QB Deshaun Watson, CLE (5 Viewers)

[Bracie Smathers]

“ or if the NFL investigation demonstrates the person engaged in conduct prohibited by the policy”

People are responding without carefully reading the policy that was implemented right after the Ray Rice fiasco when Goodell announced a suspension and then retracted the suspension right before the first game where Ray got a standing ovation from Raven fans.

The tape of Ray Rice punching and knocking out his wife and then dragging her limp body from the elevator by her hair came out and was aired on every newscast creating a public fervor forcing Goodell to suspend him.  He never played another down in the league.

The policy was in response to decades of domestic violence.  Carefully READ the policy.  It is designed to wage war against VIOLENT actions of sexual abuse or mitigating circumstances of sexually or VIOLENT actions against children or if a weapon were used.  

The first thing the league considers are criminal proceedings.  Watson faced two grand juries who did not have enough evidence to go to trial.  He is legally cleared of all cases connected to those allegations so the cannot suspend him based on the primary issue they use as reason to suspend since he has NO CRIMINAL charges.

There has been no accusations of Watson using a weapon or VIOLENCE against the women or children which establish clear reasons for suspension.   

He acted 'creepy' which is not clearly defined in the PCP.  

Due process was not enacted to aggressively take down people accused of crimes, it was created to protect innocent people from being persecuted.

The legal system is bound by due process and they could not make a strong enough case to go to criminal trial.  The NFL system of enforcing rules has shown itself to be arbitrary in the past.

No one has a clue what they will do, probably not even Goodell at this time.

 

[daveR]

I am curious - is there a minimum number of masseuses that Deshaun has admitted to?  I am not talking about sex; just how many masseuses he has admitted to getting massages from?

He was asked about the number recently.  Someone said 66 and he replied that it wasn't that many, but he was uncertain about the number.  The impression I got was that it had to be a lot, maybe not 66 but > 50. 

 

[daveR]

It very apparent he is a real ########.  Being that warrants people not liking him. That doesn’t mean someone is a hater.  But everything I see on this board shows that the majority of Browns fans don’t care about him being a terrible person.   

I agree.  Is there anything that could reasonably happen to change your mind on your assessment of him?  Do you think the stuff you see on this board (< 100 posters) accurately depicts the opinions of > 1,000,000 people?

 

[ghostguy123]

It very apparent he is a real ########.  Being that warrants people not liking him. That doesn’t mean someone is a hater.  But everything I see on this board shows that the majority of Browns fans don’t care about him being a terrible person.   

Three things.

99.999% of Browns fans don't post here.

There is a difference between not caring and not caring enough to denounce your fandom.   What, are we supposed to root for the Steelers or something?

If one of the other TWELVE teams had traded for him, their fans would be the same.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Three things.

99.999% of Browns fans don't post here.

There is a difference between not caring and not caring enough to denounce your fandom.   What, are we supposed to root for the Steelers or something?

If one of the other TWELVE teams had traded for him, their fans would be the same.

Yes - I'm fine with this approach. It's a fair stance.

Like I said earlier I hated when Michael Vick joined the Jets and considered abandoning them but in the end I figured he'd just be one of the 1,000s of players that would pass through over the course of my fandom and decided I would still follow the Jets but not root for him to do well.

Also there's plenty of actors and musicians that I'm a fan of that are deplorable people -  sometimes we need to separate the "art" from the "artist" and that can apply to sports as well.

Now I do find some of the people that are performing mental gymnastics to try and "pretend" that Watson isn't even a creep, a bit funny - but even that is harmless really. In fact, the one guy in here taking some of the oddest stances in this thread, is otherwise a very good guy as far as I can tell over the years here.

 

[-OZ-]

People are responding without carefully reading the policy that was implemented right after the Ray Rice fiasco when Goodell announced a suspension and then retracted the suspension right before the first game where Ray got a standing ovation from Raven fans.

The tape of Ray Rice punching and knocking out his wife and then dragging her limp body from the elevator by her hair came out and was aired on every newscast creating a public fervor forcing Goodell to suspend him.  He never played another down in the league.

The policy was in response to decades of domestic violence.  Carefully READ the policy.  It is designed to wage war against VIOLENT actions of sexual abuse or mitigating circumstances of sexually or VIOLENT actions against children or if a weapon were used.  

The first thing the league considers are criminal proceedings.  Watson faced two grand juries who did not have enough evidence to go to trial.  He is legally cleared of all cases connected to those allegations so the cannot suspend him based on the primary issue they use as reason to suspend since he has NO CRIMINAL charges.

There has been no accusations of Watson using a weapon or VIOLENCE against the women or children which establish clear reasons for suspension.   

He acted 'creepy' which is not clearly defined in the PCP.  

Due process was not enacted to aggressively take down people accused of crimes, it was created to protect innocent people from being persecuted.

