Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Biabreakable

Dynasty Kareem Hunt Cleveland Browns

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Gally said:

Being suspended for 1 yr only and being able to return after that is plenty incentive to successfully participate in a rehab program.   I am not sure why you think a year suspension warrants giving up and not doing what it takes to get back on the field. 

 

Returning after one year if you rehab and meet whatever counseling etc requirements are needed to meet the terms of the suspension so you can get back after that year seems like a second chance to me. 

 

Because this is his first offense with violence against a woman that anyone knows about, because there are alleged mitigating curcumstances regarding that violence that the tape supports in his actions, that the violence - while repugnant and worthy of significant punishment, which I have supported from the beginning - could have been much more egregious given the opportunity he had to inflict it, and because he has already lost 5 games with pay and the remainder of his contract terminated because of it, and because by all accounts he has shown great remorse and is modifying his behavior through his efforts in meaningful therapy for his issue.

If you’re just going to apply the stick and not give out any carrot when circumstances might warrant it, then the effect of the discipline and desire to rehabilitate is going to be diminished, possibly significantly.  Use him as a shining example that a young guy can change his life and those of others by changing himself, that the league will recognize a guy who is willing to do whatever it takes to make himself a better person, and it will likely engender more positive outcomes in the future.  Look, we got you for tuning up that girl, but we see how hard you’ve worked to be a better man and we’ll relent on half that sentence and include time served already - but understand that if you regress and it happens again you not only get the full weight of punishment a second offender gets but also the time you recovered from the first added on to that too. 

It seems resasonable to me.  Maybe not to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Bronco Billy said:

 

Because this is his first offense with violence against a woman that anyone knows about, because there are alleged mitigating curcumstances regarding that violence that the tape supports in his actions, that the violence - while repugnant and worthy of significant punishment, which I have supported from the beginning - could have been much more egregious given the opportunity he had to inflict it, and because he has already lost 5 games with pay and the remainder of his contract terminated because of it, and because by all accounts he has shown great remorse and is modifying his behavior through his efforts in meaningful therapy for his issue.

If you’re just going to apply the stick and not give out any carrot when circumstances might warrant it, then the effect of the discipline and desire to rehabilitate is going to be diminished, possibly significantly.  Use him as a shining example that a young guy can change his life and those of others by changing himself, that the league will recognize a guy who is willing to do whatever it takes to make himself a better person, and it will likely engender more positive outcomes in the future.  Look, we got you for tuning up that girl, but we see how hard you’ve worked to be a better man and we’ll relent on half that sentence and include time served already - but understand that if you regress and it happens again you not only get the full weight of punishment a second offender gets but also the time you recovered from the first added on to that too. 

It seems resasonable to me.  Maybe not to you.

There are two things at play here and although connected are still separate in many regards. 

 

The KC organization decided that they didn't want to be associated with a person that completed the actions that Hunt did.  This could include the event itself, the previous warnings, the possible lies he told the organization upon initial notice of an incident, etc.  He may have been told they had zero tolerance moving forward and if anybody did anything of this nature their contract would be terminated (yes, I understand the hypocrisy of KC and Tyreek Hill in that statement which is why I said moving forward).  We do not know what the organization said to the players about such conduct.  Because of all that his contract was terminated. 

 

Now the NFL has the right to be able to enforce punishment for breaking league rules that are separate from the organization.  In addition, any other organization (such as the Browns) can sign Hunt to a contract of their own.  He is not prevented from doing exactly what he did in signing with another team.  However, the NFL still can institute punishment based on their protocol once he is under the league umbrella (signing with the Browns puts him under their jurisdiction).  Could the NFL say that getting his contract voided is punishment enough for a first time offender that is taking it on himself to go to counseling etc?  Sure, but they are under no obligation to do so.  They have received  a lot of backlash for the way they have handled things in the past so it makes sense they want to try and be consistent with similar actions (DV for instance) regardless how individual franchises handle  these situations. 

