Judge Recommends Suspension of 6 Games for Deshaun Watson

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

I generally like and respect Kyle Brandt but I find this patently absurd.

"The threat of violence is worse than violence"
WTF?

You missed part of that quote... It was "The threat of violence is worse than implicit violence"

What did Watson do as a supposed threat?

By his logic this was actually worse than Harvey Weinstein?

What are people talking about at this point

He initiated unwanted sexual contact, and then threatened their careers. "I know you have a career to protect... I know you don't want anyone messing with it just like I don't want anyone messing with mine". That is perceived threat, no? All of these victims felt scared & threatened.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I generally like and respect Kyle Brandt but I find this patently absurd.

"The threat of violence is worse than violence"
WTF?

What did Watson do as a supposed threat?

By his logic this was actually worse than Harvey Weinstein?

What are people talking about at this point

People trying to outdo one another in their angst

 

[futballiscool]

People trying to outdo one another in their angst

What Watson did was shitty enough on its own that it doesn't require hyperbole and mental gymnastics that make it worse than r*pe

 

[futballiscool]

He initiated unwanted sexual contact, and then threatened their careers. "I know you have a career to protect... I know you don't want anyone messing with it just like I don't want anyone messing with mine". That is perceived threat, no? All of these victims felt scared & threatened.

It's a complete, indefensible scumbag move and he was threatening a victim into silence.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

It's a complete, indefensible scumbag move and he was threatening a victim into silence.

So now you're agreeing with Kyle Brandt?

 

[futballiscool]

So now you're agreeing with Kyle Brandt?

That it's worse than r*pe? No still not going there

 

[Schmoopy1000]

So now you're agreeing with Kyle Brandt?

I agree with Kyle Brandt

 

[rmilia1]

I think the primary question i have on the judges ruling is the 6 games was "based on precedent" that the league had set

But i don't see how there's any precedent for a case like this with so many accusers

Basing a ruling on prior guidelines is fine. We just don't actually have any

It appears she considered all of these accusations as a single offense ( which is why she called Watson a first time offender ) which to me really makes no sense at all

However that said there's nothing stopping the league from publicly stating that they'd like to establish a new precedent here


I don't think anyone would be upset if the league said

" we understand why the judge ruled as she did even if we don't agree with it. However we believe that in the past we didn't take these actions as seriously as we should have and we'd like to let our players and fans know that going forward we will be doing a far better job of recognizing how serious these cases are. In accordance we are upping the suspension in this case and that will be the new standard for all cases like this"

 

[Manster7588]

It's a complete, indefensible scumbag move and he was threatening a victim into silence.

I see you made a u-turn. So should Watson still appeal?

 

[Manster7588]

I think the primary question i have on the judges ruling is the 6 games was "based on precedent" that the league had set

But i don't see how there's any precedent for a case like this with so many accusers

Basing a ruling on prior guidelines is fine. We just don't actually have any

It appears she considered all of these accusations as a single offense ( which is why she called Watson a first time offender ) which to me really makes no sense at all

However that said there's nothing stopping the league from publicly stating that they'd like to establish a new precedent here


I don't think anyone would be upset if the league said

" we understand why the judge ruled as she did even if we don't agree with it. However we believe that in the past we didn't take these actions as seriously as we should have and we'd like to let our players and fans know that going forward we will be doing a far better job of recognizing how serious these cases are. In accordance we are upping the suspension in this case and that will be the new standard for all cases like this"

It's quite possible, she didn’t want to be the one who sets a new precedent, as if she she says 6 games the league could easily up it.

Maybe the way forward is to have an independent arbitrator determine PCP violations, and then send it to the NFL for the amount of discipline that gets handed out.

 

[futballiscool]

I see you made a u-turn. So should Watson still appeal?

For the 10th time I never said he should appeal. From my first post until now I said I thought 6 games was fair based on precedent and a variety of factors (no criminal charges, no prior record etc,)

It's fair to disagree without continually misrepresenting what I said

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I see you made a u-turn. So should Watson still appeal?

He'd be a crazy person to do so.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

That it's worse than r*pe? No still not going there

When did r*pe ever enter this discussion? Your post indicates you disagree with Kyle Brandt because you didn't understand the threat element.

 

[Manster7588]

For the 10th time I never said he should appeal. From my first post until now I said I thought 6 games was fair based on precedent and a variety of factors (no criminal charges, no prior record etc,)

It's fair to disagree without continually misrepresenting what I said

Sorry, I got you confused with another Watson apologist.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

I see you made a u-turn. So should Watson still appeal?

Is this dude willfully dense, or just strange?

 

[Manster7588]

He'd be a crazy person to do so.

It was suggested in another thread. I just got one crazy dude confused with another.

 

[Manster7588]

Is this dude willfully dense, or just strange?

See posts 334 and 336

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

See posts 334 and 336

Hmm.. I am still not understanding his angle in our discussion: 321, 324, 326

 

[futballiscool]

When did r*pe ever enter this discussion? Your post indicates you disagree with Kyle Brandt because you didn't understand the threat element.

He said what occurred is worse "in its way" than violent sexual assault. That type of hyperbole doesn't help the discussion. It's just a convoluted way of demonizing Watson rather than taking the events at face value

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

He said what occurred is worse "in its way" than violent sexual assault. That type of hyperbole doesn't help the discussion. It's just a convoluted way of demonizing Watson rather than taking the events at face value

His point is that its a gross distinction that gives false merit or credit to Watson's case... If its face value we're after, then how do the "indefensible scumbag moves" not require demonizing him? Instead you're trying to dismiss that distinction as hyperbole?

I'm not following your point here.