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.

WR Tyreek Hill, MIA (9 Viewers)

I always said this was mostly about PR and image management, but even if I wasn't saying it I was thinking that Tyreek almost certainly did something.  If he didn't, I really owe him an apology.

It will serve as yet another good reminder that the collective online community needs to wait before rushing to snap judgements and burning people at the stake after finding them guilty in the court of public opinion. 

 
kittenmittens said:
I always said this was mostly about PR and image management, but even if I wasn't saying it I was thinking that Tyreek almost certainly did something.  If he didn't, I really owe him an apology.

It will serve as yet another good reminder that the collective online community needs to wait before rushing to snap judgements and burning people at the stake after finding them guilty in the court of public opinion. 
Click to expand...
I hope he'll sue a lot of people, starting with the KC Star & Mike Florio.

 
Not a ton has changed. We still know that Hill previously tried to strangle the fiance (and was charged), that his child was removed from the household over multiple incidents this year, and that he threatened her on the audiotape. Add all of that together, and that collectively is than the Zeke situation. The recommendation by the league's investigator was to NOT suspend Elliott and he STILL got 6 games.

Once again, the league has a chance to send a message and take a stance on DV. They also have a chance to improve their image with the league's fan base. As I mentioned pages ago, Hill is not a first time offender. IMO, that will play into this. In essence, the league will come down harder this time because they couldn't punish him the first time (before he entered the league).

Other players between suspensions or getting placed on the exempt list missed anywhere from 8 to 16 games. I still think 6-8 games would be the minimum time that he will get suspended, and that's if no new information comes out about prior events AND he keeps his act clean throughout the NFL investigation. Remember, the league can (and has) put its own spin on things in other cases and they could incorporate a "failure to fully cooperate with their investigation" tag to extend a possible suspension. It would not shock me if the league negotiated with Hill and offered him an 8 game suspension if he didn't fight it . . . or a longer suspension if he said he would drag things out and take his case to arbitration and to court.

The interesting question will be what the Chiefs decide to do. I would guess the NFL will take its time conducting their own investigation, meaning that the Chiefs will have to either leave Hill suspended or add him to their active roster. That decision certainly should prompt some savory discussion and commentary from a lot of people.

 
Rotoworld:

According to NFL Network's Tom Pelissero, "barring any further developments, there is every reason to believe" Tyreek Hill will be back with the Chiefs before the start of next month's training camp.

This comes on the heels of a report that Johnson County police are no longer pursuing criminal charges against Hill, who had been under investigation for alleged child abuse against his three-year-old son. To this point Kansas City has banned Hill from all team activities, though Pelissero suspects the Chiefs will lift his suspension ahead of next month's training camp. Even if that happens, Hill, who previously pled guilty to domestic assault and battery after choking his pregnant girlfriend in college, will surely face a lengthy suspension from the NFL. Roger Goodell tends to drag his feet when it comes to league-imposed punishments, so don't expect a resolution to the Hill saga any time soon.

SOURCE: Tom Pelissero on Twitter

Jun 7, 2019, 2:09 PM ET
Click to expand...
 
bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
depends....
Click to expand...
I think a permanent ban is out now.  However a suspension is possible due to the threat on the recording.  As with the most recent zeke investigation being looked at it is possible they still go after him.  Once Goodell gets a set against someone he usually does something, like said above they didn't recommend a suspension with zeke in his DV case and he still got 6 games.

 
If it turns out Espinosa caused the break to the child's arm and suffers from Munchausen syndrome, he may not get any games. Dealing with someone who has a mental illness is a mitigating factor in his comment she should be terrified of him. I say two max, maybe none.

 
Stinkin Ref said:
First and foremost.....I hope the child and the children on the way are safe moving forward....there is not much that can be done to change what has happened so far, but hopefully resources and services are in place to help all those involved moving forward

with that said....if these recent findings explain some of what has been going on, I hope all the people that posted earlier in this thread come back and “check in”....I got slammed in here for simply asking for people to let the process play itself out....all the “come on man he did it guys”...need to come post....but they won’t....

should he have said what he said on the tape....nope....but if the circumstances of her condition is what he was dealing with (without any support or education on how to deal with it possibly)....and she was intentionally pushing buttons before this “taped call”...you could almost see him getting to the point of saying what he said.....she was driving the bus here a little....
Click to expand...
There is no result from all of this that could make your "no one on a message board should speculate on the probability of anything without incontrovertible evidence" stance sensical.

