What's new
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 (6 Viewers)

Hot Sauce Guy said:
the entire issue is about consent, of course. 

Worth noting, sexual offenders generally have a high rate of recidivism. 

a dude who trolls IG for 40+ masseuses to (allegedly) assault isn’t likely to quit “cold turkey” as it were. 

“What to expect?” is a fair question. I’m certain that the expectation by the NFL, the Browns, and Watson‘s agent is that he will be a model citizen. 

Time will tell if Watson will deliver on that. Unless of course this is all a massive conspiracy against Watson, in which case all of this should work out very well for all parties involved.
Click to expand...
Again assuming guilt by "trolling for masseuses to assault".   Is there a possibility that he thinks he was just flirting and trying for happy endings from what he thought could be willing participants?  Asking and if they said no he moved on to the next masseuse.  Could this be something where both sides believe their side to be true?  Women feel assaulted and Watson believes he asked for consent and wasn't told "no"?

I have no idea what the case is here.  I still do believe in innocent until proven guilty.  But I also believe these cases can have this type of situation where both sides honestly think they are in the right.  This line is very blurry without proper communication and communication these days is very poor from many people.  

 
Gally said:
Again assuming guilt by "trolling for masseuses to assault".   Is there a possibility that he thinks he was just flirting and trying for happy endings from what he thought could be willing participants?  Asking and if they said no he moved on to the next masseuse.  Could this be something where both sides believe their side to be true?  Women feel assaulted and Watson believes he asked for consent and wasn't told "no"?

I have no idea what the case is here.  I still do believe in innocent until proven guilty.  But I also believe these cases can have this type of situation where both sides honestly think they are in the right.  This line is very blurry without proper communication and communication these days is very poor from many people.  
Click to expand...
 Not assuming anything. I’m making a point about sexual offenders, who historically have a high rate of recidivism compared to other types of offenders.

I am saying what he is alleged to have done, and apologies if it was unclear, but it was an if/then statement. Factually speaking, he did troll IG for 40+ massage therapists. That happened. 

IF he did the things he’s accused of with those massage therapists THEN statistically speaking, he could re-offend.

I’m not sayin Watson is or isn’t. I’m just sayin if he is what’s likely.

As for my personal suspicion, I’ll use today’s teeth cleaning as an example. I’ve got one dentist. He’s good. His hygienist is good. I go there 4x a year to get my teeth cleaned. I don’t go to 4 different dentists a year because I have a good dentist. I’m just sayin. In that light, his 47 (or whatever it was) massage therapists seems weird.

hopefully this is more clear. 
 

ETA: and yes, it’s definitely possible honest innocent mistakes were made.  They are slightly less innocent when someone’s junk touches someone else non-consensually.  That’s a kind of “flirting” that’s usually considered unacceptable. Allegedly. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy said:
As for my personal suspicion, I’ll use today’s teeth cleaning as an example. I’ve got one dentist. He’s good. His hygienist is good. I go there 4x a year to get my teeth cleaned. I don’t go to 4 different dentists a year because I have a good dentist. I’m just sayin. In that light, his 47 (or whatever it was) massage therapists seems weird.

hopefully this is more clear. 
Click to expand...
There is no doubt he was searching for masseuses because he was looking for extra services that not all of them provide.  That doesn't mean he assaulted them.  There are "masseuses" that do that type of thing.  Watson obviously likes that type of thing.  It doesn't mean he crossed the line in his mind (which is why he seems to be fighting this thing).  It's why I can really see a situation where both sides truly believe their side of the story.  I don't have a good answer for that situation. 

 
Gally said:
There is no doubt he was searching for masseuses because he was looking for extra services that not all of them provide.  That doesn't mean he assaulted them.  There are "masseuses" that do that type of thing.  Watson obviously likes that type of thing.  It doesn't mean he crossed the line in his mind (which is why he seems to be fighting this thing).  It's why I can really see a situation where both sides truly believe their side of the story.  I don't have a good answer for that situation. 
Click to expand...
It’s a fair point, and it’s absolutely possible.

It does seem like the most generous possible explanation for his actions, and I don’t recall his saying anything to effect of “I just wanted a rub & tug, but didn’t do anything non-consentual”.

Now that I think about it, if I were in his position I’d probably say exactly that. That’s a defense I think most of the public would understand, even if they weren’t tolerant of such behavior.

At least it would sound more honest than the current “Boy Scout falsely accused by 22 gold diggers” defense they seem to be going with in declaring absolute innocence.

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
It’s a fair point, and it’s absolutely possible.

It does seem like the most generous possible explanation for his actions, and I don’t recall his saying anything to effect of “I just wanted a rub & tug, but didn’t do anything non-consentual”.

