how other posters feel about this as it pertains to Watson? I am most interested in hearing from posters who have taken a wait-and-see approach w/this case and have responded fairly and void of any bias. I don't really wish to hear from those who have already spent countless hours trying to convince others that Watson is guilty because I already know what they will say. Of course, I do realize they are the ones who will do most of the responding. LOL

The bottom line is I have always felt this way about Criminal and Civil cases. I just think if you were illegally victimized, using the Criminal Courts made the most sense while choosing the Civil Courts as your genesis seemed more about trying to collect a big payday. I am not sure if I'm justified in having that opinion. Would love to hear from some of you more rational and fair-minded folks on this topic.

Civil Court, is all about getting paid

I was agreeing with you. Then telling you it's all over. Pit can put that in his sig, I wouldn't just now.

I know you were. Maybe it was more of a message to him that I wasn't.

SO, should we blame the women?

Maybe. You shouldn't just rule things out because they are females.

j/c

I find this topic odd. Very few posters seem to have a problem with people who suggest, "They might all just be hookers". No problem with, "They are all just trying to extort money from watson". Or even the suggestion that "their attorney rounded them all up, came up with a story and they are all liars".

It seems attacking all of these women is no problem for far more posters than I would have ever imagined. At this point nothing surprises me.

Looking at all possibilities in search of the truth isn't attacking. Attacking is calling someone guilty with no solid evidence.

Yeah, all of these women doing those things is a "possibility". Pretty much like the possibility that horses fly.

Like/agree with it or not, that's where we're at right now.

Sadly you are correct.

There's nothing sad about it. No justice system is perfect, but if I had to choose I'd take innocent until guilty over mob justice.

And exactly what justice do you think a mob will impose? Lynching? Prison? It seems attacking the accusers is the chosen stance of many. I mean if you wish to discuss mob justice.

This is just my opinion and I am not saying I am correct. However, I think that considering the fact that Watson has not been indicted for any criminal wrongdoing and wondering why people would choose to first bring their case and claims to Civil Court rather than first try to find "justice" in a Criminal Court is keeping an open mind and allowing the situation to play out w/out assigning guilt or innocence to any party. I also think saying things like "I hope Watson is punished if he broke the law" and "I hope Watson is allowed to live as a free man and in piece" aren't terrible takes.

On the other had posting dozens of articles that are one-sided and stating things like Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson... is more of a mob justice mentality. But again, that is just my opinion.

It's been explained several times yet some choose not to accept it. In the absence of physical evidence it's very had, almost impossible to prove a case in criminal court. The proof of guilt requires a totally different standard in a criminal trail than it does in a civil trial. In a criminal trial it requires "beyond a reasonable doubt". In a civil trial it is a "preponderance of the evidence". I know you've chosen to ignore that.

If you think a sig. on a message board is mob justice view is quite skewed.

As I've said before, you and those like yourself seem to have no problem with character attacks on all these women insinuating they could all be prostitutes, could all be liars and there is some conspiracy theory to extort watson by some greedy attorney. It seems you have chosen to pick and choose what you have a problem with and what you don't. Allegations condemning the character of all these women is something you've never spoken out against. Sometimes what's not said speaks louder than what is said.

I would say a group of people assigning guilt before a person is actually convicted of a crime is a mob mentality. But again, that is simply my opinion.

I do understand that a Criminal trial is harder to win. Let me ask another question. Did all 22 of these women file police reports before they joined the Civil suit? I am not saying they are guilty of chasing money by using sexual encounters as a launching point to gain money, but it sure as hell would not be the first time. I think that all things should be taken into consideration before the public can say who is guilty and whom is not. Again, just my opinion.

I don't know, but based on what I've seen on here it will be justice without waiting for any amount of actual evidence.

"Attacking accusers" is the strawman argument you have created to make convicting/punishing someone without any real evidence sound more palatable.

Most people aren't "attacking" the accusers. Skepticism of the allegations (numerous and consistent as they are) is good, if uncomfortable. It's what allows the justice system to hand out punishment with any sort of credibility. I do understand that proving these cases is generally very difficult. You yourself have said that the accusers lawyer is really good at his job, and he has said that he will prove Watson's guilt. So why is it such an issue waiting for him to do just that?

Top 10 Reasons People Do Not Report Sexual Abuse

https://www.dlawgroup.com/reasons-people-do-not-report-sexual-abuse/

Why many sexual assault survivors may not come forward for years

https://journalistsresource.org/health/sexual-assault-report-why-research/

Why we're psychologically hardwired to blame the victim

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/27/victim-blaming-science-behind-psychology-research

I think just about every person in this country understands why women are reluctant to pursue charges. I have mentioned on this board that it's terrible when female accusers become the victim. Of course, you choose to ignore that.

On the other hand, I think almost every person in this country realizes that there are people who like to take advantage of others by filing claims and that is why Personal Injury lawyers pollute our airwaves.

I'm saying that it is my belief that we keep an open mind and not assign guilt to either party and that we allow the legal system to handle the case.

Yet you posted this....


On the other hand, I think almost every person in this country realizes that there are people who like to take advantage of others by filing claims and that is why Personal Injury lawyers pollute our airwaves.

I'm saying that it is my belief that we keep an open mind and not assign guilt to either party and that we allow the legal system to handle the case.[/quote]

Yep a large group of them doing it against the same person. Happens all the time in Versland.

Above you claim you understand why women don't report things right away when previously you posted this....


....when it's been explained in these threads over and over how difficult it is to prove a case without physical evidence in a criminal trial. So how many times have over 20 women accused the same man of sexual improprieties again?

Ignoring the obvious isn't something I'm having a problem with.

I disagree, but that's a conversation for somewhere other than PF.

Was your post supposed to be a dig? Is "the obvious" Watson committed a crime? If so, your "Ignoring the obvious isn't something I'm having a problem with" remark rings hollow given how quickly the grand jury decided not to indict, the lack of overall hard evidence, and your own repeating ad nauseum how hard these cases are to prove (how can something be both obvious and difficult to prove?).

Obviously those who control this board disagree no matter how much some of you protest.


It was a dig but not at you specifically. Anyone who lumps that many victims into a category that portrays them as possible prostitutes, all liars or involved in some scheme to extort money from watson isn't looking for legitimate possibilities, they are attacking an entire group of women. Claiming that's a straw man position isn't helping you there.

There you go again. You are equating any opinion/argument that is at all at odds with the unproven allegations as an attack on an entire group of women. Considering the lack of actual evidence we have to debate over, this isn't even an 'attack' on the accusers, much less a whole slice of women. It's called innocent until proven guilty and resisting mob mentality.

I believe the date is May 7th that Watson has to provide a detailed list of the number of massages and with whom he received massages since 2019. Preliminary numbers are estimating that total somewhere around 150 different women. Once these women get exposed to this circus, there's going to have to be a whole lot of explaining going forward. There's already 40 that have come forward, but I expect that number to increase greatly especially if the list gets released. As stated above, most women don't report these things because of people being psychologically hardwired to blame the victim. If half of those women decide to join the civil suit because of the exposure they obviously didn't want, what is the fallout for Watson and the Cleveland Browns with 75 plus civil suits? We all have to wait for this thing to play out but any increase in numbers will not be looking favorable for Watson IMHO.

Preliminary numbers from who?

It's all speculation. Let's actually wait for it to play out and deal with reality instead of speculation and 'it's reported that'. The situation as it stands is quite serious enough.

There are reasons why people accuse you of moving the goal posts, being a LWL, and spinning what people say. You never take the time to consider an alternative viewpoint to delve deeper into the situation. It's all about you being right and defaming the other poster's opinion. Labeling a man a Predator w/out allowing the legal system to run it's course is what's sad. You can spin things all you want, but I'm going to keep an open mind. I'll end my attempt to try and have a rational discussion w/you and allow you to once again have the last word. In this case, you are actually entitled to it since I "went off" on you.

Watson's camp is required to produce information pertaining to his massage history since 2019 as well as the language about massages in his contract with the Houston Texans, his previous team, according to USA Today's Schrotenboer.

And to everybody: Do not, under any circumstances, claim that a Houston grand jury exonerated Watson last month. It did nothing of the kind. It simply chose not to indict him. If you cite the grand jury’s decision not to press charges as proof he did nothing wrong, you only reveal your own ignorance about the criminal-justice system generally and sexual-assault cases specifically.

But you don’t have to be ignorant, because Melissa Morabito did some due diligence for you. Wasn’t that nice of her? Morabito is an associate professor in the University of Massachusetts-Lowell School of Criminology and Justice Studies and co-author of a U.S. Department of Justice-funded study of decision-making and attrition in sexual-assault cases.

The study covers 3,269 cases over a three-year period across six states. Only 1.6% of cases where sexual assault was reported to police ever made it to court. Morabito says the chances of Watson facing a jury trial were probably lower, because most of the accusations by the 22 women involve forcible fondling as opposed to direct penetration or rape, though at least one woman accused him of forcing her to perform oral sex.

But Judge Rabeea Sultan Collier overruled the objection in favor of the plaintiffs, compelling Watson to provide a history of women who gave him massages.

Watson's attorney, Rusty Hardin, estimated that Watson receives between 120 and 150 massages per year, which isn't necessarily out of the ordinary for an NFL player.

The Texans work with Genuine Touch Massage Therapy, which can arrange for therapists to work with players even while away from the team facility, although some players opt to find their own therapists.

An anonymous person with ties to the Texans said a member of the team's medical staff was concerned about Watson getting injured due to seeking out massage therapists on Instagram.

An anonymous NFC defensive back said, “I don’t know guys who use 22 different masseuses," in reference to the number of lawsuits filed against Watson.

The NFL players who spoke to SI anonymously all said they always have full-sheet drapings during their massage sessions and go out of their way to avoid exposing their genitals.

The one thing that has me thinking these women might be full of it, is this all happened AFTER DW called ownership out for racism. Money like that can buy this kind of trouble for an enemy. Other than that possibility, DW might be a guy who just pays for sex, a creep who “kind of, but not quite” forces women into sex willingly. I mean he may put them in sexual situations without crossing the line and then make a paid offer for sex. That makes him a creep, not really a predator. But if he forces them against their will or scares them into thinking if they don't something bad will happen; that's pure predator in my book. I think the facts need to get clearer for me to remain a fan of the browns during his tenure. I might have an issue rooting for another team, but I stopped watching football when they moved the Browns, and have skipped a lot of playoffs/super bowls because the Browns didn't make the playoffs. So, I will adapt one way or the other if this goes any way I don't feel acceptable. Right now, nobody knows enough to say one way or the other except perhaps a couple judges or lawyers.

Just look at the women that come out against men for political reasons. It's not like a woman or many women can't lie, especially if they are compensated. And generally, I would think if somebody is selling sex, lying in a lawsuit wouldn't be much of a leap. The number of them actually works against them in the case in that context. Think honestly about this, DW has average or IMO just less than average looks and personality. Of course that is more or less my first impressions in this context because I never really paid much attention to him before now. But it follows that a guy like that, who is suddenly that rich, maybe a little shy or introverted when it comes to sexual relationships… I could see him paying for sex like a kid in a candy store, with the team fully aware. Then he takes a dump on the owners, the league, and almost half the country that thinks blatant racism shouldn't be called out.

I've also plugged in a hundred other scenarios while thinking about all of this. They all end with not enough data to truly convict or acquit from the cheap seats.

Best case scenario, it's a Robert Kraft type situation. What they are alleging is NOT that (that he forced them to do sexual stuff that they didn't want to). As you said, more facts are needed.

Question cause to me its very important. I think I read that ALL, SOME, FEW if all its a big time fact. I read on this thread in one of the articles I believe posted by mac. It stated that these girls did not have a license to massage. If so I'm thinking who is in a HIGH END environment and does not have a "LICENSE" for their profession. I know its something I'm hoping for cause I wish to root for Watson. But that smells like Prostitute to me. I wish to be as accurate as possible so if its just 1 or 2 of the alleged victims were in that predicament then it back to the DW is scum. But if it is ALL then I really think these were ladies of the night and not Massage therapists.

jmho please feed me the facts on this thank you in advance

Delve into what? That all of these women are liars? They they must all be prostitutes? That somehow this highly successful attorney who has taken cases such as BP in the Deepwater Horizon disaster and Exxonmobil case must be some kind of ambulance chaser such as you suggested? That even Rick Perry used him in his defense and even The New York Times once called him one of the most successful trial lawyers in the country?

Those are the absurd allegations you think I should consider? Maybe the issue is really that you realize just how absurd these accusations are and rather than man up and face that it makes you feel better by throwing shade on someone else.


A civil trial means you believe someone is guilty by a preponderance of the evidence. That means 51% or more. None of the hair brained, far reaching accusations which people prefer to call possibilities to sooth the fact that their using nothing more victim blaming to absolve watson meets any threshold of a preponderance.

Don't let them fool you with their false allegations Tab....


They're basically making things up and ignoring much of what has been exposed so far in this case.

I've heard this theory before. But let me ask you this. What kind of wealthy person would try to undermine their own ability to get the most money and assets out of a commodity they were in control of? When you know you will be forced to trade a player, trying to purposefully undermine his value would take a moron. Indecent exposure is a crime. It's not just creepy behavior.

For some reason I had this saved, the narrative really changed quick when he came here.....

Who changed it? Who has said they don't think he's a top 5 or top 10 QB in the NFL on the field? I certainly haven't seen it anywhere.

Have to look but I know Fanduel had him at 8 behind Derek Carr just ahead of Ryan Tannehil and that's just in the AFC. Which is obviously nonsense.

This is to the board. Please know that I never once said that all these women were prostitutes. I never made bold claims that they were liars. I don't even think I ever mentioned the attorney. In fact, while I have never been w/a prostitute, I have always had a soft spot in my heart for them because their circumstances factored in to their predicament. I don't think they are evil people and I don't think they should be ridiculed or held in contempt or looked upon w/disgust.

I think that posters who continually lie about what others are saying are a real problem on this board. It happens far too often. It creates fights and derails threads. Others who aren't following closely probably assume that the accusing poster is telling the truth. It's reprehensible that a handful of posters continually resort to this behavior.

Secondly, I am of the opinion that we all keep an open mind and consider all the information out there so we can make an informed and fair decision and shutting conversation down by making up lies is not good for the overall good of the board.

Yes, insinuations don't count in Versland.

Just like using qualifiers such as, I'm not saying they're doing it for the money but it wouldn't be the first time.

You have been shown in this thread that many of these women were licensed massage therapists. You were shown that the message was being spread around the massage therapist community about watson's conduct. So who is it really that isn't considering the very real possibilities here?

And just to clear up the falsehood you are now trying to present, I never said it was you making these accusations. You claimed I wasn't looking at the other possibilities. I gave you the list of possibilities that had been posted numerous times on this board and let you know that I had considered them and they were absurd at best.

But over the last couple of days you've certainly insinuated a couple of them.

Then you should consider behaving yourself better. You just finished posting lies.

I don't think he is.

Is it possible some of the women are jumping in on the lawsuit?

It certainly is. When you have a group of women this large you will have various personalities and characters involved. Any time you have a large group of people in any given profession you will find a mix of both good and bad. There's also the very real possibility and even the likelihood that there are victims that as of now, and possibly never will never come forward due to some of the very things that are posted on this board. They don't wish to endure the victim blaming and publicity that is involved in all of this. It's been shown over and over again how victims of a sexual nature often never come forward. So while I agree with what you're saying, that street travels in both directions.

If people were qualifying it the way you just did rather than appear to be making sweeping accusations it wouldn't be so bad. I've never said that they were all telling the truth. As I suggested, being all inclusive with a large group of people is naive and short sighted.

