seahawk 17
Footballguy
My buddy and his wife have season tickets. She swore to him if the Browns signed Watson, she would never go to a game again. Now she is excited that they may go to a SB in the next three years.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
QB Deshaun Watson, CLE (7 Viewers)
- Thread starter Faust
- Start date
GregR
Footballguy
It wouldn't surprise me if there are some in league ownership/front offices who wouldn't mind seeing the Browns suffer because they may have drastically impacted the contract landscape. Five fully guaranteed years isn't something QBs were getting before. Now it's going to be what all the top ones are looking for.
I'll step up on my soap box and say that guaranteed contracts, especially long ones, are horrible things for sports and for fans. If a player is no longer playing at the level of the contract, he's getting paid money that other players are more deserving of having been paid. Did Jamarcus Russell's performance warrant the money he got paid? Or were there other players who were more deserving who didn't get more because it went to him thanks to his guarantees?
If we want a merit based system, we are better focusing on two things. Having salary floors that require the money be spent on a player. So releasing them doesn't save the team, they still have to spend it on another player. And having a solid system of handling injury payments so being injured and a career ending doesn't leave the player high and dry due to non-guarantees. The NFL already has a system but I don't know that it's adequate. Further expanding the existing merit-based increases the league gives out (I forget the name off hand) would also be a good move.
The current signing bonus system the NFL has is far superior to the NBA or MLB in terms of the potential of getting money to the players who most deserve it. Though the NFL needs more work on the salary floor in particular. With the NFL bonus structure, team and player can having a meeting of the minds on guarantees vs total amount. If the guarantee is more important to the player he can get it, but with the team being less willing to pay the same total as he'd get if he leaves some of the money requiring him to perform at that level to get it.
Slightly different topic... nothing at all saying this will happen. But if the NFL/ownership really did want to punish Watson and/or the Browns, they'd put Watson on the Commish Exempt list until his lawsuits are settled, which might not be until after the season, and then hit him with the suspension next year. Again, won't happen, but it would hit Watson with his next year salary, and hit the Browns with making him unavailable.
Last edited by a moderator:
-OZ-
Footballguy
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Not quite out of the woods criminally speaking just yet. Wow.
If the Browns/NFL knew about this, then this whole thing just got really, really seedy in a hurry.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Great they knew about it. Doesnt mean it's going to go the same way.
Ugh
Ugh
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
No, but it does mean that there's legitimate potential that the Browns just handed a criminal sex offender guaranteed 230 million dollars, and the NFL let them do it.
I was big on the "well whether it was a full-throated effort by the DA or not, a GJ acquitted him, so what can they do?"
This changes a lot about that mind-set. The NFL absolutely should have waited until the 2nd GJ acquitted before allowing anything to move forward, as they claimed they were doing all along.
[Ulrich] Amid his ongoing legal trouble, Deshaun Watson passed his physical with the Browns today, per source
https://twitter.com/bynateulrich/status/1507039971844231173?s=21
https://twitter.com/bynateulrich/status/1507039971844231173?s=21
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
Texas state law requires a prosecutor to either file misdemeanor or felony charges, if they file felony charges a grand jury, Texas state law requires a grand jury.
A grand jury does not decide a criminal case, a grand jury only decides if the evidence would stand up in a court of law. The defendant has no say and is not present at a grand jury trial, it is highly stacked in favor of the prosecutor.
The threshold they are trying to prove is beyond a reasonable doubt. If they fail to reach that threshold the prosecutor will decide they won't go to trial. People are protected from double-jeopardy since prosecutors cannot go back to file misdemeanor charges and cannot continue to file charges for the same crime.
According to the report, no new charges have been filed. A grand jury cannot be called unless a prosecutor files felony charges.
Texas state law is different from federal law so there was always a 'threat' that a federal prosecutor could take the evidence gathered and call for another grand jury, it hasn't and likely won't happen because the first grand jury found all sorts of inaccuracies in testimony that would not pass the threshold of reasonable doubt.