Now that I think about it, if I were in his position I’d probably say exactly that. That’s a defense I think most of the public would understand, even if they weren’t tolerant of such behavior.

At least it would sound more honest than the current “Boy Scout falsely accused by 22 gold diggers” defense they seem to be going with in declaring absolute innocence.
Click to expand...
Just FYI on what has been claimed:    https://www.chron.com/sports/texans/article/Rusty-Hardin-Deshaun-Watson-consensual-sex-massage-16089911.php

Deshaun Watson's attorney Rusty Hardin says he won't dispute that the Texans quarterback ended up having sexual relations with massage therapists during some sessions, but he insists the activity always was consensual.

"In some of these massages there’s going to be no question - we’ve never run from it, our first announcement has always been about consent – that on some occasions some active sexual activity would have taken place," Hardin said during a press conference Friday. "I’m not going into what it is, the nature, or the numbers, or with whom, but I think you can rightfully assume, what we have always been emphasizing, that never at any time, under any circumstances did this young man ever engage in anything that was not mutually desired by the other party."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
GregR said:
Just FYI on what has been claimed:    https://www.chron.com/sports/texans/article/Rusty-Hardin-Deshaun-Watson-consensual-sex-massage-16089911.php

Deshaun Watson's attorney Rusty Hardin says he won't dispute that the Texans quarterback ended up having sexual relations with massage therapists during some sessions, but he insists the activity always was consensual.

"In some of these massages there’s going to be no question - we’ve never run from it, our first announcement has always been about consent – that on some occasions some active sexual activity would have taken place," Hardin said during a press conference Friday. "I’m not going into what it is, the nature, or the numbers, or with whom, but I think you can rightfully assume, what we have always been emphasizing, that never at any time, under any circumstances did this young man ever engage in anything that was not mutually desired by the other party."
Click to expand...
Ok, I’d missed that detail in all the scrum. I recall when this first broke is opined that would be the only logical defense.

Appreciate that, thanks. That seems like the only thing he can possibly say.

Seems convenient to say “I’m not going to get into the nature or the numbers or with whom” - yeah, because it sounds way, way worse when ya do.  

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
Ok, I’d missed that detail in all the scrum. I recall when this first broke is opined that would be the only logical defense.

Appreciate that, thanks. That seems like the only thing he can possibly say.

Seems convenient to say “I’m not going to get into the nature or the numbers or with whom” - yeah, because it sounds way, way worse when ya do.  
Click to expand...
Why would it be worse if he did if all the encounters were consensual?  As long as everyone was on board, what's the problem?

 
Gally said:
Why would it be worse if he did if all the encounters were consensual?  As long as everyone was on board, what's the problem?
Click to expand...
Optics are optics. I don’t make the rules. It would look worse because of the sheer number of women and also because people generally don’t frown on picking up 47 women in a bar as compared to making appointments with 47 prostitutes, if this is what that was.

Or is the defense that they weren’t prostitutes and they all consensually slept with him? That’s a tougher pill to swallow.

That’s my point. By going into those details, more questions come up, and the optics are worse, even if consent isn’t at issue. 

 
Talking in the hypothetical on whether it's possible for both sides to feel they are in the right...

Granted this is one side without Watson's response yet. But you can read in each lawsuit what they are claiming took place.  Like this one, first google hit I got.  

The picture painted by her version is a guy trying to make something happen for awhile, without coming out and saying overtly what he wants, and her telling him no and him continuing to try until contact is made. And after, telling her she doesn't have to do anything she doesn't want.

If that is a completely true version?  Could Watson walk away thinking because he said "I don't want to make you do anything you don't want to do" that he's in the clear? And that because it didn't end in some form of sexual conclusion nothing happened? Even after having disrobed twice against her wishes and made his junk get in contract with her hand?  I can see a guy of his age and used to things going his way as a celebrity, feeling that way, as a hypothetical. Though I wouldn't agree with him, if that were an accurate depiction of events.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy said:
Optics are optics. I don’t make the rules. It would look worse because of the sheer number of women and also because people generally don’t frown on picking up 47 women in a bar as compared to making appointments with 47 prostitutes, if this is what that was.

Or is the defense that they weren’t prostitutes and they all consensually slept with him? That’s a tougher pill to swallow.

That’s my point. By going into those details, more questions come up, and the optics are worse, even if consent isn’t at issue. 
Click to expand...
Watson could be the only guy on the planet that isn't driven by optics and is instead pursuing his belief that he did nothing wrong.

 
Obie Wan said:
Watson could be the only guy on the planet that isn't driven by optics and is instead pursuing his belief that he did nothing wrong.
Click to expand...
And good luck with that, because a large segment of the world will see him as sleazy. Especially if he loses some of these civil suits.