You've said numerous times that people either believe Watson or they believe "22 women are lying". No middle ground. Choose one or the other, and if one chooses Watson they are stupid and deserving of your ridicule.

PIT - I have a question for you, or a point of clarification.

Do you actually believe the 22 women must be telling the truth - or at least some of them??? = or = do you reference the 22 women when/if a posters seems to indicate they believe Watson to be innocent and therefore are seemingly dismissing the testimony of these women? I honestly don't know.

I haven't read most of the posts in these threads, but is there any poster on the board, never mind "posters" that believe Watson is "innocent?" They would be as shameful as those who have already have said that Watson is guilty.

That thought process is completely flawed. The uber rich don't give a damn about destroying an asset's value when that asset attacks them with something as strong as being racists in business dealings. That is the type of accusation that ruins men. They wouldn't just let it go because he can sling the rock. Plug Trump into that and ask yourself what he would do. He would try to destroy the threat, period. Same for most rich men in positions of power, like these owners. But I'm still not saying you are wrong on the topic, we just need more data bro.

I will talk from my experience when I was listening to my daughters case.

When making serious accusations without enough hard proofs the police and the lawyer will ask questions to the accuser so they can verify as much as possible that the accusation is trustworthy. The women (in our case my daughter) has to present a timeline and additional information that includes certain criteria’s. Whenever my daughter was uncertain or hesitated the lawyer put pressure on her to present a solid story without logical holes. The reason was to eliminate cases that isn’t trustworthy to avoid humiliation of the accuser in the court room. My daughter said it was a nightmare because some of the things she went thru was so hard to remember in exact details.

The bottom line is that not many women are willing to put themselves inside a court house with all the negativity that follows. It’s much easier when there is more women with the same experience going to court because then they can hide their shame and insecurity behind each other.

Not every women is like Amber Heard and loves being in the middle of everyone’s attention.

It takes all kinds of people to make the world go round.. Don't assume that all Prostitutes/escorts/massage therapists are unwilling participants in that industry.

Some do it for the money, some because they love sex, some for the power over men etc.. Some do it for a hobby... For the record, there are male escorts out there.. in fact there was a reality TV show about them in Vegas... Funny show to be honest.. but a bit kinky for me...LOL

The thing is this, if DW booked an appointment with a massage therapist, he may have expected to get a happy ending.. Maybe,,,, MAYBE that's not what the woman thought was going to happen (naive at best perhaps)

That's when the problem comes into light.

In all honesty, this could be a scam by a lawyer to get a big settlement from DW... Could be that simple. I guess we are going to see.

Innocent is a VERY strong word. There's no way (IMO) that Watson is completely innocent (and by innocent, I mean did no wrong legal or otherwise).

Was his wrongdoing enough to be found guilty in these civil trials? I don't know.
Was his wrongdoing enough for me to reconsider my Browns fandom while he's the face of the franchise. I don't know (x2).

Maybe English isn't your strong suit. Saying "22 women are lying" includes all 22 women. Try again.

I believe that in a group of women this large at least some of them are telling the truth. I believe when people indicate that watson may be innocent they are dismissing the claims of all of these women. Being innocent in and of itself means you are dismissing the word of all his accusers. I have no way of knowing if at least some of these women do not have a nefarious motive behind them. I'm certainly not trying to make the case that at least some of them may not be lying or distorting the truth.

But claiming he might be innocent means you are dismissing all of these women as a group in total. The possibility of that being accurate is virtually insurmountable.

Except when it was presented to you that a single women could be lying you had to argue it instead of admitting other wise.

I am fine with English, I am not fine with gas lighting.

Show me where I did that. Just saying it doesn't make it true.

That is what we have been trying to tell you since this whole thing started.

So are you saying you think it's realistic to believe all of these women are lying? Because you either actually believe that or you don't. I don't.

!=
Pick one. Are they telling the truth or is conceivable that some are lying?

I've already answered that. Try following along next time. It's on this very page....


Either you didn't bother actually reading the thread or do you really need it explained further?

Don't be obtuse. I quoted two of your posts in this thread.

You repeatedly said people were saying "That's why you have people believe that 22 women are lying" https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.php/topics/1930931/re-deshaun-watson-ii#Post1930931

You are here to fight, you move the goal posts repeatedly so you can have yer way. Do I need to explain that any further?

What is so funny about this whole conversation is that if Watson had picked, let's say, Pittsburgh instead of the Cleveland Browns - I'd be willing to bet 90% of you people that are claiming Watson's innocence would be on this forum calling for a long prison term.

That being true, it brings up the question: If Watson is guilty in your eyes if he's on the Steelers, why is he not guilty and you're shaming the victims because he's in a different uniform?

To those who keep comparing Watson's situation to Kraft's, keep in mind that Kraft had only 2 instances he was associated with and because the video was obtained illegally, the charges were dismissed. This is not to say Kraft didn't do anything wrong, it's just the evidence was not there to charge without the video. He also has not had any civil suits filed against him. Watson has at least 40 instances and 22 civil suits against him to date.

For those of you who have mentioned prostitution by the women:

Examples of soliciting prostitutes in Texas.
You can still be charged with soliciting prostitution if you are caught offering or agreeing to engage in paid sexual conduct regardless of whether the transaction has been completed. Therefore, you can be arrested for behavior that simply demonstrates the intent. Examples of soliciting prostitutes include:

Withdrawing cash from an ATM
Picking up the prostitute
Driving to the location the sexual conduct is intended to take place (i.e. a hotel room) - The Houstonian Hotel, Club & Spa
Asking an individual to engage in sexual conduct for a cash payment.

Since buying sex is primarily a crime of words and you can be charged even if you do not actually perform the exchange, police officers often go undercover in a police sting operation and set the prostitute, client, or a third party up to agree to the transaction. All the officer needs to make an arrest is an intent to buy or sell sex for a fee.

Possible penalties for solicitation of prostitution in Texas:
Anyone who is arrested for, convicted of, and charged with a solicitation offense will now face higher fines and increased jail time depending on the offense. First solicitation offense charges could face state jail felony penalties of between 180 days in jail and up to 2 years in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. Second solicitation offenses are considered third-degree felonies and face penalties including 2 to 10 years in jail and a fine of up to $10,000.

With the increase in the seriousness of a prostitution charge comes an increase in the seriousness of its penalties.

Even if it's consensual, the act for pay is prostitution solicitation.

A league suspension could be the least of Watson's worries going forward.

I've said all along he is innocent until proven guilty. It is a fundamental principle of our justice system and one I take seriously.

Personally I don't think prostitution should be illegal, nor should solicitation of prostitution. Forcing anyone to have sex, whether with you or with someone else, should be illegal and should be prosecuted.

I honestly think this post has been going on - in such a heated fashion - for such a long time - that many, many posters are making assumptions about what people have said, assumptions about what other posters believe and they have probably seen a partial reply to a poster and assumed it meant or stated something other than intended. . . . I think posters are reading messages as black and white and definitive - when they are probably aren't intended to me.

I think the smart posters are doing a lot of skimming based on the usernames to the left.

Who is shaming victims? Did you mean alleged victims?

He has beat the drum of "you think 22 women are lying" to death. Now he that he wants to change his stand and admit that some could be lying in the group he also wants to change the history.

He was quite snarky to me about it, directly. So no, not assumptions. Point blank crappy to me. I don't suffer a bully, and that is what he has been with this, or at least tried to be if he wasn't so laughable at it.

I have always read his comment as "you think ALL 22 are lying" .... meaning 21 might be lying but if only 1 is telling the truth there is still a problem.

But that's me and that's an example of why good communication is really hard, that's just in general. Even more difficult on a message board.

Once again. Who is proclaiming that Watson is innocent? I can't imagine ten different people are proclaiming that. This another example of how you play "Once Upon a Time."

I will say this..........>I would not be calling for a long prison term. I would not even say he was guilty had he gone to the Steelers. I never once called Big Ben a rapist. Wanna know why, Mr. Baker fan? IT's because I wasn't there and I allow the legal system to play out and refuse to play Judge, Jury, and Executioner in legal matters.

HOLD ON PIT, I'm not accusing 22 women of lying when I say we need more data. So, it's not that black and white. And in here particularly, there are hundreds of die hard browns fans. It's a damn hard pill to swallow for some of us, yes. But that doesn't mean he wasn't set up for this attack or that he is innocent, it means we don't know enough to logically conclude either side is lying. WE NEED MORE DATA.

And if a guy puts the Browns on his wall and in his wallet for 50 years, I would expect MOST to go with the flow set by the FO, just being fans. Hell I bet there are more than a few who couldn't care less about any of this and just want to be Browns fans. You can't condemn them for that, can you? Not at this point, I think. But now if facts reveal he is a serial rapist, or some sort of scum like that, then you can sit in judgement and be on the right side of history. However, I think there is a chance the kid is innocent, or not at all what he is being made out to be by people wanting his money. Make no mistake, the women's lawyer and these 22 women want his money, that is their only win at this point. He doesn't seem to be going to jail, so proving he did these things, showing that they are indeed victims, and the ultimate payoff is really all they have.

With no criminal charges, all the he said she said, at this point, is nothing more than accusations and rhetoric. I personally want to believe both sides. And if it turns out the women are truly victims and not just in on the shot at a big payday, or paid off by another rich person, then I will 100% back your stance. But not without more data.

You just have to read the threads to see the people saying he is innocent because the Grand Jury refused to indict him. 10 people on this forum? Maybe close to it.

The comparison between Ben and Deshaun seems to be pretty valid, Browns fans have called him a rapist for years, he was accused of sexual assault twice. He wasnt indicted by a Grand Jury, settled out of court for one, and the other wasn't prosecuted. Some people feel comfortable changing their stance because someone plays for our team and not an opponents. Other's don't. Deshaun will get his punishment, or not, just like Ben.

As someone who's done this, I want to clarify that there are only portions of the two situations that are comparable. IMO, it's an interesting argument for specific parts of the Watson discussion.

That is NOT what he's saying. He trots out that line whenever anyone has any sort of differing perspective on the cases (and I remind you, these are pending cases... nothing has been resolved). He's equating any sort of argument against guilt as "all 22 are lying". So anyone who's not volunteering for the firing squad automatically takes the position that all 22+ women are liars, hookers, etc. You can't suggest or discuss any sort alternate theory without picking up a label. Since we're on a message board, that's totally ridiculous.

Name them.

For someone called Lex, you sure have a weird understanding of justice.

Because people have different opinions on the same facts we humans have invented laws and courts. Anyone who calls Ben a rapist is defaming the guy, no matter what team you support, it does not make it right.

Watson and Ben are innocent, because we all are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. That is how we do it, maybe its not perfect but that is the best we have. Innocence does not require proof, guilt does.

I'm not going to name any, but that ABSOLUTELY happened on here. There have been, and ARE, people on here that have asserted absolute innocence simply because the Grand Juries chose to not pursue prosecution. It most definitely, 1000% has been posted in these cesspools horse beating pits threads.

Point of clarification: we are all innocent in the eyes of the law until proven guilty. This only means that legal punishments cannot be handed down.

There is a SIGNIFICANT difference between "innocent" and "not guilty" and "not pursuing prosecution".
Stop trying to create a binary result from something that has nuanced definitions. That is NOT how it is.

He is Schroedinger's Cat, if anything. He is both guilty and innocent, and also not guilty and not innocent at the same time simply because those are definitions that happen as a result of opening the box and the Grand Jury chose to not open it.
He is "indeterminate", and in the absence of anything certain people WILL weigh in with their opinions and feelings and every last one, no matter which side it falls on, is as valid as the next.

Maybe I missed some things early on, but I'm not seeing people professing absolute innocence. I see a lot of people being accused of victim blaming/shaming because they want to see some evidence or findings from the civil trial before passing judgment though.

No there isn't. You are always innocent until being proven guilty.

You stop being innocent the moment you are proven guilty, this is how we define innocence. What I, you or anybody thinks is completely immaterial, this is a question that has to be asserted by a court of law.

This matters are not judged by physics, this is about law, and the law is clear about it.

I've tuned out much of this garbagefest for the last few iterations of these threads, but early on after the news broke, it happened a lot.
You also can now see it in the posts surrounding these. People turning a blind eye to the accused and what is out there and instead just harumphing "innocence" because they get to stand on technicalities while ignoring the reality of probabilities.

To add to this - additional reasons why many call Ben 'Therapist', me being one of them, is that when the police got involved with the case, they failed to execute a proper and impartial investigation. They were star struck by their by their star QB and if anything (based on detailed reporting) were deliberate in not investigating.

And as for the Kraft comparison - again, nothing alike and trying to make a comparison to Kraft is to try to frame the conversation around the assumption that these 22 massage therapists are all part of and willingly participate in the sex trade.

If you have proof, you shouldn't be presenting it here, you should go to the police.

I do not think the grand jury decision was based on a technicality, they just didn't find any grounds to prosecute him on any crimes.

That is how the law works, just because you accuse someone of something, that does not make you right, you have to prove it, and if you can't even prove you have a case, that should be telling you something.

I think there are similarities if you put any sort of weight into the "got his massages via social media" angle. Not totally apples-apples... true... but the comparison is too easy considering Kraft's situation was quickly swept under the rug despite the high degree of likelihood that at least one of the women he interacted with there came into that employment via trafficking or other similar pathway.

This is a message board, not a court of law. We absolutely get to talk based on opinion.

As for the grand jury, there is no way they will recommend prosecution unless the prosecutor feels like they can win the case. This is ALSO just how the law works. You can be accused of something, and even be guilty of having done it, but not have the authorities seek prosecution because they don't feel they can win the case as it stands. This allows them to come back and attempt prosecution later without having to worry about that meddlesome double-jeopardy thing. So, the fact that they opted to not indict doesn't really tell anyone anything except that, at the time, they didn't feel like there was a strong enough case to win..... which goes directly back to what folks have posted ad nauseum about the absolutely pitiful prosecution rate of sexual assault cases. They don't win often, so they aren't pursued often... not because they don't happen often.

One thing I struggle to keep straight is that there are 2 parallel conversations/situations going on here. The legal one and the moral/ethical one. Those do overlap, but only to a certain extent. I have no doubt Watson did stuff that was wrong, but don't know how wrong it was, much less if it was illegal (hence the "he's a creep, but..." argument).

p.s. this is where you now stomp your feet and yell "but he isn't convicted so he is innocent" andd ignore every other nuance to everything while making sure you keep all of your blinders on tight lest you destroy your manufactured myopic view.

But that was a progression on DW's part ... he didn't start out looking for online sources and unlicensed therapists and some of the 22 are licensed professionals.

And for those that are unlicensed and do advertise online - I'd want to see what adverts they placed and see some proof of implied 'extras' to accept a comparison to Kraft. I am not saying it's not true or possible ... but to make that assumption doesn't sit well.

I know its not the law, but for me sensual massage therapists and escorts are indeed sex workers. Also includes strippers, only fans and many other things.

But I have nothing against sex workers, just have in mind that extortion has always been part of the business model in this industry.

Choosing not to charge is nowhere near the same thing as 'innocent', but it's also not nothing, either (especially considering that you have an attorney beating his chest at anyone that'll listen about the mountain of evidence he has).

Choosing not to charge means that there was no evidence of any crime to start with. It tells you a lot. Because you can proceed to charge and still be found not guilty.

You don't have to be found innocent on anything, guilt is what has to be established, and to be guilty of something you have to be accused.

Imagine someone telling you that you are not innocent of being a pedophile, because you were never accused of being a pedophile.... makes absolutely no sense.

