The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Glad we didn't get caught up in that shitshow.

What a PR disaster.  ...don't want to deal with any of that.

Miami's alleged offer last year was a lot better than Cleveland's. Texans held on too long and were lucky to get the probable late 1st rounders that they did get.

No suspension for Watson will be coming, they couldn't even get an indictment against him. Gooddell would have to suspend him without any evidence and while he's done it before, just looks extra bad in 2022.

Wow, that's really selling the farm to get him (2022, 2023, 2024 firsts, along with a 2023 third and 2024 fourth rounder - not to mention a staggering, new $230M five year deal which is fully guaranteed).

All for a guy who may not even start for them next year!

Moves like this can make a team, or absolutely break it... As much as the Rams moves this year happened to pay off, this is the sort of gamble that rarely works out.

Legally speaking, he is in the clear. We spoke about this in another thread but to not even get a grand jury indictment means there isn't even a text message saying "sorry about last night". No evidence except the statements from the women and at this point, they will all settle for $10k and go away. No suspensions coming. I would be willing to bet that at least 17 of the 21 were added on by the attorney to get a quick payday. The alternative is he is the country's most notorious serial rapist and that seems unlikely.

The Browns are in it to win it right now. They have a great QB, just added a great WR and will probably recuperate some draft capital with Mayfield. The team was much better than 8-9 last year, Baker was injured the whole season and dragged them down. To me, they are a Superbowl contender and you make big moves like this to win it all.

Big Ben got 4 (reduced from 6) games after being accussed of sexual misconduct by just 1 woman. Multiply that by 22 and Watson may not see the field for a very long time.  Not sure how you can go less than a year and maybe even more.

I have a weird feeling about stuff like this -- on one hand, Watson is a creep and definitely did some shit.  But at the same time, the NFL isn't a court -- if there aren't charges brought against him, it's kind of a weird situation to suspend him anyway.

The charges against Ben were a lot more credible than the ones against Watson. Like I said, they couldn't even get a grand jury indictment against him and the bar is set obscenely low for that. To save his ego, Goodell may have Watson settle for a game or two, but anything above that will be fought and be very bad PR for the NFL and Roger himself. He has enough to worry about with the Flores lawsuit and the constant shitshow that is Daniel Snyder, probably doesn't want more.

Credible how? No charges were filed. It was he said-she said which is pretty much what this case is.

It's that whole "violating the league's personal conduct policy" that will get him. I get the jokes that will follow but on the surface the NFL doesn't want people tarnishing their image.

I totally understand and support this and get it.

But it's just weird -- like, are you going to have a little in-house trial to determine what is credible?  Like, in this case, 22 allegations are credible, but what precedent does it set?  You just start suspending guys who are accused of things without any due process?

That is how it's been all along.  Guys who have been charged with crimes have been suspended, only to either have the charges dismissed or go to trial and be acquitted.  Hell, a guy got suspended for the first few games of his NFL career for stuff he did while he was in COLLEGE.  

I agree with you, it has to stop.

This maybe the dumbest deal of all time.

Regardless if you believe the allegations or not….

The Browns gave a guy who has learned that he can get whatever he wants to a fully guaranteed contract.  What happens the next time he throws a temper tantrum?  He also has learned regardless of what he does off field he is untouchable.

And while he is a good player (when he chooses to be) football is a team sport.  The Browns have no ability to build a team around him.  They gave up too many picks to build a team though the draft and too much money to build a team thru FA.

The Vikings giving a 3rd for Randy Moss was brilliant in comparison.

This is the fault of the NFLPA, the weakest union in sports. Under no circumstances should a player be suspended just for accusations. It's one thing if the victim declined to press charges even though there is video evidence of a domestic assault, but quite another when it is only accusations.

This was a weird situation for everyone involved. Maybe my memory is foggy, but I don't ever remember Watson formally saying "I will never play for you again" because if he did that, the Texans wouldn't have to pay him. To my knowledge, the Texans did pay him all season because he never refused to report to camp. They just held him out for their own reasons, probably so he wouldn't get injured and ruin a trade.

Watson was 100% right to complain about terrible management and coaching and trading away his best WR for peanuts, but he definitely didn't handle it the best he could. Neither did the team, of course. Obviously, they are run poorly and have no idea what they are doing.

When it's all said and done, I think the Browns will be happy with this trade. No one remembers the cost of trades or contracts when you are winning. The Texans will draft a punter with one of these picks and be a perennial 4 win team for the next decade.

You should take absolutely nothing from the fact that a grand jury declined to indict.  All that tells you is that the prosecutor tanked the case, full stop.  A prosecutor can get a grand jury indictment any time they feel like it.  That said, there is always a competing interest between "a prosecutor doesn't want to take on a powerful rich person" and "a prosecutor can become famous as the DA who took down [powerful rich person]"; if the DA thinks they have a slam-dunk case, I don't think they'll just turn it away.  So in this case, the DA probably thought the juice wasn't worth the squeeze.  That doesn't really speak to innocence vs. guilt as much as it does effort for results.

In any case, since the criminal window is closed, the NFL's part of this is a self-inflicted wound.  When Goodell decided to get involved and start issuing suspensions based purely on accusations (and not court rulings), he put himself in the position of having to determine which accusations are worse than others.  There needs to be an event - I have no idea what it could be - that pushes the NFL to remove itself from this suspensions-for-accusations game.

I could see the NFL rationalizing that he has already sat out a season, as a reason not to suspend him from anymore games.

As for not prosecuting him, it makes it tough on prosecutors to win cases when all the victims are suing for monetary damages - the defense cross examines all the witnesses' and points out that they are all suing for millions and they lose most of their credibility if there aren't any tangible pieces of evidence.

