Jump to content
DanteGabriel

NFL 2019 Preseason: Hard Knockin on Gruden's Door

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

The NFL has just said they won’t suspend Brown for this weekend’s game. I disapprove of this, but the Straight Cash Homies, Storm’s End Sinners and King’s Landing Cullers deeply appreciate the lack of morality at the NFL’s headquarters.

I think that's because they are waiting to speak with the alleged victim.  She could not meet this week-end because she is getting married. They will meet next week and, all indications are, that if the NFL is going to put on the "Commissioners' Exempt List" it would be after that.  The Pats are apparently waiting on that and will follow the NFL lead depending on what they do.  

Now, while I am not trying to expand this discussion... has anyone been put on that list without there being an underlying criminal charge?  Again, we are at the accusation level; I think it's not fair to deprive somebody of his employment (though Brown would still be paid) if there is only an accusation.  Again, he may have done this (or portions of it).  It's just not fair to say to him "You can't play" without there being something more than an accusation.  

Edited by Rockroi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

I think that's because they are waiting to speak with the alleged victim.  She could not meet this week-end because she is getting married. They will meet next week and, all indications are, that if the NFL is going to put on the "Commissioners' Exempt List" it would be after that.  The Pats are apparently waiting on that and will follow the NFL lead depending on what they do.   

I’ve already stated this.

Quote

Now, while I am not trying to expand this discussion... has anyone been put on that list without there being an underlying criminal charge?  Again, we are at the accusation level; I think it's not fair to deprive somebody of his employment (though Brown would still be paid) if there is only an accusation.  Again, he may have done this (or portions of it).  It's just not fair to say to him "You can't play" without there being something more than an accusation. 

And? That list exists to hide things the league’s embarrassed about, not to uphold any type of integrity. It’s no different than the Chateau d'If. AB has done enough to get sidelined, and frankly if I’m the Pats, I’d already have cut him once it broke that he knew this was coming and didn’t inform the team about it before they signed him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't support adding people to the "cannot play" list based on accusation alone. It should be obvious that you could weaponize an accusation to remove a star opponent if accusation alone was the standard. Tom Brady would probably never get on the field again as Defensive coordinators would be using that rule to take him out of big games imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
1
3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And? That list exists to hide things the league’s embarrassed about, not to uphold any type of integrity. It’s no different than the Chateau d'If. AB has done enough to get sidelined, and frankly if I’m the Pats, I’d already have cut him once it broke that he knew this was coming and didn’t inform the team about it before they signed him.

I think its a different story between what the Pats should do to Brown and what a Commissioner orders under a power he has through the CBA.  I think there is something to be said for the Pats bringing relative tranquility to their building by cutting Brown.  While I still do not think that's fair to Brown, the Pats are free to do with their roster what they will.  That would send a bad message to their own players (ie: if you are accused of something, we will toss your ass), but I could still see it. 

However, the Commissioner would be setting a horrible precedent if he uses a power outside its scope and based on just the accusation ina civil complaint (which I have stated has no vetting process akin to a criminal matter).  My understanding of the power is that if a player is involved in a criminal charge involving violence, then he can be put on the exempt list (ie: the courts are involved) or if there is an investigation involving a crime launched by the NFL.  That second one gives the NFL more wiggle room, but the wider that net is cast, the worse it is for the players.  For Brown, as I have stated before, its unfair for his career to be interrupted this way- regardless of his past, non-criminal behavior (regardless of how outrageous it was) - based on an accusation.  And I think that's a bad power for the Commissioner to have and think that a power that far-reaching should be used only under very clear and narrow circumstances.  

This is why I asked if there has ever beena case where a player was put on the Exempt list without there being an underlying criminal case.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Is Cam....washed? 

If you take the mobility out of Cam's game, he's what, Joe Flacco? Being a sub 60% passer in this era is like being a 45% passer in the 80s. He was never a guy I thought would age well but injuries might push up that timetable.

Had no idea he's lost his last 8 starts until they flashed that graphic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

I'm starting to fear the worst for Cam myself. 

I think the Broncos broke him.  Hes never been the same since.

Its like when Jakob Dylan had Bruce Springsteen sing One Headlight on the MTV awards with him.  He got totally upstaged in front of the entire country and has never recovered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

The NFL has just said they won’t suspend Brown for this weekend’s game. I disapprove of this, but the Straight Cash Homies, Storm’s End Sinners and King’s Landing Cullers deeply appreciate the lack of morality at the NFL’s headquarters.

You shouldn't.  He hasn't been criminally charged and the allegations in the civil suit, at this point, are wholly uncorroborated.  Some accusations, like Vick and the dog fighting, come with enough objective evidence, dead dogs on his property, multiple witness statements, a federal investigation, that you can make a reasonable assumption about guilt, and if not legal guilt, about wrong doing, but in this case, it is right now her word and nothing else, it would be unfair, even if he is guilty, to suspend him right now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I think the Broncos broke him.  Hes never been the same since.

Its like when Jakob Dylan had Bruce Springsteen sing One Headlight on the MTV awards with him.  He got totally upstaged in front of the entire country and has never recovered.