Absolutely not true.

For you it isn't, but your and my opinion are completely irrelevant in this or in any case. Its about the judicial system, and the judicial system didn't find proof enough to charge him on the crimes he was being accused, or in any public crimes for that matter.

All attorneys for the plaintiff will do so, and the more publicity there is, the louder the perceived thumping will be, but they don't run the show at a grand jury, the prosecutor does. Any thumping they do is foreplay for the civil case(s).

And, it means nothing, really, because the amount of evidence they have, and how valuable it is, is different whether it is a criminal or a civil case. It is a LOT tougher to get a criminal case to trial than a civil case (which, in my opinion, is probably the biggest of the problems with our tort system and the expansion of tort liability in the US, but that's a separate issue altogether). While a criminal conviction would make his case a slam dunk, a criminal case returning an actual Not Guilty verdict hurts him. The plaintiff attorney's goal here is to win a civil case, which means get a payout. That doesn't require the same stringent requirements as a criminal conviction.

Correct. There was not enough to pursue prosecution. That is 1000% NOT the same as "there was no evidence of any crime to start with." on any level.

Imagine committing a crime. You ARE GUILTY of that crime the moment you commit it.
You simply do not get CONVICTED until a court proves your guilt. The entire time up to then, you are and have always been guilty.... even if the prosecution decides they don't have enough to pursue a case against you. Everyone in the world can know/feel you did it, but if nobody can prove it, you cannot be CONVICTED... but, you're STILL GUILTY.

Nope, I saw it too, early on. I think it was more the hype that we got this gunslinger than anything driving it, but it was there for all to see, in that moment. GLEEFULLY EMBRACING DW with this cloud over his head because the grand jury did not indict. But I can't really ridicule those guys for mostly wanting a QB they think is better than Baker. IMO, the OBJ debacle and Baker's injury snowballed into something we will all eventually regret as Browns fans, unless DW is innocent AND great on the field. At least nobody has posted EXONERATED, like a troll.

There were no evidences of the crimes he was charged, nor any evidence of public crimes, on which he would have to be charged no matter what he was accused off.

"Imagine committing a crime. You ARE GUILTY of that crime the moment you commit it." No you are not, you still have to be convicted, that is how our society works, and honestly I don't see how it could be any different.

Some actions are crimes in one country or state and are legal in others, that does not make you innocent in one state and guilty in other, its not how it works.

We can only discuss this maters on a legal framework, if we start discussing it on ethics anything is valid.

For many even the act of seeking for sensual massages is a "crime", for others prostitution poses no ethical problems.

I personally fail to see anything criminal in his actions, its not a thing I would do, but we are all adults here, we know how this stuff works. Did he assault or rape any of the girls? From what we know so far, no, at least for me, I do not think asking for an happy ending to a masseur should be considered harassment.

But its mostly a personal opinion, and still so far what I understand happened was very far away from criminal, armful, conduct.

False claim. The only thing you can claim based on them not pursuing prosecution is that there wasn't enough evidence to support prosecution. Claiming "there was NO EVIDENCE" is an absolute falsification of the circumstance.



This is a silly remark.
If you commit a crime - thus, by definition you have done something somewhere it is illegal to do that - , you have committed a crime and you are GUILTY of that crime regardless of whether or not anyone is able to CONVICT you of it. Period.
Your attempt to deflect with location is immaterial because it is covered in the opening statement of "If you commit a crime...".

So it would be Ok for the police to send you a speeding ticket?

For sure you are guilty of speeding, we all are.

Guilt and innocence are judicial terms, they can be applied in other planes, but in that case discussion is mostly immaterial. You think he is guilty, I think I'm not the one who should determine if he is guilty or not, I trust the system and think that is how things should be decided. I think you should only receive the speeding tickets the police has proof.

No, this is a message board, we can - and likely will - discuss it on all levels, and because we are not a court of law, we are free to express how we feel as it pertains to our perceptions of the situation. We are NOT bound by the same constraints that a court room is bound. We CAN, and as people, probably SHOULD, blend the legal and the ethical and the moral in our discussions. The legal part is that in no way does a lack of pursuit of prosecution dictate absolute innocence. It is indeterminate of guilt. He can absolutely still be guilty of something without any pursuit of a conviction. Really, until and unless the legal aspect changes, that is the beginning and end of the "official" legal aspect. That leaves us our moral and ethical stances, and our opinions of whether or not there is true guilt in there, regardless of whether or not it is ever proven.

They do it to people all the time with Red Light Cameras.
That is them accusing me of a crime. I then have a right to defend myself and it is on them to prove the guilt they have accused me of.


You're not. That would be the job of a judge and jury. That, however, does not preclude you from forming your own opinion of the situation independent of them based on what is known, regardless of whether or not it ever goes to a trial. You ARE allowed to think for yourself and not take the system's word. People can, and do, commit crimes all the time that they get away with. They are still guilty of those crimes, they just aren't convicted of them. This is why a judgement is "Not Guilty" and not "Innocent". O.J. Simpson went through a long, drawn out trial and was found "Not Guilty".... that does not stop me, at all, from feeling that he did it; from feeling that he is Guilty and not believing that he is "Innocent".

Making stupid claims doesn't help your cause. The fact you can't comprehend that by saying "you think 22 women are lying" means that those professing watson's innocence or possible innocence are dismissing the word of all 22 women is a you problem. It sounds like you're a bit sensitive and obtuse. If you believe any portion of those women watson isn't innocent. Dee, dee dee!

https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.php/topics/1934866/re-trade-for-watson-2#Post1934866 Tastybrownies - Can you provide evidence that Deshaun Watson is guilty even though he was found innocent in a court of law?

https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.php/topics/1933671/re-trade-for-watson-2#Post1933671 Rastaplan - Any criminal actions, i.e. any actions that could constitute a crime, which was what he was being acused.

https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.php/topics/1933617/re-trade-for-watson-2#Post1933617 DeisleDawg - we know the court system has found him innocent.

I skimmed 3 threads in 5 minutes, didn't link every time new comments were made by same person. Not going to bother with the rest because even if it is in front of some people's eyes they wont admit it...

Those comments do not read as if they are proclaiming him innocent. I think most people are saying they don't know if he innocent or guilty and that they will allow the legal system to decide. On the other hand, there are others proclaiming him guilty. Maybe if you would open your eyes and see the word Predator screaming at us several times a day and "so, 22 women are all lying" repeated 22,222 times, you would see that. Damn, I gottta get out of this thread.

So explain to me what alternatives you're speaking of? The main ones I've seen are...

1. All these women are on Instagram in regards to claims they're pretty much all a bunch of hookers.

2. They're not licensed massage therapists. (Which as been shown to be totally false. Some were not but many were.)

3. Their attorney is a scum bag. (An attorney who has handled many high profile cases with great success)

Let me explain to you what they wish to ignore.

It has been shown that licensed massage therapists within the Houston community were sent out a warning about watson's conduct. It has been shown he chose to meet these women at a posh hotel who had licensed massage therapists on staff. It has been shown that watson had used a far greater number of massage therapists than other players.

One side keeps throwing out wild accusations. The other side points to factual events.

So yes, either you must feel everyone of these women are lying or you must feel watson is guilty on some level.

I can see that. I can also see where people that think something is creepy may not also understand some of what they see as creepy things are also illegal. I'll use the towel accusation as an example. Where it's alleged he brought a very small towel rather than use the therapists towel which was much larger to cover himself. It was used as a means to expose himself. This was actually sent out in a message to other therapists to warn them about this behavior. To purposefully expose your genitals to someone else in an unwanted fashion, isn't just creepy, it's a crime.

Yet you just can't seem to pull yourself away since it's a great way of coming at me. Nah, you won't leave it.

Wow.

It's English.

"we know the court system has found him innocent." can't be much clearer can it?

Silly me. I woke up, waited for some people that are working in our home, then I went to work, and I came home and had to read 2 pages of this stuff. (didn't HAVE to, but I skimmed them).

I'm tired of re-explaining the same points to you over and over just for you to fall back on your twisting of what I'm saying into something ridiculous to make your argument look better.

1. The social media thing (as well as the unlicensed thing) COULD be indicative that these massages are really just him trolling for sex (pretty much him trying to solicit sex in a state that doesn't allow it). This is NOT me saying all accusers are prostitutes. I'm saying some or many COULD have been on board with the "w/ benefits" package of the massage for several reasons.

2. I don't know what the breakdown was between licensed and unlicensed. Between this and the social media thing (IMO) it points to a pattern (he WASN'T looking for treatment for his muscles). Whether the women involved may or may not have been on board with what he was really looking for (DW's argument is not that nothing happened, but that it was consensual) is the question.

3. Many articles have been linked on here regarding Buzbee's past erratic and attention-seeking behavior. At this point, trying to frame him and his actions as a talented lawyer on a crusade for justice is simply willful ignorance on your part.

I don't know if any of this was the case, but I do think it's well within the realm of possibility. I HIGHLY doubt all 22 fall one way or another, but what if some accusations fall out due to point 1, some more to point 2, maybe more to point 3, etc.... your 22 is now 15, 10, 5, etc. Still not 'ok', but for those that have been beating the "22 women can't all be wrong" horse to death for the past 6 weeks, it's problematic.


And as for your explanation... if the warning was out there on DW, then why did these women continue to take his appointments? Not saying it's right, but you try to frame these circumstances as "factual events" when they won't hold up under any sort of scrutiny.

Poppycock. You beat a drum incessantly, you move goal posts constantly, redefine words to mean new an imaginative things, fail to realize things you said have meanings other than what you later claim they mean ,and you really are only here for the fight.

Do you think this whole thing is so black and white and it is all or nothing? I know, you will answer about what you had for dinner and why people shouldn't go to the moon.

Sorry I didn't clarify that my comments weren't referring to you specifically. I should have made that clear.


And as I posted earlier I'm not trying to say some of these women may not be questionable. My assertion isn't that all 22 of these women are being totally honest or above board.


What we do know is that enough of these women were licensed and concerned with his behavior that there was a message sent out warning other massage therapists of his conduct.


First, there is nothing that shows he isn't a very talented lawyer. I certainly think that part of your comment is an overreach. Secondly there is nothing concerning his law career that indicates he takes on baseless claims or manufactures witnesses which is the part of the argument against him that I find to be baseless. From that to the claims that every lawyer who presents victims in civil court are scum bags like the ambulance chasers you hear about. That's simply not true.


How so? If 15 are left, or if 10 are left, it still doesn't mean all 22 are liars. It means some of the women who are actually lying have been weeded out. Can you explain how your scenario means they are all lying? I'll refer you back to my comments on point 1.



So it's your assertion since there were a number of massage therapists which were warned, that means all massage therapists were warned?


Unless of course SI is lying about this being told to them about comments received from two licensed massage therapists.

I repeat, do you think all 22 women are lying? Is English your first language?

Do you think that 22 women are telling the truth?

This seems like a round-about way of proving the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Are you guys almost done?

How many times do you expect me to answer that question? This is the last time. No

Who's on first?

PLEASE !!!!

And yet you accuse people of thinking all of them are lying. Maybe you should reflect on that, maybe think about it, maybe realize it isn't just about the women that have accused Watson.

To be fair I am surprised you could come up with a direct answer, actually feel like we are making some progress.

The answer had been answered and explained before more than once. The problem is you couldn't quite grasp it until it was answered with a two letter word.

Maybe you should think about the fact that unless you believe all 22 of them are lying watson isn't innocent. In this situation it absolutely is just about only the 22 women that have accused watson.

To believe that in a group of women that large that all of them are either lying or telling the truth is something only someone that isn't being rational would believe.

And for those of you tired of hearing about it, nobody is forcing you to read the thread. It seems like you have chosen to read something you don't want to read then whining about it as if someone forced you to. You know what's going on and you have a choice. Whining about it is not attractive.

It does not mean they are all lying. The line of thinking I'm attacking here is the one that largely establishes guilt due to there being 22 accusers who share a similar story... that since there are so many, you can't really argue with what they're saying. Well, what if that number starts going down? Yes, you still have pending cases, but he's less the debate-dominating monster and more just another pro athlete with a problem assuming they could do whatever they want and get away with it. The NFL (and other leagues) are full of these characters. It's not right, but it's reality.

And yet Watson is innocent until proven otherwise.

Crazy, but that is how it actually works.

You explained exactly how what I admit to could happen. I admit that it's unlikely they're all telling the truth. You explained ways with which that may eliminate some of those women. Which means the likelihood of the remaining women being truthful actually becomes more likely.

I would say it may very well be found that those who are licensed massage therapists end up being far more credible than those who are not. What my argument is, if it hasn't already been made clear, is to make the point that you either think they're all liars or you don't. The fact that some of them may be has never been the point. So your point that the less times you act like a monster the less of a monster you are? I made my point by using the totality. And if that totality breaks down to 10 or 15 of them the point isn't really any different. If they can't be eliminated by the very things you presented, that eliminates almost every obstacle posters have presented to depict them as lairs.

In your mind. Don't you mean that's the legal burden? I notice you have refused to address any of the points I brought up. I wonder why that is?

So you think O.J. is innocent?

I did answer your question, when you asked it.

I will leave the burden of figuring that out to you.

IMHO, the main issue you all are missing is the so called "consensual" part that keeps rearing its ugly head. Once they get swore testimony in court that there was an understanding of "sex" of some type to be included in the paid for service then you have admitted "prostitution" and "soliciting prostitution" which would be a felony in the state of Texas due to the number occurrences. These women that are giving "sworn depositions" are clearly aware that admitting that it was "consensual" for pay are opening themselves up to felony criminal prosecution.

If we go back to the Kraft problem in Florida, Kraft's charges were eventually dropped because the video evidence was obtained illegally. However, the 21 sites that were targeted in the sting are still dealing with the fines, court costs, and convictions of the workers for "prostitution."

If it becomes known that some of these women were providing the "sex" service as part of the session and were paid for it, Watson's problems are just beginning in the state of Texas. Since the court has ordered Watson's team to provide a list of every massage he received since 2019, there's going to be a whole lot more depositions being taken from women involved with Watson. Considering his own attorney has stated that Watson receives 125-150 massages per year, that would mean a list of close to 300 massages with various women. You can bet that that total of women is much greater than the 40 that are currently know about. That list is due to the court in about a week.

IMHO, the ugly has just started for the Cleveland Browns and Watson. However, Watson is innocent until proven guilty but from the outside looking in - It Don't Look Good!

He was found not guilty....so innocent is a word that works

Maybe switch to a less controversial subject? Like Baker Mayfield?

He wasn't found not guilty. He's never been in front of a judge. As of now the first times that will happen will be in these civil cases.

Will the recent trend established by Major League Baseball concerning sexual abuse allegations have an impact on similar cases against NFL players..?

GOOD QUESTION...

Major League Baseball and their commissioner, Rob Manfred appear to leading all major sports leagues when it comes to how seriously they take sexual assault type issues. Manfred and MLB appear to setting the standard when it comes to the investigation of sexual assault cases as well as setting a standard for handing out punishment to their players who are involved in sexual assault type issues.

The NFL might be forced to make some serious decisions in cases similar to those that MLB just faced.

[quote=FrankZ]
No, it’s not. The grand jury decides if there is enough evidence to bring a case to court. That is in no way a definition of innocent.

That's very true, in fact I am pretty sure a court/jury never finds anyone innocent, they find them guilty or not guilty. Not guilty is not the same as innocent. Innocent is we know he didn't do it, not guilty means the prosecution did not prove beyond a reasonable that he did it. It may be semantics, but definitely a different determination.