The legal system is bound by due process and they could not make a strong enough case to go to criminal trial.  The NFL system of enforcing rules has shown itself to be arbitrary in the past.

No one has a clue what they will do, probably not even Goodell at this time.

I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me, arguing, or just responded to my post to make your own points.  I never suggested due process is to “take a player down”, very much the opposite. 

 

[-OZ-]

Three things.

99.999% of Browns fans don't post here.

There is a difference between not caring and not caring enough to denounce your fandom.   What, are we supposed to root for the Steelers or something?

If one of the other TWELVE teams had traded for him, their fans would be the same.

i think we’ve been down this road, maybe it was somewhere else. You’re right. It’s just easier to “hate on” the browns than some other franchises. I was thankful from the start that it was going to be extremely unlikely for the Titans to acquire him so I never had to really consider that option. 

 

[Kiddnets]

Yes - I'm fine with this approach. It's a fair stance.

Like I said earlier I hated when Michael Vick joined the Jets and considered abandoning them but in the end I figured he'd just be on of the 1,000s of players that would pass through over the course of my fandom and decided I would still follow the Jets but not root for him to do well.

Also there's plenty of actors and musicians that I'm a fan of that are deplorable people sometimes we need to separate the "art" from the "artist" and that can apply to sports as well.

Now I do find some of the people that are performing mental gymnastics to try and "pretend" that Watson isn't even a creep, a bit funny - but even that is harmless really. In fact, the one guy in here taking some of the oddest stances in this thread, is otherwise a very good guy as far as I can tell over the years here.

good point - Im always puzzled by people that lecture me that I go to a Bruce Springsteen or Roger Waters show over politics...Im not there for a political rally Im there to enjoy music I like.  

The Jets were in need of a QB before Wilson and when this came out I wanted nothing to do with Watson - but if they traded for him like the Browns was I going to throw out 40 yrs of fandom/memories?  Probably not but it would bum me out as a fan - Im a long time Nets fan and I couldnt enjoy the team when Harden was on it....just didnt like the team at that point.  I still rooted for them but it felt hollow.  The Nets are a worse team after trading him away but I feel better as a fan for some reason

The other big issue I'd have is how the Browns taking on all that risk still paid top dollar in contract and draft value.  It just makes no sense to me to lay an entire franchise out there for a guy, albeit talented, in the middle of a storm like he is.  

I just cant see Goodell letting him play this year - we'll see tho

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me, arguing, or just responded to my post to make your own points.  I never suggested due process is to “take a player down”, very much the opposite. 

The PCP is clear on domestic violence and sexually violent acts as it was written in direct response to domestic violence.  It isn't clear on the sort of 'creepy' behavior Watson is accused of so I was responding to the specific part of your post stating

"if the NFL investigation demonstrates the person engaged in conduct prohibited by the policy”

That part was quoted because NFL policy isn't clear what Watson is accused of is directly prohibited because  it is not.  I noted criminal law is very clear.  We know Watson was not prosecuted under CLEAR criminal statutes.  We're left with the wording of the NFL PCP.

NFL policy is ambiguous and has been arbitrarily applied.

With the arbitrary way that NFL policy has been enforced, no one knows how it will be applied in this case. 

Even if you are quoted in a post, people can address more than only the part of your section that was quoted.   Happens a lot, you responded to something I did not say.  It happens.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

My Hot Take from this week and the press conferences and Rich Eisen and lots of media figureheads without reading a word from Browns fans here or other folks in the SP, these are my feelings after listening to Watson speak and how this has been framed so far...

-Should simply be put on the Commish list until these lawsuits are cleared up, plain and simple. This is outside of whatever suspension is eventually being handed down. The optics are terrible and even when Watson spoke you might be picking your jaw up off the floor. The less Watson speaks right now IMO the better, he only sounds worse or guilty with each question. "Why should people believe me over these other 24 women?" Uh, because I'm innocent or not guilty of these charges? He doesn't say that or even come close to it. 

Simply not allowed to take the field and Cleveland is now getting into deeper waters than they ever wanted to be in. All they wanted to know was how many games is the suspension and for Goodell to keep leverage in this he cannot hand down a suspension until all of these lawsuits are cleared up. A lot of this stems from way back when the Ray Rice situation exploded in the NFL's face and they will not be embarrassed the same way again this time around. Until things are settled legally they will not issue their final suspension and in the meantime Deshaun Watson is not allowed to play NFL games on Sundays this coming season.  

 

[Ministry of Pain]

No one has a clue what they will do, probably not even Goodell at this time.

I read every word, I agree with your closing remark the most of anything and I do applaud you for diving deep. 

I do believe that Goodell will take it slow and slower with this, he has the power to put him on the exempt list or Commish list without having to do too much legally. 

66 massages in 17 months with a slew of different women...it's not hard to connect the dots however you want to slice it as creepy, it looks more like a sexual predator pattern if you ask me. 

