Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
WR Tyreek Hill, MIA (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter amnesiac
- Start date
bucksoh
Footballguy
I have to meet somebody or have seen them talk before I can judge their intellect.
A TON of very intelligent people have gone bankrupt.
bucksoh
Footballguy
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_finances_of_professional_American_athletes
According to a 2009 Sports Illustrated article, 78% of National Football League (NFL) players are either bankrupt or are under financial stress within two years of retirement and an estimated 60% of National Basketball Association (NBA) players go bankrupt within five years after leaving their sport.[1]
According to a 2009 Sports Illustrated article, 78% of National Football League (NFL) players are either bankrupt or are under financial stress within two years of retirement and an estimated 60% of National Basketball Association (NBA) players go bankrupt within five years after leaving their sport.[1]
barackdhouse
Footballguy
There was either an HBO special or 30 for 30 about it.
Hankmoody
Footballguy
bucksoh said:
Classic example of statistics being used to tell a narrative.Andy Dufresne said:
A Fortune magazine article states, however, that a working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that the percentage of NFL players who go bankrupt after two years is a much smaller 1.9%, climbing to 15.7% after 12 years.[4]
The clause "or under financial stress" is ambiguous at best". If you aren't at least toeing that "financial stress" line you probably aren't having enough fun in life. And that doesn't account for the fact the average NFL player plays less than 4 years at very close to a minimum salary. That's somewhere around $2M total earnings, so somewhere around $1M in-pocket. Not to excuse it, but given the company the keep and the life they are exposed to, it's got to be very easy to spend a large chunk of $250k per year just keeping up appearances - nice car to drive to work, nice clothes for travel and game day, decent house that you can at least invite high-roller peers to and not get laughed at.
rockaction
Footballguy
Interseptopus
Footballguy
eNdblu
Footballguy
Casting Couch
Footballguy
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
It seems odd that only that one local news station is running the story and it's a "teaser" to get you to tune in at 5:00. For all we know it could be jury duty.
Also he wouldn't be heading to court if he was charged with a crime, he'd be heading to a police station first.
kutta
Footballguy
Not necessarily. I was charged and went to court for a class 4 felony 32 years ago and never went to the police station.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
If this is accurate and Hill is an alleged perpetrator that is not good for him.
If the child service agency brought that case to court there is a great chance court will order services and state the child is in need of services. I have went to court hundreds of times for child services and only 1 time did the court not agree with the decision. Only one other time was a case later thrown out. You don't have to be charged criminally for child services to take you to court, in fact a majority of the cases brought court do not involve criminal charges.
All that being said, Hill could have been going to support his fiancé and have nothing to do with the report.
Milkman
Footballguy
Wouldn't he be named on the citation like his fiance was if he was the perpetrator though?
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
No. Charges and child service perpetrators could be different people. For DCS it would take someone mentioning his name and he becomes alleged perpetrator.
The prosecutor would require much evidence to officially charge him.
All this again to say I don't know anything about what he is listed at in the child service report. I know reports were made that he was not listed on the police report. I would be more concerned if he was a perpetrator in child services report. Not being on police report is one sign he may not be on the child services report, but doesn't mean he wasn't. If he was on the police report than he would be about 95% on the child service report.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
If they operate anything like Indiana everyone needs to sell their shares now.
This means the court/child services removed the child from the parent. Removal of the child is done as a last resort when safety cannot be ensured. This means the child was deemed a child in need of services and he and the mother will be going through services. The services could last from 6 months to 2-5 years typically. If the NFL had any insight on what this means this would be very bad for his NFL status.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Thanks. Good information - figured this was criminal and he’d need to be charged first but so would your felony.
This is interesting: NFL letter seeks police records in child abuse case involving Tyreek Hill
What is interesting about he NFL sending a letter requesting info was that it was done BEFORE the second police report. I'm guessing this was around the time the lady whose name I forgot was tweeting that Hill broke his son's arm.
What is interesting about he NFL sending a letter requesting info was that it was done BEFORE the second police report. I'm guessing this was around the time the lady whose name I forgot was tweeting that Hill broke his son's arm.
I'd personally slow down on all of that.
I read a lot about this when the case first opened and from what I read it's rare that charges are pressed even when a child is temporarily removed from the home. Courts main goal is keeping families together and they understand some parents are overwhelmed or just not good parents and most of the time counseling and court supervision are what transpires, not criminal charges.
Last edited by a moderator:
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
I am going to take a wild guess on what occurred here with no inside information.
