Jump to content

Deshaun Watson suspended 6 games


xianshino
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, RetroRoq said:

Ok, just read clarification on this.

The NFL was pushing for 12 games and a 8 million dollar fine and the NFLPA was arguing against that.

It was actually a judge "neutral labor arbitrator" that determined that the 6 games suspension was enough.

Yeah. I don't think people realize that an independent judge determined this punishment - the NFL was pushing for a harder penalty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Falcanuck said:

Here comes the apologist 

what? I'm pointing out what the NFL pushed for. Not defending Watson or his actions.

You are the biggest clown on this board and was supposed to be gone when Ryan left and here you are crawling back like the dirty weasel you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, stizz said:

He can impose whatever he wants but knows he'll face legal issues from Deshaun because he wasn't found criminally guilty. 

He wanted what he wanted but used Sue as a legal safeguard which the NFLPA backed. He would get hammered either way.

I don't know that there are any legal issues.  Watson can appeal any suspension, but the CBA controls, and as I understand it the CBA gives the commissioner the authority to impose whatever suspension he wants subject to review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will keep my social commentary to myself and keep it as much about football as I can.

Cleveland lucked out and possibly 3 easy games(Panthers, Jets and Falcons) during that span. But Watson has to come back and face the Ravens, Bengals, Chargers, Dolphins, Bills and Bucs. That is an awfully tough schedule after not playing any football for about a year and half.

I guess the Browns are looking at the long game, maybe. But they will be hosed on draft picks and money for a very long time

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IBTL

The difficulty here is Watson’s case comes down to money. Doesn’t matter which way you look. Doesn’t even matter which side you are on. None of these cases have stood the test and literally all of them sprouted from the same place at the same time. If Watson towed the line and didn’t challenge McNair to a duel he’d be the starter at Texans and the staff and the city would still hold him in very high regard. 
 

Did He do it?  I don’t know and neither do you. 
But the court results don’t show it. And the timeline is beyond suspicious. 6 games on top of a full season for here-say, whatever side you take on this the NFL is probably doing the best they can because there is no proof, no witnesses that have held in court, and there is significant evidence of collusion. The NFL knows good and well what happens if they ended his career and Watson clears the final suit. 
If he’s guilty, prove it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

I don't know that there are any legal issues.  Watson can appeal any suspension, but the CBA controls, and as I understand it the CBA gives the commissioner the authority to impose whatever suspension he wants subject to review.

Im reading that in 2020 there was language added that allowed for arbitration, so the commisioner doesnt even have to be reasonable anymore... its up to the player and NFLPA to counter the suspension... ultimately it seems like a fairer process and more in line with other professional leagues.

Imagine though if this had been around before, maybe some suspensions of the past would have been cut significantly.

Also, just because the NFL CAN appeal, doesnt mean they will want to put a lot of teeth into their appeal.  Cleveland is a member of the club and the regular season is when the bills get paid.  Teams are relying on that money that Watson's return will bring to make red lines black.  I think the NFL will appeal for sake of show and the arbitrators decision will stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

For what it's worth, I think Ridley's suspension is completely fair.  It's Watson's that is the problem.  And I think a shorter suspension can be justified, but if she is convinced he did it, then 6 games is pretty silly on those grounds.

"First offense, non-violent."  The truth is it's multiple serial offenses and "non-violent" is charitable, to put it mildly.

Calling it non violent is a sick joke to me. If it was voluntary we we would have stories of women who walked out once he started his antics. Once choice is removed it’s an act of violence 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Killing Floor said:

Roethlsberger had no real consequences, the NFL declined to act even though there were 8 witnesses. In Watson’s case this has been pretty thin. 
Can’t put my finger on it. Something is different. 

 

 

Somebody else said he got 6 games - so same consequences as DW if he did.  Same consequences for a lot fewer victims than DW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Killing Floor said:

IBTL

The difficulty here is Watson’s case comes down to money. Doesn’t matter which way you look. Doesn’t even matter which side you are on. None of these cases have stood the test and literally all of them sprouted from the same place at the same time. If Watson towed the line and didn’t challenge McNair to a duel he’d be the starter at Texans and the staff and the city would still hold him in very high regard. 
 

Did He do it?  I don’t know and neither do you. 
But the court results don’t show it. And the timeline is beyond suspicious. 6 games on top of a full season for here-say, whatever side you take on this the NFL is probably doing the best they can because there is no proof, no witnesses that have held in court, and there is significant evidence of collusion. The NFL knows good and well what happens if they ended his career and Watson clears the final suit. 
If he’s guilty, prove it. 

There is no hearsay involved in this case.  There is direct testimonial evidence, which is not the same thing.

Hearsay would be "I heard Deshaun Watson did this," or "this massage therapist told me Deshaun Watson did this."  This is women testifying under oath "Deshaun Watson did this to me."  That is never hearsay.  And direct testimony is evidence just as Deshaun Watson's testimony (if any) denying it is evidence.  If the judge weighed that evidence and imposed a suspension, it's because she thinks it is more likely than not that he did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Aluminafalcon said:

Calling it non violent is a sick joke to me. If it was voluntary we we would have stories of women who walked out once he started his antics. Once choice is removed it’s an act of violence 

Yep. As I said, force is force.  Splitting hairs over what qualifies as "violence" to me misses the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...