Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

QB Deshaun Watson, HOU


Faust

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, wgoldsph said:

If he shows up why would the Texans tell him to go home?  I'd throw him right to the wolves.  He's clearly the best qb on the roster.

He doesn't want to be there, that's not the kind of player you want leading your team.  And if he tears his Achilles what does that do to his trade value?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if the massage story didn't occur you'd see a different posture from Watson (ala Aaron R), but with the looming issues he figures I might as well get paid and force the texans to move me w the baggage at hand. Now the Texans have to decide: Trade, Hold, or wait for the commissioners office to do something.

Trade: well, that goes back to what is Watson worth in his current state? If I'm any team wanting to trade for him, its a gamble vs what you are willing to pay.  Miami or Philly have picks to give, and philly isn't really in a win now mode, so Watson seems like a good spot if they can make it work without giving up all their draft capital. Miami likely tries to do this on the cheap, New England style.  As such, I do not think they will be in the running for real, unless somehow Xavien Howard ends up in the mix (ie they get a bounty of picks for him and send that to houston or something).  Denver seems to be holding out for Rodgers at this point, but maybe they dip their toe here?

Hold: Well, I think this is a bad idea.  If Watson gets past this issue, he will go back to wanting out.  If he doesn't then your most tradeable asset is on the shelf.

Wait for the commish:  Seems like a bad idea in the same light as the "hold" option.

If I'm the Texans; I trade him for picks and forget about getting a QB back.  Figure letting Miami or Philly hold onto their young QBs allows them a hedge vs a suspension and likely gets the texans an extra pick in the process.  Have tyrod do a "gap year" (ala Fitzmagic in DC) and go after a QB next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Gatorman said:

I think if the massage story didn't occur you'd see a different posture from Watson (ala Aaron R), but with the looming issues he figures I might as well get paid and force the texans to move me w the baggage at hand. Now the Texans have to decide: Trade, Hold, or wait for the commissioners office to do something.

Trade: well, that goes back to what is Watson worth in his current state? If I'm any team wanting to trade for him, its a gamble vs what you are willing to pay.  Miami or Philly have picks to give, and philly isn't really in a win now mode, so Watson seems like a good spot if they can make it work without giving up all their draft capital. Miami likely tries to do this on the cheap, New England style.  As such, I do not think they will be in the running for real, unless somehow Xavien Howard ends up in the mix (ie they get a bounty of picks for him and send that to houston or something).  Denver seems to be holding out for Rodgers at this point, but maybe they dip their toe here?

Hold: Well, I think this is a bad idea.  If Watson gets past this issue, he will go back to wanting out.  If he doesn't then your most tradeable asset is on the shelf.

Wait for the commish:  Seems like a bad idea in the same light as the "hold" option.

If I'm the Texans; I trade him for picks and forget about getting a QB back.  Figure letting Miami or Philly hold onto their young QBs allows them a hedge vs a suspension and likely gets the texans an extra pick in the process.  Have tyrod do a "gap year" (ala Fitzmagic in DC) and go after a QB next year.

I know they haven't been mentioned, but I feel like New Orleans makes a ton of sense for Watson. They have never been shy about dealing picks, they have a very unsettled QB situation(one that could probably be called a liability regardless of who wins the job) and they cleared enough cap space to afford Watson's contract, especially if they throw in Winston. 

Winston, 2022 1st, and a young starter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weren’t they seeking 3x 1sts before this situation? 

Like trying to sell a used car for $5k, and on the way to the prospective buyer’s place you get hit by a train, then tow what’s left of it over and say, “well here she is, $5k and she’s all yours!”

That dog won’t hunt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Weren’t they seeking 3x 1sts before this situation? 

They weren't returning calls on him, and then the legal stuff happened. So I don't know if anyone knows.