If Watson is suspended for a good part of the season and Mayfield walks out, there's also the potential the Browns could tank and all of a sudden at least one of those low first rounders becomes a high one... just look at what happened with the Texans after they made the massive trade for Tunsil, and how good our picks from them ended up becoming!

The other thing no one has mentioned is that Watson has already spent a full year out of the NFL. Now I'm not necessarily saying he's been shining his bum on a seat or adopted the JaMarcus Russell diet in the last twelve months, but you would have to be optimistic to expect him to light up the best defenses immediately after that time off... yet the bounty the Browns have paid suggests just that.

This has got to be just about the biggest trade gamble by an NFL team I can recall seeing. If it pays off good luck to Cleveland, but lord help them if it goes sour.

One positive thing that I see from this deal is that it is fully guaranteed and going forward, that will change how some contracts are done. The NFL has always been a sham with it's contracts, but now the top QBs coming up for new deals in the next few years like Burrows, Herbert and Lamar Jackson will absolutely not settle for anything less but fully guaranteed.

Eventually, this will trickle down to star players at non-QB positions until eventually every deal will be guaranteed.

Good.  Coaches and front office staff have guaranteed deals, no matter how bad they perform at their job.  Why should players be any different?

No contract in any sport should be guaranteed.

Really, you're just saying "Get rid of contracts," right?  All employment should be at-will?

Or are you saying that ownership should be able to cancel the contract at any time, but employees should be bound to it?

This is exactly what I'm saying.  This is a job.  The owner signs your paycheck.   He who signs your checks should be able to decide whether or not he wants to continue to do so.   

Again, it's a JOB.  And the terms of the job are that you can be let go for underperformance.  Don't like it?   There are thousands of men as talented as you who would love to take your job.

Yeah, but if this ends up being the disaster that I think it will be, THEN it reinforces to teams that you don't fully guarantee long contracts.

But if another owner will offer me more money, too bad, a contract is a contract and I have to stay?  That's crazy.

It's ridiculous to have a system where one side gets to cancel a "contract" at will.  That's not how "contracts" work in any other business.  You wanna get rid of contracts entirely and have everything be at-will employment?  OK, fine.  But a system where players are bound to the contract they signed but owners aren't is just dumb.

And yet, when there are plenty of other owners who would love to pay a player more than they're earning on their current contract, the authorities step in to say, "No no, you're not allowed to do that."

Sauce for the goose...

You can't have players be bound to contracts but owners not.

Understandable concern, but the elite guys will still demand it and someone will give in. If Patrick Mahomes ever hit the market, why not guarantee all 5-6 years? Someone will and if you expect him to still be elite, then it shouldn't stop you from offering it as well.

One other big thing I missed:


No, there are not "thousands of men" as talented as Deshaun Watson who want to take his job.  There aren't even TEN people on this planet who can do his job better than him, which is why he's able to get a fully guaranteed contract.

Here's the thing about contracts, they are written all the time where one party can cancel if they choose based on performance criteria. The thing with the NFL is they don't write the criteria out.is that problematic, probably so because the players don't know the exact criteria they have to meet but I think spelling it out for every player scenario would be complicated.

It would destroy teams. If a WR had to get 1,000 yards in a season, then he would have to beg for the ball on every play or lose his job. Even if he is being double teamed and the other receiver is feasting off of it and the team is winning.

The only solution is the NFLPA finally growing some balls and doing what needs to be done. Most brutal sport with the shortest careers and lowest quality of life after playing and they can't even get guaranteed money.

And that may be why the money isn't guaranteed.   Because the owners get hurt financially if their star players sustain serious/career ending injuries.   

A very large number of contracts (nearly all?) are guaranteed for injury.

Injured players are not just thrown to the curb and left to fend for themselves.

Guaranteeing contracts, making it at will, voidable contracts etc.  Would neither destroy the game nor improve it.  Nor would any change other than raising or lowering the salary cap/salary floor have any impact on the overall benefit to players nor any impact on owners profits. 

The rookie salary formula did not hurt or help players overall.  It moved cash from some rookies to some vets.  If all contracts were guaranteed, the future contracts would fall somewhere between the current guaranteed value and the max value of the contract.  This would benefit some and lower the pay for others.  The ones who benefit the most would be those who underperform and the ones it would hurt are the ones that overperform -- so it is probably a bad idea.

The one pay issue that I think should be changed is RFA tenders should be guaranteed. I forgot who but years ago a I recall a back up QB getting a second round tender.  Being he wasn't a great QB nobody was willing to give up a second for him.  But there likely would have been a market for him before the start of training camp if not for the tender. Then after the the final cut to 53 he was forced to take a drastic pay cut or be cut.  With only a week before the start of the season there was no longer a market as he wouldn't have time to learn a playbook unlike earlier.  I thought that was sleazy and contrary to the purpose of RFA contracts.       

Another way to look at it is that salaries would be (more) normalized across the players.  So instead of players receiving these huge contracts on paper - that are frequently unrealized but count against the cap as if they will be paid - with guaranteed contracts, the top end contracts will be lower and the bottom end contracts will be higher (but the total amount of money will remain the same).

Additionally, just as player holdouts for increased pay are not a thing in MLB or the NBA because of the guaranteed salaries, that will cease to be a problem in the NFL; players know that they will receive every dollar they signed for, and won't have to worry about re-negotiating maximum value if they overperform (to make up for the lost wages when they are cut later in their careers).  You will also have fewer instances of players being threatened with being released if they don't restructure their contract to make less money.

In a sense, this is just another version of the risk-reward dynamic of contracts vs. no contracts: a league without any contracts at all would provide maximum value to the top performers on a year-by-year basis, but would provide no security for those on the lower end of the talent pool (or those nearing the end of their careers).  A league with fully guaranteed contracts swings the needle in the opposite direction, and a league with voidable contracts is somewhere in the middle.