The child was discovered with a broken arm. Both child services and the police are alerted and begin investigations. Both Mr. Hill and fiancé deny they had any involvement and claim it was an accident. Child services contacts child abuse pediatrician specialists who claim this type of fracture is consistent with an inflicted injury and without a plausible explanation they rule it is inflicted abuse.
Due to both claiming no knowledge they remove the child from the home to ensure safety and that is what the court ruled today.
The child was discovered with a broken arm. Both child services and the police are alerted and begin investigations. Both Mr. Hill and fiancé deny they had any involvement and claim it was an accident. Child services contacts child abuse pediatrician specialists who claim this type of fracture is consistent with an inflicted injury and without a plausible explanation they rule it is inflicted abuse.
Due to both claiming no knowledge they remove the child from the home to ensure safety and that is what the court ruled today.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
I work for child services and am quite familiar with the process. I am also quite familiar with the services they go through and you are selling those short. Just because criminal charges are not pressed does not mean he didn't commit this act. Child services act on preponderance of the evidence. This means more than likely the alleged perpetrators committed this act. That is why I included if the NFL has any idea what this means this is bad for him.
The child was removed from his home on April 5th per an earlier report I read. Hill has been to court multiple times since that date and in the company of Espinal.
I trust the information I gathered and am also quite familiar with how these things transpire. I think you are jumping the gun.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
Removal is only done when child services cannot ensure safety of the child. I want to break down options for families before removal so we know where we are at.
1. Allegations are false. Child remains in home.
2. Allegations are true, but no services are needed. Sub and close. Child remains in home.
3. Allegations are true and services are needed. No court intervention, but services provided. Child remains in home.
4. Allegations are true, services are needed, and court intervention is needed. Child remains in home.
5. Allegations are true, services are needed, court intervention is needed, and child is removed.
There isn't a worse scenario that could have happened from a child service worker perspective.
Last edited by a moderator:
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
I am explaining the process with firsthand knowledge. I dont work in the state this occurred otherwise I could speak with more confidence.
I am telling you how child services operates.
You say You trust the information you gathered and I am jumping the gun. You are also familiar with the process. Let's dig deeper on that. How are you familiar?
Last edited by a moderator:
I am telling you I have an understanding how the process works but you think you know all and from what I gather you don't even live in Kansas.
I've already stated that most of the time a child is removed from the home it does not result in criminal charges but instead counseling. You on the other hand think you know all and that he broke his kids arm, will get charged and we should all sale now because the NFL will hammer him all because of a process that usually does not involve a criminal charge.
For me this his outcome is as clear as mud, like it's been. I'm not ready to convict like you are thus the jumping the gun.
For the sake of this thread how about we agree to disagree.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
You have made quite a few leaps that I have already told you how it works, but I will directly reply line by line.
1. They play in Missouri
2. I never said he broke his kids arm. The reaction of DCS to remove child/court remove child says they cannot ensure the safety of the child in said home. This could mean there is no story at all of the incident or they believe one or both had a role in this. Never did I say he would be charged. I said above he may never be charged. If you actually read my posts you will see me say this.
3. I again never said he will even be charged. I think this is bad for him based on the child services actions because this means child services had more likely than not evidence to continue forward with removal and services.
4. Okay
He has been going to court with her so they don't appear to have turned on each other but we do know the investigation is still on-going. I don't think anticipate charges being filed myself, but not out of the woods on the front yet.And of course that's step one in the process.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Calm down. He’s giving real life experience and has clearly said he’s not as familiar with the law in Kansas. It’s useful information for the rest of us. Ignore it if you want.
Last edited by a moderator:
Interseptopus
Footballguy
my sources tell me to sell sell sell
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
They may be together now but they supposedly weren't for awhile. Whether what she told her parents etc can be used or not, I have no idea.
Milkman
Footballguy
You would think if the child was deemed to be in danger they would have gotten him out of there in less time than 43 days.......they decide to take the child out now? Why? This smells like window dressing. They have to do this because of the publicity of the case and who's involved.
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Neither Zeke nor Hunt had charges filed so I don't see why that would be some hard line regarding his NFL prospects.
There is no rule on what the NFL needs to suspend someone but they have done it for a WHOLE lot less than a known abuser having his son taken away by child services because they think he might have abused him.
There is no rule on what the NFL needs to suspend someone but they have done it for a WHOLE lot less than a known abuser having his son taken away by child services because they think he might have abused him.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
We have had talks before, but this is not smoke without flame. If Goodell has any insight on what this means from child services perspective this would equal some type of suspension or exempt list status.
Child services may not be able to pin it on T. Hill himself, but they (child services and a court system) are saying the child is not safe in his home. Think about that.
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
If the price is right I suppose. Certainly wouldn't give more than 50% of his prior value.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
Similar threads