-Dawn Aponte, former Miami Dolphins Vice President and Cap Director for a long time now works in the NFL offices to my knowledge...Chief Administrator of Football Operations(she's come a long way), odds are pretty high she is in Roger Goodell's think tank group and I bet words like I'm using are being discussed. 

We have no idea what is discussed behind closed doors but these folks aren't as dumb as we sometimes accuse them of when we hate their actions. I have confidence they will do right and the society changeover in the last couple of years with MeToo and Cancel Culture, it's going to have an impact on their thinking and carrying out whatever the punishment is going to be. 

Good post BS, thanks!

 

[Ministry of Pain]

good point - Im always puzzled by people that lecture me that I go to a Bruce Springsteen or Roger Waters show over politics...Im not there for a political rally Im there to enjoy music I like.  

The Jets were in need of a QB before Wilson and when this came out I wanted nothing to do with Watson - but if they traded for him like the Browns was I going to throw out 40 yrs of fandom/memories?  Probably not but it would bum me out as a fan - Im a long time Nets fan and I couldnt enjoy the team when Harden was on it....just didnt like the team at that point.  I still rooted for them but it felt hollow.  The Nets are a worse team after trading him away but I feel better as a fan for some reason

The other big issue I'd have is how the Browns taking on all that risk still paid top dollar in contract and draft value.  It just makes no sense to me to lay an entire franchise out there for a guy, albeit talented, in the middle of a storm like he is.  

I just cant see Goodell letting him play this year - we'll see tho

Agree with a lot of these thoughts. 

-Miami was as close as anyone to getting him and simply wanted him to clear up the lawsuits, 18 of the 22 would settle on the spot for $100k but Watson wanted all or nothing, maybe the other 4 could have settled at a higher amount, $250k, again conjecture on my part. 

-I think Miami fans would have embraced him big time and like Cleveland they simply want to know "How many games?" 

Because after the suspension, even a year long, at the end you have a franchise QB for the next decade. That's really what it came down to for some fo the more QB starved teams like NYJets, Miami and Cleveland. Desperate times cal for desperate measures. 

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Should simply be put on the Commish list until these lawsuits are cleared up, plain and simple.

Goodell can't do anything right now as specified by the new CBA.

First, the league has to present evidence to the independent arbitrator.

Second, the evidence has to be strong enough for the arbitrator to make a case for punishment.

Then Goodell makes his ruling AFTER the arbitrator makes their ruling.

It looks like clear guidelines that he has to follow so that he can't arbitrarily suspend players without going through the new CBA process with an independent arbitrator review. 

I don't even know how far along in the process this case has gone, even if the NFL evidence has been sent to the arbitrator.  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As the new CBA states, the NFL and NFLPA must agree on a neutral arbitrator to review claims of a player violating the personal conduct policy.

“Fines or suspensions imposed upon players for violating the League’s Personal Conduct Policy, as well as whether a violation of the Personal Conduct Policy has been proven by the NFL, will be initially determined by a Disciplinary Officer jointly selected and appointed by the parties.”

The process for Watson to receive a suspension will be more extensive as a result. First, the NFL investigation will need to find evidence that he violated the personal conduct policy. Any of its findings must be strong enough to then make a case to the independent arbitrator.

Watson, or any player the NFL believes violated the personal conduct policy, can only be suspended if the independent arbitrator determines a violation of the policy occurred. After that, the judge can rule on a potential suspension length. Only after that ruling is made does Goodell have the authority to impose a different suspension if the league requests it through appeal.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Goodell can't do anything right now as specified by the new CBA.

First, the league has to present evidence to the independent arbitrator.

Second, the evidence has to be strong enough for the arbitrator to make a case for punishment.

Then Goodell makes his ruling AFTER the arbitrator makes their ruling.

It looks like clear guidelines that he has to follow so that he can't arbitrarily suspend players without going through the new CBA process with an independent arbitrator review. 

I don't even know how far along in the process this case has gone, even if the NFL evidence has been sent to the arbitrator.  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As the new CBA states, the NFL and NFLPA must agree on a neutral arbitrator to review claims of a player violating the personal conduct policy.

“Fines or suspensions imposed upon players for violating the League’s Personal Conduct Policy, as well as whether a violation of the Personal Conduct Policy has been proven by the NFL, will be initially determined by a Disciplinary Officer jointly selected and appointed by the parties.”

The process for Watson to receive a suspension will be more extensive as a result. First, the NFL investigation will need to find evidence that he violated the personal conduct policy. Any of its findings must be strong enough to then make a case to the independent arbitrator.

Watson, or any player the NFL believes violated the personal conduct policy, can only be suspended if the independent arbitrator determines a violation of the policy occurred. After that, the judge can rule on a potential suspension length. Only after that ruling is made does Goodell have the authority to impose a different suspension if the league requests it through appeal.