The fake money will go away but the disparity between top players and bottom players will remain. 

A possible downside of guaranteed contracts (if extended to rookies) would be teams choosing to give less UDFAs a chance at making the team.  Teams start camp with the 53 guys they expect to make the team and then 37 other guys that are given a chance to prove they are more worthy than the incumbent 53.  Those guys are typically offered a two year contract and a $50K signing bonus.  If they are good enough to make the team they earn $1.5 to $2 million over two years, if they get cut they only get the $50k.  If all contracts are guaranteed that means it will cost a team three fourth of a million dollars for each of the extended tryouts.  Teams might decided to only have 70-80 guys in camp so they can use the money elsewhere.   

If every tryout cost the team a full years salary there will be much less churn at the bottom of the roster meaning less guys being given a chance to prove themselves and other guys that should be cut hanging on.

I know in the NBA, there is a subset of non-guaranteed contracts for players at the bottom of the roster (usually players that have not accrued enough time in the league to qualify as a veteran).  I would imagine there would be something similar if the NFL went to a guaranteed contract system.

Baker Mayfield has no trade market. The Panthers nor Seahawks want him and there are basically no spots left. I think the Browns are going to have him as the backup QB or even worse, the starter for a few weeks if Watson is suspended. Baker has a fully guaranteed $18 Million contract too, it's just a mess of a situation.

I think there should be a few teams (ATL, NYG, PIT) willing to take Baker with a Brock Osweiler-style deal (e.g. Baker plus a third-round pick for a fourth-rounder).

Would have to be with the Browns eating something like $12 Million as well because of his huge salary. Even then, Giants got Jones and will give him every chance to be a star this year, Falcons got Mariota and the kid they just drafted and Pittsburgh just drafted their Week 1 starter. It's shocking but aside from Seahawks or Texans, he has no spot. Especially on a 1 year deal.

If the Texans had any interest in Baker, they would have taken him as part of the deal for Watson.

Jones is circling the drain just as much as someone like Drew Lock, and Mariota is no more an entrenched starter in ATL than Winston is in NO.  PIT certainly has enough pieces in place to want to trot out a veteran so Pickett is not thrown to the wolves on day 1 (Tomlin only said that Pickett will have "a chance to win the starting position"), and Baker is certainly an upgrade from Trubisky.  The music may have paused without a chair for Baker (and: Jimmy G) to sit in, but the song is far from over.

This will forever change the way contracts are handed out.  When Watson signed his deal, the Browns had to deposit $230 million into an escrow account to cover the guarantee (NFL requires it).   

Not very many owners can afford that.   Thankfully, Ross is one of the ones who can.

I didn't know they had to do that but I guess it makes sense. Heard some places say that other teams are reluctant to do any business with the Browns because of what they did. I know that would be collusion, but we aren't children. We understand it is done if it is in the league's best interest.

Moves like this can force the league to raise the salary cap dramatically because these contracts can't be moved and teams would be hamstrung. The league and owners are not going to like this.

The NFL doesn't care if teams are hamstrung .. especially the Browns.

It's really simple from an owner's point of view.   If you don't want to hamstring your team, don't sign anyone to a 100% guaranteed contract.  Especially one of that size.

It's simple until your franchise QB demands it and starts sitting out games.

Then you replace his ass.   And that goes for anyone who tries that shit.   There's thousands of other men lined up to take that spot.

Those "thousands of other men" suck playing QB and you'll be losing every year.
The Browns have already tried saving money with terrible QBs; dozens of men that aren't as good as their craft as Deshaun Watson.  They didn't like the results, so now they're paying Deshaun Watson.  It's that simple.

Yeah, there aren't many replacements for Patrick Mahomes, if he didn't sign that huge extension a few years back. Only other guys on the same level are Josh Allen and.....yeah, that might be it and you aren't getting Josh Allen.

The difference is, only one third of Mahomes contract is guaranteed.   No contract in ANY sport should be 100% guaranteed. 

There can be a compromise in the NFL for contracts where things aren't 100% guaranteed or contracts are toilet paper. However, once the first fully guaranteed monster deal happens, then Pandora's Box can't be closed again. The Browns will be ostracized for this, may not be able to trade with anyone unless they get fleeced.

How would this affect future trades with the Browns?  Their cap is crippled for a long time and they won't be able to trade Watson anytime soon if ever.   But that's pretty much the extent of what I can see happening.

Suppose the Chiefs were somehow forcibly dissolved as an NFL team.

If MIA had the ability to get Patrick Mahomes without giving up any players or draft picks, with the sole condition that the rest of his contract becomes 100% guaranteed, would you take that deal if you were in charge of the Dolphins?

There is only one correct answer to this question, and it ain't hard.

The Browns broke an unwritten agreement that the rest of the owners had and that's "don't fully guarantee monster money deals". Silently or discreetly, every NFL team agreed to this. All it takes is one teamto break rank and set a new precedent going forward and we will all see that soon with Herbert and Jackson and hopefully, Tua.

Just speculating on my end and going by some reports already that other teams are angry at the Browns and aren't doing business with them because of this. Time will tell if this is real.

I dunno about that.  Different teams have different approaches.  Agents are no doubt going to push for more fully guarantee money.  Some teams might cave,   Others will say, no, this is what we are offering if you want to go elsewhere, go elsewhere.  Somehow I doubt this deal is going to change the Patriots or Steelers approach one iota.   

It's not really the smaller guys, but the QBs that will be opened up. If you're the Chargers and Herbert wants his whole deal guaranteed, what do you do now? Can't franchise him every year, plus that pisses him off and he could sit out games.