By the simple fact that when charged with a crime your are either not guilty or guilty. Not guilty and innocent are not the same for sure, and in the case of Watson, at this point in time is innocent. Why? two things, innocent until proven guilty and there was never charged with anything, only accused. Accusations not a criminal charge make. 2 grand juries decline to indict Watson on a criminal charge, yet people still want to play the "oh hes not innocent blah bblah" I can't believe how much this pandering has gone on. Surely there has to be something else to talk about. Noone on this board, myself included have ANY CLUE what either side knows or does. The only thing that is absolute is he has 22 civil cases to respond to and ZERO criminal charges to answer for. The moral police can keep that rhetoric, but until theres any resolution either way its just trolling

If he is not charged, he IS innocent until proven guilty. If you are not charged, it can't be assumed that you are still guilty. Evidence is a funny thing, without it, you got nothing but hearsay.

I was quoted as saying ge second thing but I did not.

Will MLB’s two-year suspension of Trevor Bauer impact NFL’s handling of Deshaun Watson?

Posted by Mike Florio on
April 30, 2022, 11:28 AM EDT
link


Major League Baseball stunned the sports world on Friday by suspending Dodgers pitcher Trevor Bauer for two full seasons, based on allegations of domestic violence. Although the facts are very different, it’s difficult not to wonder whether the extent of the punishment will influence the NFL’s ultimate handling of Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson.

Bauer was accused of sexual assault that occurred when he allegedly went too far with consensual rough sex during a pair of encounters in April and May 2021. The allegations resulted in no criminal charges. A request for a permanent restraining order also was denied.

That doesn’t prevent the MLB from taking action. The league interviewed other women who claimed they had been assaulted by Bauer. One woman accused Bauer of choking her to the point of unconsciousness “dozens of times” during a relationship that spanned years.

Bauer was placed on paid leave last July. He has appeal rights, and he intends to exercise them. He has vehemently denied any and all wrongdoing.

The alleged facts are disturbing. More detail is available in this item from ESPN.com. The broader point, as it relates to the NFL, is whether Commissioner Roger Goodell will feel compelled to take stronger action against Watson, based on the two-year suspension imposed on Bauer.

These are fair and appropriate considerations. The entire Personal Conduct Policy is a P.R. tool, aimed at creating a vehicle for the league to take proper action against players who do things while not working that prompt fans and media to ask, “Why doesn’t the league take proper action?” Whether the action taken is or isn’t proper is determined not by any formula or calculation but by how fans and media react to it.

Already, some in the league office are privately advocating harsh action against Watson, who is accused by 22 women of sexual misconduct during massage sessions. He has not been charged with any crimes, but 22 lawsuits are pending and proceeding. Some in the league office believe that Watson should be placed on paid leave until the cases are resolved, with a decision made thereafter as to a possible unpaid suspension.

Last month, the Commissioner seemed to rule out paid leave, explaining that if the league concludes there’s enough to justify paid leave, Watson would simply be suspended without pay. For more than a year, there has been a sense in league circles that Watson will be suspended from four to eight games. Last October, for example, the Dolphins believed that, if they had finalized a trade for Watson following the settlement of all cases (18 of the 22 were ready to be resolved), he would have been suspended six games.

The Bauer case requires a fresh look at the question. Those in the league office who believe he shouldn’t play until the cases are resolved could also be inclined to push for a much harsher suspension, if/when the Commissioner decides to impose one. Could Watson be suspended for a full year?

It shouldn’t be regarded as impossible. And it could be reason enough for the Browns to try to re-build a bridge to Baker Mayfield. With their options for trading him drying up, there’s still a chance they’ll need him to play in 2022 — if Watson ultimately is suspended for the entire season.

This news came out earlier this week and may have a bearing on Watson's playing status this upcoming year.



https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/news/update-in-the-deshaun-watson-civil-cases


I can see where the NFL might be hesitant to hand down a suspension before all the facts come out. On the other hand, I heard Shefty say last night the NFL would like to get this thing wrapped up as soon as possible. He mentioned around the time of training camp.

I just logged into Twitter, and I have been blocked byWatson.

Oh well, no big deal. I guess that I am in quite a bit of good company, who have said things like "Gee, I hope the things he is accused of are untrue .... but it's hard to ignore 22 women ......"

I would be willing to bet the NFL is pressuring some involved behind the scenes to settle out of court and get it all behind him and the League before the start of training camp. I would also predict that is the most likely outcome at this point in time. Then the leagues discipline from their investigation will end the case.

j/c...

Watson is back in Houston today for a deposition.

Actually it's two depositions today and then six more June 22-23.

https://www.si.com/college/clemson/football/deshaun-watson-to-give-depositions-this-week-next-month

The opposition will try to keep him in national or Cleveland headlines until it's over. nanadance

It's to be expected. Just like the Baker rage will continue until the browns make a conference championship or Superbowl.

People cling to their ideas even if they don't know what they are talking about.(that is a general comment and not necessarily pointed at anyone on this subject)

I doubt I ever get over the method they employed to dump Mayfield.. I still think it was cheesey.. That's not likely to change. No matter what the seasons ahead may hold

Baker's contract is fully guaranteed. He will make just short of $19 million this year even if he doesn't play, but the Browns were in the wrong? What should they have done instead? Treated him like Landry who was owed $15 million by the team? Instead, they cut him and don't owe him a penny. Poor, poor Baker. Some of you live in an alternative universe.

I've said this before. If my employer said, "we hurt your feelings trying to better the organization, here's a no strings attached 18 million to get over it". I'd sign off on that with a big smile on my face.

Yes - other than the question of whether more could have been done sooner to get 'value' for Baker in a trade, I have no issue with what the FO did. But the reality is we don't know how far they went and what they tried to do, especially as Baker is still recovering. The flip side of that is that I also have no issue with Baker not renegotiating to reduce his guaranteed income - it's a business and both sides are taking care of business.

jc...

I wonder how Watson's Friday the 13th went in Texas...?

The sooner Watson and his lawyer conclude this ugly situation and settle his legal matters the better it will be for all.

Well, they started looking at Deshaun in October of last season, so they were obviously willing to move on for a huge upgrade... and already weighing that upside against allegations and legal problems. I'd say they were ready to move on pretty early but very unsure they could get "the prize". And unwilling to do so for a minor upgrade.

j/c

And now we have yet another Baker thread. Hmmmm.....

And OCD, of course it will be kept in the headlines. It's headline material. Anyone unaware of that is due to their own thought process. Sometimes the press invents stories. Sometimes they report on stories. This unwanted attention was inflicted upon the team by the decisions of the FO, not the media. If they and some of you didn't know this would be a part of getting DW, that's on you.

I agree w/that side of the story, as well.

I think the fact that Baker played injured and then was shown the door left a bitter taste in his mouth. You're the best option for us...oh no wait you are not btw be a good soldier. I don't know how it could have been done all I know is it was not done with class. Then again we are putting all our Football in the hands of one who puts something else in his hands that wasn't a football. Just a very dangerous thing to do and not much regard for the fans especially our female fans. Obviously I am not a female so I don't know for sure. All I can go on is my daughter in laws holding it against me cause I'm a Browns fan I don't like to be in that position so I ASSume other Browns fans has character issues with the trade.

1. we need to have DW play for us.
2. we need to have DW win for us. Stats could go out the window if we don't have that one stat that could have us won over...WINS!!!

jmho

No matter how the team did it, Baker would have found a way to manufacture a chip for his shoulder. It's just the way he is wired.

It's a lot easier to tolerate that approach when things are going well. Unfortunately, things aren't always going to go well.

Some people bear down and work when adversity strikes. Others blow up. Here's hoping Watson is the former.

As the team preaches, it's all about the work.

I've seen a couple of comments insinuating Baker doesn't or hasn't knuckles down and worked hard. Given his history of being a walk on, not being given 1st team reps by Hue, etc and a total lack of any feddback to this affect previously... I find it odd. Would I prefer him to have embraced a QB coach? Sure. Do some QBs have a rep for always being first in and last out? Yes. Does that somehow mean Baker hasn't worked hard his entire career? No. As for Baker's feelings and if he has a chip on his shoulder, I couldn't care less.

There is a good chance Watson may be suspended for half the season or more. I wish the Browns had traded for Russel Wilson instead. If Watson is suspended for a long time, it will look really bad for Berry and may even cost him his job!

I don't believe it was Barry's choice. I think the decision to get Watson came from the top.

Yep. Berry is exempt from any downside of the Watson situation. Jimmy decided to go all in independent of any desire by those around him.

I personally find this hard to believe, but I am no insider. Do you guys have proof about this?

I personally think the Browns soured on Baker w/all his drama and substandard play and wanted to move on. Watson was the most talented option out there. Russ is good, but he is another short qb who drops so deep that he is sacked more than he should be.

I really should have quoted this post, but I was also agreeing with Pdawg...


No way in hell Berry gets fired for anything that has to do with Watson. We were OUT until the owner sold the farm.

I'm sure I could find the source if pressed to do so but, I remember reading in the first few days after acquiring Watson that the origin of the idea came from "football operations". I don't know how the team defines that term. To me, it sounds like Berry, DePodesta and other Brown executives formated the plan to pursue Watson, then presented it to the Haslams'.

Too often board members misinterpret the reasons for a particular post. So, I'm repeating this for the sake of accuracy. Nothing more. I am not anticipating any developments beyond a possible suspension. Once that's behind Watson I tend to believe he will be an upgrade at the position. In my opinion, the risks to Berry's career are negligible.

As with a lot of the conversations on this forum, feelings and heart interfere with what is actually business. Berry, DePodesta, and other Brown executives are tasked with enhancing and protecting the company image while developing a winning program. The Haslam's are the owners of the said company who hire those individuals to make that business acumen successful. Whether the pursuit of Watson was driven by the Haslam's or Berry, DePodesta, and other Brown executives, the success or failure of the move will land directly in the laps of Berry, DePodesta, and the other Brown executives.

The expectation with the deal complete is that the Browns are a bonafide challenger for the AFC crown. Somewhere during that process, which included Stefanski, it was determined that the team could not achieve their business acumen with a QB they had not chosen in Baker Mayfield. That excuse has been corrected and now the success of the acumen falls directly in the laps of Berry, DePodesta, and other Brown executives including Stefanski. Ownership and the FO group are prepared for the suspension as it was set up contractually. Other than that, anything else that effects the eventual W-L record will fall directly into the laps of Berry, DePodesta, and other Brown executives including Stefanski.

The sleeping dog in the room might be awaken with the depositions of the 18 women (often ignored) that have come out in support of Watson. Those depositions will IMHO be the smoking gun in this whole matter for Watson because if these women admit having sex with Watson for money the solicitation felony will become front and center. To solicit a prostitute is to request that someone engage in intercourse or a lewd act in exchange for compensation. To be convicted of soliciting prostitution, you must be found guilty of: Soliciting another person to engage in sexual intercourse or a lewd act in exchange for money or some other form of compensation. All forms of prostitution including soliciting a prostitute are charged as a state jail felony — regardless of whether it is your first offense.

Solicitation of Prostitution Under the New Texas Penal Code §43.021. Under the new Texas law, it remains a crime to solicit prostitution even if no money is exchanged (or other form of payment) and/or no sexual conduct transpires. It remains a crime in Texas merely to ask for sex in exchange for any type of payment. Texas Penal Code Ann. 43.03 defines the solicitation of prostitution as a criminal act. Therefore, the law doesn’t apply to the prostitute (the person who provides sex for money or other compensation). A person charged with acting as a prostitute shouldn’t be charged under this section of the law.

The sleeping dog will be the now 40 depositions from the women involved that surely will be focused on the sex expectations. The more that confirm Watson's intentions the more likelihood potential felony charges could be on the horizon. That could blow this whole Watson to Cleveland situation out of the water.

Thats cool. I don't know what method had you irritated. The team moved on with a better option. At least what they felt was a better option. I guess only time will tell if that proves out or not.

To me it was pretty evident that it wasn't all roses between the two camps once we didn't extend him and exercised the 5th year option.

Bakers big mistake was not opting for surgery when he first got hurt, or shortly after. Yes, it probably helped in the sense it made him look tough and dedicated, but it didn't help him at all in getting another contract.

I realize you wish not to argue with me regarding Baker...I see the TOM TERRIFIC hat ready to blow...lol its ok we can debate without insulting each other. I really think your distaste for Baker has you seeing things that just don't exist. If it is as you say it was then why did we sign him for a "GUARANTEED" 18+ million when he was healthy I think Haslam is not a good owner where he let the MEDIA convince him to force the issue after seeing the success OBJ had with the RAMS. He couldn't understand that OBJ didn't want to play for us and that he robbed us cause he could have turned it on and be a good team player but he bought into the media drowning with Baker hate and OBJ still with his DADDY protecting his son as any dad would.

If it was done right we would have a DW suspension with Baker starting and winning having that positive active auction for Baker before the trading deadline. But we burnt the bridge...it takes two to do so. We have reviewed teams in the past who bomb on their 1st and 2nd round picks and we aren't talking Baker we are talking 3 years without a pick at all. That void is hard to fill and I just don't see Berry doing it as a GM decision when we were so so close to having that dynasty. Teams going 3 years without a first round pick and in our case with the bridge burning it will actually make it FOUR YEARS without a first round pick. Berry/DePodesta are suppose to be draft GURUs with us being so close building both the O and especially the D to be dynasty level. I just think its a diservice to us fans and it was done by somebody that was just impatient...somebody like a silver spoon Billionaire with no patience even if the time was right and we drafted a new QB...obviously not this year. But if Baker was a bust then we would be picking top 5-10 after a top 13 pick which we saw would have given the DEFENSE a Jordan Davis. I am giving Berry the benefit of the doubt that he was not that STOOPID to give away 3 "YEARS" THREE YEARS of first round picks away to finishing building this team.

jmho - don't get me wrong DW is a very good QB who has some baggage though that endangers us having the opportunity to use him. 3 YEARS going without a first round pick is how a team ends up sucking!! We just got the tip of the iceberg and like the captain of the TITANIC...full speed ahead! How well did that go???

I had company yesterday and drank too many beers, so I may not have been clear w/my post. If so, I apologize. In no way was I implying that Berry could lose his job. The part I questioned was that going after Watson was Haslam's decision and that Berry was just following orders. I never once got the impression that Berry was being forced to do something he didn't want to do. But again........I agree that Berry's job should be safe. He's doing an excellent job!

I don't know whose decision it was to trade for Watson. If he is suspended for most of the season and the Browns have a losing record, Berry could be the fall guy.

I disagree.

It was not as simple as "the decision to trade for Watson". We had been doing our homework for over five months. It was the prospect of competing for his services. ALL were on-board with the prospect (FO), and the five months of due diligence necessary, as Berry said, "the most extensive investigative, legal, and reference work I've been a part of".

Why? You always try to get better at QB. At a certain point, with this type of endeavor, with this type of price-tag, it's the owner that is making the calls. When Berry came back and said "Sorry we couldn't get it done", Haslam pounds his fist on the table and decides to push the most lucrative offer in the history of football into the center of the table.

That's Haslam going all-in. That's Haslam flexing his muscles. That's an owner "getting what he wants".

There is no way for him to blame that on anyone else.

j/c...

with what we're paying him, he can buy the plane, field, and a resort for them all to stay in.

DCit...imo, Jimmy Haslam made the decision to trade for Watson.

Haslam might fool a few with his charade, pretending to be a "hand-off owner"...but in reality the Watson decision exposes Haslam for what he is..a spoiled billionaire owner whose idea of fun is "playing with his toys", the Browns in this case.