Looking back at articles back then, media types were putting deals they thought were realistic like:   In essence, Miami is trading the 13th overall pick in 2019 (Wilkins) and the fifth overall pick in 2020 (Tagovailoa), plus two ones and two twos for Watson.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, I'm not sure any of the mentioned teams has a QB the Texans would really want to develop around at this point if I were them. Why would they want Tua or Drew Lock or probably even Hurts? All have question marks and the Texans are already headed for enough instability.

If I'm them, push for the non-QB player + 3 1sts and see who bites. Next year's QB class has guys like Rattler or Howell among others and the Texans are picking anywhere from 1st to 3rd since they are especially awful. Picking a top QB plus these 2-3 additional picks resets the foundation so see what else you might be able to get and just move on at this point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jayded said:

To be fair, I'm not sure any of the mentioned teams has a QB the Texans would really want to develop around at this point if I were them. Why would they want Tua or Drew Lock or probably even Hurts? All have question marks and the Texans are already headed for enough instability.

If I'm them, push for the non-QB player + 3 1sts and see who bites. Next year's QB class has guys like Rattler or Howell among others and the Texans are picking anywhere from 1st to 3rd since they are especially awful. Picking a top QB plus these 2-3 additional picks resets the foundation so see what else you might be able to get and just move on at this point.

I agree on Lock and Hurts, but Tua is/was a top prospect, who was coming off a career threatening injury, in a year with no training camp. He had a solid rookie season, he just was outshined by Herbert having one of the best ever. 

Rattler is on a different level, but I'd probably prefer Tua to Howell, especially since you can use your picks to surround him with talent. Also gives you the option of trading the #1 pick(Rattler) if you get it, for an even bigger haul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Soulfly3 said:

Tua did???

6-3(2 of the losses were to KC and Buffalo) as a starter, 64% complete, 87.1 passer rating, only 5 INT's on 290 attempts, and that was with pretty below average weapons, and a bad OL.

Edited by travdogg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, travdogg said:

I agree on Lock and Hurts, but Tua is/was a top prospect, who was coming off a career threatening injury, in a year with no training camp. He had a solid rookie season, he just was outshined by Herbert having one of the best ever. 

Rattler is on a different level, but I'd probably prefer Tua to Howell, especially since you can use your picks to surround him with talent. Also gives you the option of trading the #1 pick(Rattler) if you get it, for an even bigger haul.

Don’t disagree about Howell personally. While the 2022 class doesn’t have a Trevor level prospect, I’d argue, I think it’s a deeper QB draft than many realize so if you have to rebuild and pick a QB early, it’ll have plenty of options at least. 

Something about Tua just doesn’t scream confidence since he’s been in the pros, and that’s nothing to do with his injury. I think it’s more the team has yet to rally around him and then his admission of not really knowing the playbook. 

Remember, the Texans have lost Hopkins, Watt, and shortly Watson. They need a vocal field general not yet on the roster. I’m not convinced that’s Tua or any trade available QBs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

There is one interesting point not many are talking about. Watson wants to be able to tell his side of the story. The non-disclosure issue. From what I understand the Watson side does not want a non-disclosure agreement in the settlement. I find this very interesting as to why? 

 We are all speculating because what else can we do. I do wonder if the NFL knows more than the public. Normally a defendant in this situation might WANT the disclosure agreement. I also think if there was a real smoking gun so to speak it would have come out and again Watson would not want that to get out. I also read Buzbee's statement from his honeymoon with a raised eye brow. I think a man on his honeymoon would have better things to do than throw shade at a defendant in a civil suit he is involved in. I think he is a cocky lawyer but he also might be frustrated that he can not get what he wants in the settlement. He goes on to describe what he did not do during his massage. He is really laying out what Watson is being accused of. If that is the only thing they have with the number of cases to their case then I like Watson's chances of getting this behind him with a settlement and 6-9 game suspension at some point. The question still remains why does Watson want to tell his side so badly??? 

The way the NFL conducts investigations, they will talk to everyone else willing to talk to them and then will talk to Watson last. That way, they will hear first hand what he says happened. And then once they have that, they will present him with conflicting stories or information that don't fit his narrative.