Nothing has really changed.  If you feel what he is asking for is more than he is worth you let him walk and let someone else overpay him.  If you feel he is worth that much you pay him.  Personally I think it would be bad to pay someone a massive 7 year fully guaranteed contract.  But some teams might disagree.  If the long term fully guaranteed contract backfires often enough teams will become less willing to offer them, if most of the time they work out they will be more frequent.

To me Watson is a very poor candidate for a fully guaranteed contract.  Only people who I would ever consider extending one of those to are players that meet three criteria:  1) outstanding football player; 2) outstanding health history; and 3) strong character with absolutely no red flags. 

   

Mike Florio reports that there is language in the Watson contract that can allow them to void the whole thing if he gets suspended. Now, I imagine the team knows that he will likely get some type of suspension, but this appears to be in case he is suspended for a year or maybe more.

He just got hit with his 23rd and 24th civil lawsuit today which is so beyond ridiculous that the only way to believe all 24 women is to crown Watson as the Country's most notorious serial rapist. I'm not ready to do that but I guess anything is possible.

I don’t actually have to believe all 24.  If only 2.5% of them are telling the truth and 97.5% are lying he is a rapist that belongs in jail, not the NFL.

If you have concerns about being falsehood accused this man has some great advice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qoW7FIWWs8

Oh, I would hope he would rot in jail for even one for the rest of his life. Just saying that 24 is a ridiculous number that hurts the credibility of the alleged victims since the only way to believe that number is to confirm he is one of the worst rapists since Genghis Khan. That's a big stretch. And, if a few are proven to be liars, then the ones telling the truth will be lumped in with them.

False accusations should come with severe jail time for the damage they do.

It's not 24 accusations of rape, specifically, though, right?   I mean...it's inappropriate sexual assault....not necessarily forceful -- trying to coerce hand-jobs from the masseuse was part of it, no?

Just the opposite...

If 1 person tells me they got ripped off by an auto mechanic, maybe the mechanic is untrustworthy or maybe that one person had a bad experience with the mechanic.

If 24 people tell me they all got ripped off by the same mechanic, I am not bringing my car there.  

If 24 people tell me they got ripped off by the same mechanic, and then I learn the 24th person was exaggerating and wasn't really ripped off, but just heard others complaining and joined in.  I am still not using that mechanic.  

I find it a lot easier to believe that someone who got away with raping 12 women would rape 12 more, than the idea that all 24 women decided to make a false accusation against the same person.  So the claim that 24 is too many is stupid.  Wilt Chamberland claimed to have slept with over 20,000 women.  Charlie Sheen claims to have slept with over 5000.  Those are likely overstated, but idea that someone could have non-consensual sex with 24 unique partners is not unreasonable.  It is more partners than I have had in my lifetime, but not an unreasonable number.  

As for punishing women for making false accusations.  Maybe we should start by punishing the rapists, who get off all too often.  If you are worried about false accusations watch the video I posted.    

Getting robbed by a mechanic is far easier to do than getting raped by a famous QB in a massage parlor. It's not even comparable.

Just the opposite.

They (PFT) apparently got hold of the full contact which stipulated that “solely in connection with matters disclosed to Club in writing pursuant to paragraph 42 and such suspension results in Player’s unavailability to Club solely for games during the 2022 or 2023 NFL League Years.”

So, basically, the Browns are only on the hook if it's something they knew about and doesn't reach beyond the 2023 NFL year.

Watson is the best thing the Dolphins have ever lost out on. Words just can't express how excited I am that we are not in the middle of this shit show!!

I agree 100%.

What a nightmare scenario.

It was a paid vacation, not a punishment.  The fact 24 unique women have all accused him is evidence *he* is lying.  There is a 2% chance an allegation of sexual assault being false.  If multiple woman are all accusing ya of sexual assault then you done something wrong.

Washington Post reporter is saying that the NFL is seeking a significant suspension of at least a year. The reporter also spoke with someone on Watson's side and said they also expect the NFL to hand down a year long suspension. Watson would obviously fight this and I don't know what it means for his contract status with the Browns. They might be legally allowed to void the whole thing, but then they just wasted a shitload of valuable draft picks for nothing.

Could also be why Baker Mayfield is still around, as insurance.

Either way, the league allegedly wants all the appeals wrapped up before August so I guess in 2 weeks or so we should see the NFL's ruling.

Like I said earlier in this thread.   No one is worth the guaranteed money Watson received. 

If the Browns can legally void the contract and they do so, they've thrown away draft picks.  And if they decide to keep Watson but he gets suspended for a long time, they've lost out anyway.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

A lot of owners will look back on this and be very hesitant to hand over a high amount of guaranteed money going forward.

Watson has settled all but 4 lawsuits as of today. The 4 are represented by the same lawyer so they will probably be settled unless they think they are getting millions. In situations like this, only the lawyer is really going to get paid.

It's an interesting dynamic because does this mean no more people will file lawsuits against him? If not, doesn't that seem a bit odd?

Lots of things to play out, including the NFL's decision. Seems like settling is going to hurt him suspension wise, but maybe they cut a deal where they told him to get it out of the press and only get 8 games or so.

The biggest tell in this whole story is Watson still maintains he has no regrets about how he acted. That dude needs some friends. No way my buddies wouldn't be killing me over something like this.

Well, what choice does he have? He either denies it due to his innocence or not wanting to admit guilt, or he apologizes and basically admits to sexually assaulting or acting inappropriately with 28 women. If he apologizes, he's suspended for at least a year.

You can apoligize without admitting fault. "I regret the situaiion we find ourselves in and I'm sorry that my actions somehow made these women feel uncomfortable but that was never my intention. Going forward I will make sure I act in a professional manner so that nothing can be miscontrued etc ... " Obviously it can be much better than that but you get my dift. Here it is years into this and he still acts like he is the victim.  He said he has no regrets about any of his actions but admitted that he does regret the impact the allegations have had on the people around him.