I'll do it this way. I am not going to argue point by point with you. I'm comfortable enough with the evidence I have seen that everything you just wrote has merit and at the same time I simply go 66 massages in 17 months by as many as 25+ women and it's hard to believe Watson is innocent. The number is staggering and speaks to a serial sexual deviant of some type that prays upon women thinking they are issuing massage therapy but being asked to provide sexual favors.

That's enough IMO for Goodell to have all the ammo he needs. Why didn't Watson play last year? By choice or the Texans keeping him off the field? What role did these lawsuits play in all of that?  And yet here we are still talking about it. 

It's hard for me to believe Watson is taking the field Week 1 and that's only gotten stronger since the off season started. 

-Rich Eisen is the voice of the NFLN and in many ways can be very one sided and always protecting the shield but in this case I think many of his comments on this issue and in recent days warrant a lot of merit. It's hard for me to see Goodell not listening to members of his inner circle and major media heads like Eisen on his own network. 

Look what happened to Marshall Faulk who was one of the best I had seen as a commentator for the Sunday Morning circuit. I used to actually watch when he was speaking on the day of the games, now I never listen to any of the pre game hoopla/hype except thru Twitter posts from more on the ground media heads in the local cities. But my point was they cancelled him out for making advances at someone who worked behind the scenes and suddenly he was evaporated overnight. I understand Goodell and the NFLN are handled differently but there is precedence for a very high standard that is going to have to be met whenever this comes to a close. 

You make excellent points but that doesn't discount what is being put on the table as "evidence" which we don't know what the NFL has in their ongoing and expanding file on this situation. 

 

[Soulfly3]

isn't Ian Rap also a "face of the NFLN'? and didnt he say this past week he's thinking a 6-10 game suspension (or something along those lines... someone posted it in the last few days here)

 

[Anarchy99]

Goodell can't do anything right now as specified by the new CBA.

First, the league has to present evidence to the independent arbitrator.

Second, the evidence has to be strong enough for the arbitrator to make a case for punishment.

Then Goodell makes his ruling AFTER the arbitrator makes their ruling.

It looks like clear guidelines that he has to follow so that he can't arbitrarily suspend players without going through the new CBA process with an independent arbitrator review. 

I don't even know how far along in the process this case has gone, even if the NFL evidence has been sent to the arbitrator.  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As the new CBA states, the NFL and NFLPA must agree on a neutral arbitrator to review claims of a player violating the personal conduct policy.

“Fines or suspensions imposed upon players for violating the League’s Personal Conduct Policy, as well as whether a violation of the Personal Conduct Policy has been proven by the NFL, will be initially determined by a Disciplinary Officer jointly selected and appointed by the parties.”

The process for Watson to receive a suspension will be more extensive as a result. First, the NFL investigation will need to find evidence that he violated the personal conduct policy. Any of its findings must be strong enough to then make a case to the independent arbitrator.

Watson, or any player the NFL believes violated the personal conduct policy, can only be suspended if the independent arbitrator determines a violation of the policy occurred. After that, the judge can rule on a potential suspension length. Only after that ruling is made does Goodell have the authority to impose a different suspension if the league requests it through appeal.

Even with more defined guidelines in the CBA, the range of potential outcomes is all over the map. As I mentioned earlier, Trevor Baeur didn't get charged with a crime based on lack of evidence and he got a two-year suspension by MLB. Who's to say what Baeur did or didn't do . . . just like none of us knows what Watson did or didn't do. Sure, maybe his kinky fetishes were more physical than Watson's, but there were fewer women involved (and again, the league threw the book at Baeur). I'm not saying the situations are the same, but the way MLB reacted could impact what the NFL does.

Part of the issue is going to be the volume of women involved for Watson. For example, will the punishment handed down escalate with the number of claims made against Watson? Since there hasn't been a situation remotely close to this in the NFL before, a case could be made that the punishment could be 0 games (no charges were filed and the outstanding issues are monetary not criminal) all the way to a year suspension or more (if the league wants to make an example of Watson by asking an arbitrator for a one game suspension for each allegation).

I have no idea what putting women in situations where they felt pressured, uncomfortable, or unsafe merits in terms of an NFL punishment. At this point, the league probably doesn't know either. I also am not sure what Goodell has the option of doing. For example, if the arbitration process yields a recommendation of an 8-game suspension (just as an example), can Goodell pick 4 games? 17 games? A number of games for now but have the investigation continue with additional games added on later? We saw Goodell impose a suspension with Zeke when the investigator did not recommend one.

And how does the arbitration process work or not work with the exempt list? Does placing someone on the exempt list trigger the ability for a player to appeal or go to arbitration?

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Watson was never accused of the crimes of Trevor Bauer.

Trevor Bauer allegedly choked a woman unconscious, punched her in the head and sodomized her without consent,

Two grand juries could not find enough evidence to go to trial with Watson.  I haven't looked at Bauer's case that was based on text messages enough to comment but the allegations are not similar.  

AFIK the league negotiated the new CBA policy and has to abide by it.  I simply posted the details.  It has clear guidelines.