The Watson deal is similar to some of the other judgments Haslam is responsible for...such as deciding to draft Johnny 'Football' Manziel then attempting to fashion a cover story that some "homeless man" told him to draft Manziel. Jimmy tries so hard to project himself as a hands off owner rather than taking responsibility for his actions.

Another clear example of Haslam's compulsive behavior as he attempts to prove himself as a legit NFL owner. It was Jimmy who went against all who were advising him against hiring Hue Jackson as the Browns new head coach after Pettine was fired by Haslam. Haslam went against the advice of those he hired to run his franchise and took it upon himself to fly to Cincini and sign Hue Jackson as his HC.

Below...excerpt from a Jan 24, 2019 article entitled Report: Jimmy Haslam ignored advice to not hire Hue Jackson
link

Quote

The Browns were 4-1 in favor of hiring McDermott. Unfortunately, the singular vote belonged to owner Jimmy Haslam.

I view the Watson situation as just another example of the Browns owner taking it upon himself to prove to the rest of the NFL that he deserves to be treated as a serious NFL owner, who will not take NO for an answer.

Watson did not want to play in Cleveland evidence being the Browns were the first team eliminated from consideration by Watson and his team of negotiators. But the Browns went from being the first team out of contention for Watson's services...to being the high bidder for Watson with Haslam giving him the most expensive contract in NFL history at that time. IMO, Jimmy took that rejection by Watson's team of negotiators as a personal insult and once again took it upon himself to make the deal happen, regardless of the cost involved or the damage it might do to the franchise long term financially.

...just like Haslam did with drafting Johnny Football and hiring Hue Jackson based on his own judgement.

There is no way that Berry should be held responsible for the decision Jimmy Haslam made...signing Watson to the richest QB contract in the history of the NFL. GMs are not going to have that level of control over a franchise's purse strings to pull off such a deal.

I am still waiting for a link that says Haslam forced Berry to acquire Watson. I'm sorry, but I don't believe that. I think that the Browns organization realized that they had a good roster and that they needed an upgrade at the QB position. That is why they did not give Baker the extension and it is why they started looking at Watson way back in November or whenever it was. I have a feeling they were exploring other possible options as well. They may have considered trading for guys like Carr, Cousins, Jimmy G [before his throwing shoulder was injured, etc. They may have considered Wilson?

I do NOT believe that the the coaching staff and FO wanted to keep Baker and Haslam demanded they make the trade for Watson. Sorry. I'll change my mind if you have a link to back up your claim.

That could be said of any owner of a professional sports team. Owning a team is a luxury, a rich man's hobby. If you think any owner just shells out insane money for a team and then turns over complete control to others without any input, you are mistaken. There are a few exceptions to this, like Randy Lerner, who inherited the team and was disinterested as an owner. I pretty sure that's not what you're looking for either.

vers...you seem to have a bit of a problem with reading comprehension...try reading again.

I never once said Berry was forced to do anything and my response has NOTHING TO DO WITH BAKER..!!!

LOL mac. Actually my reading comprehension is very good and that is why I addressed your claims.

I think you're reading too much into this, or others (including myself) are not expressing their actual view on the subject.

I am, in no way, suggesting only Haslam wanted Watson. I'm simply saying that there was a large investment of time and energy in the pursuit... most of it taking place during a time when nobody had any idea what would come of the allegations. As the situation morphed into a real possibility, and then a real meeting, then a real "let-down"; it became a decision largely based on Haslam and his being on-board with the largest contract (as far as guarantee) and one of the largest payouts (assets) in NFL history. Nobody makes those decisions but the owner.

If you think about the logistics of a deal like that, the other participants (who don't sign the checks) are basically in a situation where they can't be held to shoulder the blame. Of course, that changes if Berry or anyone else was pressuring Haslam to do something he didn't feel comfortable with, but I *don't think* that was the case at all. Of course there would be no link to substantiate what is obviously an opinion.

Basically, what I think happened is Berry reached a point where he said "sorry boss, I don't think we can get it done because the cost is too high"... And then Haslam said "the hell, you say!" (insert southern twang).

Let's be honest, the smart thing to do at that point would be for Berry to insure job security by advising (read: lightly warning lol) against the high price-tag. That makes it even harder for Jimmy to place blame on him if it doesn't work out.

The owner always has the final say. The owner signs the checks. I didn't think that was something that required proof.

Different opinions are good. I don't know, maybe you are correct. I just see mac's post as one of those kind of things that reads like it really happened and it is repeated enough by different people that it becomes fact. The OBJ not running the right routes and not knowing where to line-up is an example of how BS becomes fact around here.

From what I understand, there were four teams that all agreed to Houston's trade demands. New Orleans, Carolina, us, and Atlanta. There were other teams who wanted him but Houston would not trade w/Indy because they are in the same division and other teams simply were not in position to give up that many assets. So, I don't think Jimmy made our FO make the trade. Perhaps the guaranteed money was suggested or approved by Jimmy? I don't know. I do think that the organization realized they needed an upgrade at the position and there was not another QB available who was better than Watson. The price was extremely high in regards to what we had to give up, Watson's compensation, and even the amount of negative public attention it has brought our organization. Time will tell if it was worth such an investment. I realize not everyone feels this way, but I am hoping they made the correct decision.

Will you please stop? I never said that the owner doesn't make the final decision. Again, you live to argue and demean others. It's like a job you clock into every day.

So you think the fact he wasn't sexually inappropriate with all of them is some strong argument he wasn't sexually inappropriate with others? Apply that to anything else and see how that works.

"Well he didn't steal thousands of other cars in the city so he must not be a car thief."

Sounds a little crazy doesn't it?

That sounds great when you shift the blame to me for stating the obvious. How is what I said an argument? The owner makes the final decision what checks he writes. In regards to motive, the owner has the most to gain financially by bringing a SB title to Cleveland. The owner has the most to lose if this thing goes belly up and doesn't work out. That's not an argument no matter how much you would like to frame it as such. It's just a convenient excuse to try and dismiss my points.

One last time and then I am going to ignore your constant need for conflict. I never once said that the owner doesn't make the final decision. Please stop writing things and making accusations about things I have never said.

And as I stated, the owner was the one who had the most to gain or lose in acquiring DW. Your claim is I have a constant need for conflict? I'm not the one who has sat here and gone after Baker in thread after thread and post after post. That would be you.

Maybe you are thinking about the DW threads? There you may have a point. But stop pretending you haven't been on a consistent rant about Baker. People can read.

j/c...

How can they meet with him in Texas? I though he was in the Bahamas?

What a jet setter he is!

Man, this could put a real damper on the Bahama vacay. "Man, I won't see you guys 'til week nine, but let's go toss the ball anyway."

You are a little too quick to argue, I said it will wake the sleeping dog. The 18 women that are supporting Watson have not said he didn't have sexual relations with him - they stated that they didn't feel pressured. The Judge demanded that these women needed to have dispositions to determine how many of these women participated and if it indicates a trend. Watson's issue is if half of them say he did proposition them and you add that to the 22 other complaints you have a definite trend of solicitation. The judge also requested Watson cash app records. As with most crimes, if you follow the money you will find the problem. Solicitation is a felony in Texas and a game changer as far as Watson being able to play for Cleveland if they start going down that road.

Maybe the league officials wanted to be in the Bahamas too...

This may end the speculation soon though, the NFL isn't like SCOTUS taking 6 months to put out an opinion.

Shefty reported last week that the NFL wants to make a decision by the start of training camp. I think that is around the end of July.

While I take him with a grain of salt I can see that and this would put them on track for that time line.

Josh Gordon disagrees.

Which time?

The only way any of this would fall back on Berry IMO, is if the court cases go really bad and Watson ends up on long term suspension or never plays. I think Jimmy signed off on everything else. Biggest contract ever? You know they did that ONLY with the Haslam's blessing.

I know you are making a joke, but the process has changed. Here is an article about it.

Here is a chart that is helpful about the new personal conduct policy.


https://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/NFL_domestic_violence_policy.pdf

Does this mean NFL players no longer have access to an appeal process?

they do

Doesn't read like that at all...

"Thus, the Commissioner continues to have full and final say over all discipline under the Personal Conduct Policy. The Commissioner’s powers become short-circuited only if/when the Disciplinary Officer concludes that the player should experience no discipline. If any discipline is imposed, the Commissioner can change it in any way that he wants. With no appeal rights beyond that."

It was well known that the Browns were out of the race because Watson didn't want to move to Cleveland and play in the cold.

Baker's childish actions are the only reason we have Watson.

Had Baker not thrown a temper tantrum... Haslam would have flown to Texas and smoothed things over.


Instead, Baker demanded a trade and Berry make Watson a deal he couldn't refuse. Because... well, there was no other option - We are in our window of "win-now".

The aftermath is that Baker is now a 6th-string back up and no NFL team is willing to trade for him. Had he kept his mouth zipped... he would be the starting QB for the Browns and we would have been able to get a ton of additional weapons and a lot of future cap space.

It sounds to me like the player can appeal the act of discipline but not the actual punishment if one is handed out.

You should click on the link for the chart I referenced after the Florio article. It's from CBS Sports.

These three parts may answer your question.



RESPONSE OF INDIVIDUAL
The individual is given notice of proposed discipline and can choose to
appeal the decision while remaining on paid leave during the duration
of the appeal. In cases of a criminal conviction, the underlying
conviction can not be challenged and the court’s judgment and factual
findings are binding for the purposes of the NFL disciplinary process.


NFL EXPERT PANEL HEARING
The appeal process will include a review panel of three outside experts
to make recommendations to the Commissioner or his designee on an
appeal ruling that will be decided by the Commissioner or his designee.


FINAL DECISION
The Commissioner or his designee reviews the panel’s
recommendations and makes a final decision on disciplinary measures.


Here is the link again: https://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/NFL_domestic_violence_policy.pdf

Florio's commentary and that flowchart represent two totally different sets of "protocol". I'll trust the chart (I guess) although the article is written under a headline of "new process", goes on to say it may have an impact, states there is no appeal process and then points to a flowchart that says there is. Weird.

Language from the chart is this...

Violations involving assault, battery, domestic violence or sexual assault will result in a baseline six-game suspension without pay, with more if aggravating factors are present, such as the use of a weapon or a crime against a child.

Considering there was no assault, battery, domestic violence or sexual assault proven, I would think it would be very difficult to push for more than six games.

I agree. I was really hesitant to post Florio's article because there was such a slant to it. He was trying really hard to push a certain narrative. But, I was worried that people would not take the time to read through the chart and I tried to find a dummied-down article about it.

Gotcha. Should have clicked the chart first, google is not my friend today.

Do you know if any one from the league has confirmed that this case has been pigeon-holed into "domestic violence"? I mean, it's not, really. Just wondering if it will just fall into the generic "personal conduct policy" and they'll just make up the rules as they go... wouldn't be the first time.

Number of incidents could easily be an aggravating factor. It is not a singular, isolated incident; it's a well established pattern of deliberate conduct. I'm not saying that means much to the NFL, especially with their history on how they view things, but it is something that could escalate the punishment.

That said, the change in the process allows the Commish to say "my hands are tied, there's nothing I can do" if the guy comes back with no recommendation for punishment. The public backlash in that scenario would be huge, but he has an out to say he cannot do anything.

I don't know the answer to that question, Fate.

I have a feeling that the NFL is in a bad spot because it seems unfair to punish a man w/out all the facts of the case being public and the fact that criminal charges were not pursued. Yet, they are probably under quite a bit of pressure to hand down a punishment to save face in the eyes of the media and significant segment of the public.

Personally speaking, I think it would be the most fair to wait until the courts have made their decisions and all the evidence has been revealed, but I understand why they want to put this ugly situation behind them.

Yeah, I think the idea to take away "omnipotent" from the commissioner is a good one. People were tired of judge, jury, executioner. At least now he's not deciding someone's actual guilt before laying down the punishment.

I agree w/you that while the new protocol isn't perfect, it's a helluva lot better than it was. I know that it was agreed upon during the latest Collective Bargaining Agreement. At least I think I know that. LOL

lol. Hard to know what you know or don't know with this league.

If the guideline is a 6-game suspension, then what is it for 22 separate violations? Surely no one on this forum can believe that the NFL is going to roll all these cases into one occurrence and treat it as a single violation of the personal conduct policy? These claims occurred between 2019 and 2021 and each probably should be considered individually. A one game suspension for each violation would be a minimum of 22 games. Harty NOS got a 3-game suspension for a single DWI arrest in 2021. Guice WAS was suspended 6 games for a single domestic violence accusation in 2021, Desmond Harrison was suspended 6-games for a single accusation of assault on a woman in 2021. None of these players had been convicted of the crime before their suspension.

IDK how this will play out, but a 6-game suspension would seem highly unlikely considering there are 22 individual complaints over a 2 plus year period. Treating Watson's problem the same as a single domestic violence accusation wouldn't seem balanced in any way, shape, or form. That's just my opinion though.

Six games... he wasn't reprimanded by the league between any of these incidences, was he? Then he's not a repeat offender.

I could see the league saying (rightfully so, because it's true) that he was made aware that his actions were not welcome by several accusers and continued the same behavior. And since it is sexual behavior they may point out the continued behavior and tack on a couple games besides the six. That's about it though.

When has the NFL ever suspended a player based on civil suits? I cannot find a single example.

Per the most recent CBA, Roger Goodell no longer acts as the sole disciplinarian or has final say.

Former U.S. District judge, Sue Robinson will act as the judge/arbitrator in deteriming Watson's punishment, if any. https://www.fedarb.com/professionals/judge-sue-l-robinson-retired/

Lisa Friel is heading the investigation on behalf of the NFL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Friel

https://sports.yahoo.com/roger-good...s-personal-conduct-policy-014712381.html

Don't be surprised if it is 17-34 games.

It took quite an effort as there is no date on the chart and no date available by searching the link in at least two search engine... finally, I "inspected" the .pdf and it's from late 2014.

You're right. That's how little I believe whatever happens will land on Berry.

Or 24 games for his 24 "possible" victims.

No way it is that long. 4-6 games.

I know some in here are hoping it is that long.

The METHOD of dumping a kid that wasn't horrible,,, They way they did it.. In other words... THE METHOD... What's so hard to figure out?

I'm no fan of how this all came down... Also no fan of Watsons character either, But to hang Watson out to dry for that long for what is thus far unsubstantiated claims seems nutty.. I don't see that happening.. 6 or 7 games is my guess if any at all.

This part of her bio worries me.

I appreciate the article posted. It was informative, but I couldn't help but chuckle about your sentence and then the first one in the article.

Figure out what? They wanted another QB. How else should it have been done?

This is quite the public call out by the Left Tackle.

I would think that stating that the claims against Watson are unsubstantiated is a little bit of blind belief. Even the most livid supporter of Watson has to question why:

1) Watson was going outside the team for massages when the Texans had in house care available. Massage therapy is a key part of NFL players’ weekly recovery regimens. Many clubs have therapists come to the facility once per week, often on the Tuesday off day, setting up tables in a large room where players cycle through for treatment. The Texans have had a contract with Genuine Touch Massage Therapy since the team’s founding in 2002; the owner of the practice, Joni Honn, was listed in the Texans’ 2020 media guide as part of the sports medicine staff. She has a team of several therapists that players, including Watson, can also text directly for sessions away from the facility but Watson went outside for treatment.

2) The quantity of different therapists Watson appears to have used, as well as the lack of experience of some that he hired and the massage techniques he requested according to the civil suits, stand out as different from the experiences shared by his NFL colleagues. One person with close ties to the Texans says a member of the team’s medical staff, worried about increased risk of injury to the franchise quarterback, was concerned last year when they were told Watson was seeking out therapists on Instagram. Watson admits that he did not tell his trainer or anyone at the Texans about his private massage sessions.

