Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Casting Couch

Antonio Brown - Out of his Head - Out of the League

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

They should, AT THE VERY LEAST, have placed him on the exempt list while they conduct their own investigation, then made a final decision once either the civil case is resolved or the NFL investigation is concluded. 

I'm a teacher & if I was facing these kinds of accusations, I'd be prevented from working while my school looked into the charges.  Why should NFL players be held to a lesser standard?  Because they have lots of fans, their teams have lots of fans?  That's BS.

But we all know the NFL always handles these things poorly.  There really is no precedent.....they make knee jerk reactions, and then change their minds, or reduce suspensions, or whatever.......the reality is, they'd rather see these guys on the field whether they did it or not, as long as it doesn't hurt the bottom line......they wait for public perception and adjust from there......Ray Rice was on video and there was a HUGE public outcry.....he gone!  But I agree, AB should be inactive until this is sorted out.....but again, it's the NFL and he's a star player, so who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, davearm said:

Because it was degrading and dehumanizing.

exactly and because ABrown loves power

he had the power to get out of Pit, then amazingly enough to get out of OAK and to go get a SB ring ..... I think its a power thing and he was showing he she was nothing

 

until she decided to be strong

 

I'm not saying ABrown raped her or even assaulted her ... I'm saying there is enough evidence/facts being shown that its an accusation that needs looked at and ABrown doesn't need to play until its resolved because of how it looks to the NFL and to the Patriots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, davearm said:

Apparently opinions differ but to me it's as clear as day that she didn't consent.  She wasn't even aware it was happening. 

Both her account of the situation, and his subsequent texts, point to this conclusion (IMO).

Why would he be teasing/taunting her in the texts about the incident if she had consented?  Makes zero sense.

 I read that as in- You’re a slutt, I’ve nutted all over you - you filthy whore”. Essentially sayin she has very little respect for herself and zero credibility. 

Again, I’m certainly not in ABs corner and I hope whoever is guilty of any crime is held accountable. 

I’ll say no more as I have no interest in getting heavily invested in a strangers (AB) problems but those are my thoughts. 

Edited by STEADYMOBBIN 22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bayhawks said:

That is a lot of extreme "what ifs" you're suggesting, but yes, if it takes 2-3 years to play out & the NFL decided to keep him on the exempt list, I'd have no problem with that decision.

If he's cleared, he can take actions against the false accusations at that point.

Let's not argue about him having his chance to make a living taken away; this is a guy who was willing to retire a month ago because he couldn't wear his special helmet.  If a special helmet is important enough to not work, possible sexual assault should be at least as important, no?

The exempt list has nothing to do with the civil litigation.

The exempt list provides the NFL a chance to conduct its own investigation to determine whether Brown violated the league's personal conduct policy.  The timeline on that would be wholly unrelated to, and independent of, the legal proceedings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, davearm said:

The exempt list has nothing to do with the civil litigation.

The exempt list provides the NFL a chance to conduct its own investigation to determine whether Brown violated the league's personal conduct policy.  The timeline on that would be wholly unrelated to, and independent of, the legal proceedings.

I didn't pose the 2-3 year timeline question; it was asked of me.  I was answering the hypothetical question posed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bayhawks said:

I didn't pose the 2-3 year timeline question; it was asked of me.  I was answering the hypothetical question posed.

Fair enough.

Your statement, "if it takes 2-3 years to play out & the NFL decided to keep him on the exempt list" represents a false choice.  That's not a possible outcome here.  The league will not sit around waiting on the resolution of civil litigation.

Just clearing up that misconception, but not attaching it to you. :cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, davearm said:
27 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Why would he be teasing/taunting her in the texts if she hadn't consented? Makes zero sense.

Because it was degrading and dehumanizing.

Okay. But your previous logic seemed to be based solely on Brown's willingness to discuss the topic.

I was pointing out that the same logic could be applied to the opposite position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Okay. But your previous logic seemed to be based solely on Brown's willingness to discuss the topic.

I was pointing out that the same logic could be applied to the opposite position.

How so?

There's no logical reason for his texted taunts if she consented to him ejaculating on her.

There's obvious reason for his texted taunts if that behavior was not consensual.