 
This thread and the speculation from people who own vs sold him continues to amaze me. I feel I am only getting dumber by returning to this thread

 
NightStalkers said:
I think a permanent ban is out now.  However a suspension is possible due to the threat on the recording.  As with the most recent zeke investigation being looked at it is possible they still go after him.  Once Goodell gets a set against someone he usually does something, like said above they didn't recommend a suspension with zeke in his DV case and he still got 6 games.
Click to expand...
Agreed perma-ban not going to happen, owners that held on and new purchasers can rest easy on that.

But his owners are always going to be nervous every time this thread is bumped, because the other shoe could have dropped.

 
Aunt Jemima said:
no problem with Faust's post, I just think all the rest is silly speculation. Just my opinion and my own fault for returning here to read.
Click to expand...
Speculation while considering the facts as we know them and trying to predict Goodell's arbitrary version of justice is where those of us who are already drafting are right now. If he's not out at all? He's a first or second round pick. Two games out? Third round, maybe. Eight games out? He's typically been going in the 8th/9th round in RT Sports drafts. Some grab him in the 6th, some as late as the 12th.

 
(dynastyleaguefootball) District Attorney Steve Howe said Friday there is no active criminal investigation of Tyreek Hill

Analysis: District Attorney Steve Howe said Friday on the criminal investigation into Tyreek Hill, âIt is not an active investigation.â Howe followed up by saying, âAs in any case, if we receive additional evidence we reevaluate.âWhile the criminal case examining Tyreek Hill is not currently active, he is in no way free and clear. There is an ongoing case against him with the Kansas Department for Children and Families that when resolved will trigger Roger Goodell to decide Hill's Fate. We've seen many times before that the NFL does not need criminal charges to issue a suspension if the player's alleged actions reflect poorly on the NFL community. Hill remains in a slightly better state of limbo, but this news doesn't do much to clarify his current and future outlook in the NFL
Click to expand...
 
Buckna said:
Agreed perma-ban not going to happen, owners that held on and new purchasers can rest easy on that.

But his owners are always going to be nervous every time this thread is bumped, because the other shoe could have dropped.
Click to expand...
Personally I wouldn't own zeke or Hill in dynasty.  If I did I would look to trade them.  Risk vs talent is a key point.  I would not give more than a third for either which means I wouldn't own either as no one would move them for that.  If somehow I had either I would move them for equal value which in zeke's case is likely a good return.  For me it is to hard to develop the value of a stud and risk it on possibly losing them for suspensions or bans.  I did the same with Gurley as normally arthritis doesn't get better.  All 3 of these players could have great seasons this year but if you can get equal value why risk it?

 
Stinkin Ref said:
First and foremost.....I hope the child and the children on the way are safe moving forward....there is not much that can be done to change what has happened so far, but hopefully resources and services are in place to help all those involved moving forward

with that said....if these recent findings explain some of what has been going on, I hope all the people that posted earlier in this thread come back and “check in”....I got slammed in here for simply asking for people to let the process play itself out....all the “come on man he did it guys”...need to come post....but they won’t....

should he have said what he said on the tape....nope....but if the circumstances of her condition is what he was dealing with (without any support or education on how to deal with it possibly)....and she was intentionally pushing buttons before this “taped call”...you could almost see him getting to the point of saying what he said.....she was driving the bus here a little....
Click to expand...
Come on. You know. They won’t come here. They will just puke elsewhere!!

 
Guess I'm going to "check in". I'm not sure there is any news here. I thought the assumption was there wasn't enough of a threshold of evidence met in order to press criminal charges, and that this is otherwise in the hands of the family services folks. I honestly thought that's where we already were. It's just that the DA specifically came out and said the criminal case is closed. And sports journalism took that and ran with it. Now the narrative is he will be in minicamp next week. Could be and I must say it will be nice if we gain some clarity. But I still think the most likely outcome is a lengthy suspension. I never thought there was going to be criminal charges anyway. 