3) An AFC defensive back said, “You always want to use somebody that has experience working on guys in your profession. You don’t want a person that doesn’t really know what they're doing. I don’t know guys who use 22 different masseuses.” If you count all 22 plaintiffs as having worked with Watson as well as a former plaintiff who dropped her suit “for now” (she cited privacy and security concerns, after the court ruled all women had to refile with their real names), the 18 therapists who issued statements in support of Watson through Hardin’s firm and other therapists who spoke to SI (and whose accounts were verified), Watson has worked with at least 44 therapists over the past year. However, Watson has reached out to way more than that 44 number and the actual number is surely much higher. It is a decent time to point out how bizarre it would be to hire this many people for massages in one year.

4) Seventeen of the 22 plaintiffs say in their lawsuits that Watson made first contact with them through social media, where they market their businesses. (The majority of plaintiffs also say they had never before worked on any Texans players.)

5) Deshaun wasn’t satisfied with spending his days off at his swanky six bedroom/five bath home on Legend Manor Drive in the upscale Royal Oaks Country Club subdivision. Maybe his pool with attached Jacuzzi just wasn’t his form of relaxing. Deshaun had an account at the Houstonian. He had his marketing manager prearrange to acquire rooms there for the quarterback usually on his practice days off. And the Houstonian Hotel is something else: part of the fight for pretrial evidence in the 22 civil suits against him. There are 22 women who have sued Deshaun accusing him of sexual misconduct during massage sessions. According to some of these documents, rooms at the Houstonian were used for some of these women to show up and give him massages. These same documents also state that the sexual misconduct occurred during his stays. The attorneys for the 22 women are now seeking documentation regarding the Houstonian including records of payments made to the hotel, which rooms were rented and duration of stay, and any correspondence between the Texans and Deshaun from 2019-2021 regarding the hotel.

6) A court filing by the plaintiffs resulted in a hearing several weeks ago. In that proceeding, the judge compelled Deshaun to provide detailed accounts of all massage treatments with payment information from March 2019 to March 2020. Currently, Deshaun is required to provide the courts with specific massage information with dates, therapists used with locations. He is to provide this information by May 6.

This story, though, is more complicated than the binary matter of innocence or guilt. There is the enormous power imbalance in a star athlete’s every interaction intersecting with the vulnerability of a role performed in the hidden corners of the sports world; the often misunderstood nature of what constitutes consent and the difference between what is inappropriate and what crosses a line legally. All of which play a role in how 22 women and Deshaun Watson arrived at this point.

That is concerning. Why would the NFL hire someone with those black marks on their resume?

I don't know the whole enchilada - but because it's on Wiki does not make it true and who knows if this is a biased/untrue or partially true take? I can't see any benefit for the NFL to be using anyone who has a tarnished history.

Because if you think the NFL is going to appoint someone that doesn't tend to favor the outcomes that end the same way they have conducted themselves before in terms of suspensions, then I think you are fooling yourself. It's great way to put a show on for the public that Goodell has given up control yet at the same getting the results he would have come to had he decided the issue himself. NFL suspensions are for public consumption and about the appearance of the brand. If anyone expected that the NFL would have put people in charge of this process that would have changed that I feel they're sadly mistaken.

#Facts

I guess if you look at it from a criminal court system where each time you commit the same crime the penalty increases you would be correct. But acting as if an independent body such as the NFL won't judge it as multiple incidents of the same infraction and punish it as such is wishful thinking. They may not in the end, but you do realize that each time you do the same thing over and over you repeated what you did in the first place, right?

Why would the NFL hire someone they weren't certain was unafraid to see things as they feel things need to be seen?
They aren't hiring a person for Justice, they're hiring a person to handle public relations messes.

I remember posting articles on here about how Friel barred the lead investigator, Kia Roberts, from testifying even though the latter said she had evidence Elliot was not guilty. Here is another article that may be slanted, but I think it might make the Wiki article more valid.

4:20

Here is an article about the NFLPA's action against Friel and the NFL in the Ezekiel Elliot case.

j/c:

"“Repeat Offenders” – Players who have had previous violations of law or of this policy may be
considered repeat offenders. When appropriate, conduct occurring prior to the player’s association with
the NFL will be considered."

Is Watson a repeat offender? Nope.

Just interpreting the law of the land, definitions, and corresponding punishment as outlined by the NFL. This is agreed on as part of a CBA. Not sure how much they can change the rules on the fly.

Not going to wax philosophical or play "you see" for endless responses though, so don't bother.

I will only say that can be taken two different ways. If it is found that several violations of the same offense are found to have happened, the first one could be considered the first offense and everyone there after could be considered as repeating that same offense on multiple occasions. I have no idea which way they will look at that. It could go either way.

It simply defies common sense as to why the NFL would have her in a position such as the NFL's special counsel for investigations of alleged violations of the NFL's personal conduct code including "domestic violence, sexual assault, animal cruelty, blackmail, extortion, racketeering, disorderly conduct".

IMO, given her past history, any case the NFL would assign to her for investigation would "automatically" carry grounds for appeal based on her alleged past conduct.

Thinking that this should be considered a single offense is like saying a serial killer only killed once since he wasn't caught until the 20th murder. This is at a minimum 22 different occurrences over a 1-2 year period. I get that everyone is hopeful that the suspension is minimal because a Super Bowl is more important in their eyes but as of now until proved differently, there are 22 civil suits against Watson that should not be just pushed to the side because Cleveland needs him to play football. If the civil hearings rule against Watson and or solicitation charges are filed he should be charged to the fullest extent of the law and the NFL. 22 civil suits for a 6 game suspension will send the wrong message that it was ok what he did and the NFL doesn't care about women. This is a lose-lose here and if he gets off light it going to put the Browns in a very bad light - very bad.

Gotcha. I basically said as much in my original post you pulled the first quote from...


The way "crime and punishment" in the NFL seems to be written, any, and almost all, severe penalties are for "repeat offenders". I understand, fully, what you're saying, but he simply doesn't fall into that category because they haven't punished him before.

At the end of the day, their "code" also contains language that gives them leeway to stray from their guidelines at will anyway... so they'll judge and punish as they see fit. My quote above is basically my prediction, as anything can happen.

There's also this, which gives them as much power as they need to impose any punishment:

However, the NFL’s Personal Conduct Policy specifically states that “actual or threatened physical violence against another person” is expressly prohibited. The policy also says that NFL players are held to a higher standard, noting that “it is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime.”

But something like that would definitely get tested in another court of law if Deshaun or the player's union thinks the punishment is excessive. I'd put that over/under at about ten games.

I've said since this all went down I expect 10 games. No great rationale other than I expect the NFL will want the optics to look like they take this seriously.

As for Lisa Friel - I have no idea what the truth is. I do have an observation about Friel and Watson.

Many are claiming Watson is innocent until proven guilty. Many point to the decision by the Grand Jury not to prosecute as grounds to lean towards all the allegations being flase.

With Friel - she's been accused of things at least twice, but accused by the defendants lawyers who have a vested interest in casting shade on the judgements handed against their client(s). Friel has not been prosecuted. She has not been found guilty.

It seems that if posters want to give Watson the benefit of the doubt as he has not been prosecuted - but want to cast significant shade on Friel who is sort of in the same situation ... doesn't seem consistent. Not saying that's exactly what's going on, but the situation made me ponder.

I think the noise about Friel is concerning - but I don't understand how the NFL is still using her if these allegations have any substance. I think the allegations against Watson are concerning.

Do you think they would suspend Watson 8 to 11 seasons (132 - 176 games)? He has not had previous violations under the policy, this is a single incident for these purposes.

Albert Breer's Deshaun Watson claim offers major boost to Browns as reports emerge

By
Matt Baldwin

Published: 17 May 2022, 18:00
link


NFL insider Albert Breer has claimed that the Cleveland Browns could be set to play with Deshaun Watson this season despite his off-field issues.

The Cleveland Browns took an awfully big risk this offseason when they made the trade for Deshaun Watson, who is currently facing 22 civil lawsuits surrounding allegations of sexual assault and misconduct, something they were very much aware of when bringing him on board.

When you play as well as Watson has done in his NFL career, throwing for over 15,000 yards and 108 touchdowns across his four full seasons in the NFL, with 19 rushing touchdowns thrown in on top for good measure, you fall into the category of ‘worth the gamble’, knowing that there is plenty of upside for you to work on.

With a possible suspension hanging over him, it may turn out to be a waste of time for the organisation, but according to Breer, the Browns might be in the clear somewhat for the time being when it comes to the man who could very well be their next franchise quarterback.

What has Breer said?
Writing in his MAQB column for SI.com, Breer explained how the timing of NFL officials wanting to speak to Watson might provide something of a benefit for the team in the short run. He writes that:

“If the 22 lawsuits don’t reach resolution by July 1, the sides, and the court, have agreed to essentially press pause until the NFL season is over. And if there isn’t closure there, there will be those in the NFL office who argue to wait on issuing any sort of suspension.

“That opens the possibility Watson plays the whole year in 2022, and then perhaps deals with any consequence the league assesses him in ’23.”

All or nothing in 2022?

This might have just opened up the window that the Browns needed for this season. Having shown some promise in 2020 when they made the playoffs and won their first playoff game since 1994, bringing in someone with the talent of Watson could have been the catalyst to take them over the top.

That might have taken a stumble in 2022, but if as Breer claims, the punishment could be pushed to 2023 then that gives them all the incentive to go all out for this year, knowing that a punishment could be coming further down the line.

Honestly all that does is move the bubble in the wallpaper. It leaves the situation over DW's head and the Browns all season. It leaves room for the lawyer representing the 22 women to drip "news" stories into the media cycle at any/all points through the season. Does nothing to move closer to closure.

2 winning seasons in 5 this is are window.

Considering the NFL's history of dealing with Browns issues, they're using her because those allegations do have substance.

Who are these posters? I haven't seen one person say she should be in jail. I haven't seen one person say she should be punished. Meanwhile, there are posters who are openly campaigning for Watson to be severely punished while completely overlooking other things.

Btw--------the removal and lock-out of the lead investigator in the Elliot case is not an allegation. It actually occurred.

Yeah, I saw that and I understand. I wasn't angry or challenging you when I made my reply to you. I just wanted to set the record straight that I don't want the woman punished or removed because you know who will be around claiming that I did indeed say that.

Here's another thing to consider, having this woman be in charge could actually be a good thing for those who don't want Watson to be suspended. She was the one who reduced the suspension of the Giants' kicker and was accused of letting the police officers off lightly. I have no idea how she will rule. Either way, one group of people are going to be upset.

""Either way, one group of people are going to be upset.""

Yes - the inclusion or employment of Friel by the NFL is a complete head scratcher and seems guaranteed to ensure more unrest and angst than otherwise.

Oooppps....I should have said "is" rather than "are."

Our window to win is open as long as the franchise exists and is playing games and we are still alive to see it.

Oh golly gee, this case is so mysterious. Why did a rich, powerful, and famous football player with access to professional trainers and masseuses seek out over 40 vulnerable young women for off premises massages??? I’m so confused what happened here. Oh I know, he was trying to support small business entrepreneurs. What a great dude!

Oh and don’t worry, that paragon of truth and honesty, good old Jimmy, did a full investigation and found all charges to be meritless.

Let’s go to a browns game!!

Just be sure to wash the slime off afterwards.

NFL’s betting partners surely would like to have a Deshaun Watson decision, too

Posted by Mike Florio on May 17, 2022, 7:25 PM EDT
link

Beyond the Browns, their opponents, and their fans, there’s another key constituency that would like to know whether quarterback Deshaun Watson will miss any, some, or all of the games to be played in 2022.

The NFL’s seven sports betting partners.

They want to take bets. They want to make money from taking bets. With Watson’s status unknown, key Browns bets aren’t on the board. For example, PointsBet still doesn’t offer an over/under win total for Cleveland, or a bet on whether the Browns make the playoffs, or fail to do so.

For some reason, however, bets can be placed on the Browns to win the AFC North, where they are co-favorites with the Ravens at +200.

Whether it’s PointsBet or FanDuel or DraftKings or any of the other four NFL sports betting partners, the sooner Watson’s status is know, the sooner these various sports books can start making money from bets placed for, or against, the Browns.

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.

j/c:

I understand why people want closure. We, the fans want closure because we want to know where our team stands. Surely, the Browns and Watson feel the same way. The NFL probably wants to put this yucky mess behind them as soon as possible. The gambling community wants the opportunity to make more money. However, if fairness and accuracy are the goals, it would be wise to wait until all the cases have been heard and all the facts that come w/them have been considered in determining a fair and accurate decision. I don't know if fairness and accuracy are important to the decision makers, but that's another discussion.

Yeah, as ridiculous as the serial killer example is (still NOT a repeat offender if they find and charge him after the 20th murder), it's true because people are innocent until proven guilty. If he hadn't previously been proven guilty, then I don't think he's eligible for repeat offender status. That said, I don't know what happens after that first guilty verdict. At the time of the subsequent murders, the serial killer still hadn't been found guilty and wouldn't be a repeat offender (right?).

That said, we're talking about the NFL personal conduct policy... which is arguably defined more by its "we can do pretty much whatever we feel like" clause than anything else.

And that is what it is. The conduct policy is there for a number of reasons, but mostly to deal with people who embarrassed the league or tarnished the shield. They aren't there as law enforcement or part of the justice system.

"Sorry about you feeling uncomfortable," Watson texted. “Never were the intentions. Lmk if you want to work in the future. My apologies.”

Asked why he sent an apology, Watson testified: “Yes, because she was teary-eyed. And I was trying to figure out what was going on. So, I assumed that she was uncomfortable in whatever reason. And we talked about working in the future. And so, I said, `We can work in the future. Just let me know.’ And then I sent my apologies as whatever reason she was teary-eyed for.”

"sent my apologies as whatever reason she was teary-eyed for"

I am pretty sure this testimony came from the same person...

“During the massage, Watson began to aggressively dictate the massage and complain that she was not doing what he wanted. The plaintiff began to think that Watson only wanted sex.

Watson repeatedly directed her towards his penis. She alleges that he purposely exposed the tip of his now fully erect penis from under the towel. He began moving himself to expose himself more, and eventually turned to touch her hand with his penis.

The plaintiff immediately ended the massage and started to cry. After telling him to leave, Watson said "I know you have a career and a reputation, and I know you would hate for someone to mess with yours, just like I don't want anyone messing with mine."

Later, Watson reached out to her via text message to apologize. She did not respond.”

J/C

I’m figuring this case will not be resolved for a while and the NFL will probably wait. Leaks like the ones from yesterday were bound to happen. I can’t see the NFL handing out less than 8 games, but that’s just a guess

You may be right that it creates a law suit but that has been tried before. The problem comes with the fact that the players are contractually obligated to accept final decisions by the NFL. They have a right to appeal the suspension with the NFL but have fallen short in law suits because they agreed to abide by the NFL's decisions on such matters in their union contracts.

The suit against the NFL had already been lost and the players union was lost here....

Philadelphia Eagles’s Lane Johnson Loses Suit Against Union

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily...ss-lane-johnson-loses-suit-against-union

Here is La'el Collins suing over a drug suspension...

Cowboys’ Collins Loses Drug Case Appeal Despite Judge’s NFL Rebuke

https://www.sportico.com/law/analysis/2021/lael-collins-drug-suspension-nfl-1234644108/

I'm not saying it would be impossible for DW to fight it in court but his odds certainly do not appear to be good in terms of winning.