Edited by davearm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manster said:

So is this turd playing this weekend?

Schefter speculated that word could come as late as Saturday as to his game 2 status. I'm sure there will be reports of whether Brown is is traveling with the team.

Imagine the scene in Miami on Sunday... a hated division opponent in town... public enemy #1 catches a TD pass... immediately goes into the "next great thing" of end zone celebrations while the disgruntled Dolphins fans collectively chant RAAA-PIST RAAA-PIST RAAA-PIST! Should make for great TV. Happy 100 NFL!

Edited by Dizzy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, davearm said:
6 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Okay. But your previous logic seemed to be based solely on Brown's willingness to discuss the topic.

I was pointing out that the same logic could be applied to the opposite position.

How so?

There's no logical reason for his texted taunts if she consented to him ejaculating on her.

There's obvious reason for his texted taunts if that behavior was not consensual.

People tend to be more likely to openly discuss activities which were consensual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dizzy said:

Schefter speculated that word could come as late as Saturday as to his game 2 status. I'm sure there will be reports of whether Brown is is traveling with the team.

Imagine the scene in Miami on Sunday... a hated division opponent in town... public enemy #1 catches a TD pass... immediately goes into the "next great thing" of end zone celebrations while the disgruntled Dolphins fans collectively chant RAAA-PIST RAAA-PIST RAAA-PIST! Should make for great TV. Happy 100 NFL!

ouch

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

People tend to be more likely to openly discuss activities which were consensual.

LOL at characterizing those texts as an open discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, davearm said:

How so?

There's no logical reason for his texted taunts if she consented to him ejaculating on her.

There's obvious reason for his texted taunts if that behavior was not consensual.

Actually, if they were engaged in a consentual relationship and she later tried to extort 1.6 million dollars from him in a defamatory claim an angry response from him referring to their prior intimacy, as in "how could you do this to me after we were together" would be perfectly logical.  

But you have it all figured out so let's just throw due process in the trash can, and have him flogged in public for having been found guilty in the court of public opinion.

Parting shot: "Hi, I'm religious and wholesome, but I like to go to strip clubs with a bunch of dudes, then drive them home, go into their houses at 2am (just to pee), then return home to pray.  I particularly like to do this with dudes who have already crossed relationship boundaries because these dudes are totally believable when they are contrite.  Oh, and the 1.6 million dollars I was trying to get, and the pics of me and AB on social media the whole time, that doesn't damage my credibility at all."

Unbelievable.

 

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, davearm said:
6 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

People tend to be more likely to openly discuss activities which were consensual.

LOL at characterizing those texts as an open discussion.

:rolleyes:

Okay, feel free to remove the word "openly" from my sentence.

People tend to be more likely to discuss activities which were consensual.

Or, to put it another way: if Brown had refused to discuss that particular incident (while agreeing to discuss other activities), then people here would be saying "See! He refuses to address the subject! That's proof of guilt!"

It's flawed logic to assume that something wasn't consensual based solely on a person's willingness to discuss a subject.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SeniorVBDStudent said:

Actually, if they were engaged in a consentual relationship and she later tried to extort 1.6 million dollars from him in a defamatory claim an angry response from him referring to their prior intimacy, as in "how could you do this to me after we were together" would be perfectly logical.  

But you have it all figured out so let's just throw due process in the trash can, and have him flogged in public for having been found guilty in the court of public opinion.

Parting shot: "Hi, I'm religious and wholesome, but I like to go to strip clubs with a bunch of dudes, then drive them home, go into their houses at 2am (just to pee), then return home to pray.  I particularly like to do this with dudes who have already crossed relationship boundaries because these dudes are totally believable when they are contrite.  Oh, and the 1.6 million dollars I was trying to get, and the pics of me and AB on social media the whole time, that doesn't damage my credibility at all."

Unbelievable.

 

Ejaculating on someone without their consent is like spitting in their face, only much worse.  The purpose is to dehumanize and humiliate that person, and assert dominance over them.

Nothing in Brown's subsequent texts indicate he had some other motivation.  In fact they tend to confirm that was his intent.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, davearm said:

Fair enough.

