Originally Posted by staylor26:
No I didn’t. What was he saying the NFL should do?
Don’t recall him proposing anything permanent, but the gist I got out of it was he’d seen enough of this shitshow and the league should sideline him for the year to protect the shield
He sees the bullshit adding up, just like everyone else... gotta say it was pretty shocking, Dan Patrick danced around it for 3 hours [Reply]
Originally Posted by Easy 6:
Don’t recall him proposing anything permanent, but the gist I got out of it was he’d seen enough of this shitshow and the league should sideline him for the year to protect the shield
He sees the bullshit adding up, just like everyone else... gotta say it was pretty shocking, Dan Patrick danced around it for 3 hours
Good to see not everybody has lost their mind.
Meanwhile, Dan Patrick was assuming Tyreek would be gone very early on. [Reply]
Originally Posted by New World Order:
The accuser has known Brown for 10 years, passed a polygraph, has the most vulgar texts that may corroborate her story and multiple people were aware of the incident right after it happened.
He should be on the exempt list. Period.
Anyone that says otherwise is just prioritizing football over this incident.
Not true. I personally believe it's not the league's place to punish criminal matters, that's why we have a criminal justice system. If he's guilty, I don't want him on the exempt list. I want him in jail. If he's innocent, there's no reason he should be on the exempt list.
In either case, it's not about prioritizing football, it's about the proper role of the league and whether we as society should double punish folks for matters in their past or try to make up for inadequacies in the criminal justice system by punishing them when we think they're guilty even if they're not found guilty in a court of law.
This applies to Tyreek, Zeke, Michael Vick, you name it. I 100% agree with the idea that the football organization focuses exclusively on football, and if someone is guilty of something, let the actual criminal justice system take care of it.
Besides, what does him being on the exempt list actually accomplish? Who is served by that and how? [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
If they actually handled it, sure. Letting a guy accused of rape (with enough of a trail to lead you to think that there might be something to the suit) practice and prepare for live game action is not how you handle a situation like that.
The Chiefs handled it 100% the correct way. Sorry the team you like is a piece of shit. Maybe not support the enabling.
I wouldn't be cool with it at all.
BB said the Pats are looking into it and doing their own investigation.
For me you can not just suspend a player just cause someone files a lawsuit.
I agree that he has a past, and those text were not flattering, but i still want to see what is up with this plaintiff before i go suspending someone.
my two cents.
Is might be one thing it is was a an A&B and one sees a video of the A&B, then you have the evidence right there and no need to investigate, one can make a decision on the video.
And the pats have suspend/released players in the past quickly, one that comes to mind is Brandon Spikes left the scene of an hit and run and was release essentially immediately. No one was injured, but the leaving the scene of the accident was enough to release him [Reply]
Originally Posted by Easy 6:
Don’t recall him proposing anything permanent, but the gist I got out of it was he’d seen enough of this shitshow and the league should sideline him for the year to protect the shield
He sees the bullshit adding up, just like everyone else... gotta say it was pretty shocking, Dan Patrick danced around it for 3 hours
Player actively does everything he can to force a team to release him. What is to stop other players from similar shenanigans? Now we have rape allegations against him. The whole thing is pretty good reason to put him on the exempt list. [Reply]
Originally Posted by New World Order:
The accuser has known Brown for 10 years, passed a polygraph, has the most vulgar texts that may corroborate her story and multiple people were aware of the incident right after it happened.
He should be on the exempt list. Period.
Anyone that says otherwise is just prioritizing football over this incident.
Sorry I do not agree. We can not just place folks on exempt list out of the gate and based on some stuff we see on the internet.
Do the due diligence and investigate, get a lay of the land and then decide.
Our courts system have a process and so should the process of suspending folks, do some work first, then suspend or place on exempt list. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Giant Octopodes:
Not true. I personally believe it's not the league's place to punish criminal matters, that's why we have a criminal justice system. If he's guilty, I don't want him on the exempt list. I want him in jail. If he's innocent, there's no reason he should be on the exempt list.
In either case, it's not about prioritizing football, it's about the proper role of the league and whether we as society should double punish folks for matters in their past or try to make up for inadequacies in the criminal justice system by punishing them when we think they're guilty even if they're not found guilty in a court of law.
This applies to Tyreek, Zeke, Michael Vick, you name it. I 100% agree with the idea that the football organization focuses exclusively on football, and if someone is guilty of something, let the actual criminal justice system take care of it.
Besides, what does him being on the exempt list actually accomplish? Who is served by that and how?
They have, and do punish criminal matters. [Reply]
If I found out one of my employees was being sued for rape, I would ask him if there was anything I needed to know. That would figure in to my decision at that point.
If he said he was innocent, I would let the law decide after that.
On the other hand, if he acts like a complete ****wad, even outside of work and it hurts my business his ass is gone.
If the guy was off the wall talented, and he treated his former boss like shit I would never hire him. We can be the best without him. New England kind of displayed a lack of confidence by signing Brown. They felt a need to have him even though they are the best. Hmmm........ [Reply]
Originally Posted by Giant Octopodes:
Not true. I personally believe it's not the league's place to punish criminal matters, that's why we have a criminal justice system. If he's guilty, I don't want him on the exempt list. I want him in jail. If he's innocent, there's no reason he should be on the exempt list.
In either case, it's not about prioritizing football, it's about the proper role of the league and whether we as society should double punish folks for matters in their past or try to make up for inadequacies in the criminal justice system by punishing them when we think they're guilty even if they're not found guilty in a court of law.
This applies to Tyreek, Zeke, Michael Vick, you name it. I 100% agree with the idea that the football organization focuses exclusively on football, and if someone is guilty of something, let the actual criminal justice system take care of it.
Besides, what does him being on the exempt list actually accomplish? Who is served by that and how?
Pretty much every major corporation in the world disagrees with you. [Reply]
Originally Posted by New World Order:
They have, and do punish criminal matters.
Right, I'm not saying they haven't, or don't. Just that it is my opinion they shouldn't, and that's been my opinion from the get-go. I don't run the league, but you didn't say he Will be on the exempt list, you said he Should be. I disagree.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Pretty much every major corporation in the world disagrees with you.
Oh I'm well aware, and there's plenty more which could be said on this topic, but I don't want to delve into politics so I'll abstain. Suffice to say that just because they disagree with me, and outnumber me, and have more power than me, doesn't make them right :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by notorious:
If I found out one of my employees was being sued for rape, I would ask him if there was anything I needed to know. That would figure in to my decision at that point.
If he said he was innocent, I would let the law decide after that.
On the other hand, if he acts like a complete ****wad, even outside of work and it hurts my business his ass is gone.
If the guy was off the wall talented, and he treated his former boss like shit I would never hire him. We can be the best without him. New England kind of displayed a lack of confidence by signing Brown. They felt a need to have him even though they are the best. Hmmm........