 
barackdhouse said:
Guess I'm going to "check in". I'm not sure there is any news here. I thought the assumption was there wasn't enough of a threshold of evidence met in order to press criminal charges, and that this is otherwise in the hands of the family services folks. I honestly thought that's where we already were. It's just that the DA specifically came out and said the criminal case is closed. And sports journalism took that and ran with it. Now the narrative is he will be in minicamp next week. Could be and I must say it will be nice if we gain some clarity. But I still think the most likely outcome is a lengthy suspension. I never thought there was going to be criminal charges anyway. 
Click to expand...
You might want to look up in this thread from yesterday on the report of the likely mental illness of the girl friend.  That is the real news about Tyreek

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Where are people coming up with this "lengthy suspension" talk?  Dynasty; Hill is a strong hold or buy low. He might get 6-8 weeks but the dude is a game changer. If you don't have the stomach for a Randy Moss, Chris Carter, Zeke Elliot, Kareem Hunt type of a player, by all means, sell him. I'll buy low and win with him. Good luck with your Tim Tebow-based teams.... those always work. Thoughts and prayers to you....

 
Ksquared said:
You might want to look up in this thread from yesterday on the report of the likely mental illness of the girl friend.  That is the real news about Tyreek
Click to expand...
Yeah it's news that his girlfriend has problems.

Ok yes it is news a bit, if true. But the criminal investigation closing again is less so. I can certainly see more of a path out of this for Hill where I couldn't before, but I'm still betting against it. Not because I think I *know* something others don't, but rather because the preponderance of evidence points me in that direction. The needle has definitely moved in Hill's favor but I think Goodell will suspend him still. If he is actually at minicamp next week I'll be ready to eat some crow. I don't think the Chiefs will reinstate him without some private assurances from Goodell, which I don't think will happen.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I personally could care less about a player's character in regards to FF. I let the NFL worry about that. This is a hobby. If you make roster decisions based on character (other than as it relates to scouting), more power to you.

The problem with being self-righteous without legit evidence is you can be wrong. And it's looking like a BUNCH of people could've been wrong about Tyreek.

@Stinkin Reftook a beating on here for simply saying let's wait & get more info before we crucify him. It was the prudent thing to do, but a lot of people are reactionary. It's akin to a mob mentality.

That said, maybe new info emerges & it becomes obvious Reek is guilty, but there's enough questions now that it's a real reach to say he definitely harmed his child.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99 said:
Not a ton has changed. We still know that Hill previously tried to strangle the fiance (and was charged), that his child was removed from the household over multiple incidents this year, and that he threatened her on the audiotape. Add all of that together, and that collectively is than the Zeke situation. The recommendation by the league's investigator was to NOT suspend Elliott and he STILL got 6 games.

Once again, the league has a chance to send a message and take a stance on DV. They also have a chance to improve their image with the league's fan base. As I mentioned pages ago, Hill is not a first time offender. IMO, that will play into this. In essence, the league will come down harder this time because they couldn't punish him the first time (before he entered the league).

Other players between suspensions or getting placed on the exempt list missed anywhere from 8 to 16 games. I still think 6-8 games would be the minimum time that he will get suspended, and that's if no new information comes out about prior events AND he keeps his act clean throughout the NFL investigation. Remember, the league can (and has) put its own spin on things in other cases and they could incorporate a "failure to fully cooperate with their investigation" tag to extend a possible suspension. It would not shock me if the league negotiated with Hill and offered him an 8 game suspension if he didn't fight it . . . or a longer suspension if he said he would drag things out and take his case to arbitration and to court.

The interesting question will be what the Chiefs decide to do. I would guess the NFL will take its time conducting their own investigation, meaning that the Chiefs will have to either leave Hill suspended or add him to their active roster. That decision certainly should prompt some savory discussion and commentary from a lot of people.
Click to expand...
And I will ask again like I did pages ago after you said it the first time and then didn’t answer when I asked....when exactly was his second case of DV that would make him a multiple time offender? @Anarchy99

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Football Jones said:
I personally could care less about a player's character in regards to FF. I let the NFL worry about that. This is a hobby. If you make roster decisions based on character (other than as it relates to scouting), more power to you.

The problem with being self-righteous without legit evidence is you can be wrong. And it's looking like a BUNCH of people could've been wrong about Tyreek.

@Stinkin Reftook a beating on here for simply saying let's wait & get more info before we crucify him. It was the prudent thing to do, but a lot of people are reactionary. It's akin to a mob mentality.

That said, maybe new info emerges & it becomes obvious Reek is guilty, but there's enough questions now that it's a real reach to say he definitely harmed his child.
Click to expand...
Preach.... :thumbup:

 
I do think this is now getting ridiculous.  YES YES YES....if the guy intentionally hurt a kid, shoot him....dead serious.  BUT......if it;s taking this damn long to figure this out, the hell with it. What can they STILL be looking at? 

