What's new
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.

QB Deshaun Watson, CLE (3 Viewers)

Deshaun Watson’s team had every legal right to lift the veil of anonymity so that he could face his accusers and could form a legal defence. What I take issue with is how his legal team made it easy for the media to mass broadcast those names.  
Court filings are public records.

 
Court filings are public records.
Yes but that isn't really the complaint in this situation.

As the article says, people can get at the names in the legal filings, and doing so usually takes time, possibly even money.  That may not seem like a high barrier, but it's probably one that most of people on the internet who may lash out with a death threat or threat of rape if the name is dropped in their lap, wouldn't pursue to acquire the name if it took effort.  Even some reporters might not go to the effort to get the actual legal documents.

The complaint here is that the lawyer basically included the names in what he sent directly to the press. And some of those press then just dumped them out into the wild.  I don't disagree that's kind of poor behavior on both accounts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
the article makes it seem like its a bad thing the other 10 didn't show up to a status conference.....I don't know maybe they have jobs and bills to pay and can't just hop on a plane in the middle of the week if Watson isn't picking up the tab....
Florio is such a weaselly little knob

 
I think the one thing that helps the plaintiff side is the old adage "there is strength in numbers". If 12 of the 22 do show up to show support for their cases, that should help all 22 continue with their cases because that is tangible evidence that they are not going through this all by themselves.

 
I think the one thing that helps the plaintiff side is the old adage "there is strength in numbers". If 12 of the 22 do show up to show support for their cases, that should help all 22 continue with their cases because that is tangible evidence that they are not going through this all by themselves.
You may want to rethink your working definition of tangible.

 
GregR said:
Yes but that isn't really the complaint in this situation.

As the article says, people can get at the names in the legal filings, and doing so usually takes time, possibly even money.  That may not seem like a high barrier, but it's probably one that most of people on the internet who may lash out with a death threat or threat of rape if the name is dropped in their lap, wouldn't pursue to acquire the name if it took effort.  Even some reporters might not go to the effort to get the actual legal documents.

The complaint here is that the lawyer basically included the names in what he sent directly to the press. And some of those press then just dumped them out into the wild.  I don't disagree that's kind of poor behavior on both accounts.
I hear you, but do you think the wouldn't be at least a few reporters who dug up the names on their own? 

GregR said:
Yes but that isn't really the complaint in this situation.

As the article says, people can get at the names in the legal filings, and doing so usually takes time, possibly even money.  That may not seem like a high barrier, but it's probably one that most of people on the internet who may lash out with a death threat or threat of rape if the name is dropped in their lap, wouldn't pursue to acquire the name if it took effort.  Even some reporters might not go to the effort to get the actual legal documents.

The complaint here is that the lawyer basically included the names in what he sent directly to the press. And some of those press then just dumped them out into the wild.  I don't disagree that's kind of poor behavior on both accounts.
At best it would have taken a couple days for a couple reporters to get and release the names. 

As an attorney I'm still not doing it myself, but it's no longer that big an issue. 

Did not mean to double quote 🤷🏽‍♂️

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a prime example of a situation where the NFL should do absolutely nothing regarding suspensions/fines and allow the legal system to play out.  This could literally take 2 years where Watson could be suspended that entire time only to found out he was innocent.  

It might even be a GOOD thing for the league if they start to lean on the legal system before making decisions on these kinds of suspensions.  "We will punish based on the legal findings" isnt necessarily a bad thing.  


That won't happen because of the current social justice climate in the NFL and I phrased that as nicely as I could and certainly don't want to open that can of worms in the Shark Pool, so I'll just leave it at that.


The NFL screwed up when they allowed public opinion in to decide severity of punishment.

This led to a media frenzy because now they felt they had power to influence descipline.

"We will follow the standards of the law".  It will be tough at first but would be easy after a year.


I guess my question would be is "let it play out in court first" really the standard for this in any profession, and if not why do we expect it in football?