Yeah, his answer is the best one for his career and that's why he went with it. If he takes ANY responsibility, then he looks 100% guilty and gives the NFL the opportunity to suspend him for at least a year without facing backlash. If he denies everything, then it's a risk for the NFL to suspend a black man the whole season with no conviction or admission of guilt.

It's all PR at this point for both sides.

"I have no regrets" is definitely not the best answer for his career.  CF's answer is much better; you can say "I'm sorry they feel this way," "I'm sorry they got the wrong impression," or any of the other common non-apology apologies.  You shouldn't be out there saying the equivalent of I'd do it all again if I could.

Maybe I need to hear his words and judge the tone. To me, "I have no regrets" means "I did nothing wrong that I should be remorseful for". If he says he has no regrets AND offers a fake apology, then it looks bad.

Of course, at this point he should just shut up and let his lawyer issue statements when needed.

No, I take it like Spider said. It sounds exactly like he wouldn't change a thing.

NFLPA believes Watson will be suspended for one year at the minimum, and perhaps indefinitely. Watson and the NFL were having conversations about his suspension length but talks have broken down. To me, that means Watson thought the suspension was way too long and didn't want to budge past a certain number of games, probably 4-6.

No doubt Watson will sue and appeal, but what is his legal case? The NFLPA is the worst union in all professional sports, they let Goodell basically have complete power over how he hands out suspensions. Even suspending for accusations. Legally speaking, I think he can basically suspend Watson for however long he wants and that's that.

Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe this is why Brady lost for the deflated balls. The Courts ruled that Roger had the power to suspend him and that's that.

P.S. Let's say the suspension is indefinitely, minimum of one year. Did the Browns not put any protections in their trade agreement with the Texans for this? Or, are they out all those draft picks and get nothing in return?

If they are out all those draft picks, the GM and the entire front office should be fired.   They failed to perform their due diligence with this guy and as a result, it will set the franchise back for years to come.

I think they did their due diligence and decided to roll the dice anyway. Giving Deshaun that contract is the greater sin as far as I'm concerned.

Both were stupid.  What due diligence? I knew he was toxic and an extreme risk of being unavailable due to legal/suspension issues based on reports in PFT and ESPN. 

The NFL is in such an unwinnable position.

If they had a hard line where you needed a conviction or no-contest or civil settlement to be suspended by the league, at least they'd let themselves off the hook.  Individual teams could suspend for their own PR, but it would have to be the league.

The precedent is set and they're in this tough spot of weighing one kind of crime or case to another.  I do not envy their choices.

And what happens when you roll the dice?   Sometimes you'll get snake eyes. 

You don't gamble with multiple draft picks on a risky player like that.  You just don't. 

There were 20 cases that reached settlement.

A bright line rule that a settlement means suspension could be problematic.  NFL is playing softball in his backyard and hits ball through neighbors window, day after neighbor files suit in small claims court,  player settles for $300 (the cost to replace window).  A bright line rule means suspension.  Is it really warranted?

Also lets say there is bright line rule of 6 game suspension for settling a lawsuit.  Does Watson get a 6 game suspension or a 120 game suspension?

I wasn't suggesting that settled would guarantee suspension -- just that the league wouldn't consider cases at all until there was some kind of legal filing or admission of wrongdoing.  Then they'd evaluate like normal.

Else, you're kind of having to be judge and jury on everything, which is where they are now and are dealing with these problems.

Watson will have his disciplinary hearing on Tuesday.   And Edge was right that the league is pushing for a long suspension

Seems like the outcome that saves the most face for the most people (which should not be mistaken, in any way, for the outcome that is the most just) is to suspend Watson without pay for the 2022-23 season.

Watson's contract is specifically written to minimize the financial impact of such an event.
The Browns still have Baker signed to the roster for next season.
The NFL can credibly claim that they issued the longest suspension for sexual assault allegations in league history.

To me, this seems the most likely but no way Watson and the NFLPA don't fight this, maybe even beyond Goodell if he upholds it. It's a loss of tens of millions and a year off the field for no convictions. I know that this seems like a special case, but it's still going to be a lengthy legal battle if it's over 8 games or so.

While no convictions there were at least 20 women whom he tacitly admitted to assaulting.  This guy is a serial rapist.

I'm in the camp that thinks this happens.  It allows everyone to walk away and come back with something later.

He did not admit to assaulting them, he settled for money to make them go away. Not saying he is innocent, but settling doesn't denote guilt.

Wall Street Journal is reporting that the suspension will probably be indefinitely, with a year being the minimum.

The NFLPA is ready for war, of course it should be noted that they gave Goodell and the league the power to suspend outside of the Judicial system in the first place.

Settling doesn't prove criminal liability, but implies acceptance of civil liability.

Very rare someone pays unless there is liability.  Also if his concern was women lining up to make false accusations, settling is a very bad idea as it would encourage others. 

Twenty four women didn't all fabricate rape.

It's a loss of exactly $1,035,000.

Watson's contract with the Browns was written specifically to account for a potential suspension this year.  That's why I think he accepts that outcome.

Wow, I did not know that. That changes things. I still think he would fight an indefinite suspension as that could be lifetime, but maybe if he bargains down to one year then he will accept it.

What a shitshow.

According to what I read if he gets a full year suspension the contract tolls.  So this year it would cost him only the $1 million but next year he only makes $1 million not the $42 million and he becomes a FA one year later.  A part year suspension otoh would cost him the game checks but no tolling.