Time to move on.

Sure, the fans will boo and yell, that will last until The Cheetah blows by a defender......TOUCHDOWN.

 
NightStalkers said:
Personally I wouldn't own zeke or Hill in dynasty.  If I did I would look to trade them.  Risk vs talent is a key point.  I would not give more than a third for either which means I wouldn't own either as no one would move them for that.  If somehow I had either I would move them for equal value which in zeke's case is likely a good return.  For me it is to hard to develop the value of a stud and risk it on possibly losing them for suspensions or bans.  I did the same with Gurley as normally arthritis doesn't get better.  All 3 of these players could have great seasons this year but if you can get equal value why risk it?
Click to expand...
What player does not carry risk?

 
FreeBaGeL said:
There is no result from all of this that could make your "no one on a message board should speculate on the probability of anything without incontrovertible evidence" stance sensical.
Click to expand...
Seems to make a lot more sense than the run away speculation we see in this thread and others.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bronco Billy said:
NFL investigations are incredibly thorough.  They are pain staking in how much they work to corroborate stories and turn over rocks.  
Click to expand...
🤣 Sure they are.  It's tough to trust an organization that doesn't believe in transparency and plays the PR game as much as the NFL does.  Goodell has a long track record as Commissioner at this point...if you believe what comes out of his mouth that's on you now.  It's all spin with that clown - including the findings of their 'investigations'.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
trader jake said:
🤣 Sure they are.  It's tough to trust an organization that doesn't believe in transparency and plays the PR game as much as the NFL does.  Goodell has a long track record as Commissioner at this point...if you believe what comes out of his mouth that's on you now.  It's all spin with that clown - including the findings of their 'investigations'.
Click to expand...
Transparency?  The CBA precludes the NFL from making a lot of information public.  They also want to ensure their decisions stand up per legal standards and labor laws, which means they also are going to keep their cards very close to the chest until a decision is made.  

If you’re going to only rely on the superficial and what players’ agents put out, no wonder you feel the way you do.

 
matuski said:
What player does not carry risk?
Click to expand...
You've heard the adage "better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt"?  Well Hill and EZE have removed all doubt.  And EZE even has one strike on the conduct policy - one that might lead to an "indefinite" ban next time.  Hill doesn't have that strike, but he'll get less leniency for a first-time offense than most would based on his documented past.  So while all players have risk, some have decidedly more risk, with far more dire consequences should the risk manifest into result.

 
Bronco Billy said:
Transparency?  The CBA precludes the NFL from making a lot of information public.  They also want to ensure their decisions stand up per legal standards and labor laws, which means they also are going to keep their cards very close to the chest until a decision is made.  

If you’re going to only rely on the superficial and what players’ agents put out, no wonder you feel the way you do.
Click to expand...
Yeah, all that or they make it up as they go along.  Then justify with whatever 'legal' means they possibly can.

Ask yourself this, Do you believe the NFL attempts to determine the truth, reaches a fair ruling, transparently announces their findings and decision based on facts, and then moves on?  If so, then we just won't see eye to eye on this (which is fine).

I believe the NFL reads the tea leaves for any public sentiment and/or advertising backlash and then works backword to reach the outcome they desire.  They shift in the wind like a sail, chase the bottom line at all costs, and only do the 'right thing' if it also corresponds with public opinion at the time and the bottom line.  Otherwise they flat out lie and spin their yarns to the media. See any of the recent 'Gate' cases, player discipline or demonstration examples, or franchise relocations. It's a total crock.  In the last 15 years NFL leadership has completely lost their way.

 
trader jake said:
Yeah, all that or they make it up as they go along.  Then justify with whatever 'legal' means they possibly can.

Ask yourself this, Do you believe the NFL attempts to determine the truth, reaches a fair ruling, transparently announces their findings and decision based on facts, and then moves on?  If so, then we just won't see eye to eye on this (which is fine).

I believe the NFL reads the tea leaves for any public sentiment and/or advertising backlash and then works backword to reach the outcome they desire.  They shift in the wind like a sail, chase the bottom line at all costs, and only do the 'right thing' if it also corresponds with public opinion at the time and the bottom line.  Otherwise they flat out lie and spin their yarns to the media. See any of the recent 'Gate' cases, player discipline or demonstration examples, or franchise relocations. It's a total crock.  In the last 15 years NFL leadership has completely lost their way.
Click to expand...