 

[zeeshan2]

Per a source with knowledge of the intended strategy, the NFLPA currently is bracing for a recommendation by the league of “unprecedented” punishment of Watson. Whatever the specific penalty, the union will mobilize to defend Watson, as it is required to do by the federal duty of fair representation.

The source explains that the NFLPA would defend Watson in part by making an aggressive argument premised on the consequences, or lack thereof, imposed on a trio of owners who recently have found themselves embroiled in off-field controversy. The argument will be that the punishment of Watson is not proportional to the punishment of those owners, especially in light of this key line from the Personal Conduct Policy: “Ownership and club or league management have traditionally been held to a higher standard and will be subject to more significant discipline when violations of the Personal Conduct Policy occur.”

According to the source, the union’s defense of Deshaun Watson will take specific aim at the league’s handling of Commanders owner Daniel Snyder, Patriots owner Robert Kraft, and Cowboys owner Jerry Jones.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/06/16/nflpas-defense-of-deshaun-watson-will-take-aim-at-nfls-treatment-of-multiple-owners/

 

[Shawnky]

I agree.  Is there anything that could reasonably happen to change your mind on your assessment of him?  Do you think the stuff you see on this board (< 100 posters) accurately depicts the opinions of > 1,000,000 people?

Probably not with everything that has come to light.  I do believe in second chances and that people can change.  But it isn't a good look how people have defended him for this or that.  I remember when this first came out, people said there was no way he did this......he's a Christian.  LOL.  In my opinion and background in the Christian faith from my childhood, that in itself makes it even more plausible.  I actually have a friend who is extremely vocal about the situation on social media.  He in no way thinks Watson did ANYTHING, and that the only reason he's being accused is because he's black.  I can't help but shake my head at that stupidity.

 

[Shawnky]

Three things.

99.999% of Browns fans don't post here.

There is a difference between not caring and not caring enough to denounce your fandom.   What, are we supposed to root for the Steelers or something?

If one of the other TWELVE teams had traded for him, their fans would be the same.

No.  But some have actually defended him here.  I do believe in innocent until proven guilty.  And at this point we've seen he's no choir boy.

 

[Anarchy99]

Watson was never accused of the crimes of Trevor Bauer.

Trevor Bauer allegedly choked a woman unconscious, punched her in the head and sodomized her without consent,

Two grand juries could not find enough evidence to go to trial with Watson.  I haven't looked at Bauer's case that was based on text messages enough to comment but the allegations are not similar.  

AFIK the league negotiated the new CBA policy and has to abide by it.  I simply posted the details.  It has clear guidelines.

My point in bringing up Bauer was the lengthy suspension with no criminal charges filed. I believe there are now three women that have told similar stories involving Bauer. If he did the things he is accused of without permission, then he deserves what is coming to him.

But there apparently are tons of texts, pictures, and videos that the women sent to him discussing their desire to have rough sex. Certainly none of them are board friendly, and maybe he took those requests to the extreme. But the women texted him after the fact and said they liked it and wanted more. I believe one of the women kept hooking up with him for 8 or 9 years. Maybe it’s just me, but I have a harder time believing these acts were against their will if they kept seeing him and kept doing whatever over and over again. IIRC, one of the women had started referencing getting money out of Bauer in texts to her friends.

It’s hard to argue due process for Watson but not for Bauer. Both of these guys engaged in behavior that I would never dream of. But they both have similar arguments (I didn’t do anything they didn’t want and everything was consensual). Yes, Bauer’s accusations are more serious and disturbing, but his lawyer claims to have mountains of evidence that the women were down with getting worked over. If the texts are legit, Bauer even talks about wanting to get them unconscious and having his way with them. That’s not my thing, but his argument is he did what they asked for. People can choose to believe him or not.

In both Baeur and Watson, it’s possible the women came forward as part of a money grab. That is another element that both situations have. We will have to see what the NFL does in the next few weeks and months and when Watson will be allowed to play. But IMO there is a chance the league will ask for a huge suspension (who knows if they will get it).

 

[ghostguy123]

No.  But some have actually defended him here.  I do believe in innocent until proven guilty.  And at this point we've seen he's no choir boy.

Some?  Who like two people?  

C'mon.  We all know what we got here.

 

[daveR]

Probably not with everything that has come to light.  I do believe in second chances and that people can change.  But it isn't a good look how people have defended him for this or that.  I remember when this first came out, people said there was no way he did this......he's a Christian.  LOL.  In my opinion and background in the Christian faith from my childhood, that in itself makes it even more plausible.  I actually have a friend who is extremely vocal about the situation on social media.  He in no way thinks Watson did ANYTHING, and that the only reason he's being accused is because he's black.  I can't help but shake my head at that stupidity.

What your opinion of Myles Garrett?

 

[daveR]

The TSN article has some interesting things to say...