That wouldn't make sense.  It's easy to see if you apply it to his normal salary instead of his schemed-up 2022 salary.  Suppose he gets suspended again in 2025:

- if he gets a 16-game suspension, he permanently loses $43.44 million from his contract
- if he gets a suspension for the entire 17-game season, he loses $0 and it's simply deferred

He loses what he would have made in his first year as a FA post contract.

I mean, he loses a year of his career... but in the scenario of a 16-game suspension, he loses over $40 million in addition to losing a year of his career.

Considering he's already sat out a year, if he gets suspended another year, how effective can he be when he takes the field again?

I was just thinking this too. Football is a game of timing, even more so at the QB position. 2 years away in his prime? That's rough. Not impossible to come back but rough.

Browns won't have much choice but to give him the necessary reps to get back in shape.  He has a guaranteed contact.

Wouldn't it be glorious if they have to keep Mayfield and he has a great year and they have to let him walk for nothing? Everyone knows he played very injured last year, a strong bounceback to 2020 levels is not that crazy.

I dont think there is any way Mayfield could play for them this season. They have treated him pretty poorly.

I know, but these are weird times. If they can't find a willing trade partner who doesn't want Cleveland to eat 80% of his contract, then he is the best QB on the roster. Baker may pout, but he won't be sitting out. On the contrary, he is probably salivating at the idea of having a monster season and then walking away for nothing.

Vick came back and finished 2nd in MVP voting.

I agree with Edge.  Mayfield will give 100% if Browns keep him.  He needs to prove he is worthy for his next contract.

Players in the NFL do not get to "walk for nothing" unless the team wants them to.  CLE could franchise him and trade him.

If he has a decent year they will get a third round compensatory pick even if they don't tag.

They would be in a similar situation to the one they are in right now. Meaning, they are basically forced to trade him or have a very expensive QB room. They could still get it done, but if Baker doesn't want to go to a certain team, he will make his feelings known and the trading team might back off. It definitely carries it's own risks.

A lawsuit filed against the Texans alleges "individuals within the Texans organization knew or should have known of Deshaun Watson's conduct."

Watson just settled all but four of the lawsuits filed against him. This new lawsuit claims the Texans enabled his behavior by providing "rooms set up for him at the Houstonian Hotel, massage tables provided to him for private massage sessions, and a NDA provided to him from the head of Texans' security." The lawsuit paints a truly disgusting situation in an even worse light by accusing the Texans, an NFL franchise worth billions of dollars, of supporting Watson amidst his alleged instances of sexual misconduct. Watson's disciplinary hearing began on Tuesday. Many reports have indicated that the NFL will push for a suspension no shorter than a year.
Related:

    Houston Texans

Source: NFL.com
Jun 27, 2022, 4:07 PM ET

Now, just because a lawsuit is filed, doesn't mean it's all true but when you file a lawsuit with very specific details like this? That definitely doesn't look too good for you. Does anyone know if the women who sued him ever mentioned these details before?

The difference is that right now, Baker is coming off of a mediocre year and the demand is low.

If he plays the same next year, let him walk.
If he lights it up next year, the demand will be high and CLE will be able to get value out of trading him.

If they tag and trade, they will likely have already worked out the trade before the tag.

Browns just traded Baker Mayfield to the Panthers for a 5th rounder.   I guess they either know Watson's suspension will not be for a full year or they're really taking a gamble here by getting rid of their safety net.

I think they just got rid of their safety net. All signs point to a year suspension if not more and while it will be fought, I don't think precedent is on their side. Either way, you have to figure that best case scenario is Watson only getting an 8 game suspension. They still need a real QB for 8 games to avoid falling so far back the playoffs are out of the picture.

Not like they got a great deal either. A 5th Rounder while they eat $10.5 Million? Sounds like they just wanted him off the team.

Panthers play Browns in Week 1. Should be fun.

They killed themselves with Baker Mayfield. I wouldn't read too much into why they did it. He wasn't ever going to play for them again and everyone knew that so they had no leverage in getting much in return.

And with the first overall pick Browns Texans select...

I think when all is said and done, they will have Laremy Tunsil'd Cleveland.

Wow ... the Browns are even covering over 10 million of his salary for this year. They basically were begging to get rid of him and save any money. hahahaha. They did this to themselves.

Jacoby Brisett is the backup. Obviously, we are not too fond of him around these parts. Their schedule is fairly light in the beginning of the year if he has to start 8 games, but if he has to start all of them, they're doomed and the Texans got themselves a nice draft pick.

They got 3-4 nice draft picks...   :P

If this trade plays out for Cleveland like it is looking like it will play out, then the team should be moved to Baltimore again. Just have two teams there.

I would just like to point out that Baker Mayfield also sucks.  So, all this talk about Watson and Brissett and Mayfield....blah blah blah.  Baker will probably go suck somewhere else, Brisset is a bum, and Watson isn't going to play.

It's lose, lose all over and couldn't happen to a better city than Cleveland.

Yahoo is reporting that if Watson is suspendd for a year, then he and the NFLPA will sue the NFL. We all pretty much knew this beforehand but now Yahoo is "confirming it".

I still don't know what legal ground Deshaun has to stand on because the NFLPA gave Goodell the power to basically do whatever he wants. The appeals process is drawn out and messy but if the league really wants a year or more, looks like they will get it.

Word is, with that threat of a lawsuit, the judge that presided over the hearing is expected to hand down a suspension of somewhere between two and eight games.   If an eight game suspension is administered, the first game Watson will be eligible to play in will be Nov 13..... against the Dolphins.

I really hope that this situation causes a change to the Personal Conduct Policy when it's time to sit down and renew the CBA.

This is not how any court works.

Watson gets 6 games.   I have a feeling that the Browns dodged a major bullet

Watson will not appeal but Goodell has the power to extend it. So, this is only over once the NFL agrees.