Just because the bar is lower, these women will still have to make a convincing enough case to win. And as I’ve said before, evidence has a funny way of leaking out.

CLE should probably brace themselves for a PR nightmare. But like most societal outrage, this too shall pass in a year or so. Which is likely what they’re counting on. 

 
I think some of this may come down to what Rog and the NFL thinks "settling" 22 cases means...

for many, it is admitting guilt in some way.....

for others it is just a mechanism to resolve an issue and it in no way admits any type of guilt....(even if they include non disclosures)....

somebody mentioned earlier about the NFL reserving the right if "new information comes to light"....is "settling 22 cases" new information....so if he settles, does the Rog and the NFL think it is admitting guilt and they need to bring down the #metoo hammer...?...or do they say "nothing to see here....he didn't do anything... as far as we know"....

I could see exempt list....until he settles....and then a suspension after that....

and for me it feels like it is going to take a long time before we see all 22 "settled"......and even longer if Watson really has "no intention" of settling.....which I think is BS....if he doesn't settle with non disclosures, it will be a freaking circus of these ladies selling their stories to the highest bidders....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinkin Ref said:
I think some of this may come down to what Rog and the NFL thinks "settling" 22 cases means...

for many, it is admitting guilt in some way.....

for others it is just a mechanism to resolve an issue and it in no way admits any type of guilt....(even if they include non disclosures)....

somebody mentioned earlier about the NFL reserving the right if "new information comes to light"....is "settling 22 cases" new information....so if he settles, does the Rog and the NFL think it is admitting guilt and they need to bring down the #metoo hammer...?...or do they say "nothing to see here....he didn't do anything as far as we know"....

I could see exempt list....until he settles....and then a suspension after that....

and for me it feels like it is going to take a long time before we see all 22 "settled"......and even longer if Watson really has "no intention" of settling.....which I think is BS....if he doesn't settle with non disclosures, it will be a freaking circus of these ladies selling their stories to the highest bidders....
Click to expand...
I distinctly recall the NFL statement saying that their actions will be Independant of the civil suits or grand jury findings, and will be based only on their internal investigation.

That’s their “official” position. But you raise interesting questions. Civil suits settled with NDAs are often seen as admissions of guilt, as you suggest.  I don’t know if the NFL would see it the same as the general public, but they might have interviewed some of the litigants privately (as part of their investigation).

So while “Independant” of the civil suits, and regardless of an NDA, the NFL may have 1st hand accounts that they find unsavory enough to be seen as violations of the PCP.

I’m sticking to my prediction. 6 games (or 8, reduced to 6) for the PCP violation of looking like a creepy creep who did creepy things. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zeeshan2 said:
His deposition:

https://twitter.com/NFL_DovKleiman/status/1508864371895713799?s=20&t=gNWqQuKtCPLBpxBnxIopyQ

-Watson went somewhere he didn't know, to meet someone who he never met, for a massage, and he didn't even know if they were licensed and brought his own towel too

-The Texans were aware of his massages at all

-He posted on Instagram that he was in New York but was actually in Houston getting a massage
Click to expand...
I can't decide which of these bears less on the question of consensual/nonconsensual conduct. 

 
Asked about Deshaun Watson at the Owner's Meetings, Roger Goodell reiterated that "there's no time table" on a decision of any potential discipline through the NFL's personnel conduct policy. 

"The personal conduct policy is very important to us... (The Browns) realize that's something we're going to pursue... A decision will be made on whether there should be discipline and what it should be," Goodell added. It continues to be likely that some punishment will be handed down, and the NFL is now able to talk to more of the parties now that Watson has escaped criminal indictment. 

SOURCE: Adam Schefter on Twitter

Mar 29, 2022, 5:14 PM ET
Click to expand...

 
@AlbertBreer

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell very clear here—it’ll likely be a suspension/fine or nothing for Deshaun Watson. Commissioner’s exempt list not in play.

but he's going on the exempt list for the season and then being suspended next season I thought?

 
They only had months to prepare for this scenario of him not being criminally charged... but NOPE, they will take time aka wait till right before camps start to announce something.  