When Louis CK was accused of all that sexual harassment no one really expected him to continue going around headlining comedy shows.  When an actor gets accused on multiple counts no one really expects to see them in new movies with their names plastered on movie posters.

If your employer found out your co-worker was being accused of sexual assault by 22 women, would you expect to see him in the office on Monday?

I have no idea what the NFL should do here, but I do find it interesting that we constantly complain about how football players get more leniency because they are football players and then turn around and expect football players to get more leniency because they are football players.  If Steve from HR was accused of 22 counts of sexual assault there is NO WAY anyone who works with him would even question for a half a second when he wasn't allowed back in the office.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess my question would be is "let it play out in court first" really the standard for this in any profession, and if not why do we expect it in football?

When Louis CK was accused of all that sexual harassment no one really expected him to continue going around headlining comedy shows.  When an actor gets accused on multiple counts no one really expects to see them in new movies with their names plastered on movie posters.

If your employer found out your co-worker was being accused of sexual assault by 22 women, would you expect to see him in the office on Monday?

I have no idea what the NFL should do here, but I do find it interesting that we constantly complain about how football players get more leniency because they are football players and then turn around and expect football players to get more leniency because they are football players.  If Steve from HR was accused of 22 counts of sexual assault there is NO WAY anyone who works with him would even question for a half a second when he wasn't allowed back in the office.
This is a great point, and one I hadn't really considered in this case.  Thanks for the food for thought.

 
No one saw this crap coming did they?  Seems like every year someone is in hot water with off-the-field issues.  I just wish it would be over soon, but it won't.  This will drag out for who knows how long, so plan on parking Watson on your bench for 2021. I know I have.  Also, don't sell him cheap.  That would be stupid.  You're better off seeing how this plays out.  

 
From a purely football lens, I'm curious where his head would be now. Every team but Houston might shun him or at least shun him for a good while and show unwillingness to pay him beyond his current contract. Does the legal process he'll eventually be on the other side of make him reconsider Houston?

I can't imagine he still wants to stay, but I'm not sure if anyone else will accept him. I will assume he could be gone half the year if not the full year, and if so, Houston is picking early in 2022 again. That would be beyond the disastrous sets of trades that forked over players and drafts and see Houston with draft capital to start to right the ship (and maybe still retain their franchise QB).

 
A little thought experiment.

Let's say a flawless fortune teller guarantees you that Deshaun will be on the Commish Exempt List for 2021 and 2022 which is the time it takes the court cases to play out.  I've seen that mentioned as how long it could take potentially.  I am not personally saying I think it will be that long.  And I don't know that the NFL would keep him there that long, but for the sake of this, lets say they do.

That would cost the Texans $15m in 2021 and $35m in salary in 2022 which gets paid to him and hits their cap. Deshaun gets paid in full while on the list and it hits the team's cap.

Or they could trade him now for presumably less than they'd get if they waited until the cases are resolved. But if they trade him now, they save those two guaranteed salaries and the new team takes them on .

When comparing an offer of purely picks now, versus what you'd get for him in 2 years after the legal cases settle... what would you say the saved $50m in cap space is worth if you translate it into draft picks and add it into the 'now' offer?

Again I'm  not saying I think he'll be on the Commish list for 2 years. But it's the possibility I used in the thought experiment when I first saw it mentioned as a potential timeline for the legal stuff.

 
A little thought experiment.

Let's say a flawless fortune teller guarantees you that Deshaun will be on the Commish Exempt List for 2021 and 2022 which is the time it takes the court cases to play out.  I've seen that mentioned as how long it could take potentially.  I am not personally saying I think it will be that long.  And I don't know that the NFL would keep him there that long, but for the sake of this, lets say they do.

That would cost the Texans $15m in 2021 and $35m in salary in 2022 which gets paid to him and hits their cap. Deshaun gets paid in full while on the list and it hits the team's cap.

Or they could trade him now for presumably less than they'd get if they waited until the cases are resolved. But if they trade him now, they save those two guaranteed salaries and the new team takes them on .