If Fidel Goodell extends it, then you can be sure that Watson will appeal

6 games is like 1 quarter per charge isn't it? That's a pretty light sentence if you ask me but I do get it.

The fact that no arrests were made and the police closed it due to lack of evidence played well for Watson. If he was charged but then charges were dropped after financial settlements like a lot of cases, then he probably would've gotten the year.

No official word but Watson would probably appeal if Goodell adds on more games. The league will probably just have to bite their tongue on this one.

And the NFL has appealed the ruling body's decision.   Goodell himself will decide who hears said appeal.  Reports are coming out that the NFL is asking for an indefinite suspension with a minimum of one year.  NFLPA has come out saying that if that's what the NFL is asking for, they plan to file suit in federal court.

The NFL appealing the decision is a really bad look, as the appeal is heard by... Goodell.
Why even bother with the arbitrator if you are going to reject her ruling and do whatever you want anyway?

It may look bad but it is the process the union agreed to so really not much to bitch about.

The weird thing to me is the NFL only presented 4 of the cases so that is what the arbitrator had to go by.

You can say there's not much to bitch about now, but CBAs don't last forever.  This is a penny-wise and pound-foolish move; whatever the NFL is gaining in PR from being tough on Watson, they are going to pay for at the bargaining table.

There is no point in going to arbitration if one of the parties has the power to say "Never mind, I'm gonna do what I want anyway."  The NFLPA is not going to participate in this sham next time.

Then why would they agree to it in the first place? You don't think they had the same bargaining power last time? Ultimately it matters what the public thinks as they are the one paying to watch the players. If the NFL is going to say they don't care about women then that is going to hurt them pretty badly in the pocket.

Which is why the union is willing to take the NFL to court over this.   That process can be thrown out by way of a class action.   

And I agree with Spider.   Why even bother with an arbitrator if you're gonna throw out the ruling if it doesn't go your way??

Because they thought the NFL would act in good faith when agreeing to arbitration?

When a head coach signs on with a team that has a GM with "final say on roster" in his contract, that does not mean the HC should expect the GM to overrule him every time they disagree on a player.  There is a bare minimum expectation of good faith in negotiation of terms, not simply might makes right.

In the last negotiation, the NFLPA thought that the NFL would respect the decision of an arbitrator, making it a minor issue that technically Goodell can overrule them.  Now that the NFL has made it clear that the arbitrator will only be allowed to be a rubber stamp for the league and will be immediately overruled otherwise, they will extract a pound of flesh for that concession in the next negotiation.

I would normally agree with you, but the NFLPA is one of the weakest unions in the country and I am convinced the Head of it secretly works for the NFL and not the players. They routinely get nothing. Hell, they just added a game without another bye week. This won't change anytime soon until they get real leadership.

I don't really understand why the NFL is doing what they're doing -- do they just not want Watson to play to avoid the bad press?  I mean...it's something they're going to have to face anyway at some point, right?

It seems that arbitration was the "out" for the NFL.  They wanted more, but agreed to arbitration, so Watson comes back and they can say that they did what they could to fight it, but a deal's a deal.

I think everyone on both sides probably hopes that Watson just sucks and is out of the league in 2 years.

I might be the most cynical person on this board, but I still truly believe this is about power. Roger is an egomaniac and wants to impose his will on the league. He is going to ignore the arbitrator and give out his sentence because that's what he wants and there isn't much more to it than that. He gave the arbitrator a chance to do what he wanted and they decided otherwise, so now he will rule his way.

Take a step back and look at how the NFL deals with suspensions. If you aren't even charged with a crime, you can get suspended for weeks or years. I know this isn't the Justice System, but how messed up is it that accusations without evidence can cost you millions and or your career?

And this is why the NFLPA has a good chance of winning if they file a class action suit.

But they don't because they willingly gave that power to Goodell. It's one thing if he just decided to go outside the bylaws and do what he wants, but the CBA says that he has the final say on these matters and the NFLPA signed off on it. It's a terrible deal for them, one I personally feel was negotiated with under the table deals, but it is what it is.

The Players need to get their shit together next time and stop relying on suits to speak for them. Only professional league without guaranteed contracts and it's the shortest and most violent career span.

In situations like this (and Michael Vick before it), I just want it over.  I just want Watson to play himself or age out of the league so that this isn't hanging over everyone.  You don't really want to have a rapist celebrated on NFL Prime Time for the next 10 years.  It's just kind of a gross feeling.  I get due process and that he has a right to work and all that.  It doesn't mean I have to like it.

I think you guys are far off base .. MLB suspended a player 2 years and he's losing 65 million dollars for 1 sexual assault allegation

Click Here to see it (https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/29/trevor-bauer-suspended-for-2-seasons-over-sex-assault-policy-violation.html#:~:text=Oliphant%20%7C%20Getty%20Images-,MLB%20suspended%20Trevor%20Bauer%20for%20two%20seasons%20after%20completing%20an,Commissioner%20Rob%20Manfred%20announced%20Friday)

Watson has 20+ and the nfl arbitrator only suspended him for 6 games because that's as much as she was allowed to. the facts of the arbitration judged that he more like than not did commit the sexual assaults.

expect an indefinate suspension where he has to re-apply to join the NFL and could very well be denied year 2

From what I remembered, Trevor Bauer is appealing his suspension but I don't know the timetable. If it is not reversed, he will sue them, or at least that is what he said. His case is very odd in legal terms because I think they suspended him for admittedly engaging in very rough sex, so he isn't denying that but he says it was consensual and at that point, is this just kink shaming? As of now, he is suing the woman who accused him of sexual assault and 2 media outlets for defamation.

Personal note, Bauer is a sick fuck and so is anyone who enjoys violent sex. Go to therapy.