Your statement, "if it takes 2-3 years to play out & the NFL decided to keep him on the exempt list" represents a false choice.  That's not a possible outcome here.  The league will not sit around waiting on the resolution of civil litigation.

Just clearing up that misconception, but not attaching it to you. :cheers:

I know it represents a false choice; it's the one that was presented to me as an argument against the NFL using the exempt list in this situation.  I was merely saying that even if that extreme example was possible, I'd be OK with the NFL doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

People tend to be more likely to openly discuss activities which were consensual.

Unless they are entitled and think that because of their fame, their behavior will be tolerated.  That doesn't sound like AB at all, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

exactly and because ABrown loves power

he had the power to get out of Pit, then amazingly enough to get out of OAK and to go get a SB ring ..... I think its a power thing and he was showing he she was nothing

 

until she decided to be strong

 

I'm not saying ABrown raped her or even assaulted her ... I'm saying there is enough evidence/facts being shown that its an accusation that needs looked at and ABrown doesn't need to play until its resolved because of how it looks to the NFL and to the Patriots.

You can't suspend every NFL player who has been accused of something.  If that were the case, each team would be playing 5 on 5.  If this is the logic, what about Peyton Manning and his situation with a trainer?  Should he have been suspended when that story came out?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bad_Mo said:

You can't suspend every NFL player who has been accused of something.  If that were the case, each team would be playing 5 on 5.  If this is the logic, what about Peyton Manning and his situation with a trainer?  Should he have been suspended when that story came out?

No, you don't suspend every player that has been accused of something.  But you do investigate those accusations if they're deemed credible.

If that investigation reveals a violation of the league's personal conduct policy, then you discipline that player in accordance with the policy's rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rugcleaner said:

Jesus, lock this thread this stopped being football discussion 20 pages ago.

100%. At minimum put it in the politics forum where it can bask in its own toxicity like the rest of those threads. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dondante said:

100%. At minimum put it in the politics forum where it can bask in its own toxicity like the rest of those threads. 

Almost every player thread goes this route when extracurricular activities hit the headlines. Should be split threads in all these cases...

<insert name here> - Football News

<insert name here> - Moral Compass, or Court of Public Opinion, or Legal Experts Only, etc.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I think is great about the moralizing here is that one person will use a part of the case as a negative and then another person will use the same part and see it as a positive.

"he called her a whore, obviously it was rape"

"he called her a whore, obviously it was a consensual relationship for gone bad"

 

PLAY BALL!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dizzy said:

"Taylor’s complaint refers to another football player as present in the house when she claims Brown raped her. This player would be a key witness."

"It’s unclear what the other football player in Brown’s house was doing at this time, or if he heard Taylor’s alleged screams."

"It appears the only other person near the alleged rape was the unnamed football player."

First I heard/saw this other football player mentioned... assume that name will leak out shortly.

Gotta be Big Ben

  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of whose this other player at the strip club...  What are the chances it is Cam Newton?   Cam has been known to visit a club   Cam is also who trained with AB at some point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, [scooter] said:

People tend to be more likely to openly discuss activities which were consensual.

Well, unless you've been in the perp's shoes in this scenario you aren't qualified to make this statement. You look at it in black and white: if he talked openly about it, it was obviously consensual. But you assume rational, logical thought. You aren't accounting for the power and dominance that plays a role in these types of situations. 

It reminds me of when I was on jury duty on a welfare fraud case. The defendant's lawyer was picking the jury based on his argument of: if my client didn't hide that he received welfare benefits, that proves he didn't intentionally defraud the county. Would you agree? 

Just because they flaunt it doesn't prove intent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dizzy said:

Almost every player thread goes this route when extracurricular activities hit the headlines. Should be split threads in all these cases...

<insert name here> - Football News

<insert name here> - Moral Compass, or Court of Public Opinion, or Legal Experts Only, etc.

This is really a great idea.  I don't want to wade through all this discussion to see if there is actual news about his availability on Sunday.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

exactly and because ABrown loves power

he had the power to get out of Pit, then amazingly enough to get out of OAK and to go get a SB ring ..... I think its a power thing and he was showing he she was nothing

 

until she decided to be strong

 

I'm not saying ABrown raped her or even assaulted her ... I'm saying there is enough evidence/facts being shown that its an accusation that needs looked at and ABrown doesn't need to play until its resolved because of how it looks to the NFL and to the Patriots.