Like other similar cases, the issue may be more the threat of league action or actually getting placed on the exempt list that could have more of an impact than an actual suspension. That kept Antonio in Brown in limbo for almost a full season.

I think the optics of the league allowing Watson to play actual meaningful games in September will cause them to place him on the exempt list. They will let the situation play out more and ultimately will also suspend him. But slow rolling things and then suspending him could cost him the entire season.

We also don't know if ultimately there will be criminal charges filed, which also could impact the outcome. It would not shock me if the NFL released a blanket statement that indicated no conclusions have been met on Watson and the league could take action at any time . . . effectively warning 31 other teams that they could trade for him but buyer beware they may not have him available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

My point was why does Watson not want a non-disclosure agreement in the settlement? It appears at this point it's Watson's camp that wants to be able to disclose information. He wants to tell his side of the story. If they go to court then everything is going to come out including the names of accusers from what I understand I could be wrong on that. If Watson wanted to settle this and have it behind him and he agrees to the money and non-disclosure it would be done but instead the reported hang up is Watson wants to be able to disclose his side of the story. I would think the money would be the issue and not the fact that he wants to be able to disclose everything. There is a lot more going on than the public knows. I'm starting to think Watson is either delusional or very confidant. Maybe both. I would think in a case of this size and the allegations the defendant would  be all for non-disclosure.

Your point is clear but you're missing the implication.  Watson's side wants it public to put the Social Injustice Media to work.  Get the names out there, let the trolls and despicable little people do your dirty work in scaring and intimidating the defendants.  It's dirty tactics but that's lawyers.  It has nothing to do with telling his side.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

My point was why does Watson not want a non-disclosure agreement in the settlement? It appears at this point it's Watson's camp that wants to be able to disclose information. He wants to tell his side of the story. If they go to court then everything is going to come out including the names of accusers from what I understand I could be wrong on that. If Watson wanted to settle this and have it behind him and he agrees to the money and non-disclosure it would be done but instead the reported hang up is Watson wants to be able to disclose his side of the story. I would think the money would be the issue and not the fact that he wants to be able to disclose everything. There is a lot more going on than the public knows. I'm starting to think Watson is either delusional or very confidant. Maybe both. I would think in a case of this size and the allegations the defendant would  be all for non-disclosure.

His reasons may be what you say, although I doubt Watson wants to talk much about this situation at all once resolved. His attorney said the reason for this requirement is Watson does not want the stigma of "of course you demanded a nondisclosure to settle, because you are guilty and have something to hide." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

 Any team trading for him now should have already baked in the idea of worst case scenario. I think the league learned from the Zeke fiasco. The time, money and  bad pr. The NFL is now more willing to let legal process play out instead of having weeks of bad pr going to court and dealing with the NFLPA. Zeke taking the NFL to court changed a lot of the process. The evidence against Watson is not significant enough to take action at this time.  The ball is in the Houston Texans court right now if they want to take action to keep Watson from training camp.

Zeke was a long time ago relatively speaking. There was the Tyreek Hill situation since then, where the commissioner stepped in and put him on the exempt list (and he eventually was cleared and missed no game time). Then there was the AB situation, which seemed tamer than the Watson situation and Brown ended up missing like 22 games. Technically he could have been signed and played, but Roger made it clear teams might have to pay their new player without him actually being allowed to play. 

We don’t really know what the league is going to do. They haven’t said Watson can’t play. But they also haven’t said he can play. I would be surprised if Watson will be allowed to suit up Week 1. It is probably in the best interest of the team to suspend him indefinitely, as that way they wouldn’t have to pay him. If the Commish put him on the Exempt List, then HOU would have to pay him each week and that could go on for weeks. 

The Watson demanding a trade scenario doesn’t help matters any. But showing up for camp at least prevents him from racking up huge fines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

I see this as not likely at all.  His accusations are much worse than saying "I did not want people thinking I wanted an non-disclosure". And he already has made it clear he does not want a non-disclosure. He would now be open to agreeing to the non-disclosure and settling because he has made it public he did not want one. He now can point that he did not want one but settled for one to get this behind him.  And maybe that will happen. He seems ready to go to court. I think he should have settled from the start but now I would like to see both the accusers and Watson take it to court so everyone gets their day and some type of justice for the accusers or Watson can be had. He has already lost in the court of public opinion. Now it's about justice and money.