When comparing an offer of purely picks now, versus what you'd get for him in 2 years after the legal cases settle... what would you say the saved $50m in cap space is worth if you translate it into draft picks and add it into the 'now' offer?

Again I'm  not saying I think he'll be on the Commish list for 2 years. But it's the possibility I used in the thought experiment when I first saw it mentioned as a potential timeline for the legal stuff.
Nobody would trade for him at all if it was known he wont play for two years......or would they

 
A little thought experiment.

Let's say a flawless fortune teller guarantees you that Deshaun will be on the Commish Exempt List for 2021 and 2022 which is the time it takes the court cases to play out.  I've seen that mentioned as how long it could take potentially.  I am not personally saying I think it will be that long.  And I don't know that the NFL would keep him there that long, but for the sake of this, lets say they do.

That would cost the Texans $15m in 2021 and $35m in salary in 2022 which gets paid to him and hits their cap. Deshaun gets paid in full while on the list and it hits the team's cap.

Or they could trade him now for presumably less than they'd get if they waited until the cases are resolved. But if they trade him now, they save those two guaranteed salaries and the new team takes them on .

When comparing an offer of purely picks now, versus what you'd get for him in 2 years after the legal cases settle... what would you say the saved $50m in cap space is worth if you translate it into draft picks and add it into the 'now' offer?

Again I'm  not saying I think he'll be on the Commish list for 2 years. But it's the possibility I used in the thought experiment when I first saw it mentioned as a potential timeline for the legal stuff.
It's not 50 million of cap space the Texans would save but 30 million. Trading him now takes this years cap hit from about $15 million to $20 million (due to the Texans being on the hook for his signing bonus). So it costs the Texans $5 million this year, and then they save the $35 million next year for a net savings of $30 million

 
what GM in their right mind would trade for this guy to begin with.....?....as a GM are you really going to hang your hat on a trade for DW as a move you will be tied to for the rest of your career.....and cost you that much money and he may not even play....what owner/fan base wants any part of this guy....IMO he is about as untradeable as it gets right now....

 
what GM in their right mind would trade for this guy to begin with.....?....as a GM are you really going to hang your hat on a trade for DW as a move you will be tied to for the rest of your career.....and cost you that much money and he may not even play....what owner/fan base wants any part of this guy....IMO he is about as untradeable as it gets right now....
100% this. The media s**tstorm alone would be a fiasco & would undoubtedly cost the team in terms of hassle & negative publicity. 

I recall it was quite the circus when Michael Vick was reinstated, and the Eagles took a ton of heat for signing him.

And Vick did his time, paid his fines and went on a rehabilitation tour, becoming a spokesperson against animal cruelty. And it was *still* a PR nightmare. 

Watson’s case is ongoing, getting bigger by the day & dare I say involves things that are somehow significantly worse than dogfighting/electrocution & strangling of dogs. 

A team would be absolutely bonkers to make that move right now. 

 
dhockster said:
It's not 50 million of cap space the Texans would save but 30 million. Trading him now takes this years cap hit from about $15 million to $20 million (due to the Texans being on the hook for his signing bonus). So it costs the Texans $5 million this year, and then they save the $35 million next year for a net savings of $30 million
Actually my $50m should have been $45.5m, I had his salary wrong for one of the years.  

But no, you aren't using the right equation to get at the total savings over all years of the cap for the different scenarios. 

The cap collectively takes the signing bonus hit ($21.6m actually,) if he's traded this year, next year, is cut, or plays out his contract. The only difference is which years it hits in. So when we want the total change in cap hits between the two scenarios we can completely remove it from the equation. It hits equally in all, just the timing is different. The Texans total cap across the years is reduced this amount in all scenarios.

The only change in total cost depending on year of trade is the salary you pay him and it hits your cap, or you don't pay him and it doesn't.  I'll leave the signing bonus in there for completeness, but it doesn't end up playing a role.