 

[ghostguy123]

I still think the easiest thing the NFL can do for themselves is no suspension, and see how the civil suits turn out.  

If they suspend him 6 games they are saying that wrong doing occured, and that sexually harrassing/assaulting dozens of women is only worthy of a 6 game suspension.  They same problems arise when he comes back, if not worse.

 

[daveR]

I still think the easiest thing the NFL can do for themselves is no suspension, and see how the civil suits turn out.  

If they suspend him 6 games they are saying that wrong doing occured, and that sexually harrassing/assaulting dozens of women is only worthy of a 6 game suspension.  They same problems arise when he comes back, if not worse.

Or, they can say 1 year and have 2021 count as time served.

 

[daveR]

Something to consider...  If I did something shady and 25 people went to the cops & filed reports of what they saw me do, that would constitute pretty good evidence.  The stories would be collaborative. That's the idea behind the claiming that the number of lawsuits creates certainty -- strength in numbers, more or less. And, I would agree, except for the fact that they weren't filed independently.  Every one of them was filed the same way through the same person.  Does anyone think the attorney played no part whatsoever in crafting the scenario, or the wording, or the depiction of emotions, or "what to leave in, what to leave out"?  

IMO, the fact that the stories are similar and not independent, could well be a point in the defendant's favor.  If they had filed independent police reports, I'd be more inclined to accept the numbers logic.

 

[daveR]

Someone suggested that "most Browns fans are supporting him" (or something of that nature).  That prompted me to wonder why I keep coming back to this.  If it were happening in Seattle say, I probably would have let it go by now, sitting on the sidelines, declining to comment.  So, why?  Well, here in the C-L-E, every talk show and every news broadcast has something to say.  You cannot hide from it.  That gets the wheels turning, which prompts the comments.  And, now that I've started, it's too late to go ghost on the topic.

 

[menobrown]

  If I did something shady and 25 people went to the cops & filed reports of what they saw me do, that would constitute pretty good evidence.  The stories would be collaborative. That's the idea behind the claiming that the number of lawsuits creates certainty -- strength in numbers, more or less.

Agree but other then possibly being coached up by the attorney the majority of these lawsuits were filed after the first batch become public. So between possible attorney coaching and publicly released accounts the number of accusations is not some huge indicator of guilt to me.  This is a world away from 25 people independently reporting something.

If you gave a massage to Watson in the last few years it's fairly easy money to mirror the claims of the one's you've seen knowing you'll be put in line if/when a settlement or award is granted. I feel like if you gave Watson a massage in the last few years and you or your family really needed the money it's almost financially irresponsible to not attach yourself to the civil suits, morals aside.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Or, they can say 1 year and have 2021 count as time served.

No, they can't. He was paid for 2021 and he didn't want to play that season just as much as Houston didn't want him too. 

 

[Faust]

Pro Football Talk's Mike Florio reports the "divide intensifies in the league office over handling of Deshaun Watson."

The story around Watson continues to grow as two more women reportedly look to file suit against him -- which would bring the total to 26. According to Florio, a source close to the situation said "the league is very concerned about the drip, drip, drip of more cases being filed." Since the March trade that sent Watson to the Browns, a 23rd and 24th lawsuit was filed -- those coming shortly after the league reported it was nearing an end to the Watson investigation. Now, the additional cases only further complicate whatever penalty the NFL ultimately chooses to hand down, with Florio reporting that some in the league office want Watson "sidelined until the litigation has completely ended." With no end to this situation in sight, we can't completely rule out a reunion with Baker Mayfield in 2022 as long as he remains on the roster.

SOURCE: ProFootballTalk

Jun 16, 2022, 7:56 PM ET

 

[menobrown]

No, they can't. He was paid for 2021 and he didn't want to play that season just as much as Houston didn't want him too. 

Yes and even if he did not get paid there is no precedence for time served. This is not the parole board.

 

[Soulfly3]

Pro Football Talk's Mike Florio reports that some in the league office want Watson "sidelined until the litigation has completely ended." 

which means that some in the league office don't believe that's the correct course of action. 

easy to see in reporting what side of the fence a person sits... 

 

[daveR]

No, they can't. He was paid for 2021 and he didn't want to play that season just as much as Houston didn't want him too. 

As far as I know, this is correct.  The uninformed part of me wonders if there wasn't more to it, though. 

 

[daveR]

Agree but other then possibly being coached up by the attorney the majority of these lawsuits were filed after the first batch become public. So between possible attorney coaching and publicly released accounts the number of accusations is not some huge indicator of guilt to me.  This is a world away from 25 people independently reporting something.

If you gave a massage to Watson in the last few years it's fairly easy money to mirror the claims of the one's you've seen knowing you'll be put in line if/when a settlement or award is granted. I feel like if you gave Watson a massage in the last few years and you or your family really needed the money it's almost financially irresponsible to not attach yourself to the civil suits, morals aside.