He lost in the court of public opinion? Maybe when the story broke, but seems to me people have moved past it. The fact there is no criminal charge after 10 victim interviews, I think, has most folks still unclear what is going on here. Memories are short when it comes to pro athletes. I do agree he could probably sign a nondisclosure after being very public he did not want one. Maybe that is where this ends.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think pounding his chest saying "I don't want non disclosures" is all posturing.....he is saying that now, but when the rubber meets the road he will want them if he is in fact going to "settle" now 24 cases.  He is trying to come off looking like a good guy/victim in his own right by saying "I don't want non disclosures".  He is saying that now, but he will probably be whistling a different tune when push comes to shove.  

Does he really want to pay 24 women millions of dollars and then also allow all 24 of them them to make more money by appearing on every Jerry Springer show out there giving out all the juicy details?  Which then keeps his name dragging through the mud even more than it already will be. I don't think so.  Posturing 101.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

I see your reasoning. I suppose I'm wondering myself. I think Buzbee's weird tweet or comments about Watson made me think more is going on. It seemed he is frustrated. Some would say he was just trying to keep the story in the limelight so he could remind the public opinion of what a scumbag Watson is. I think the shade was intended to agitate Watson/Hardin. The question is why? Also, why is an attorney on his "honeymoon" taking the opportunity to give details of what he did not do during his massage basically laying out what is being alleged Watson did or did not do. Again why? No one cares what you did or did not do during your massage on your honeymoon. Just to keep the story in the press? And agitate Watson/Hardin.  I guess both is possible. It just seemed extremely odd. The closer to week one the more this discussion will take place and more pressure on the NFL to do something. Deadlines spur action. The first deadline happens at the opening of training camp. Did Watson do something not appropriate? I think there is no doubt something happened on multiple occasions. I think 22/24 women are not making this all up. 

The Houston Texans should excuse him with pay. I think that would be the smart play. If you try to suspend him claiming " conduct detrimental to the team"  you have issues with NFLPA  and perhaps legal action since he has no criminal charges and been found guilty of anything.  I do not know the exact terms of "conduct detrimental to the team". Just excuse him with pay and move on with training camp.  Giving Taylor and Mills the reps they need. He is not playing for the Texans anyway.

probably because when you get a case "like this" it pretty much takes priority over just about everything.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

I see your reasoning. I suppose I'm wondering myself. I think Buzbee's weird tweet or comments about Watson made me think more is going on. It seemed he is frustrated. Some would say he was just trying to keep the story in the limelight so he could remind the public opinion of what a scumbag Watson is. I think the shade was intended to agitate Watson/Hardin. The question is why? Also, why is an attorney on his "honeymoon" taking the opportunity to give details of what he did not do during his massage basically laying out what is being alleged Watson did or did not do. Again why? No one cares what you did or did not do during your massage on your honeymoon. Just to keep the story in the press? And agitate Watson/Hardin.  I guess both is possible. It just seemed extremely odd. The closer to week one the more this discussion will take place and more pressure on the NFL to do something. Deadlines spur action. The first deadline happens at the opening of training camp. Did Watson do something not appropriate? I think there is no doubt something happened on multiple occasions. I think 22/24 women are not making this all up. 

Yeah, it's a puzzle for sure. I think this has been a money grab all along for Buzbee (not talking about the merits, there no doubt are some). But that's his job. I just think his strategy to come out with a bazooka (15-20 plaintiffs), over a long offseason, backfired when it did not lead to settlement. I've heard a lot of sports gurus opine that it should have, so hard to question the strategy completely. However, as it has played out, in particular that there were no criminal charges (yet) or NFL suspension (yet) after many many interviews, it makes the claims look more iffy and pressure decreases over time on Watson to settle. Not a doubt in my mind that many of these plaintiffs got onboard with assurance they'd never need to go through a trial. Given common stereotyping of the private masseuse industry, suspect it would not be difficult for a defense attorney to sling a ton of mud. That's where 24 plaintiffs, with likely different histories, may work against Buzbee. Would be better to have 3 snow whites. 