I think Antonio's prose is rubbing off on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

NE planning to play AB this weekend (which should surprise no one).

Nope. Not a surprise. As an organization they have no moral compass.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The chance AB gets out of this are pretty slim (& Slim left town). Evidently, she has some aces up her sleeve. Her attorney is well-respected & would never get involved in this circus unless it was a virtual slam dunk.

That said, if I were the Pats, you've already signed AB. It doesn't make sense to backtrack now. Just play dumb, play him until he's exempt/suspended or evidence is revealed that makes cutting him a no-brainer.

In other words, I'd do EXACTLY what the Pats are doing now.

Edited by Football Jones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dizzy said:

Schefter speculated that word could come as late as Saturday as to his game 2 status. I'm sure there will be reports of whether Brown is is traveling with the team.

Imagine the scene in Miami on Sunday... a hated division opponent in town... public enemy #1 catches a TD pass... immediately goes into the "next great thing" of end zone celebrations while the disgruntled Dolphins fans collectively chant RAAA-PIST RAAA-PIST RAAA-PIST! Should make for great TV. Happy 100 NFL!

Now picture that endzone celebration involving his clenched fist moving from his upper thigh to his chest twice before the hand explodes open. That would be totally in character for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Football Jones said:

The chance AB gets out of this are pretty slim (& Slim left town). Evidently, she has some aces up her sleeve. Her attorney is well-respected & would never get involved in this circus unless it was a virtual slam dunk.

That said, if I were the Pats, you've already signed AB. It doesn't make sense to backtrack now. Just play dumb, play him until he's exempt/suspended or evidence is revealed that makes cutting him a no-brainer.

In other words, I'd do EXACTLY what the Pats are doing now.

There has been plenty of stuff from ABs camp the last two days that should have people piping down until this is settled. It looks very questionable and it would be enormously inappropriate to form a position off of what we know, its pretty hard to read the texts, see the videos, hear the personal accounts and come to the conclusion that shes telling the truth, but we also should not assume shes lying.

 

The only opinions ive formed so far are that this woman seems so much less credible than Reeks fiance who turned out to be lying and that this would be a horrible precedent to start placing players on the exempt list with such little information.

Edited by Run It Up
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Grigs Allmoon said:

Nope. Not a surprise. As an organization they have no moral compass.

I hate NE as much as the next guy but come on - at this stage it’s way too early to be that definitive on this.  And it’s hardly a NE-specific phenomenon even if the allegations have merit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Run It Up said:

The only opinions ive form so far are that this woman seems so much less credible than Reeks fiance who turned out to be lying and that this would be a horrible precedent to start placing players on the exempt list with such little information.

They did it with Elliott. It seems that the biggest concern the NFL has here is the upcoming negotiations in collective bargaining about the procedures regarding accusations such as these. They'll likely wait until they have her side and a ruling by those witnessing the extrajudicial hearing, but they have overruled their own administrators/observers as early as the Zeke case, so who knows?

This thread is all baseless speculation other than certain things that can be explained by practicing lawyers. 

Edited by rockaction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, elbowrm said:

I hate NE as much as the next guy but come on - at this stage it’s way too early to be that definitive on this.  And it’s hardly a NE-specific phenomenon even if the allegations have merit.

Honestly, I understand NE not taking action a heck of a lot more than the league not taking action. The commissioner exempt list was created for this exact situation...

Someone quickly develops a really bad stink that puts the perception of the shield at risk... Put him on the exempt list while things shake out. He still gets paid, etc. Let's just wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grigs Allmoon said:

Honestly, I understand NE not taking action a heck of a lot more than the league not taking action. The commissioner exempt list was created for this exact situation...

Someone quickly develops a really bad stink that puts the perception of the shield at risk... Put him on the exempt list while things shake out. He still gets paid, etc. Let's just wait and see.