Never heard of this Jakob person. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rockroi said:

However, the Commissioner would be setting a horrible precedent if he uses a power outside its scope and based on just the accusation ina civil complaint (which I have stated has no vetting process akin to a criminal matter).  My understanding of the power is that if a player is involved in a criminal charge involving violence, then he can be put on the exempt list (ie: the courts are involved) or if there is an investigation involving a crime launched by the NFL. 

Nope:  

Quote

The league could opt to suspend Brown under the league's personal conduct policy, which does not require a criminal charge or conviction. (Brown has not been formally charged with or convicted of a crime.) But the league, especially recently, has generally opted to wait for legal proceedings to play out before suspending a player under the personal conduct policy.

https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/patriots/just-what-nfl-commissioners-exempt-list

 

Plus, you’re not suspending him for just the accusation, it’s his entire body of work over the last year. Dude needs to be sat down and ordered to seek a mandatory psychological evaluation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Plus, you’re not suspending him for just the accusation, it’s his entire body of work over the last year. Dude needs to be sat down and ordered to seek a mandatory psychological evaluation.

So in other words, if you act like a jerk, no suspension.  But if you act like a jerk and somebody makes an accusation against you- suspension.

That's terrible policy.  And it's not fair to the accused.  Again, I did this for a living- I defended people who did bad things and they were accused of other bad things; I do not think their punishment should be handed down BEFORE you find out f they did that other bad thing based solely on a non-criminal accusation.  As stated, I would like to know if any player has gone on the Commissioner Exempt list with no criminal charges. 

And I'll deeply consider the advice to seek psychological evaluation; very meaningful coming from you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Never heard of this Jakob person. 

 

That's how thoroughly overshadowed he was performing his own song.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

So in other words, if you act like a jerk, no suspension.  But if you act like a jerk and somebody makes an accusation against you- suspension.

No…it’s more like once someone gets a third strike, they have to go on time out. This was his third strike. He’s staining the league, and again, that’s why the list exists in the first place. To make problems go away while they’re too hot.

Quote

That's terrible policy.  And it's not fair to the accused.  Again, I did this for a living- I defended people who did bad things and they were accused of other bad things; I do not think their punishment should be handed down BEFORE you find out f they did that other bad thing based solely on a non-criminal accusation.  As stated, I would like to know if any player has gone on the Commissioner Exempt list with no criminal charges. 

First, my father is a retired defense attorney, and by his own admission he wouldn’t wish that profession on his worst enemy. Second, as a lawyer, you should know this isn’t a court of law and thus it doesn’t operate that way. Furthermore, he is not losing any guaranteed money. The most you can argue is that he could miss out on some performance incentives, but you know what, tough s**t. Act like an adult and you won’t find yourself in this position.

Quote

And I'll deeply consider the advice to seek psychological evaluation; very meaningful coming from you.  

If we’re citing our credentials, I have a degree in psychology from a D-1, R-1 university which is considered a public Ivy, graduating summa cum laude with high distinction, and have worked in multiple clinical settings. That said, you don’t need to be an expert to see he needs help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rockroi said:

So you are comparing me debating here to a Glenn-Beck caricature in the direct context of the term rape apologist.  I don't appreciate that.

I agree the context might have made that impression, but that's not what I meant by the South Park/Beck reference.  As I already explained:

19 hours ago, DMC said:

As for the rest of my post - the South Park allusion - that was referring to Kal's clear and succinct demonstration detailed in this post showing your original whining about her complaint was very far adrift from the actual content of her complaint.  Funny, you never really responded to Kal pointing that out, did you?

Note:  Yeah, I can quote you now.  Must of just been something funky going on yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DMC said:

Note:  Yeah, I can quote you now.  Must of just been something funky going on yesterday.

I'm actually having the same issue with Rock today. FYI, if it happens to you again, you usually can work around it with the MultiQuote function . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

If we’re citing our credentials, I have a degree in psychology from a D-1, R-1 university which is considered a public Ivy, graduating summa cum laude with high distinction, and have worked in multiple clinical settings. That said, you don’t need to be an expert to see he needs help.

Okay, this one I just made a mistake on; I thought you were saying I needed psychological counseling (as opposed to Antonio Brown), hence my snarky response.  This one is entirely my bad.  Sorry.  because, yes, I agree, that Brown almost certainly needs help, but that's hardly a hot take. 

 

 
 
 
1
3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

..., my father is a retired defense attorney, and by his own admission he wouldn’t wish that profession on his worst enemy. Second, as a lawyer, you should know this isn’t a court of law and thus it doesn’t operate that way. Furthermore, he is not losing any guaranteed money. The most you can argue is that he could miss out on some performance incentives, but you know what, tough s**t. Act like an adult and you won’t find yourself in this position...

But even if it's not a court of law, even if its some other system where the burden of proof is not so high, I would not want a system where an accusation is akin to proof; where the mantra is always "Where there is smoke, there is fire."  Again, even to somebody like AB- a bad person who has exhibited troubling toxic, narcissistic tendencies, I think its unfair for him to have all this behavior, the league do nothing (not even issue a warning) and then say "Well, this one, largely uncorroborated accusation make sit so you can no longer play football."  That's not fair.  yes, he is getting paid, but payment now is not the issue; it's his long-term marketability which would be adversely affected.  Its also how he would be marked in this way.  Unfair and wrong. 

And just to point out- if he did it and if the evidence mounts it would not be wrong to suspend him later.  But now?  Not enough.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×