Somehow you seemed perplexed and incredulous that a business would act in its own best interest.  However, I am also convinced that you don’t have a lot of the facts that go into these decisions (nor do I) and because of that you may be shortsighted on a lot of your judgments.  And because this is a business, we’ll never see a lot of that information - and it is well within the privilege of the league not to share it.

So I’m guessing you’re more than happy to stick to you judgment which is based on only some of the information, whereas I’ll give the league a bit more leeway given how it has gotten things right in the past (like the Elliott suspension, which was spot on, and yet quite a few still whine about despite the NFL finally making all of its findings public) and also given how wildly successful the league continues to be.  And that’s also despite my questioning some of their decisions, which at times don’t seem to make much sense or that seem counterproductive.

I agree with you, we’re just going to have to settle on disagreeing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hankmoody said:
You've heard the adage "better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt"?  Well Hill and EZE have removed all doubt.  And EZE even has one strike on the conduct policy - one that might lead to an "indefinite" ban next time.  Hill doesn't have that strike, but he'll get less leniency for a first-time offense than most would based on his documented past.  So while all players have risk, some have decidedly more risk, with far more dire consequences should the risk manifest into result.
Click to expand...
Would you say these players are more or less likely to be injured than suspended?

 
trader jake said:
I believe the NFL reads the tea leaves for any public sentiment and/or advertising backlash and then works backword to reach the outcome they desire.  They shift in the wind like a sail, chase the bottom line at all costs, and only do the 'right thing' if it also corresponds with public opinion at the time and the bottom line.  Otherwise they flat out lie and spin their yarns to the media. See any of the recent 'Gate' cases, player discipline or demonstration examples, or franchise relocations. It's a total crock.  In the last 15 years NFL leadership has completely lost their way.
Click to expand...
In other words they are acting like.... a business.

The NFL has never been more successful than over these 15 years you seem to have convinced yourself were lost.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
matuski said:
Would you say these players are more or less likely to be injured than suspended? 
Click to expand...
I never said no players have risk, but sure, they have the same injury risk that all NFL players have.

Plus they have additional suspension risk. 

Thanks for illustrating my point for me.

 
Hankmoody said:
I never said no players have risk, but sure, they have the same injury risk that all NFL players have.

Plus they have additional suspension risk. 

Thanks for illustrating my point for me.
Click to expand...
Your effort to speculate on the additional risk as if it is something you can quantify, and that even if quantified aggressively would be largely irrelevant considering the crazy inherent risk of all players is the point.

Thank you for acknowledging while still missing it.

 
Trying to predict NFL suspension risk seems more fool hardy than predicting injuries.

You at least know all the injury history.  Unless there is some Belichikian effort to confuse it.

 
Even if you knew every off field habit and personality of every player in the league, we would still be left utterly clueless.  Scratching our heads in regard to whom and when and how long the NFL hands out punishment.

 
matuski said:
Trying to predict NFL suspension risk seems more fool hardy than predicting injuries.
Click to expand...
Really?  Maybe for guys we have never heard a bad thing about, but there are plenty of guys out there I would consider to be quite a bit more likely to serve a suspension than other players. 

 
Yeah, I don’t understand how it seems so outrageous that some fantasy owners prefer to avoid players with off the field “issues”. It’s simple risk tolerance.

Personally, I’ve held Hill this whole time in FFPC instead of selling low during this time of uncertainty, but that’s both because I’m willing to take the risk in order to have a top5-ish WR, as well as the fact that my WR Core is very thin behind him. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So when is the time to sell Hill?  Now?  When he’s been cleared but before Goodell can suspend him?  After his suspension?  When he officially comes back?  

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

barackdhouse
My own Top 5 worst & best preseason takes
Replies
25
Views
851
rockaction
rockaction
Ministry of Pain
How can an NFL team have WR be their No 1/2/3 priority when you just watched the Chiefs win B2B Super Bowls without them?
2
Replies
55
Views
1K
FairWarning
FairWarning
Panda13
Having 2 WR on the same team (Hill/Waddle)
2
Replies
79
Views
3K
JohnnyU
JohnnyU

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 10 (members: 0, guests: 10)
Top