The NFLPA is a joke; they should atleast be pressuring the office to make a decision NOW

 
KellysHeroes said:
or going to be around the 2 to 4 game mark... They still got Baker :)
Click to expand...


gun to my head, I'd say 4 games now.... but like I mentioned (not that it means a damn thing) friends of mine who are all reasonable non-browns fans, seem to think he's getting nothing, and believed so from the get-go of him coming. i guess that really is on the table by the sounds of things, but again... 4 games that MAYBE gets reduced to 2... probably not

 
ESPN:

Goodell also was asked whether the structure of Watson's new, fully guaranteed contract with Cleveland, which includes a large signing bonus but a league-minimum salary this year, would affect the manner in which the league might impose discipline. The low base salary could serve as financial protection for Watson should he be suspended with pay, since the game checks he missed would be league-minimum ones. But the personal conduct policy specifies that "discipline may be a fine, a suspension for a fixed or an indefinite period of time (or) a combination of the two," which indicates that, if she saw fit, the disciplinary officer could impose a fine in addition to a suspension without pay.

"That would not restrict our ability to impose discipline," Goodell said of the contract structure. "We would have the ability to apply discipline as appropriate."

 
I believe the baseline was for personal conduct violations was amended to a baseline of 6 games for the first offense. I'd put all my money on Watson getting at least 6 games.

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
And good luck with that, because a large segment of the world will see him as sleazy. Especially if he loses some of these civil suits.

Just because the bar is lower, these women will still have to make a convincing enough case to win. And as I’ve said before, evidence has a funny way of leaking out.

CLE should probably brace themselves for a PR nightmare. But like most societal outrage, this too shall pass in a year or so. Which is likely what they’re counting on. 
Click to expand...
that's sort of the point

he doesn't care if the bleeding hearts of the world "see" him as sleazy

He is confident he has done nothing wrong and that he will not lose any cases

why should he settle and let people see him as guilty, when he is not

the Commish will let him clear his name with no use of the exempt list

 
Obie Wan said:
that's sort of the point

he doesn't care if the bleeding hearts of the world "see" him as sleazy

He is confident he has done nothing wrong and that he will not lose any cases

why should he settle and let people see him as guilty, when he is not

the Commish will let him clear his name with no use of the exempt list
Click to expand...
I was with you until the bolded. We have no idea what's going to happen with the civil suits, and we have no idea what's going to happen with the NFL investigation. And just because he said at a press conference he wasn't going to settle doesn't mean he isn't going to settle. Lots of civil suits get settled after the famous person gives a press conference saying something like that. 

Regardless of the exempt list, he's likely to be suspended under the PCP. But we don't know what's going to happen yet. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zeeshan2 said:
-Watson went somewhere he didn't know, to meet someone who he never met, for a massage, and he didn't even know if they were licensed and brought his own towel too
Click to expand...
So he's a cool frood, who really knows where his towel is.  I wasn't expecting that, but then, we're all just a couple of pan-galactic gargle blasters away from a terrible decision or 2, aren't we? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigJim® said:
JMHO, NFLPA has been noticeably silent, and suspect they are pressuring the NFL. 
Click to expand...
I doubt this. They’re a pretty weak union. If they’re silent it’s because they’re not involved.

Watson got 230 million dollars. I’m pretty sure the NFLPA is ok with whatever happens. 

 
I gotta think this is a culture gap thing.  He (IMO, this is only my guess, I really don't know) was hiring "massage parlor girls" to do what they do.  NOTHING NEW THERE.  A young, athletic man (like I was many years ago) that's not "hormone-driven" is rare.  So, the NFL has a problem if they want to continue to ignore the elephant in the room and try to portray a lily-white image.  Young people, of either gender, have strong sex drives.  It's normal!!!  I don't blame him for hiring hookers, if that's what happened.  To each his own, but he is digging a hole by trying to dodge that aspect.  IMO, he should just say he wanted a little touchy and paid for it, like a large percentage of the population.  To say otherwise just sounds nonsensical.  

 
BigJim® said:
It's anyone's guess, but this has gone exactly the way the union would want it to go for their member. You are guessing they are weak and played no role. I doubt that. Again, anyone's guess.
Click to expand...
True. Maybe you’re right. Honestly don’t know and I am guessing. As you say, it couldn’t have gone better for their player. I’m just going off what I’ve heard of the NFLPA. 

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
KellysHeroes said:
not a chance, the NFL will look so stupid after having the guy sit all yr PAID then admit fault and say nah, you can go play now; they gotta give him something to save face
Click to expand...
Regardless of anything else, I agree with this 100%. 
Click to expand...
It would definitely send quite a message. That the NFL's tolerance for sexual misconduct against women then would require at least 25 complaints before they get a 1 game suspension.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Football Jones
Blake Watson, RB, Broncos
Replies
0
Views
426
Football Jones
Football Jones
J
  • Poll Poll
Richardson or Sanders- Who has more potential?
Replies
14
Views
514
TheWinz
TheWinz
Ministry of Pain
Tankathon '24-'25
2
Replies
52
Views
3K
pollardsvision
pollardsvision

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top