 

I have no problem with the NFL still instituting a harsh penalty for something that Hunt did and then allowing him to continue his career.  I have no issue with the NFL instituting a common suspension for certain infractions that shouldn't be affected by any additional punishment each individual franchise wants to dole out.  Each entity should be able to run their business as they want to as long as it is clear to the players how it will be done.  I don't think any of this is unreasonable. 

 

It's a fine line trying to have a harsh enough penalty to be a deterrent for the action taking place at all and giving a second chance for someone making a mistake that they regret.  If the player truly regrets their actions then any hoops the NFL or Franchise institutes to allow the player to return should be followed.  Reducing the standard penalties because the player finally decided to get the help they needed after they got caught (instead of before doing something bad) isn't necessary to me.  It's the price they have to pay for doing bad things.   The "carrot" that is being dangled is being able to play a game for huge amounts of money for your profession.  Asking someone to not beat up a girl to be able to do this, and make sure you don't do it again seems like a very good "carrot" to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tired of reading ....beat up a girl....in all this. The guy did not beat up a girl, he shoved her because she refused to leave, then he kicked at her. He didn;t....beat her up....at all.

YES....he shouldn't have gone that route, yes he did wrong and deserves to be punished.  But when it comes to abuse that video would never be used as a good example. it was weak.

Now the Browns have a stud RB and the Chiefs are weaker,  they should have suspended him.  Being cool with the Tyreek Hill situation then pulling this....OH NO...hmm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MAC_32 said:

WAT

The incredulous responses to a obviously known fact is obnoxious. How about you show me what is wrong with my statement and further the conversation?

Every team has to spend 90% of their cap space every year. So giving players front loaded contacts (overspending on them in one season).

Its not like I said the Browns haven't made good moves in the process of doing that, but yes they had to spend the money somehow.

Anyhow the idea that the Browns are spending more money on the RB position than other teams because of the Duke Johnson and Carlos Hyde contracts is not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Biabreakable said:

Anyhow the idea that the Browns are spending more money on the RB position than other teams because of the Duke Johnson and Carlos Hyde contracts is not the case.

I don't think anyone said that.  I just said that they've invested a lot of assets in the position recently.  Two fairly hefty contracts (for RBs), a premium draft pick, and now a big PR hit that most teams weren't willing to take all in just the last 12 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, abbottjamesr said:

I think its a decent possibility that Hunt never plays another down in the NFL.  Ray Rice was black balled as soon as the video surfaced of him hitting a woman.  Not sure how this is any different.  

If he does get to play for the Browns, maybe he can hold Chubb's water bottle for him and spell him for a play or two a game.  

Ray Rice was blackballed for being washed up, period. No doubt in my mind he would have been back in the NFL if he had a lot more tread on those tires.

Share this post


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

Ray Rice was blackballed for being washed up, period. No doubt in my mind he would have been back in the NFL if he had a lot more tread on those tires.

Not to mention his violent act was a million times worse than Hunt's.

Share this post


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

Not to mention his violent act was a million times worse than Hunt's.

This is very true.  They are different degrees of violence for sure.

Ray Rice could have killed his girlfriend with that hit. 

What Hunt did was totally unacceptable, but it was not something with high chances of causing a serious injury. 

We don't know much about the other incidents yet, though. 

Share this post


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

Being cool with the Tyreek Hill situation then pulling this....OH NO...hmm?

There seems to be some unwritten rule that you're allowed one guy with a high profile background of violence against women per team. If you have 1, you believe in 2nd chances. If another comes to light after you already have 1, you have to react in a horrified manner and remove the player (even though there is no doubt the chiefs knew what was on the video prior to it being released).

Then a team with no high profile woman beaters gets to fill their "2nd chance" role on the cheap. 

Once again, the NFL is full of poop and hypocrisy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jtd13 said:

There seems to be some unwritten rule that you're allowed one guy with a high profile background of violence against women per team. If you have 1, you believe in 2nd chances. If another comes to light after you already have 1, you have to react in a horrified manner and remove the player (even though there is no doubt the chiefs knew what was on the video prior to it being released).