Texas law is different from Colorado where I served on a grand jury for one year, so I know the responsibilities of a grand jury. I highly doubt that a prosecutor would attempt another grand jury trial, no new charges have been filed, this isn't even close to being normal and sounds like grandstanding. The legal case is basically over.
I don't even know how a prosecutor could file charges. I honestly don't so if someone from Texas with a legal background can provide information it would be greatly appreciated.
The civil cases are the issue hanging over Watson.
GregR
Footballguy
It seems pretty straight forward. The previous grand jury was a Harris County grand jury which dealt with the criminal complaints that had taken place in Harris County.
One of the criminal complaints took place in a different county, and that county's DA is now sending it to their grand jury.
It's not double jeopardy, it's a different case in a different jurisdiction than the ones previous handled.
One of the criminal complaints took place in a different county, and that county's DA is now sending it to their grand jury.
It's not double jeopardy, it's a different case in a different jurisdiction than the ones previous handled.
Last edited by a moderator:
Soulfly3
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Yes, I'm aware of this. I was not aware that there was a 2nd GJ convened. And this 2nd GJ could do what the 1st did not: indict, resulting in a trial, where criminal charges could still be levied against Mr Watson.
No new charges need to be filed for this to happen, so I'm not sure what your point is there.
The fact is that it was widely believed, and widely reported that Watson was out of the woods criminally, and he only faced civil suits. That has proved to not be the case. He is still in legal jeopardy, pending the findings/recommendation of this 2nd GJ.
That is why this is problematic, but I thank you for your 2000 word dissertation nonetheless.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Exactly. And that county's DA may have more will to pursue a criminal charge, and thus be more forthcoming with what is presented to this 2nd GJ.
And the outcome could be vastly different as a result.
As I don't know any of the details (no one does) we don't know what the outcome will be. But suffice to say, Watson could still be going to court to face criminal charges as a direct result.
Whether that happens or not will come out on Friday.
Last edited by a moderator:
GregR
Footballguy
Nothing I've seen linked to indicates the information came from Buzbee. The most that it has is the investigative team having reached out to both Hardin and Buzbee for comments.
Link to show why you're saying it was Buzbee?
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
Grand juries are not convened for misdemeanors. According to the report the prosecutor is investigating an indecent assault charge which is a misdemeanor which is easier to convict but grand juries are not convened for misdemeanors.
The timing of this 'story' breaking is um, quite interesting, isn't it? This prosecutor sits on this for one full year, but the minute Watson is introduced to his new team he goes to the press. Hmmmmn gets a lot of free press for a misdemeanor, lots of exposure.
I'm sure it's just a coincidence and not a classic case of grandstanding. Its not like he'd file a misdemeanor at any point in time over the past year and not sit on it waiting for the most opportune time to get free pub.
Terpman22
Footballguy
This is America baby. Selling yourself/being successful/chasing cash no matter the principles or lack thereof >>>>>most other things
SHIZNITTTT
Footballguy
GregR
Footballguy
Possibility of Commissioner exempt list still looms for Deshaun Watson
Many assume that Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson eventually will be suspended for the civil and criminal allegations that have been made against him. The number — 22 civil complaints and two additional criminal complaints who did not sue Watson — is large enough to be troubling on its face. Whatever the critical mass of complaints that will naturally cause concern, 24 is on the wrong side of it.
The league knows this. Some have concluded that the failure of the league to take action against Watson means that the league won’t, at least not until the 22 civil cases are resolved. That’s possibly a misreading of the situation.
The league hasn’t placed Watson on the Commissioner exempt list (a fancy label for paid leave) because it hasn’t had to. He didn’t try to play for the Texans in 2021. He wasn’t traded to a new team that would have tried to put him on the field. Now with the Browns, he won’t play until August at the earliest.
The league has made the Personal Conduct Policy more than broad enough to permit paid leave, even in the absence of criminal charges. “When an investigation leads the Commissioner to believe that a player may have violated this Policy by committing any of the conduct identified above,” the Policy explains, “he may act where the circumstances and evidence warrant doing so. This decision will not reflect a finding of guilt or innocence and will not be guided by the same legal standards and considerations that would apply in a criminal trial.”