Edited by BigJim®
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

Huh? So your telling people how you behaved during a massage on your honeymoon because this is a big case?

I was basically just responding to the part about "he's on his honeymoon, why is he even talking at all about the case"....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

also have just been wondering what "settling" really means here....what kind of figures are we talking here x24.....I realize he makes a lot of money, not sure how much he has left and if he has a good budget practices....but this seems like it could get really expensive....I mean I think if I am still in it up to this point....I'm going to want to get mine.....especially if there does end up being "non disclosures" ....which I think will happen eventually....

feels to me like with some things not happening until FEB 22, that there is no way he plays a snap this year.....I think dude is toast, almost no matter how this shakes out....too much smoke for there to be no fire that could probably have end of career like collateral damage....who would really want to try and sell this guy as the new face of our franchise...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

This is a good post. I have wondered that myself on "settling" from what I recall the settlements in civil cases do not turn out to be as large as people think they are. Mike Florio outlined something like this before in an article or pod. I remember when this all started the asking price to settle was like 30,000 (thirty thousand). It's public knowledge that Florio was a lawyer in a past life but in what I have no idea. I assume the price tag can go up but I would assume if it goes to court then the amount would be determined by the court? So your point is very valid.  If the amount could be less in court x24 this could be a motivating factor on settlement. Watson may figure he has already lost public opinion and your right what kind of endorsements will he get in the future. If he figures he can get a better figure at the end of the day in court this could be a motivation. I don't know enough to say.  A civil court attorney  would be a great resource for this question.

"Settling" typically is a way to prevent dirty laundry from being aired and going on the record. Settling can be a better option for both sides . . . Watson may not want the public to know some freaky stuff he requested . . . and his accusers may not want to have to reveal their identifies and testify in court to things they agreed to do. Also, the court can order full discovery (especially if they are looking for criminal activities), meaning that both sides can demand all electronic communication and access to cell phones, etc. Who knows what would be on Watson's phone that he may not to want get out, and vice versa for the women.

From what I have seen as a non-legal observer in class action suits, sometimes all plaintiffs get the same amount but many times they do not. One woman could have had it way worse than others and might demand a greater sum. There could be others that either had weaker cases or only suffered limited harassment and they might receive a lesser amount.

IMO, the worst outcome is if all the women demand their own trials and Watson stays in the limelight over this for years. That's why he might be inclined to settle and maybe even pay out more just to get all this behind him. Of course, the issue for the NFL is they have lacked consistency in how they have treated off field issues and how they hand out punishment. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't, and the penalties have been all over the map.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, BigJim® said:

Yeah, it's a puzzle for sure. I think this has been a money grab all along for Buzbee (not talking about the merits, there no doubt are some). But that's his job. I just think his strategy to come out with a bazooka (15-20 plaintiffs), over a long offseason, backfired when it did not lead to settlement. I've heard a lot of sports gurus opine that it should have, so hard to question the strategy completely. However, as it has played out, in particular that there were no criminal charges (yet) or NFL suspension (yet) after many many interviews, it makes the claims look more iffy and pressure decreases over time on Watson to settle. Not a doubt in my mind that many of these plaintiffs got onboard with assurance they'd never need to go through a trial. Given common stereotyping of the private masseuse industry, suspect it would not be difficult for a defense attorney to sling a ton of mud. That's where 24 plaintiffs, with likely different histories, may work against Buzbee. Would be better to have 3 snow whites. 

I think going into court, and attempting to call 24 professional masseuses prostitutes would be a really really bad idea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, massraider said:

I think going into court, and attempting to call 24 professional masseuses prostitutes would be a really really bad idea. 