Wasn't there something in the SI story where the woman said she didn't file because she had to go through Buzbee, or something to that effect?

 

[menobrown]

Wasn't there something in the SI story where the woman said she didn't file because she had to go through Buzbee, or something to that effect?

Not that I recall. "Mary" did contact Buzbee's office however after the first complaints were filed, said she felt pressured to sign with him and at the time of the article had hired a different attorney.

BTW- in case people forgot, the author of that SI story is the same author of NY Times story. If you are an athlete with legal or league problems you don't want her sniffing around your life. She's thorough in her investigation,  but I'd not say she is impartial. I recall reading a few of her investigative articles on athletes but I can't recall any person that is her subject talking to her and that I believe is because anything they say will just be used against them.

 

[GregR]

I agree with those who’ve suggested they may suspend him conditionally, reserving the right to take further action as more information develops.

Lol....Isn’t that basically the exempt list....?

He gets paid fully on the exempt list.

He does not get paid when suspended, which is the punishment part. 

 

[daveR]

Not that I recall. "Mary" did contact Buzbee's office however after the first complaints were filed, said she felt pressured to sign with him and at the time of the article had hired a different attorney.

BTW- in case people forgot, the author of that SI story is the same author of NY Times story. If you are an athlete with legal or league problems you don't want her sniffing around your life. She's thorough in her investigation,  but I'd not say she is impartial. I recall reading a few of her investigative articles on athletes but I can't recall any person that is her subject talking to her and that I believe is because anything they say will just be used against them.

On the local news, there is a propensity to take whatever they themselves recently learn and broadcast it as "more bad news" regarding Watson / the Browns. In addition, they have to "talk tough" about it, because that inspires emotions and conversations.  Following that model, it would be impossible (stupid?) to show any support for him.  

 

[GregR]

Since I think some of what's in the player conduct policy might get lost in the talk about domestic violence... not a lawyer but I expect it's a different part that Watson would be impacted by. Just pasting the parts that seemed relevant when I look at it:

Prohibited conduct includes but is not limited to the following:

* Assault and/or battery, including sexual assault or other sex offenses;

* Stalking, harassment, or similar forms of intimidation;

* Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL personnel

I don't know if the last would apply but including it. Sounds more for like, point shaving to me, but I wouldn't rule it out. "Other sex offenses" would seem to open the door on the types of behavior in question, and sexual assault is one of the things he's accused of. 

The civil suits alleged coercive and lewd sexual behavior, and sexual assault.  A player is subject to discipline if there is a disposition of a criminal proceeding, or if the league's investigation demonstrates he engaged in prohibited conduct.  

It doesn't take a criminal proceeding, though if he's involved in one it can trigger the conduct policy regardless of the outcome. I don't know if a Grand Jury is considered a criminal proceeding in this context. But again, it doesn't have to be a criminal case, they just need to be convinced he engaged in prohibited conduct.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

CBS...take it with a grain or two of salt...pass the pepper please!

"After spending more than 15 months investigating Deshaun Watson, it appears the NFL is getting closer to doling out a possible punishment to the Browns quarterback and it could be a big one. 

According to the Washington Post, the NFL is going to argue that Watson deserves a "significant" suspension. Watson is currently facing 24 civil lawsuits that include allegations ranging from sexual misconduct to sexual assault. Although Watson isn't facing any criminal charges from the cases -- two different grand juries in Texas have declined to press charges -- he can still be punished by the league for violating the personal conduct policy. 

A person in Watson's camp told the Post that the NFL will likely argue that Watson deserves to be suspended for at least one full season. However, the Post did note that it's difficult to predict what the length of the suspension might look like, but that the NFL will almost certainly argue that it needs to be "significant" in length. 

The fact that the league will be asking for a significant suspension comes just days after Pro Football Talk reported that some in the league office want Watson off the field until his lawsuits are resolved. The league has been investigating Watson since March 2021. 

The reason the NFL has to argue for a "significant" suspension is because the league isn't in charge of handing out the punishment. Under the old collective bargaining agreement, Roger Goodell was given the power to hand out suspensions, but under the new CBA, that power belongs to a disciplinary officer, who is jointly appointed by the NFL and NFLPA. In Watson's case, that officer is former U.S. district judge Judge Sue L. Robinson. 

After Robinson makes a decision on the case, either side will be free to appeal it. 

Although it's still not clear when a decision might come, the Post is reporting that the NFL would like to have the entire process completed, including any potential appeals, by the start of training camp. With the Browns set to kick off training camp on July 27, that means Watson will likely know if he'll be suspended at some point in the next six weeks.

The Browns quarterback met with the media this week for the first time since March, and in that interview, he continued to insist that he did nothing wrong. 

"I've been honest and I've been truthful," Watson said. "I never forced anyone, I never assaulted anyone. I've been saying it from the beginning, and I'm gonna continue to do that until all the facts come out."