Didn't Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson and Tom Brady have similar lawsuits resulting in reinstatement and judges overturning their suspensions? I'm pretty sure all three did.

This is a unique case because a court of law has already declared lack of evidence for indictment. It's also a situation where the league is (maybe) choosing to impose punishment before more evidence comes forth in civil cases. They obviously don't need to wait, and they obviously have a right to hold their own standards of conduct.

However, they also seem to be in a no win situation through no fault of their own. Hold to a certain benchmark standard of punishment (which would be six games, according to their code of conduct policy) and everyone will scream because of the absurd amount of "occurrences". Excess punishment will have people screaming that he didn't even "commit a crime". Doing it too soon will put egg on their face if they are too lenient in lieu of possible forthcoming evidence... Waiting too long (in the eyes of many) says that they don't care.

It will be interesting to see how this whole thing plays out.

Let me give you a possible scenario here. Let's say for the sake of argument that the NFL finds validity in 12 of the 22 allegations. So that is 12 separate incidents in violation of the same policy. Is it your contention they would give him only a half game suspension for each infraction? Even in your post you said "violations" not "violation". It was also posted how it is written in NFL policy how they can easily get around that by other things written within their policies.

Now I understand how you felt the need to point out the most ridiculous case scenario to try to make a point that has never been stated. What I've suggested they MIGHT do is make his suspension longer because it is multiple incidents. Not some crazy 132-176 games.

The NFL is a business. A business that image is everything. They call that "protecting the shield". What I don't believe they will do, if they find validity in multiple allegations, is treat it as if it was only a single infraction. That would not be a good look for them and when image is everything, I don't believe most people looking at it from a realistic way believe that either.

And who are those people? Are you trying to twist what people consider possible scenarios and outcomes into "campaigning" for that outcome to happen? And before you and others hop on the sig train, my belief is watson is guilty of at least some of these allegations. To believe otherwise would take me entertaining some conspiracy theory. What conclusion or punishment the NFL comes up with is of no real concern to me or has it been posted as such. So again, who are these posters?

The problem with your scenario is they use the same person for all NFL allegations for all 32 teams.

Isn't it odd that we heard she was willing to work with watson again. Some even said watson's lawyer had proof of that. watson is still saying that. But when we look at the evidence, the only thing that leads in that direction is a text watson sent after the incident. Were they talking about appointments in the future before the alleged incident happened? Because it's quite clear that after the incident she refused to have further comminications with her. Things that make you go hmmmm....

Actually I agree with you. In the end I think the NFL will do what they feel is the best case scenario to make them look good. I would prefer that they wait until the process is concluded and all of the evidence is in. But as you so aptly pointed out that would drag the process out for a very long time which wouldn't be a good look either.

In the end they may feel that acting quickly is in their best interest. As if you suggested it gets appealed they can say they did their best and it was overturned in court. It makes them look like the good guys in taking such topics seriously even though they may feel relatively certain it won't stand up to scrutiny in court. I have no idea at this point but it does make sense to look at the possible scenarios.

You, for one. And how did you miss this gem?



There are multiple posts throughout these threads that are completely one-sided. And none of them are pro-Watson posters.

j/c:

Well there goes any worry of him being suspended at least!

Exactly!

Now I can start betting on the Browns props.

Great way to go broke. Enjoy!

Let me be a devil's advocate here. Let's say that starting next April, all of the cases start going to court. Between April and July, Watson loses 22 civil case's but the NFL had already suspended him for 6 games in 2022. What's the NFL, Cleveland Browns, and for that fact Watson to tell the fans and the American public then? That he's already served his suspension? If a player is suspended for 6 games for a single domestic dispute case, you can bet that the NFL is going to look at 22 civil case losses a heck of a lot differently as will the public. If Watson had stayed with Houston, my guess is that the vast majority of his supporters here would be crying foul if he was given a 6-game suspension before the 22 cases were heard.

I don't believe the NFL wants to take that chance. IMHO, I expect Watson to get an indefinite suspension until the civil cases are heard. Much like the MLB, allowing Watson to play with 22 cases pending is just not a good look for the league and I suspect that is something the league does not want to have to address on a weekly basis or the fallout that will occur if he plays and then losses the civil cases. The purpose of the NFL action is not to determine guilt or innocence but to protect the image of the league. I don't believe the league wants to tell 51% or more of the population that Watson playing is more important to the NFL than the treatment of women. That is not the image they want to portray.

I get it, Watson is a Cleveland Brown and the anointed savior of the franchise. I want the Browns to win a Super Bowl too. However, when I take off my Browns hat, I don't want a guy to get off easy or be playing when 22 women have accused him of such mistreatment. IMHO, clean up your mess and then come play for the Browns.

Where have I said that?


I didn't miss it. You missed the context which I put in bold for you in order to help you out.


But that's nothing close to the accusation you stated. Here's what you stated....


Even in the post you quoted as your example it plainly stated that should happen IF Watson were found guilty in civil court. In my comments on the matter it is based on IF the NFL finds validity in the lawsuits. Nothing about that is "overlooking other things". I think you just get a little worked up sometimes and perceive things that simply are not there. It happens.

j/c...

Pretty sure the over/under on suspension is still 4.5 games. It's weighted though, at -140.

To be fair your original post made it sound like you expected it to be 22 (or 12 in your follow up) separate violations of policy. With 6-8 games as the "standard" for each violation that would amount to ending his career and being suspended for 11 seasons (though I might have divided by 16 not 17 there out of habit).

if he is found to have violated the policy I think it will be handled as a single violation. Any more strikes of retribution and not discipline. If they found cause in all 22 cases though I could see a little fatter of a sentence, but surely not more than a season.

No, you took what I originally said out of context. I was replying to another post that you chose to ignore.

It's fine. I knew you would respond the way you did. You have an innate ability to change things around and never admit to being wrong. Frankly, I am tired of it and it's best to just allow you to keep on w/your one-sided ridiculing on this subject of Baker and Watson w/out responding to you. But, you keep getting in those digs, because perception is reality in this forum.

I understand that when you can't defend your position the best thing to do is shift the blame to someone else. It's a specialty of yours.


This is a direct quote that has in no way been manipulated or "changed around".



As per usual you try and change the topic. Watson's issues have nothing to do with Baker. They are totally separate issues. I have said over and over again that watson is one of the top QB's in the league and he is a big upgrade "on the field" over baker. People that actually bother to read and admit what has actually been posted understand that. But I can understand why you would wish to try and make it appear to be the same thing. Speaking of having "an innate ability to change things around".

So steve, if you get your wish and Watson is suspended indefinitely and is unavailable this upcoming year, do you think that Baker Mayfield will be the starting qb for the Browns this year?

I've tried to keep an open mind about Watson's situation concerning the upcoming civil cases, but it is going to be difficult for me.

Some seem to be insinuating that all these massage therapists are lying about Watson's alleged conduct...yet when Watson was placed under oath in a deposition last week he appears to confirm Ashley Solisa's account of what happened when she attempted to give Watson a legitimate massage. Ashley Solisa was the first to go public with allegation of sexual misconduct against Watson.

Just my take on the information outlined in this USA Today article.

Browns QB Deshaun Watson testified woman cried at end of massage, according to transcript

USA TODAY
Brent Schrotenboer
May 17, 2022
link


Cleveland Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson admitted during a pretrial deposition last week that one of his disputed encounters with a massage therapist ended with the woman crying, followed by an apology sent to her by text message from Watson, according to the woman’s attorney.

This verifies a portion of the women’s claims against him and raises the question of what caused to her cry during their encounter. In his deposition, Watson said he didn’t know, according to the attorney, Tony Buzbee. The woman is suing Watson for civil assault and claims in her lawsuit that Watson purposely touched her with his penis during the massage, causing her to feel scared and cry.

Watson left and sent her a text message apologizing afterward: “Sorry about you feeling uncomfortable,” he wrote, according to a screenshot of it previously posted by her lawyers. “Never were the intentions. Lmk if you want to work in the future. My apologies.”

The deposition last week was taken on behalf of the therapist, Ashley Solis, the first of 22 women who have sued Watson and accused him of similar sexual misconduct during massage sessions from early 2020 to March 2021. The encounter with Solis came on March 30, 2020, in her home in the Houston area.

“But you know why you sent that text apology afterwards?” Buzbee asked Watson during the deposition last week, according to a partial transcript obtained by USA TODAY Sports.

Of course not, I don't expect Mayfield to take another snap for the Cleveland Browns no matter the situation. That bed has been made and both parties have to deal with it.

I wonder if Pit will ask you who are these people? He sure made a big deal about me saying something while ignoring 888's claim about the NFL's about posters giving Watson the benefit of the doubt in regards to his innocence. For the record, I don't think 888 meant any harm and I don't want Pit to get on either of your cases, but it shows how fake the dude is.

Thanks for answering, steve.

I know Ashley Solisa was the first to come forward, but do we know where she falls on the actual timeline?

I think the "timeline" may come into play pretty heavily in the court of public opinion and the NFL.

If we reach a point where someone can ask... "Deshaun, at this point we have two girls who cried, two who told you to get dressed and GTHO, one who threatened to call the police... and you thought it was a good idea to continue this behavior for another six months??"... this may get ugly on a few different fronts.

vers...so you are agreeing with me that after reading Watson's response under oath from last week's depositions, that some of these women might very well be telling the truth about Watson's conduct..the sexual misconduct accusations.

Watson's response under oath appears to confirm the account of Ashley Solis, imo.

Just my .02 worth. I want to see my beloved Browns win in the worse way. I'll be 65 this year and I hope I get to see a Super Bowl victory before I pass on. I hope things work out well with DW and we can achieve that SB victory. However, being a Browns fan since I was 10 I've come to the realization that if something can go wrong here it will. Time will tell and I hope I'm wrong but we'll just have to wait and see.

No, I wasn't agreeing w/you. I was pointing out the hypocrisy of Pit and perhaps a few others. But, since you brought it up...........who are the posters that are insinuating that the massage therapists are lying? I have seen words like "predator," "rapist," "deviant," and "creepy" thrown around, but I haven't really seen people claiming that the women are lying.

Personally speaking, I don't feel the need to convict anyone in the court of public opinion. I allow the courts to sort things out and I don't rant about anyone's presumed guilt. As I explained to 888, I did not say that Friel was guilty of the crimes she is accused of. I did not ask for her to be removed from the proceedings due to her past record. I won't say whether she is guilty or innocent of the alleged crimes. I did say that there was no doubt that she locked out the lead investigator who had proof in the Elliot case because that is not up for debate. She did lock her out. That does not mean that Friel should be punished. Likewise, I will not say that Watson is innocent or guilty. I don't think I am omnipotent and can assign guilt to a person when I don't have all the facts. I don't think I should play judge, jury, and executioner. I let the laws of our land make those determinations because I am an American and mostly proud of our great land. So while guys like you, Pit, steve, Lex, etc can declare that someone is guilty of a crime while not having ALL the facts.........>I will not be following your lead. And I will be damned if you think you can get me to stand down on the laws of the land where a man is innocent until proven guilty.

I agree in principle, but the way these cases are disposed of leaves too much room for doubt IMO. If these are settled and no new facts are revealed or released proving him innocent (or at least not a total rapey scumbag), I can't root for him. That becomes a major issue for me personally. I don't know about you. We all know allegations can falsely ruin a man's career, and I don't want to do that by assuming his guilt or culpability. But I also will not root for a rapey scumbag, no matter who he plays for. No way I would have rooted for Ben, because I know exactly who he WAS coming out of college, rather he still is or not. My daughter went to school there and everybody knew Ben was full of himself and would use his star status on women. He could have easily went to jail over some of the things I heard. But again, I can't be sure how accurate those claims were, even coming from my daughter. She never personally interacted with him.

The women in this case did, and I would like to hear them on the stand. Not some article where they can easily cover their bases on being fact checked, but on stand under the pressure of legal testimony. If the accusations stand up after that, smh, what should we think? If not, it makes it easier to have him here by leaps and bounds. I couldn't care less about a Super Bowl right now, and can't believe I'm in a position to even feel that way. Hell, I've wanted that for the Browns since I was a kid. How do you turn that off? Like this I reckon, bring in a star QB with all these rapey allegations, while crapping on the guy you said would start and just extended. This whole situation is mind blowing to me from a business and moral sense. Just as a fan, anything to win sounded good until now. But suddenly a larger than you think portion of the fanbase NEEDS these answers, or it's going to be very hard going forward. And I don't think winning will cure this, personally.

Three comments and one question.

--I would not dream of holding it against you if you didn't root for the Browns. It's a freaking game that is for entertainment purposes. People put too much stock into what team others root for.

--We did not extend Baker. That is why I thought there was a good chance he would not be back after this past year.

--Oh, I think a large portion of the fanbase are demanding answers. I think a large percentage of them are Baker fans who are bitter about the latter's demise here in Cleveland. I think those folks will be highly critical of Watson and the team even if Watson is allowed to play. I think that they will bring constant venom. I have already read crap about "no excuses," and "Super Bowl or anything else is a failure," etc, etc.

--The question............>I probably have not followed the legal proceedings as closely as others. You keep saying "rapey scumbag." I haven't heard of allegations of rape. Did I miss that or is that just a conclusion that some are drawing because their minds are already made up?

For me it boggles my mind how a single person can offer up that asking for a trade and being upset after being replaced is a glaring character issue for a person while also completely overlooking 22 allegations by different women for someone else. Like I read earlier today, if he had gotten the hint after two or three it wouldn't seem so bad but at least 22 seems really concerning. It seems reasonable that people take a step back at that point and become cautious about supporting that person. I am not sure why that is an issue for other people. There are so many disingenuous arguments on both sides at this point I am not sure fans care about the truth.


The upside that someone said that echoed with me, I can support every other player on the team without reservation and still be concerned about the character of one. The guys supporting Watson are doing that now, they just take issue with a different QB so it shouldnt seem strange to them either.

rapey
/ˈrāpē/
adjectiveINFORMAL
sexually aggressive or inappropriate in a way that causes fear or unease.
"I always got a real rapey vibe from them"

Statements like this one are why I asked that the legal matters be moved to the Tailgate forum. Every other single legal issue that I have read on this board was moved to the Tailgate forum. Like the Ezekiel Elliot case. The Urban Meyer thing when an assistant coach's wife accused her husband of abuse. Like the Adrian Peterson thing. The Kareem Hunt situation. The Ray Rice situation. The Tyreek Hill situation. Etc, etc, etc.

This is supposed to be a "Pure Football forum." The powers that be chose to allow the legal issues into this forum and that is Purp's right. It is his board. He can do as he pleases. The problem occurs is that we are now faced w/interpretations of character. There is no doubt that the allegations surrounding Watson are far more severe than anything Baker has ever done. Yet, since this is the Pure Football forum.........I am trying to view this in football terms. Baker is no longer wanted in the Brown's locker room. He's gone no matter what. He talked too much and burned bridges w/his teammates, coaches, and ultimately, the FO. Not one person in the Brown's organization has come to his defense. In fact, not one team or player in the league has said they want him on their team. On the other hand, have we heard any players complaining about Watson being on the team? Were other teams not interested in bringing Watson on board?

Thus, while you may wish to chastise others who don't see it your way.........I am simply looking at it from a "football" perspective. That is why I didn't think the legal issues belonged here because I knew that eventually the two circles would conjoin and form a Venn diagram of sorts. There is a difference when defining "character" in every day life and "character" on a football team.

Dictionary.com
Rape: unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim.