Trade now: 
$21.6m (signing bonus escalated) hits the cap in 2021. 

Trade after 2022:
$10.5m salary hits in 2021.
$35m salary hits in 2022
$5.4m (signing bonus) hit in 2021
$5.4m (signing bonus) hit in 2022
$10.8m (signing bonus escalated) hits in 2023
---------------
$67.1m cap hits total across 2021+2022+2023 ($21.6m bonus + $10.5m salary + 35m salary) 

So the difference now or after 2022  = $67.1m - $21.6m = $45.5m.   Which is exactly his two salaries we didn't pay, $10.5m in 2021 and $35m in 2022.

Why didn't your number work?  $5m is the NET CHANGE in the 2021 cap if you trade him now. It is not his actual cap number.  If you want to work with net changes then you have to use the actual net changes for the other years too. $35m is only part of the net change in the 2022 cap. There is also the $5.4m that changed when you escalated it into 2021. And there are also $5.4m charges in each of 2023 and 2024 similarly changed. Those contribute too if you're going to work in net changes. Those 3 x $5.4m =16.2m of his signing bonus are the amount you're off by (or would be if we'd used the same exact numbers instead of rounding/approximate).

But easier to just skip the cap hit from the signing bonus since it hits eventually regardless of scenario.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
But, back to the question... what draft picks would be equal to a $45.5m cap savings?
The cap space doesn’t really help them much this year, but clearing the space in 2022 has some real value and if some team was willing to take him the Texans should take a discount to move him. The thing is, like others have said, I just don’t see any takers right now.

 
The cap space doesn’t really help them much this year, but clearing the space in 2022 has some real value and if some team was willing to take him the Texans should take a discount to move him. The thing is, like others have said, I just don’t see any takers right now.
Unspent cap space each year does carry over until it's used, so not like it's lost.

 
They weren't going to trade him most likely no matter what
Based on what? The Texans saying they weren't? My guess is they were playing hard to get to try to drive the price up. The fact is you had two teams in the same division with multiple first round picks, one who desperately needs a franchise QB, and one who went 10-6 with a Fitzpatrick/rookie Tua combo at QB which Deshaun would be a significant upgrade over. Plus other teams (The Panthers, Broncos, and Bears) who appeared ready to give away the store to get Watson. Without the sexual harrassment lawsuits, the Texans would have been offered the biggest package for a franchise QB ever. If you assume that he is serious about never playing for the Texans again, the Texans would have been morons NOT to trade him before this draft. Waiting a year to trade him doesn't make as much sense because a) you lose a year to start your rebuild b) the market for Deshaun would at best be the same as this year but most likely would be worse and c) the salary cap implications are easier for the team trading for Deshaun this year, with a $10 million base salary, as opposed to next year, when his base salary goes up to $35 million.

 
Based on what? The Texans saying they weren't? My guess is they were playing hard to get to try to drive the price up. The fact is you had two teams in the same division with multiple first round picks, one who desperately needs a franchise QB, and one who went 10-6 with a Fitzpatrick/rookie Tua combo at QB which Deshaun would be a significant upgrade over. Plus other teams (The Panthers, Broncos, and Bears) who appeared ready to give away the store to get Watson. Without the sexual harrassment lawsuits, the Texans would have been offered the biggest package for a franchise QB ever. If you assume that he is serious about never playing for the Texans again, the Texans would have been morons NOT to trade him before this draft. Waiting a year to trade him doesn't make as much sense because a) you lose a year to start your rebuild b) the market for Deshaun would at best be the same as this year but most likely would be worse and c) the salary cap implications are easier for the team trading for Deshaun this year, with a $10 million base salary, as opposed to next year, when his base salary goes up to $35 million.
I mean there were reports that 8 teams were interested in him and whatnot but to start over at QB and just give up a Top 5-10 QB to me is asinine. 