IF true   Not trying to imply it isn't   Boy they have this meeting early next week and then decide to place the player on the list?  But I dunno all it could take is breaking down if/when she intends to file a report   (Ben had to serve four in a somewhat similar allegation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Grigs Allmoon said:

Someone quickly develops a really bad stink that puts the perception of the shield at risk... Put him on the exempt list while things shake out. He still gets paid, etc. Let's just wait and see.

The problem with that is that by suspending him, the NFL gives authoritative credence to her claims and sets precedent. I'm actually against the personal exempt list for this very reason. It creates an imprimatur of authority that leaves an aura of stink around the player, around the situation. The NFL as an investigative body causes so many conflicts of interest and leaves things that are so undesirable in its wake that giving Goodell that authority was a mess in the first place.  

Bad all around. But if ever there was a reason for the CBA to have this in place (which is the root of the problem), a player like Antonio Brown and the circus that follows him certainly is it.

Edited by rockaction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We search for procedural clear and bright lines in instances like these, and the NFL really has an ad hoc, per-case way of meting out justice that seems ripe for unjust effects depending on one's feelings regarding the matter at hand, and that's not a good thing. 

Edited by rockaction
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, davearm said:

Ejaculating on someone without their consent is like spitting in their face, only much worse.  The purpose is to dehumanize and humiliate that person, and assert dominance over them.

Nothing in Brown's subsequent texts indicate he had some other motivationIn fact they tend to confirm that was his intent.

:sigh:

we keep rehashing the same point.  you keep inferring lack of consent.  you keep inferring what his intentions were.  you keep taking the position that absence of proof of innocence is guilt.  this is judgement.  perhaps your judgement will eventually be shown to be correct.  but why the rush, when there are few facts available, only inferences.  sexual assault is a tragedy.  false claims, money grabs, and rushing to judge others are also tragedies.  lets wait for the truth to come out...or at least some scraps of real facts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dismattle said:

IF true   Not trying to imply it isn't   Boy they have this meeting early next week and then decide to place the player on the list?  But I dunno all it could take is breaking down if/when she intends to file a report   (Ben had to serve four in a somewhat similar allegation)

Roethlisberger had pretty much the same situation happen as AB. A woman served him with a civil suit in 2009 over an incident in 2008 which she deemed as a sexual assault. From what I remember, it was reported to authorities, they investigated, but there was not enough evidence to file charges. The case was settled with a NDA in 2011.

In 2010, Roethlisberger was accused of raping a woman in a bar bathroom. A police report was filed, an investigation was launched, and the local DA ultimately did not find enough evidence to go after Big Ben because he didn't think he could win the case.

While all that went on, the league did not place him on the exempt list and did not suspend him after either incident (not initially). After the police investigation of the second incident was concluded, Goodell suspended Roethlisberger for the first six games of the 2010 season (which was later reduced to four games).

The point being, after the first civil complaint was filed in July of 2009, the league did nothing and Ben played the entire 2009 season. Only after the second incident did they act and both of them involved formal complaints and police investigations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, davearm said:

In the texts contained in the filing, AB twice references ejaculating on her back.  That constitutes assault, provided it was done without her consent (which seems clearly to be the case).

 

No, it doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Roethlisberger had pretty much the same situation happen as AB. A woman served him with a civil suit in 2009 over an incident in 2008 which she deemed as a sexual assault. From what I remember, it was reported to authorities, they investigated, but there was not enough evidence to file charges. The case was settled with a NDA in 2011.

In 2010, Roethlisberger was accused of raping a woman in a bar bathroom. A police report was filed, an investigation was launched, and the local DA ultimately did not find enough evidence to go after Big Ben because he didn't think he could win the case.

While all that went on, the league did not place him on the exempt list and did not suspend him after either incident (not initially). After the police investigation of the second incident was concluded, Goodell suspended Roethlisberger for the first six games of the 2010 season (which was later reduced to four games).

The point being, after the first civil complaint was filed in July of 2009, the league did nothing and Ben played the entire 2009 season. Only after the second incident did they act and both of them involved formal complaints and police investigations.

... so you’re saying I should accept the trade offer I just got for AB? 

Is the Shady McCoy situations from the past any inkling in how the league will react? 

