NFL 2022

[pdub]

I don't think the NFL should be a judge and jury for things outside of football BUT since they are, yes, this judgement, compared to others, is a joke.

[NewtonHawk11]

Well. This was kind of out of their hands. Third party judge decided this. NFL wanted at least a year. NFLPA wanted 0 games. Does the NFL appeal and fight the process that they set up a few years ago? Should be interesting.

[CrimsonNBlue]

I haven't followed close enough, but I wonder if the lack of criminal charges forced the NFL to seek a lighter punishment. Guessing they knew they would be in a legal battle w/ NFLPA on this and a multi-year suspension was going to be tough to stick.

If there would have been charges and/or convictions, then I personally would have been fine with a permanent ban based on the player conduct codes. NFL/sports have too blind of an eye to these issues, imo.

[twocoach]

I don't think the NFL should be a judge and jury for things outside of football BUT since they are, yes, this judgement, compared to others, is a joke.

He got the same length of suspension as DeAndre Hopkins got for having trace amounts of a PED in one test sample.

[KUTradition]

I haven't followed close enough, but I wonder if the lack of criminal charges forced the NFL to seek a lighter punishment. Guessing they knew they would be in a legal battle w/ NFLPA on this and a multi-year suspension was going to be tough to stick.

If there would have been charges and/or convictions, then I personally would have been fine with a permanent ban based on the player conduct codes. NFL/sports have too blind of an eye to these issues, imo.

imo, the lack of criminal charges from the grand jury is (or at least should be) the bigger story

[pdub]

imo, the lack of criminal charges from the grand jury is (or at least should be) the bigger story

Yep.

[CrimsonNBlue]

I haven't followed close enough, but I wonder if the lack of criminal charges forced the NFL to seek a lighter punishment. Guessing they knew they would be in a legal battle w/ NFLPA on this and a multi-year suspension was going to be tough to stick.

If there would have been charges and/or convictions, then I personally would have been fine with a permanent ban based on the player conduct codes. NFL/sports have too blind of an eye to these issues, imo.

imo, the lack of criminal charges from the grand jury is (or at least should be) the bigger story

In what way?

[UnholyLivingDead]

I believe they said 6 games is the standard for a first violation of the league's personal conduct policy, so with the grand jury not charging him for whatever reason, the arbitrator was basically handcuffed when it comes to recommending anything longer than what's outlined in the CBA.

[KUTradition]

I haven't followed close enough, but I wonder if the lack of criminal charges forced the NFL to seek a lighter punishment. Guessing they knew they would be in a legal battle w/ NFLPA on this and a multi-year suspension was going to be tough to stick.

If there would have been charges and/or convictions, then I personally would have been fine with a permanent ban based on the player conduct codes. NFL/sports have too blind of an eye to these issues, imo.

imo, the lack of criminal charges from the grand jury is (or at least should be) the bigger story

In what way?

in the way that alleged pathological sexual assault not being charged criminally should be the subject of conversation, rather than the nfl’s response

how the grand jury decided not to pursue criminal charges is beyond me, and is the real travesty (aside from the actual “alleged” assaults themselves)

[CrimsonNBlue]

imo, the lack of criminal charges from the grand jury is (or at least should be) the bigger story

In what way?

in the way that alleged pathological sexual assault not being charged criminally should be the subject of conversation, rather than the nfl’s response

how the grand jury decided not to pursue criminal charges is beyond me, and is the real travesty (aside from the actual “alleged” assaults themselves)

Gotcha, I don't disagree, just thought there was a few different things that your post could have meant.

I think, as always, the caveat here is the very different burdens of proof, not having access to the evidence, etc., but your point is well taken.

[CrimsonNBlue]

The backlash to this seems pretty significant.

I can see the NFL appealing and Goodell slapping Watson with a year ban, at minimum.

NFLPA will sue, and from what little I have read about it, will likely lose as they collectively bargained the appellate process. Very similar to Tom Brady. Their system really needs an overhaul.

[NewtonHawk11]

An NFL Network show, Good Morning Football, went in pretty hard on this too. And they're mostly produced and monitored by the league.

[UnholyLivingDead]

The NFLPA coming out and saying they would not appeal the decision no matter what it was and then trying to pressure the league into making the same commitment really was foreshadowing.

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

If the NFL is going to suspend players based on ACCUSATIONS then most NFL Players should be suspended for something.
If Watson did what he was accused of doing to even one woman - and was found guilty - then I fully support his being suspended for multiple games - if not a permanent ban.

[pdub]

The NFL has suspended a number of players based on accusations.
I don't necessarily agree with it but once you've set a precedent, you need to be more reasonable with equal/fair punishment.

It's difficult to believe he didn't do something very wrong if 24 women came forward.

[pdub]

Skyy Moore leaves practice with a hip injury.
Of course.

[twocoach]

If the NFL is going to suspend players based on ACCUSATIONS then most NFL Players should be suspended for something.
If Watson did what he was accused of doing to even one woman - and was found guilty - then I fully support his being suspended for multiple games - if not a permanent ban.

So buying himself out of a court decision by reaching a financial settlement with the accusers gets him off punishment free?

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

If the NFL is going to suspend players based on ACCUSATIONS then most NFL Players should be suspended for something.
If Watson did what he was accused of doing to even one woman - and was found guilty - then I fully support his being suspended for multiple games - if not a permanent ban.

So buying himself out of a court decision by reaching a financial settlement with the accusers gets him off punishment free?

Excellent question! I just feel it opens a bad precedent to punish someone for something they may not have done. On the flip side, I can all but promise you the majority of NFL players have done something worthy of suspension and yet the majority of NFL players have not been suspended.

[Deleted User 863]

If the NFL is going to suspend players based on ACCUSATIONS then most NFL Players should be suspended for something.
If Watson did what he was accused of doing to even one woman - and was found guilty - then I fully support his being suspended for multiple games - if not a permanent ban.

So buying himself out of a court decision by reaching a financial settlement with the accusers gets him off punishment free?

Are you referring to the civil lawsuit or criminal trial?

[twocoach]

If the NFL is going to suspend players based on ACCUSATIONS then most NFL Players should be suspended for something.
If Watson did what he was accused of doing to even one woman - and was found guilty - then I fully support his being suspended for multiple games - if not a permanent ban.

So buying himself out of a court decision by reaching a financial settlement with the accusers gets him off punishment free?

Are you referring to the civil lawsuit or criminal trial?

You don't reach financial settlements with accusers to end criminal court cases, Illy. Is that a question that seriously needed to be asked? I also assume you already know that there aren't any criminal court cases going on. So just say what you were trying to say.