The key words are “may have violated.” With 24 people accusing Watson of sexual misconduct during massage therapy sessions and Watson’s lawyer admitting that some massage therapy sessions did indeed become voluntary sexual encounters, there’s enough for the Commissioner to conclude that Watson “may have violated” the Personal Conduct Policy.
Remember, Ben Roethlisberger was suspended six games (reduced to four) in 2010 for two sexual misconduct allegations, neither of which resulted in criminal charges. In 2017, Ezekiel Elliott was suspended six games for domestic violence allegations that ended in neither criminal nor civil claims. The league can, and will, do whatever it chooses — and the decisions quite often will be driven not by notions of fairness and justice but by balancing the P.R. consequences of taking action and not taking action.
On Monday, I suggested that the league should tell Watson that he can either settle the cases and take an unpaid suspension to start the season or keep fighting the cases and be placed on paid leave until they are resolved. I now believe the league won’t do that. The league won’t do that because the league doesn’t do that. It doesn’t telegraph its plans or tip its hand.
The league has learned to keep its head low and its mouth shut in these matters, or as long as it can. The league will act when the time comes to act. And I’m currently confident that, if 22 civil cases remain pending against Watson when it’s time to play games, Watson won’t be playing in those games.
The league won’t tell Watson or the Browns that. The league will expect Watson and the Browns to figure it out on their own. And the league will shed no tears and make no apologies if/when they decide to place Watson on paid leave, if Watson fails to get the cases settled before football season rolls around.
Many assume that Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson eventually will be suspended for the civil and criminal allegations that have been made against him. The number — 22 civil complaints and two additional criminal complaints who did not sue Watson — is large enough to be troubling on its face. Whatever the critical mass of complaints that will naturally cause concern, 24 is on the wrong side of it.
The league knows this. Some have concluded that the failure of the league to take action against Watson means that the league won’t, at least not until the 22 civil cases are resolved. That’s possibly a misreading of the situation.
The league hasn’t placed Watson on the Commissioner exempt list (a fancy label for paid leave) because it hasn’t had to. He didn’t try to play for the Texans in 2021. He wasn’t traded to a new team that would have tried to put him on the field. Now with the Browns, he won’t play until August at the earliest.
The league has made the Personal Conduct Policy more than broad enough to permit paid leave, even in the absence of criminal charges. “When an investigation leads the Commissioner to believe that a player may have violated this Policy by committing any of the conduct identified above,” the Policy explains, “he may act where the circumstances and evidence warrant doing so. This decision will not reflect a finding of guilt or innocence and will not be guided by the same legal standards and considerations that would apply in a criminal trial.”
The key words are “may have violated.” With 24 people accusing Watson of sexual misconduct during massage therapy sessions and Watson’s lawyer admitting that some massage therapy sessions did indeed become voluntary sexual encounters, there’s enough for the Commissioner to conclude that Watson “may have violated” the Personal Conduct Policy.
Remember, Ben Roethlisberger was suspended six games (reduced to four) in 2010 for two sexual misconduct allegations, neither of which resulted in criminal charges. In 2017, Ezekiel Elliott was suspended six games for domestic violence allegations that ended in neither criminal nor civil claims. The league can, and will, do whatever it chooses — and the decisions quite often will be driven not by notions of fairness and justice but by balancing the P.R. consequences of taking action and not taking action.
On Monday, I suggested that the league should tell Watson that he can either settle the cases and take an unpaid suspension to start the season or keep fighting the cases and be placed on paid leave until they are resolved. I now believe the league won’t do that. The league won’t do that because the league doesn’t do that. It doesn’t telegraph its plans or tip its hand.
The league has learned to keep its head low and its mouth shut in these matters, or as long as it can. The league will act when the time comes to act. And I’m currently confident that, if 22 civil cases remain pending against Watson when it’s time to play games, Watson won’t be playing in those games.