There wasnt any rape or sexual misconduct involved ... but there was a cop beat down, and then a strange break in with a bludgeoned girlfriend pressing charges.

no commish exemption 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fox reporting AB incident in PIT not being investigated by authorities. CBS reporting AB likely to play this week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Anarchy99  One small deviation aside from one case involving separate woman on two different occasions could involve the NFL's view on changes (Survivors rights)

The term "sexual assault" means any nonconsensual sexual act prohibited by federal, state, or tribal law, including when a victim lacks capacity to consent.   

Believe that pretty much makes it somewhat open and shut... A woman is at a club has a few drinks which are followed by sexual relations. The law of the land which the NFL may want to consider as somewhat important dictates that punishment should ensue in some form  (NFL certainly seems to have embraced punishment for physical abuse)

(Basically, the drinks makes it somewhat similar)  However, it does appear that the NFL does not seem to care that the incident involved alcohol   Maybe it is a 6-week suspension at a later date?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ray Barboni said:

... so you’re saying I should accept the trade offer I just got for AB? 

Is the Shady McCoy situations from the past any inkling in how the league will react? 

There wasnt any rape or sexual misconduct involved ... but there was a cop beat down, and then a strange break in with a bludgeoned girlfriend pressing charges.

no commish exemption 

I mentioned that like 20 pages back. People said apples and oranges. McCoy was in another state and denied any involvement. In Brown's case, he admitted to hooking up with her and in his mind had a relationship. So he can't argue he didn't do it because he was hundreds of miles away.

Another key difference is plenty of media sites are pretty much demanding that the league put him on the exempt list. That doesn't mean the league will, but if the league is all about protecting the shield, they could cave based on peer pressure.

A bunch of people are also thinking NE "will do the right thing" and either bench or release AB. IMO, that ship sailed days ago. If they didn't cut him as soon as the news broke, they were all in on keeping and playing him. The statement they posted pretty much outlined that . . . the league will be conducting an investigation and we will not discuss the matter. Translation: the ball is in the league's hand, we are proceeding all systems go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

I mentioned that like 20 pages back. People said apples and oranges. McCoy was in another state and denied any involvement. In Brown's case, he admitted to hooking up with her and in his mind had a relationship. So he can't argue he didn't do it because he was hundreds of miles away.

Another key difference is plenty of media sites are pretty much demanding that the league put him on the exempt list. That doesn't mean the league will, but if the league is all about protecting the shield, they could cave based on peer pressure.

A bunch of people are also thinking NE "will do the right thing" and either bench or release AB. IMO, that ship sailed days ago. If they didn't cut him as soon as the news broke, they were all in on keeping and playing him. The statement they posted pretty much outlined that . . . the league will be conducting an investigation and we will not discuss the matter. Translation: the ball is in the league's hand, we are proceeding all systems go.

......soooooo?

 

lol. As someone that seems to be much more informed on everything than I am, probably more than the casual FF player.

could you give your prediction on the AB outlook this season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ray Barboni said:

......soooooo?

 

lol. As someone that seems to be much more informed on everything than I am, probably more than the casual FF player.

could you give your prediction on the AB outlook this season?

Depends what the trade offer is. Post specifics and I can give you an opinion (others probably will as well).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grigs Allmoon said:

Nope. Not a surprise. As an organization they have no moral compass.

That's unfair.  When Hernandez did what he did, these boards were all about "what's going on?" And "let's see what happens" and the Patriots straight up released him in like a few hours.  

The Patriots don't lack a moral compass. They don't over react and create uneccessary drama. They play the hand that's available to them.  They are always under such a public eye that every little thing gets talked about all the time but there are players and owners out there not living a pristine and untarnished life.  

People just love to hate them because of their success but I seriously doubt they are any more worse than other teams.  Geez, Gregg Williams put bounties out on people and we get to see him still hanging around.  That's a real, proven offense.  I'm sure if the due process shows Brown is at fault the Patriots will kick him to the curb in a minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Depends what the trade offer is. Post specifics and I can give you an opinion (others probably will as well).

Curtis Samuel(3yr deal)  2020 1st for  

 

AB (2yr) 2020 3rd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.