There are multiple women with civil suits that claim they were forced to give Watson oral sex. Thus, the comment "rapey scumbag" would fit the allegations. That is not drawing some conclusion, whether with force or not, without consent can be called rape.

An allegation is not proof. You keep forgetting that.

Look man.........you wanna believe he is guilty.....more power to you. However, you aren't changing my mind that I am not going to proclaim him innocent or guilty and will allow the courts to decide. Thus far, Watson has not been charged of any criminal crime. The civil cases are pending. I understand that you have your mind made up, but you will never convince me to be part of the mob mentality.

You have it all wrong, I don't believe he's guilty. I believe that he should have his day in court just the same as the 22 women that say he sexually assaulted them. Unlike you, I don't believe that you push these women's claims to the side in a timeout for 10 months so Watson can go play his football games. That is total disrespect of the women and the law. Watson being able to play or serve a minor suspension is rewarding his behavior while the women, justified or not, are reliving their alleged bad experience with Watson every time they even hear his name. Add to that fact, every sports service nationwide is more interested in whether Watson will be playing or not on a daily basis while the women are an afterthought.

Unfortunately for you, that is not being a part of a mob mentality. That's just a quest for "Justice For All" whether Watson is innocent or guilty and football shouldn't have any bearing on the cases at all - NONE! That is why I have said the NFL should suspend Watson indefinitely, to protect the image of the league, until the matter is addressed properly for both sides. Football, IMHO, shouldn't have any consideration in these cases.

I just wish that you were as zealous for the plight of the women as you are for Watson to be able to play.

Yet, Pit will continue to claim that no one is campaigning for Watson to be suspended.

Look steve.........you have your way of thinking and you have expressed it. I view things differently. I don't think I am in position to judge one's innocence or guilt. You have an issue w/that. So be it. However, I won't change my mind because you pressure me to do so.

And one last thing........about this quote:



That is a low blow and I almost guarantee you that I have done more to help others than you have. I also have a high respect of women. I married a minority. She is very successful and I am not intimidated by that like many other males are. I raised my daughter to never ever become dependent on a male. Accept it if is genuine, but make sure you educate yourself where you don't need anyone. I have championed minorities, and I am including females in the work place in this, for decades. So shut your mouth w/such baseless accusations.

Steve, let me play devils advocate to your devils advocate....What if they do suspend him indefinitely...then next year, he goes and wins all 22 cases...he already wasn't allowed to play last year...and then get suspended for another full year...and in the end, he would have been shown not to have done anything wrong...You would be ok with that?(just asking...not accusing)

I think the NFL as was said earlier to be in a no win situation...And MLB and their pre-emptive nuclear deterrent of punishment isn't helping things. It isn't helping victims of domestic violence or sexual assault, and it certainly isn't helping people who might be falsely accused. I can't agree with an indefinite ban until things are cleared up in the civil cases...Once you impose it...you can't take it back. They either need to be specific, eg, 0, 4, 8, 10 games, or they should hold off until the cases are completed next year.

Personally, I have no idea what is going to happen...Much like Vers, I am not saying he is guilty or innocent. in fact since these are civil cases he is not guilty or innocent. Two Grand Juries have stated as such...So I actually hate the connotation of guilt or innocence in these discussions. So rather I should say I don't know what he did or did not do and I am not going to speculate. I am going to let things play out. As such I am going to keep an open mind to all possibilities. I will not try him in the court of mob mentality. In fact I won't judge him at all. I am not on any jury, I don't have all the information and may never get any information. All I can ethically do is make decisions based on the results.

If he is found responsible in the civil trials....Then he deserves all that comes his way...But if he isn't.....Well there is a group of people that won't even consider that possibility even if that were to happen...

Browns Get Bad News on Deshaun Watson's Legal Issues

By Ryan Phillips
May 17, 2022
link


The Cleveland Browns just received a serious body blow when it comes to their new quarterback. The legal issues Deshaun Watson has been facing for more than a year won't be resolved until at least 2023. That means the issues related to allegations sexual misconduct and assault leveled against him will hang over the franchise for at least another year.

On Tuesday it was reported that Tony Buzbee, the attorney representing 22 women suing Watson for sexual misconduct and sexual assault, and Rusty Hardin, Watson's defense attorney, haven't been able to agree on a number of issues. That has pushed the proceedings back so much that it would violate an agreed-upon moratorium set to last from August 1, 2022 to March 1, 2023.

Watson still has a number of depositions remaining and will have at least six in June alone. There's no way to get everything done and start the trials before the August 1 date. That means they'll all begin after March 1, 2023, just after Watson's first season with the Browns ends.

While it's nowhere near the most important aspect of this story, the Browns would almost certainly prefer Watson to just settle the lawsuits and put it behind him. He has steadfastly refused to do so. Now Browns officials, coaches and Watson's teammates will be asked about his issues continuously.

The Browns pushed all their chips in on the 26-year-old quarterback despite his troubling off-field issues. They sent first-round draft picks in 2022, 2023 and 2024, as well as a third-rounder in 2023, and fourth-rounders in 2022 and 2024 in exchange for Watson and a 2024 sixth-round pick. Then they handed Watson a five-year, $230 million deal that's fully guaranteed, making him the highest-paid player in NFL history. Given everything they gave up for him and the contract he received, Cleveland needs its new franchise quarterback on the field.

Nice post. The scary thing is that guys like steve, Pit, mac, Lex, etc are probably eligible for jury trials. Imagine being tried for a crime and having jury members who have already deemed you guilty before the case has been tried?

That's beyond scary, but all too real.

Uhmmm mac............I reported that news quite some time ago. However, the take from that article wasn't about "bad news." Because if we want to be fair--and I know you are not interested in fairness because you are upset about Baker---but, the decision to suspend Watson should be postponed until the cases have been completed. Thus, that information is probably good news for the Browns and Watson.

With that said............as I mentioned before......I am not sure if that fairness and accuracy are actual concerns of the NFL.

Vers I've been quiet for quite awhile but you have a huge case of confession thru projection. You call people out on things that you do and then pretend you are annoyed by that behavior. You claim that I "wish to chastise others who dont see it your way" but you have done that post after post after post after post...

I am sorry that something I find to be really silly applies to you and you feel offended. I didn't quote you and call you out for it. Yes, if someone feels that Baker behavior is unacceptable and DeShaun can't be looked on badly by anyone I believe that opinion is silly. You can disagree if you want, right? Maybe stay out of the topic if the discussion bothers you? But blaming other people because you don't like their opinion...that shouldn't fit in any forum on this site.

...after post after post...

It's a shame you have to attack people that have a different opinion than you. I used to think you were a good poster years ago with really good takes on things. Whatever happened to that guy?

I could have sworn that this discourse between you and I started w/this comment:



I will be frank. Kiss my ass w/your nonsense.

Are you OldColdDawg too, Vers??

mac...first this has been known for a while, and I think it presumptive to say it is "bad news" In fact it was actually AGREED upon by both parties to not have any depositions or trials during the August to March time frame and NOT as reported in your article where it was a disagreement that is pushing things back. How can an agreement between the 2 sides be a bad thing? In fact ....IF Deshaun is allowed to play this year, he won't have to have this hanging over him as he knows he won't have to deal with it until March. Just another way to look at it.

Terrible article and an example of failed journalism in this country. Could it stay a story for that whole time...I guess it could be...but with no new developments to happen during that time frame....well anything written would be a waste of time to read.

For the record, I ignored multiple posts from you about me in the past. Grew tired of it. I will put it to you this way......if you think I am so insulting, I will surely stop instantly in replying to anything you say. On the condition that you leave me alone, as well? I s that fair? Is that a deal?

Dude, you responded to a post I made to someone else and called me out so quit playing the victim. You 'attack' other posters and act like an ass, own your mistakes or don't it really doesn't matter. If you hadn't responded to my post calling me out I would have kept on ignoring you because I do not believe you are worth any discussion anymore. I think Baker wrecked you.

Lex............I am waiting? I saw you read the post. What say you? You want me to stop "attacking" you, as you put it? I promise w/all my heart that I will never respond to you again provided you leave me alone as well. You cool w/that, bro?

Yes? Or no? Your choice.

Are you guys really going to be happy inside when the Browns AFC Championship/Super Bowl appearance will be behind a "Probable" Female Abuser???

A couple of things. No one is forcing you to root for the Browns. If you are so disgusted by the Browns signing Watson, there is no shame in you leaving. Go root for another team or no team at all. I would never blame you for either. On the other hand, who the hell are you to tell me who to root for? Just asking.

Yo Lex.........I checked online again and you are still viewing this thread. So......what say you? You want me to stop "attacking" you? I don't think I was attacking you, but I promise I will stop responding to your posts if you agree to do the same. You cool w/that, bro? Or, do you want to continue the fight? Your choice, bro.

This reads like a teen texted another teen
“Sup? Why you keep ghosting me girl? I see your online and your just ignoring my messages saying the same thing over and over again. If you agree to just agree to not ever me make bad again. I’ll do the same. I know your not trying to make me look bad. It just really hurts my feeling when you ignore me. It seems like your happier when I’m not in your life. Are you seeing someone else”.

Leave people alone and quite acting like a child. This is a place for men, and ladies to discuss football. Take this nonsense to pms and quit ruining this board with your feelings.

It sounds like Vers wants to do that. And he is dealing with it like a man. He is confronting the issue and not tossing in comments from somewhere in the back row.

Here is the last paragraph of the above story..it was sandwiched between a couple of ads further down the page..sorry for missing it.


Trading for and signing Watson was a huge risk for the Browns that carried a tremendous downside. It appears they're going to have to deal with the repercussions through at least the 2022 season and possibly longer. The quarterback and the franchise will face endless scrutiny and these issues won't just be swept under the rug. Nor should they be.

The Browns chose this path knowing the issues. This kind of negative attention is fully deserved for all of the parties involved in this mess.
link

vers and pete...speaking to both of you, this article might not be one that fits your opinion and you might very well disagree with what the "author" of the article wrote...BUT, understand this, I post articles, from many sources, to help keep the board informed about what is being said "by the authors".

These articles are not my opinion though sometimes I will give my opinion on the information included within an article. Most of the time I post articles without giving my opinion because I'm not looking to sway anyone's opinion..I'm simply forwarding the news to the board and prefer to let folks make up their own mind.

This article was posted on the web on Tuesday, May 17 and while it may touch on issues that have been discussed in the past, it is not an "old news" article. Those attempting to label the information as nothing but a repost of an earlier article, I would disagree. IMO, Browns fans are concerned about what the franchise did, getting involved in a messy situation that might not end any time soon.

Now, I'm going to give my opinion about this article...this article points out a fact that I have touched on from the beginning of the Watson deal...the sooner Watson and his team of lawyers and advisors get the entire 22 civil cases settled..the better it will be for the Browns and Browns fans.

You are entitled to your opinion, mac. On the other hand, I respect Watson's decision if he is innocent and doesn't wish to settle the matter. It's his name that is on the line. Not mine. Not yours.

Ummmm Good for you????....why so defensive? You posted an article, I gave my thoughts about that article in that it was presumptive, old news, and poor journalism. Would it be nice and better if things were shored up before the season??? sure. But It would also be nice and good if my company gave me a 200K raise. Neither is going to happen...but that doesn't mean it is bad news. In the Browns case, the story is there...but as there will be no new developments, it will be a stale story...And someone that consistently brings it up or continues to harp on this...knowing that there will be no developments, is showing a bias and agenda (not a diligence as one would suggest)...

To quote an OLD Sidney Croft show....No Gnu's is good Gnu's....lol And really that is what this hiatus is...could it be better news...sure...but that doesn't mean it is "bad"...

You know - I don't want to get dragged into this back and forth. At this point it feels like different folks have different opinions and none of them are willing to simply accept that people have different perspectives. Because of the highly emotive topic I guess that's maybe to be expected idk.

What I will point out - is that while it's been established that very few were defending Watson as if he was innocent (we did have a few posts claiming the lack of prosecution by the Grand Jury was a proclamation of innocence which I think has since been put to bed).... I also think overwhelmingly posters have made it clear no-one is pre-determining Watson's guilt. Communication is hard at the best of times - but when posters have what might be a harder line that others, but then spell out that they don't think Watson is guilty until the conclusion of the civil cases and more evidence is provided one way or the other ... you have to take them at their word. just how I see it.

“Back row” sounds like anyone not the 10-15 people that post here anymore. I’ve been here since beginning, and this site is trash because of “front row”’posters that ruin every thread trying to keep defend their honor.

Seriously, the Reddit board has more useful knowledge, and maturity. And that’s saying a lot. Me and so many others barely engage in conversations her anymore. All off topic and basically just scroll through same ol posters doing same ol nonsense.

Love the idea of this board and still read, though a lot less these days. Better options out there. Nice to come back and see it run by the same 10-15 posters. Hey when it’s actually about football, pretty good insight involved. But heaven forbid someone disagrees with someone. O my god. Even worse if your not part of the cool kids. I seen people post and totally get ignored if they have less than 5000 posts.

And the comment of he’s dealing with it like a man? Did you really type that with a straight face?

Go Browns

I think that saying you're no longer a fan of the team because of Watson is pre-determining his guilt.

Well, let's be honest. The story was written to highlight the negative with some over the top vocabulary.

*The Browns knew the downside before they ever jumped on the plane.
*"Asked continually" was already baked in to the decision.
*This isn't necessarily "bad news", some may argue to the contrary.

I’ll break up the fight for a minute with a pop quiz?

Why does a hypothetical professional athlete without significant injury visit 40 different massage therapists in a few years time?

Here are some hints:
(1) all are young, vulnerable women.
(2) 20 have filed sexual lawsuits against him.

My guess is he is an avid supporter of businesses run by females and that he got unlucky 50% of the time in picking women that did not like his professional team, so they are trying to destroy him.

Love to hear others explanations for this hypothetical.

I think a lot has been made of the idea of "guilt" which is not actually relevant. We have "turned on" many players as a fan base without them having to be guilty of anything. I think the QB shirt is a good example. For people that really want to support him they have decided unless he is found guilty in a court of law he must be supported or you are wrong. For others that feel 22 allegations are a great concern they aren't as willing to accept him. Other people have football related concerns.

But even if he does not settle and does not get found guilty I will continue to have concerns about him. His former team had someone to manage his massages due to an issue for a reason. 22 women made allegations against him. If all 22 women are lying he doesn't seem to realize how easily this can all get out of control, in my opinion. To me he is giving off Josh Gordon vibes with the messaging and behaviors, someone that didn't get a good handle on their choices and became a target, right or wrong. One bad choice will cost the team a ton of money and picks with nothing to show for it.

I would disagree.

I think that many have expressed a "taint" associated with this signing and any success we have with him... there's been talk of an asterisk ... talk of being unsure if you can root for the player as we have done for other talented Brown's players. And unless he clears his name I think those labels/badges/insinuations will probably continue because as has been discussed here and elsewhere, no matter the legal rulings, that many massage therapists, that many paid for sexual liaisons is "creepy" if nothing else. Certainly not a role model for your kids and family .... and yes I agree with anyone that wants to suggest that kids need to look elsewhere than pro-sports for heroes and role models, but the concept/idea remains the same.

When the winning starts, when the Browns make a deep play off run ... the majority might not care. And that's ultimately what Haslam and the FO are banking on. But I don't believe that to feel a taint associated with this move is to suggest that fans are saying Watson is 100% guilty or that he doesn't deserve his chance to exonerate himself in the civil trials.

No offense, but all of this was covered, and covered pages and pages of this board. You're a Baker fan that shows up late to fan the flames, I doubt that too many here will engage as we're all pretty burned out with the stuff that was covered the first three days.