 
I mean there were reports that 8 teams were interested in him and whatnot but to start over at QB and just give up a Top 5-10 QB to me is asinine. 
I agree, but the offseason was so mismanaged, I believe him when he said he was going to sit out this season. A franchise QB is not worth a whole lot if he won't play for your team.

 
I think they had every intention of trading him in the days leading up to the draft in the hopes that would drive the price up. Some teams would have dropped out along the way and made some of the moves we’ve already seen at QB but there would have been a huge market for him.

Now they have to hope they can patch things up (maybe that’s possible if other teams consider him radioactive) or that this time next year his legal issues have been either resolved/settled or at least not at the news forefront anymore and they can trade him prior to the 2022 draft.

Edit: Either way I still think it’s unlikely he plays a game in 2021 thru some combo of Exempt List, suspension and/or holdout.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is no way the Texans are cutting Deshaun which this article cites as a possibility. First, they would be giving up a major asset with nothing in return, and second, the salary cap hit would be ridiculous. So that leaves them trying to get him to play for them or trading him. I think the ship has sailed on Deshaun playing in Houston as he stated he would never play for them again before the lawsuits came out, and now that the lawsuits are out, the Texans may not want Deshaun to be the face of the franchise anymore. So that leaves trading him. Until the lawsuits are resolved, nobody is going to trade for Deshaun unless they are only giving up pennies on the dollar. Because the courts are so backed up in Houston due first to Hurricane Harvey in 2017 (the courthouse was flooded), and then due to the pandemic, Deshaun's case might not be heard for two or three years. It is in nobody's best interest to wait that long for this situation to get cleared up. The lawyers on both sides have been very quiet for almost two weeks which to me indicates that they may be working together to try to settle this thing. If they come to agreement in the next couple of months, then the NFL can determine what penalties, if any, to dole out, and then teams can trade for him, knowing what contingencies are involved. While I don't think the Texans will ultimately get what they could have gotten this year for him, due to the lawsuits, I think any team with multiple first round picks in 2022 will be in the running. If Jalen Hurts doesn't pan out for the Eagles, then I could see them being frontrunners for Deshaun as their pick will be a high one, and then they have the Dolphins #1 pick and potentially the Colts #1 pick if Wentz reaches some benchmarks in 2021.

 
There is no way the Texans are cutting Deshaun which this article cites as a possibility. First, they would be giving up a major asset with nothing in return, and second, the salary cap hit would be ridiculous. So that leaves them trying to get him to play for them or trading him. I think the ship has sailed on Deshaun playing in Houston as he stated he would never play for them again before the lawsuits came out, and now that the lawsuits are out, the Texans may not want Deshaun to be the face of the franchise anymore. So that leaves trading him. Until the lawsuits are resolved, nobody is going to trade for Deshaun unless they are only giving up pennies on the dollar. Because the courts are so backed up in Houston due first to Hurricane Harvey in 2017 (the courthouse was flooded), and then due to the pandemic, Deshaun's case might not be heard for two or three years. It is in nobody's best interest to wait that long for this situation to get cleared up. The lawyers on both sides have been very quiet for almost two weeks which to me indicates that they may be working together to try to settle this thing. If they come to agreement in the next couple of months, then the NFL can determine what penalties, if any, to dole out, and then teams can trade for him, knowing what contingencies are involved. While I don't think the Texans will ultimately get what they could have gotten this year for him, due to the lawsuits, I think any team with multiple first round picks in 2022 will be in the running. If Jalen Hurts doesn't pan out for the Eagles, then I could see them being frontrunners for Deshaun as their pick will be a high one, and then they have the Dolphins #1 pick and potentially the Colts #1 pick if Wentz reaches some benchmarks in 2021.
I guess I kind of disagree.....not sure ANY team wants him as the face of their franchise....even if he "settles"....because for most "settling" equals guilty....as a GM would you hang your hat on trading for this guy if he "settles".....don't think so....and you sure as heck aren't giving up a first rounder for him and taking on his massive contract and the ongoing "risk" of something else popping up...so IMO that in many ways also eliminates getting traded.....

he should tuck tail and thank his lucky stars if HOU considered keeping him in any way.....that may be the only option and would probably involve him agreeing to take a massive pay cut and pay back some bonus money or something....in addition to some type of treatment or something....he would probably have to agree to that anyway IF there was a trading partner that would give up anything for him.....

