NFL 2022

[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?

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.

The player gets an opportunity to make their case as to whether anything happened or not to the NFL. They don't just read the papers and then hand down a suspension out of the blue. They aren't trying to determine whether or not they committed criminal offenses, just whether or not they violated the NFL's personal conduct policy.

[CrimsonNBlue]

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.

Not every single thing is adjudicated through the criminal courts.

But, more to the point, are you under the assumption that the intermediary did not find that Watson violated the conduct policy? Sure seems like they did.

[CrimsonNBlue]

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.

The player gets an opportunity to make their case as to whether anything happened or not to the NFL. They don't just read the papers and then hand down a suspension out of the blue.

This is also a situation where someone is not being allowed to play 6 fucking football games. It’s not death row.

Sports fans as a group can often miss the forest for the trees, imo.

[Deleted User 863]

A financial settlement in a civil trial isn't the same as a guilty verdict.

[CrimsonNBlue]

Lot of bad legal takes going on here. But, I think the takeaway is, lawsuits, criminal proceedings—I’m not sure why so many think that matters.

People get legally fired every day for much, much less.

[twocoach]

A financial settlement in a civil trial isn't the same as a guilty verdict.

What does this have to do with anything? Are you under some sort of impression that a guilty verdict is needed to prove a violation of the NFL Personal Conduct policy?!?

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

twocoach and CNB - I fully admit I am not really educated on the process. I appreciate your input and at some point I will try and learn more about the procedures and protocols in regards to conduct policies and how they are (and are not) enforced.
Like most things, I figure there will never be a perfect system.

[CrimsonNBlue]

twocoach and CNB - I fully admit I am not really educated on the process. I appreciate your input and at some point I will try and learn more about the procedures and protocols in regards to conduct policies and how they are (and are not) enforced.
Like most things, I figure there will never be a perfect system.

Completely fine--I certainly don't understand the entire process either and also believe the NFL is completely inconsistent on enforcement.

I do think, however, that in situations like this fans confuse the interplay between the criminal and civil court system and NFL rules enforcement (and if there should be any at all!).

Certainly you know from your own employment that you can be fired for things that fall way short of ever touching a criminal investigation or are grounds for a lawsuit whether you're at work or not.

[twocoach]

twocoach and CNB - I fully admit I am not really educated on the process. I appreciate your input and at some point I will try and learn more about the procedures and protocols in regards to conduct policies and how they are (and are not) enforced.
Like most things, I figure there will never be a perfect system.

As CnB noted, think about this from an employer perspective. My employer can see my name noted in the newspaper as being involved in some unsavory business and bring me in to ask me questions about it. If they feel that their questions lead them to believe that I have violated my employee code of conduct, they can fire me or some other mutually agreed upon punishment. It does not require me to be found guilty of a crime for me to be found guilty of violating that agreement.

NOTE: I haven't actually read my agreed-to Employee Code of Conduct in some time so I am not sure of specifically what I could or could not be found to be in violation of said policy. I use the above only as an example.

The actions being taken by the NFL vs. Watson are by an employer against an employee for a violation of the mutually agreed upon NFL Personal Conduct policy.

[CrimsonNBlue]

twocoach and CNB - I fully admit I am not really educated on the process. I appreciate your input and at some point I will try and learn more about the procedures and protocols in regards to conduct policies and how they are (and are not) enforced.
Like most things, I figure there will never be a perfect system.

As CnB noted, think about this from an employer perspective. My employer can see my name noted in the newspaper as being involved in some unsavory business and bring me in to ask me questions about it. If they feel that their questions lead them to believe that I have violated my employee code of conduct, they can fire me or some other mutually agreed upon punishment. It does not require me to be found guilty of a crime for me to be found guilty of violating that agreement.

NOTE: I haven't actually read my agreed-to Employee Code of Conduct in some time so I am not sure of specifically what I could or could not be found to be in violation of said policy. I use the above only as an example.

The actions being taken by the NFL vs. Watson are by an employer against an employee for a violation of the mutually agreed upon NFL Personal Conduct policy.

Do you have a CBA? That would be the one NFL nuance here that is different from most people's employment. Most US employment is at-will, so those employees can be legally fired for liking the wrong sports team let alone for being the subject of a criminal investigation or unsavory news story.

But again, we're kind of missing the real story here: the NFL signaled that they are completely fine with Watson making 100's of millions of dollars playing football and again being a face that represents the NFL and its teams.

[twocoach]

twocoach and CNB - I fully admit I am not really educated on the process. I appreciate your input and at some point I will try and learn more about the procedures and protocols in regards to conduct policies and how they are (and are not) enforced.
Like most things, I figure there will never be a perfect system.

As CnB noted, think about this from an employer perspective. My employer can see my name noted in the newspaper as being involved in some unsavory business and bring me in to ask me questions about it. If they feel that their questions lead them to believe that I have violated my employee code of conduct, they can fire me or some other mutually agreed upon punishment. It does not require me to be found guilty of a crime for me to be found guilty of violating that agreement.

NOTE: I haven't actually read my agreed-to Employee Code of Conduct in some time so I am not sure of specifically what I could or could not be found to be in violation of said policy. I use the above only as an example.

The actions being taken by the NFL vs. Watson are by an employer against an employee for a violation of the mutually agreed upon NFL Personal Conduct policy.

Do you have a CBA? That would be the one NFL nuance here that is different from most people's employment. Most US employment is at-will, so those employees can be legally fired for liking the wrong sports team let alone for being the subject of a criminal investigation or unsavory news story.

But again, we're kind of missing the real story here: the NFL signaled that they are completely fine with Watson making 100's of millions of dollars playing football and again being a face that represents the NFL and its teams.

No, we do not have a union or any sort of agreement that was mutually agreed upon between members of the ownership and the employees. In reviewing our internal "Code of Business Conduct" and Employee Handbook, there isn't a lot that my employer would consider if it happens outside of the workplace other than a generic "any fraudulent or criminal activity".

And I agree on your take with the NFL; they glossed over this as a standard first time offense under the personal conduct policy and moved right on to the next order of business.

[Cascadia]

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.

“I’m a stupid troll”. - illy

[NewtonHawk11]

NFL appealing. He’ll probably be out at least a year. Goodell gets the call now.

[NewtonHawk11]

[pdub]

Watson apparently will sue if the NFL suspends him a year.

[NewtonHawk11]

He'll lose too. If a judge said it looks like he went against the PCP. But went light on the punishment. But the current CBA shows Goodell has final say. If the judge went with like a 12-16 game suspension, NFL probably doesn't appeal.

[CrimsonNBlue]

That's how I understand it, as well. But not sure if anything has changed since the Tom Brady suit.

Goodell with way too much power, although I think 6 games is crazy light for Watson.

[hartjack8]

Just wandering if you all forgetting he sat out all last year. He did not play a year of football already.
Is this not considered or just forgotten.

[Cascadia]

Just wandering if you all forgetting he sat out all last year. He did not play a year of football already.
Is this not considered or just forgotten.

Yeah bro, we all forgot he didn’t play last year. Thanks!

[Overlander]

Have we all forgotten that he really ISN’T a top money QB?