Watson is currently facing 24 lawsuits, but that number could soon be jumping to 26. The lawyer for the plaintiffs, Tony Buzbee, told CBS Sports earlier this week that two more lawsuits would likely be filed in the near future. The fact that more lawsuits could be filed even after Watson is hit with a potential suspension does complicate things. In that case, the NFL could add a stipulation to any potential Watson punishment that would allow the league to impose additional discipline if any more lawsuits get filed after the original discipline is handed out."

-66 massages inside of 17 months with at least two dozen different women that we know of so far...

Just put him on the Commish list and be done with it for now. Press Watson and his attorney to find a solution or risk not playing in 2022 which seems more and more likely, but let it draw out to 2023 and then let me hand down the suspension. How long of a break can Watson take from the NFL before we get something along the lines of Josh Gordon where he has all the talent but couldn't stay in NFL ready mode always suspended. What if Watson does not see the field until '23?

-30+ months without taking a snap and $230,000,000.00 guaranteed? That's a tough pill to swallow. 

 

[ghostguy123]

So, lets just suspend him indefinitely for what equates to he said/she said.  Granted, it's she-said coming from 30 different women.

We all think he is a perv.   It's not illegal to be a perv, it's illegal to do illegal things.  Did he do any of those illegal things?  Who the F knows.

Seems crazy to suspend someone without actual iron clad proof they did what they are being accused of.  

But, obviously nothing would surprise me here

 

[Dr. Octopus]

So, lets just suspend him indefinitely for what equates to he said/she said.  Granted, it's she-said coming from 30 different women.

We all think he is a perv.   It's not illegal to be a perv, it's illegal to do illegal things.  Did he do any of those illegal things?  Who the F knows.

Seems crazy to suspend someone without actual iron clad proof they did what they are being accused of.  

But, obviously nothing would surprise me here

You’re correct but it’s still possible it could be shown in a court of law that it was “more likely than not” that he did a few things that may rise to criminal levels (if it was an easier case to prove criminally) - if a jury ruled in the favor of the plaintiffs. That’s something. 
 

ETA: although it’s probably more likely it settles.

 

[TheWinz]

Seems crazy to suspend someone without actual iron clad proof they did what they are being accused of. 

This statement reminds me of this video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHQljMOQdJ4

 

[-OZ-]

So, lets just suspend him indefinitely for what equates to he said/she said.  Granted, it's she-said coming from 30 different women.

We all think he is a perv.   It's not illegal to be a perv, it's illegal to do illegal things.  Did he do any of those illegal things?  Who the F knows.

Seems crazy to suspend someone without actual iron clad proof they did what they are being accused of.  

But, obviously nothing would surprise me here

Are you suggesting the only thing players should be disciplined for are crimes? 

The policy is rather clear that expectations go beyond avoiding being found guilty of a crime. 
 

 

[massraider]

League is already floating talk about a lengthy suspension. 

I think a minimum of 8 games, and if I was getting odds, I would say a year. 

Lol at the notion that the league can't do this or that. This isn't a court of law. People getting fired and suspended every day in every field. Conduct Detrimental. That covers a lot of ground.

 

[GregR]

So, lets just suspend him indefinitely for what equates to he said/she said.  Granted, it's she-said coming from 30 different women.

We all think he is a perv.   It's not illegal to be a perv, it's illegal to do illegal things.  Did he do any of those illegal things?  Who the F knows.

Seems crazy to suspend someone without actual iron clad proof they did what they are being accused of.  

But, obviously nothing would surprise me here

It's a case of he said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said/she said.

 

[DropKick]

-66 massages inside of 17 months with at least two dozen different women that we know of so far...

Bolded, no less...

If I was an athlete of his caliber and similar financial resources, I would probably get as many massages in this time frame and, likely with as many women, "just because" I can and I enjoy it.  And, yes, I prefer a female masseuse to a male one although I've gotten massages from very proficient men,  My last massage was last Saturday.  And, no, I've never questioned or cared about their credentials as I've got massages I didn't like (too soft) from pros and great massages from students.

I'm not saying that Watson isn't a perv but the fact that he got this many massages, in and of itself, really isn't a big deal.

 

[ghostguy123]

Are you suggesting the only thing players should be disciplined for are crimes? 

The policy is rather clear that expectations go beyond avoiding being found guilty of a crime. 
 

No,but he would be getting suspended for things people said he did with no actual proof he did them.

Personally, I think he did most if not all of it.  But........

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

No,but he would be getting suspended for things people said he did with no actual proof he did them.

Personally, I think he did most if not all of it.  But........

I’m betting some have “proof” (aka Monica Lewinsky) - an actual U.S. president got impeached for that sort of proof, so….

 

[-OZ-]

No,but he would be getting suspended for things people said he did with no actual proof he did them.

Personally, I think he did most if not all of it.  But........

Testimony can easily meet the standard applicable here. 

Side note - it amazes me how smart people seem to miss that there’s a huge difference between criminal and employment discipline.