I actually do think at some point HOU may have to say we just need to go ahead and take the hit and cut our losses....chalk it up to something they just did not see coming....the loss would be brutal financially and devastating for the franchise, but they would save face and could hang their hat on that they "did the right thing".....maybe he even agrees to some of the above so that they will cut him and let him become a free agent and roll his dice....give them back some money, let them out of the contract so he could be free...and roll the dice if someone is willing to sign him....

its such a weird situation because almost every ending scenario has holes in it.....(assuming he isn't found completely innocent and all this was made up)....

 
I guess I kind of disagree.....not sure ANY team wants him as the face of their franchise....even if he "settles"....because for most "settling" equals guilty....as a GM would you hang your hat on trading for this guy if he "settles".....don't think so....and you sure as heck aren't giving up a first rounder for him and taking on his massive contract and the ongoing "risk" of something else popping up...so IMO that in many ways also eliminates getting traded.....

he should tuck tail and thank his lucky stars if HOU considered keeping him in any way.....that may be the only option and would probably involve him agreeing to take a massive pay cut and pay back some bonus money or something....in addition to some type of treatment or something....he would probably have to agree to that anyway IF there was a trading partner that would give up anything for him.....

I actually do think at some point HOU may have to say we just need to go ahead and take the hit and cut our losses....chalk it up to something they just did not see coming....the loss would be brutal financially and devastating for the franchise, but they would save face and could hang their hat on that they "did the right thing".....maybe he even agrees to some of the above so that they will cut him and let him become a free agent and roll his dice....give them back some money, let them out of the contract so he could be free...and roll the dice if someone is willing to sign him....

its such a weird situation because almost every ending scenario has holes in it.....(assuming he isn't found completely innocent and all this was made up)....
I think different owners tolerate different behavior from their players. The McNairs are pretty conservative as owners go. Part of the reason they drafted David Carr in 2002 was because he was a young family man who shared similar morals and could be the face of the franchise. Do you really think someone like Robert Kraft would have a problem with Deshaun on his team? How about Daniel Snyder? I think owners are willing to ignore a multitude of flaws from a player IF they have the talent to bring the owner a championship. If you surround Deshaun with enough good players, I think he is one of those guys. I would be shocked if once these lawsuits are settled, no one trades for Deshaun. 

 
I think different owners tolerate different behavior from their players. The McNairs are pretty conservative as owners go. Part of the reason they drafted David Carr in 2002 was because he was a young family man who shared similar morals and could be the face of the franchise. Do you really think someone like Robert Kraft would have a problem with Deshaun on his team? How about Daniel Snyder? I think owners are willing to ignore a multitude of flaws from a player IF they have the talent to bring the owner a championship. If you surround Deshaun with enough good players, I think he is one of those guys. I would be shocked if once these lawsuits are settled, no one trades for Deshaun. 
yes and yes....if the allegations are shown to be true or he settles this one feels different because of the nature of the allegations and more importantly the volume....it doesn't appear to be just a one time thing/mistake after a night of drinking or something....

 
All great points.  Fascinating.  I think WATSON needs to do 1 thing.  WIN.  Winning will solve his problems and WINNING is his out. I don't know what he has to to do to get on a field and WIN but he should find a way to do that.  It worked for VICK, KOBE, Antonio Brown, Robert Kraft. People still support Michael Jackson and R Kelly.  Mike Tyson.   I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying that people are way more forgiving if you're creating success.   List goes on.   Houston should offer to pay whatever the lawyer is asking in exchange for first 8 games of the season if he wins 6 he gets to be traded. Something like that.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top