Almost everyone thinks he should have gotten more games and been forced to go to therapy. Regardless of everything else he has a problem. I have to believe since almost every show and news stations makes it seem like the 6 games is light it kind of puts pressure on the NFL to act. Everyone knows they have the power to do so if they don't it really makes them look bad.

It's a tough call because it isn't like he had charges pressed against him and they were later dropped due to an out of court settlement. The police investigated and found nothing. Not saying that clears him because some things are very hard to prove, but to me it's enough to not be suspended for a year because it is literally just accusations now. Suspended indefinitely is extreme, even if by the CBA Roger might be allowed to do that.

The AP is reporting that Watson's people have offered an 8 game suspension and $5 Million fine to avoid a lengthy legal battle and even lengthier suspension. It is expected that the NFL will respond with laugh reacts.

This is far from over.

NFL and Watson have settled on an 11 game ban and $5 Million fine.

If the Browns go with Jacoby for the first 11 games, then they won't make the playoffs. Which makes it easier for us, so that's good.

I looked up CLE's schedule to see if Watson will be playing against MIA; he will not.  In fact, he won't be playing against any AFCE team, so (from the standpoint of competitive football) it's all level playing field for the division.

But I did find it hilarious that his first game back is against... HOU.  I daresay that is why we are seeing an 11-game suspension and not 12.

You could be right, as 11 is not a nice, even number. It will make a game between two teams very likely in last place seem interesting.

Is he able to practice as part of this?

I'm pretty sure he isn't. The suspension starts after final roster cutdowns.

I'm shocked that you would infer the NFL would use the suffering of dozens of women to increase viewership in week 12 of the season.  ::)

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?&q=Casablanca+quote+about+gambling&view=detail&mid=FCF5BE2D5DF9F9A92971FCF5BE2D5DF9F9A92971&form=VDQVAP&rvsmid=11F6C4E3FB19CE02462911F6C4E3FB19CE024629&ajaxhist=0

Then i don't see him playing against the Texans.

I'll take that bet right now.

Unless he's injured or somehow ruled administratively ineligible to play, Watson will absolutely play against the Texans.  No question.

Just an update to this thread since I couldn't find the contract extension one.

Watson played 6 games last year and was meh at best, but he was coming back from a long layoff so that could be excused.

This year so far, he has played 3 games at mediocre production and missed the last 2 games with an injury. Weird thing is, he was medically cleared to go in Week 4 but chose not to play because he didn't feel he was ready. Then, he sat out on Sunday.....and now his coach says that he might not play in Week 6 either.

Did he quit on the season already? What an absolute disaster the trade and contract has been for the Browns.

^^^^ Between Johnny Football and Watson, the Browns are the worst at evaluating QB's.  They should bring in Kevin Costner to draft their next QB, I'll bet he does much better.

Don't forget Tim Couch, Brady Quinn and Brandon Weeden.   But other than that, I agree.   And to think the Dolphins were in that position between Marino and Tannehill although they never blew a first rounder on any of the QBs they had.

The Browns had a bye this week...

Technically, he did not play and I refuse to admit defeat.

That being said, if he may not play next week, then he definitely wasn't going to play yesterday if there was a game.

yes, TECHNICALLY, he sat out week 5.

...Along with everyone else on his team.

But you're right, he better be back on the field this week.

He is ruled out for the Niners game, refused to answer a question about his health and the local newspaper said he could miss several more weeks while his head coach called him day to day a week ago.

Something happened, this isn't an injury. I think he's angry at the team or owners and he's sitting his fully guaranteed ass out until he feels like playing.

^ It was reported that it's a deep shoulder contusion, which is acting more like a sprain. He tried to warm up before the first  game after he was cleared and said he was experiencing a lot of pain and weakness. He's reportedly been told not basically not throw the ball until the pain subsides.

I'm not ruling it out that this is the truth, but that's a colossal fuck up by the medical staff if true. To the point that they should be fired, so I'm still skeptical. Telling a player during a playoff game that he is fine when he isn't? Yeah, that happens. Telling your franchise QB that he is good to go in Week 4 when he isn't? That leaves me still questioning.

The Browns are the absolute worst organization when it comes to QB's.  Tim Couch, Johnny Football, Mayfield (when others were available), and then bringing in Watson.  It's like they're stepping up to the plate trying to hit a grand slam when their batting average is .150.

They just beat SF without Watson and Chubb.
any given Sunday

I don't know what was more of a WTF moment yesterday, the Niners losing to the Browns or the Eagles losing to the Jets. 

the Watson situation looks like crap on the surface, but I think if he were faking an injury, the team staff would know it.  The team doesn't want their 200-million dollars sitting on the couch, but I agree it looks suspicious.  We'll see if he gets back on the field.  If he was going to be out 4 weeks, they'd have tossed him on short term IR.

Watson had a bad start to the game by going 1-5 for 5 yards and an INT. Then, he took a big hit and was tested for a concussion. He passed his test and......stayed out of the rest of the game. No concussion. No injury.

Coach said it was a precaution but......nah.

Watson got paid and now he says a big FU to the NFL.

Watson is a piece of garbage.
and he's laughing all the way to the bank.
Fully guaranteed contract, can't get on the field and act like he doesn't want to.  Hell, why work for your money when you don't have to?
What a piece of crap.

....and Watson is out for the season with a shoulder injury.

Enter Joe Flacco, 38, who worked out with Cleveland this week; looking to pickup a couple million in retirement for a half season.  In the mean time the Browns will start 5th round draft pick Dorian Thompson.

The Browns got what they deserved. Watson shouldn’t be in the NFL, so glad our idiot owner wasn’t able to get him. Can you imagine right now? Ugh

On the bright side for Cleveland, Watson wasn't playing well anyway. So, they're 6-3 due to their defense.