Then a team with no high profile woman beaters gets to fill their "2nd chance" role on the cheap. 

Once again, the NFL is full of poop and hypocrisy.

I think it's the PR affect videos have. 

If there is a video it's hard to spin it away.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jtd13 said:

There seems to be some unwritten rule that you're allowed one guy with a high profile background of violence against women per team. If you have 1, you believe in 2nd chances. If another comes to light after you already have 1, you have to react in a horrified manner and remove the player (even though there is no doubt the chiefs knew what was on the video prior to it being released).

Then a team with no high profile woman beaters gets to fill their "2nd chance" role on the cheap. 

Once again, the NFL is full of poop and hypocrisy.

There is no way Hunt is a....woman beater.  Hell, me and my three older sisters have gone FAR further than that nothing skuffle.  I adore my sisters.

I get what you are saying however.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Biabreakable said:

The incredulous responses to a obviously known fact is obnoxious. How about you show me what is wrong with my statement and further the conversation?

Every team has to spend 90% of their cap space every year. So giving players front loaded contacts (overspending on them in one season).

Its not like I said the Browns haven't made good moves in the process of doing that, but yes they had to spend the money somehow.

Anyhow the idea that the Browns are spending more money on the RB position than other teams because of the Duke Johnson and Carlos Hyde contracts is not the case.

They're not facts.  They're bad assumptions.  Below are the facts:

QB - Mayfield (draft), Taylor (trade), Stanton ($4.15 mil gtd)

RB - Chubb (draft), Duke (draft), and Hunt (scrap heap)

WR - Landry (trade + extend), Higgins (draft), Callaway (draft), Ratley (draft), Perriman (scrap heap)

TE - Njoku (draft), Fells ($4.65 mil gtd)

OT - Hubbard (9 mil gtd), Robinson (scrap heap), Harrison (udfa)

OG - Zeitler ($23 mil gtd), Bitonio (draft), Corbett (draft)

C - Tretter (6.5 mil gtd)

DE - Garrett (draft), Ogbah (draft), Smith ($4.5 mil gtd), Thomas, (draft), Zetter (scrap heap)

DT - Ogunjobi (draft), Coley (udfa)

LB - Schobert (draft), Kirksey (draft), Collins (trade + extend), Avery (draft)

CB - Ward (draft), Carrie ($10 mil gtd), Mitchell ($3.5 mil gtd), Gaines ($1.4 mil gtd)

S - Randall (trade), Peppers (draft), Kindred (draft), BBC (scrap heap)

---

2016 money > $3 mil (just picked a reasonable #) - Tramon Williams + Demario Davis (they fit your criteria but I'd argue they weren't overpay's - they were positive contributors at positions void of a starter), RG3 (he doesn't fit because Hue), McCown (was already here)

2017 - Brock (but actually Chubb), Haden (already here), Britt (facepalm) - but would have been used to extend Pryor if he weren't an idiot

2018 - nobody

---

So in 4 years you can easily point to one player that fits your criteria - Britt - and he wasn't even what the team wanted to.  Flimsily point to two - because Brock wasn't about Brock, it was about what turned into Chubb.  And...really can't make a strong argument for anyone else.

The facts are this team was ripped down to the studs and was rebuilt via acquiring draft capital, taking shots on cheap young talent, and (for the most part) unproven but young(ish) free agents who would accept modest contracts the team could get out of easily.  The team was either 1st or 2nd in cap space in each of the last 3 years.  The only free agents that received > $10 mil gtd were Zeitler, Brock, and Britt.  And if you wiggle to $10.5 then it's only Zeitler and Brock.  And again, Brock wasn't brought here to QB - he was brought here to acquire a pick for when this team would be good.  And he wasn't a free agent anyway.  All of this is why this team has so much cap space now along with extra draft picks (again), despite already having a capable starting lineup.