I don't think that would be necessary. You seem to have more info than I do on the "professional masseuse" designation. I know nothing about their certification, how he found them, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stinkin Ref said:

I think pounding his chest saying "I don't want non disclosures" is all posturing.....he is saying that now, but when the rubber meets the road he will want them if he is in fact going to "settle" now 24 cases.  He is trying to come off looking like a good guy/victim in his own right by saying "I don't want non disclosures".  He is saying that now, but he will probably be whistling a different tune when push comes to shove.  

Does he really want to pay 24 women millions of dollars and then also allow all 24 of them them to make more money by appearing on every Jerry Springer show out there giving out all the juicy details?  Which then keeps his name dragging through the mud even more than it already will be. I don't think so.  Posturing 101.

Victims of sexual assault generally don't go on shows like Jerry Springer, but I agree his camp's "DeShaun doesn't want non disclosures" is posturing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, massraider said:

I think going into court, and attempting to call 24 professional masseuses prostitutes would be a really really bad idea. 

I don't think they are all professionals, but a good number of them are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Foosball God said:

Victims of sexual assault generally don't go on shows like Jerry Springer, but I agree his camp's "DeShaun doesn't want non disclosures" is posturing.

hmmmmm....without knowing details, I am not sure if we are talking full blown sexual assaults here or being creepy/inappropriate or something somewhere in between....and all 24 could be different.....if the price is right, I could see at least some of the 24 willing to openly talk about what they experienced.....you know the whole I am willing to talk about it so it doesn't happen to others type of thing.....(that also puts a few dollars in my pocket)....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Foosball God said:

Victims of sexual assault generally don't go on shows like Jerry Springer, but I agree his camp's "DeShaun doesn't want non disclosures" is posturing.

and obviously Springer is just an example, but it could be money for book rights or a magazine interview or a podcast or an appearance.....whatever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Foosball God said:

I don't think they are all professionals, but a good number of them are.

Unless they have a bunch of mug shots of these women, and convictions for that kind of behavior, I would re-state my previous statement. It would be a bad strategy in court. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigJim® said:

I don't think that would be necessary. You seem to have more info than I do on the "professional masseuse" designation. I know nothing about their certification, how he found them, etc. 

Wait, are you unaware that this is a profession? 

I am making an assumption here. I am assuming he found them through normal channels, and didn't hire them through sketchy means. I make this assumption because if he was hiring them through poorly-disguised prostitution fronts, that would have been all his lawyer would have needed to win the battle of PR. 

Assuming these women weren't advertising a 24 hour discreet encounter on shady websites, I believe that any court strategy that would come across as, "they are a masseuse, we all know they are whores, right?", would go very badly. 

 

 

Edited by massraider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, massraider said:

Unless they have a bunch of mug shots of these women, and convictions for that kind of behavior, I would re-state my previous statement. It would be a bad strategy in court. 

I'm not going to argue good/bad (would not want to be involved in this area of law), but it is basically textbook in these sorts of cases to demonize the victims, and depict them as money grabbers. What other defense is there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, massraider said:

Wait, are you unaware that this is a profession? 

I am making an assumption here. I am assuming he found them through normal channels, and didn't hire them through sketchy means. I make this assumption because if he was hiring them through poorly-disguised prostitution fronts, that would have been all his lawyer would have needed to win the battle of PR. 

Assuming these women weren't advertising a 24 hour discreet renovating l encounter on shady websites, I believe that any court strategy that would come across as, "they are a masseuse, we all know they are whores, right?", would go very badly. 

 

 

Of course I'm not unfamiliar that there are professional massage therapists. I don't know all of these plaintiffs are. They may be. His long time massage therapist said she dropped him as a client because he was using so many she was unfamiliar with and "he needed to be careful Bc his name is getting around." Who knows where 24 therapists were found over a short period of time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

Innocence and consent come to mind.

