Today at 3:00, Steve will be holding a press conference regarding the criminal investigation involving Tyreek Hill and Crystal Espinal. This will be held in our 4th floor conference room.
Originally Posted by CasselGotPeedOn:
Of course you think that. You're the biggest homer on this site.
There's really nothing "Homer" about it. It's legit reasoning IMO. I mean if I did something, like violently break my kids arm, and if I were trying to cover it up, the LAST thing I'd do is post a pic of my kid with a broken arm on social media. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by jd1020:
Whether he did it or not, I think we can all assume he knows who did it and the fact that he's unwilling to come forth with that information is enough to suspend him in my book.
Certainly, if he's not willing to talk to them about it, they can suspend him for that.
Let's not forget that Hunt was let go not for fighting but for lying. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
So they suspended Elliott based on hearsay. An account that wasn't credible enough to seek criminal charges but credible enough to warrant a suspension.
Think about that for a minute and then think about this case.
Oh I'm tracking you. He'll suspend Hill if he wants to, I just hope the NFLPA can step up and get it removed. Goodell has too much authority and final say, and too little sense to know what to do with it. He's a god awful commissioner, but he's made the owners hundreds of millions of dollars so he isn't going anywhere.
But again in the Zeke case, there was an accuser naming Elliott the entire time. This case is way more cloudy, not that Goodell cares much about that. I guess we'll know in a week or two? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Eleazar:
If you're the Chiefs, you think about Hill's expiring contract, the fact that the league might move him to their exempt list while investigating, the fact that he might face suspension after they finish investigating, the fact that the guy has a history and didn't have the sense to avoid this situation even if he is innocent. Cops are being called to his house often, etc. He is still with this woman and the situation is unchanged. He has a pretty high chance of getting in trouble again. A big contract for him is a bad play.
No way is he getting extended anytime soon and probably never. At best, he plays for essentially free this year, and he gets tagged next, and that's it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by jd1020:
Whether he did it or not, I think we can all assume he knows who did it and the fact that he's unwilling to come forth with that information is enough to suspend him in my book.
So you think suspending people for your "feelings" or "presumptions" is acceptable?
Originally Posted by Bowser:
Oh I'm tracking you. He'll suspend Hill if he wants to, I just hope the NFLPA can step up and get it removed. Goodell has too much authority and final say, and too little sense to know what to do with it. He's a god awful commissioner, but he's made the owners hundreds of millions of dollars so he isn't going anywhere.
But again in the Zeke case, there was an accuser naming Elliott the entire time. This case is way more cloudy, not that Goodell cares much about that. I guess we'll know in a week or two?
Maybe I'm just in "because Chiefs" mode right now but I think it will be a lot longer than one or two weeks.
And while the NFLPA can fight it, they've not had a great track record of results, including losing a major decision in court. Goodell really has all the power in this case. He can pretty much do whatever he wants. [Reply]
Look, I don't WANT Hill to get suspended. At this point, I don't think he SHOULD be suspended.
But if you think there's no chance he will at this point, you simply haven't been paying attention to the NFL.
Exactly what would Hill be suspended over? Brooke and the KC Star wrote a disingenuous hit piece without knowing any facts and published a bunch of nonsense that got a lot of people prejudging Hill. No one knows who the DA thinks is guilty and no one knows if it was just an accident. There is exactly ZERO evidence that Hill did anything wrong. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Certainly, if he's not willing to talk to them about it, they can suspend him for that.
Let's not forget that Hunt was let go not for fighting but for lying.
If the Chiefs already have removed Hill from their future plans, as some reports had said, due to his history and his ongoing legal issues, they'd be looking at having this year left with him, and maybe next year under the tag.
If he's going to be exempt for a while and suspended after that, he may not have many games in a Chiefs uniform left regardless. Cutting him might (save them the issue of tagging him) and PR relief, at the cost of only a handful of games of Tyreek Hill, in their view. And his ongoing legal issues severely diminish his trade value next offseason. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
Hate to break it to you guys, but this is how 90% of the country is probably going to view this outside of Chiefs fans.
This just in Twisted Chief hates Tyreek. Oh wait... [Reply]