---

tl;dr - WAT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, ZenoRazon said:

There is no way Hunt is a....woman beater.  Hell, me and my three older sisters have gone FAR further than that nothing skuffle.  I adore my sisters.

I get what you are saying however.

 

I was speaking more from a perception standpoint. But I wouldn't say there's no way. Maybe the video doesn't automatically make him a woman beater, but his conduct was not a reasonable and normal reaction. Most people don't get so angry as to physically impose themselves on someone much smaller and weaker than them.

I grew up with 8 sisters. Interactions with older sisters don't have the same rules as interactions with the rest of society 😂

But anyway, my main point is that teams probably don't ask "how bad is this incident vs. that guy's incident that we already have on the team?" I think it's more to do with how many black eyes they can take. Chiefs already made their choice with Tyreek, so even though his action was much worse, they had to appear like they gave a crap about violence against women when the Hunt stuff became public. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 12:13 PM, CalBear said:

He will get claimed. The team claiming him will say "we're very concerned about the incident and will have a deep conversation with Hunt about our expectations for his behavior and what punishment is appropriate." Or some BS like that. Code for "he's a good cheap player and as long as no other video shows up we're good."

Actual text:

Quote

We fully understand and respect the complexity of questions and issues in signing a player with Kareem’s history and do not condone his actions. Given what we know about Kareem through our extensive research, we believe he deserves a second chance but certainly with the understanding that he has to go through critical and essential steps to become a performing member of this organization, aside from what the NFL determines from their ongoing investigation. We fully understand that Kareem is subject to discipline by the NFL. Here at the Browns, there is a detailed plan with expectations laid out that he understands and must follow, because any similar incident will not be tolerated. We will support Kareem through this process and utilize our resources, however permitted, to help him become successful on and off the field as long as he continues to show the commitment necessary to represent this organization.

I shoulda been in PR. It still means "he's a good cheap player so we're signing him as long as he can keep his nose clean."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Casting Couch said:

RBBC Hunt / Chubb

50/50 share ?

No.

80/20 Chubb/Duke, unless another back is brought in and Duke is shipped out.

Re-assess based on performance if Hunt gets near the end of his suspension without another issue.  If it's going well then Hunt's not just going to be handed a big piece of pie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Casting Couch said:

RBBC Hunt / Chubb

50/50 share ?

For both games that they're both on the field at the same time?  Probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CalBear said:

I shoulda been in PR. It still means "he's a good cheap player so we're signing him as long as he can keep his nose clean."

The 10th Circle of Hell is reserved for people who work in PR.

(For those counting at home, the 8th Circle is telemarketers and the 9th Circle is lobbyists.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything preventing the Browns from trading him?

Wait for the suspension, maybe reinstated prior to trade deadline... jackpot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, MAC_32 said:

They're not facts.  They're bad assumptions.  Below are the facts:

QB - Mayfield (draft), Taylor (trade), Stanton ($4.15 mil gtd)

RB - Chubb (draft), Duke (draft), and Hunt (scrap heap)

WR - Landry (trade + extend), Higgins (draft), Callaway (draft), Ratley (draft), Perriman (scrap heap)

TE - Njoku (draft), Fells ($4.65 mil gtd)

OT - Hubbard (9 mil gtd), Robinson (scrap heap), Harrison (udfa)

OG - Zeitler ($23 mil gtd), Bitonio (draft), Corbett (draft)

C - Tretter (6.5 mil gtd)

DE - Garrett (draft), Ogbah (draft), Smith ($4.5 mil gtd), Thomas, (draft), Zetter (scrap heap)

DT - Ogunjobi (draft), Coley (udfa)

LB - Schobert (draft), Kirksey (draft), Collins (trade + extend), Avery (draft)

CB - Ward (draft), Carrie ($10 mil gtd), Mitchell ($3.5 mil gtd), Gaines ($1.4 mil gtd)

S - Randall (trade), Peppers (draft), Kindred (draft), BBC (scrap heap)