The league won’t tell Watson or the Browns that. The league will expect Watson and the Browns to figure it out on their own. And the league will shed no tears and make no apologies if/when they decide to place Watson on paid leave, if Watson fails to get the cases settled before football season rolls around.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
i never said they were. Where is this even coming from?
Sexual assault is a felony. Obviously. This is the same case. Different county.
If he’s indicted, this could go south in a hurry.
where are you getting “misdemeanor”?
the timing is what it is. apparently the GJ will reach a decision on Friday.
Seems likely timely reporting. Not sure what you’re alleging here.
I have no idea what this means.
Theres a GJ, peripheral to the other GJ that acquitted him. They could also acquit. They could indict.
Watson’s 2022 season likely hangs in the balance.
Not sure what all your noise here is supposed to add to this but I’m very confused by it.
SHIZNITTTT
Footballguy
Imagine if the Browns gave up all those draft picks for a guy who never takes the field. Would anyone be surprised?
Wouldn't that be the most Browns thing ever! Epic!
Wouldn't that be the most Browns thing ever! Epic!
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
While not a high % chance, there’s a non-zero possibility that Watson is indicted, this goes to trial (he misses this season) and then he goes to jail.
And yes, that would be the most Browns thing, ever.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
The NY Times reports the charge as a misdemeanor, see the hyperlink of the charge in the story.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/24/sports/football/deshaun-watson-texas-grand-jury.html
I believe you. I'm sure you don't.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
It’s behind a paywall, and I’m not interested in subscribing to the NYT.
Why would a GJ hear a misdemeanor? Makes none sense.
To be fair, once I hit the 1K word mark I start losing interest.
GregR
Footballguy
Re: Grand juries hearing misdemeanors in Texas. Also, grand juries hearing a case more than once (not that that is happening at present):
https://www.dallascriminallawyer.com/grand-jury-representation/
Grand Jury Representation
Before any felony case can be tried, it has to go to the Grand Jury and be indicted. Though rare, even a misdemeanor allegation can be referred to and heard by the Grand Jury. If a case is no-billed, it is generally not going to be prosecuted unless new evidence is discovered. If new evidence is discovered, or if a complaining witness complains about an initial No Bill, the case can be re-presented to the same Grand Jury, or it can be re-submitted to a new and different Grand Jury.
https://www.dallascriminallawyer.com/grand-jury-representation/
Grand Jury Representation
Before any felony case can be tried, it has to go to the Grand Jury and be indicted. Though rare, even a misdemeanor allegation can be referred to and heard by the Grand Jury. If a case is no-billed, it is generally not going to be prosecuted unless new evidence is discovered. If new evidence is discovered, or if a complaining witness complains about an initial No Bill, the case can be re-presented to the same Grand Jury, or it can be re-submitted to a new and different Grand Jury.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Ok, Acquitted.
there. Now it’s just back to bring the regular old creepy and not actually criminally creepy Watson.
all better.
there. Now it’s just back to bring the regular old creepy and not actually criminally creepy Watson.
all better.
Last edited by a moderator:
Soulfly3
Footballguy
The Brazoria County grand jury has declined to indict #Browns QB Deshaun Watson on any charges after being presented a single criminal complaint
This was a separate Texas grand jury considering one last charge after a grand jury in Houston rejected nine criminal cases.
.....carry on friends
This was a separate Texas grand jury considering one last charge after a grand jury in Houston rejected nine criminal cases.
.....carry on friends
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Soulfly3
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Soulfly3
Footballguy
Ive said over and over, there's zero doubt he might have been slimy. But likely not a criminal.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Depends what info the league has.
Just because he was acquitted doesn’t mean he isn’t a creep.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
GreenNGold
Footballguy
It's not that cut and dry, as the league cares about its image as well. Ridley did not break any laws and is suspended for a year, for example.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Ridley gambled on the sport in which he played. His suspension is 100% cut & dry.