Yeah, agreed. I said "sling mud" - mass raiders said "call them prostitutes." I would expect him to argue that the allegations are wrong. However, in he said/she said you do need to impeach credibility of the person making an allegation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BigJim® said:

Of course I'm not unfamiliar that there are professional massage therapists. I don't know all of these plaintiffs are.

According to reports, definitely not all of them are masseuses.  

 

Quote

That evening, he appeared in the office of a licensed aesthetician, whom he'd contacted via Instagram for a massage, according to her lawsuit. The woman says she told Watson she was not a massage therapist, but that he insisted on booking with her anyway.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, GregR said:

According to reports, definitely not all of them are masseuses.  

 

 

I believe it was reported that at least one woman withdrew from the suit because she wasn’t a licensed massage therapist as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

When it fits. You can not make things up of course but if they have some kind of past that points to issues that might help your client. I can see that being used in court. 

That was my only point. You don't have to call someone a prostitute to suggest they became added to a list looking for a payday, having never filed a police report previously. It's going to be a challenge in any action with 24 plaintiffs, who may or may not have pasts. A lot of that won't even be known until discovery/depositions are complete. Sexual assault is a serious allegation and they should expect to have credibility impeached with anything under the sun.

Edited by BigJim®
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, BigJim® said:

That was my only point. You don't have to call someone a prostitute to suggest they became added to a list looking for a payday, having never filed a police report previously. It's going to be a challenge in any action with 24 plaintiffs, who may or may not have pasts. A lot of that won't even be known until discovery/depositions are complete. Sexual assault is a serious allegation and they should expect to have credibility impeached with anything under the sun.

Apologies, it seemed as if the mud-slinging was centered on their profession, in your post.  

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If an NFL player illegally pays a woman for a sexual act does the NFL have the authority and willingness to suspend the player for solicitation? Licensed Massage Therapy is a legitimate, licensed, and beneficial health profession. Massage, not to be confused with the former (LMT), is sometimes a front for prostitution. From what we know, Deshaun Watson had some consensual acts with some of the plaintiffs. We've heard after undressing, he would cover his privates with a hand towel as opposed to a full towel. If we are talking about a LMT, I would consider that a form of sexual misconduct. If we were talking about a "front" for prostitution, probably anything goes. If I had to speculate, I would guess Deshaun Watson was seeking out the latter and not the former LMT, but in doing so crossed paths with legitimate LMTs. If he unknowingly exposed himself to LMTs he is still culpable, but the misconduct is perhaps less egregious. I haven't heard the word solicitation used in describing Deshaun's Watson's behavior, but it seems to me to be appropriate. That brings me back to my original question, how does the NFL handle solicitation?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

Here is something new at least new for me and if this has been covered than my apologies. 

 

The exempt list is only for games and not training camp. Per Ian Rapoport on the Pat McAfee show yesterday.

I was not aware of that if that is in fact true and I assume it is. Since he clearly reported that.

The reason why it’s true is there are no games being played and the player’s aren’t getting their game checks. That’s why I suggested earlier we have no idea if the league intends on letting Watson play once the season starts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the past players have been instructed by the league to stay away from "team activities" until further notice.....I will say I am a little surprised that has not happened yet....

Edited by Stinkin Ref
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Stinkin Ref said:

in the past players have been instructed by the league to stay away from "team activities" until further notice.....I will say I am a little surprised that has not happened yet....

From Rotoworld

 

The NFL announced that it will not place any restrictions on Deshaun Watson's ability to participate in team activities "at this time."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A question I'm curious about for others following this situation:

If you're Nick Caserio, you might have been granted a semi-second window here. He had a chance right after the season to make the big deal with the largest recoupment of assets. Then the legal scenarios came out and his value went in the tank.

Now, his value is probably somewhere in the middle of those two previous extremes. Do you deal him right now ahead of any legal resolution or do you see the legal situation out, hoping for a positive reconciliation, and then hope to get the same level of assets as your first window would have allowed?

AKA - what would you do and when would you pull the trigger if you were running the Texans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Faust changed the title to QB Deshaun Watson, HOU

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...