---

2016 money > $3 mil (just picked a reasonable #) - Tramon Williams + Demario Davis (they fit your criteria but I'd argue they weren't overpay's - they were positive contributors at positions void of a starter), RG3 (he doesn't fit because Hue), McCown (was already here)

2017 - Brock (but actually Chubb), Haden (already here), Britt (facepalm) - but would have been used to extend Pryor if he weren't an idiot

2018 - nobody

---

So in 4 years you can easily point to one player that fits your criteria - Britt - and he wasn't even what the team wanted to.  Flimsily point to two - because Brock wasn't about Brock, it was about what turned into Chubb.  And...really can't make a strong argument for anyone else.

The facts are this team was ripped down to the studs and was rebuilt via acquiring draft capital, taking shots on cheap young talent, and (for the most part) unproven but young(ish) free agents who would accept modest contracts the team could get out of easily.  The team was either 1st or 2nd in cap space in each of the last 3 years.  The only free agents that received > $10 mil gtd were Zeitler, Brock, and Britt.  And if you wiggle to $10.5 then it's only Zeitler and Brock.  And again, Brock wasn't brought here to QB - he was brought here to acquire a pick for when this team would be good.  And he wasn't a free agent anyway.  All of this is why this team has so much cap space now along with extra draft picks (again), despite already having a capable starting lineup.

---

tl;dr - WAT

Yeah you are missing the point.

Obviously rookie contracts are inexpensive and the Browns have a lot of cap space, more cap space than they are allowed to have without being penalized. They have to spend the money some where.

Your list of players is incomplete and does not include the player that was being talked about Carlos Hyde. Obviously there are others such as Jamie Collins and Tyrod Taylor as highly paid players by the Browns recently.

As far as overspending in free agency, every team does that, it is just the economics of the NFL with a yearly rising salary cap. 

I never was trying to say that the Browns have overspent or anything, just that them signing Carlos Hyde and Duke Johnson to decently sized contracts for a RB was part of filling that gap in the salary cap which is what they did.

Share this post


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

Yeah you are missing the point.

Obviously rookie contracts are inexpensive and the Browns have a lot of cap space, more cap space than they are allowed to have without being penalized. They have to spend the money some where.

Your list of players is incomplete and does not include the player that was being talked about Carlos Hyde. Obviously there are others such as Jamie Collins and Tyrod Taylor as highly paid players by the Browns recently.

As far as overspending in free agency, every team does that, it is just the economics of the NFL with a yearly rising salary cap. 

I never was trying to say that the Browns have overspent or anything, just that them signing Carlos Hyde and Duke Johnson to decently sized contracts for a RB was part of filling that gap in the salary cap which is what they did.

Because he wasn't paid much money.  I only accounted for free agents that commanded meaningful money.  And there's a good argument that some of those cited didn't actually command meaningful money.  This team's been intentionally not paying free agents to maximize spending ability once competitive.  And now we're there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

Because he wasn't paid much money.  I only accounted for free agents that commanded meaningful money.  And there's a good argument that some of those cited didn't actually command meaningful money.  This team's been intentionally not paying free agents to maximize spending ability once competitive.  And now we're there.

Tons of cash for the Browns to spend this year.

I am surprised there are teams such as the Colts who have even more cap space right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

NFL suspended Browns RB Kareem Hunt eight games for violating the league's personal-conduct policy.

Hunt's ban was expected to be for at least six games, so this falls in line with that. The Browns shouldn't be surprised here. For the first half of the season, Nick Chubb will be Cleveland's workhorse. Hunt will not appeal the ban after being caught on video beating up a woman at a hotel. The Browns will welcome Hunt back with open arms as long as he doesn't have anymore slip-ups. NFL teams will always bet on talent no matter how harsh the crime committed.

Mar 15, 2019, 8:05 AM

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Faust said:

@Biabreakable - time for an edit to the thread title 

You got it.

Nothing fancy or funny here as Hunts recent history not a joking matter to me.

He seems to be saying all the right things.

  • Like 1

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.