Can you tell me who was present at the Watson hearing? Was the media present? If not, isn't what they say hearsay? I strongly disagree with " no coercion" Lets see what happens.
Can agree we just need to wait and see what happens at this point (as hard to know what really happened in these reports), but as I said, you and others agree with anything that supports your agenda, dismiss what does not.
Well after over a year some of us have drawn conclusions, doesn't mean we have an agenda, just means we have an opinion based on the over all reports. You have even said Watson needs help, must be a reason for that.
Who is "we"?
But you still believe anything that supports your agenda even if just a report. If it does not support your agenda then it's hearsay, unsubstantiated, reporter not there, etc.
Saying I believe anything that supports my conclusions is a stretch at the very least, but once drawing a conclusion I'm more likely to agree with reports that verify my conclusion then those that go against my conclusion, that's just being human. I don't have in skin in Bakers trade market ( while you do) I just judged it to the best of my abilities and honestly was fairly of accurate when I said it was similar to Bridgewater to the Broncos.
I thought most of your comments about Baker being traded were fair other than the misguided victory lap.
no
Well the final outcome ( so after appeals) will sure be interesting. Personally feel the NFL prevails.
what does the NFL prevailing mean since they've been saying they want either a year or indefinite suspension?
I think prevailing means indefinite suspension. With 4 more cases pending until next off season and a couple of possible new suits pending a indefinite suspension just makes sense to me. The NFL wants to have the image of caring about women well being in relationship to NFL players, so to me this is a no brainer for Goodell and the only thing to abort a indefinite suspension is if the judge clears Watson of any wrong doing and that seems so very unlikely, especially with a women judge.
Would 6-8 games but has to apply for reinstatement be a win for the NFL. Anything other than indefinite a loss?
I don't think so with the cases still hanging out there and potential additional cases being filed.
Not sure it has to be indefinite for the NFL to be allowed to suspend later should something else happen/be discovered.
Safest course to protect the NFL image is a indefinite suspension IMO, just to many pitfalls to risk any thing else.
So, again, if not indefinite the NFL "lost"?
IDK about saying any thing less is a lost, but any thing less is not ideal and there isn't much reason IMO for settling for less then ideal for the NFL.
Possible (likely?) NFL only cares about public opinion. They have already done the posturing to show they allegedly want a year or indefinite. Not sure how it helps the league if he gets a long suspension.
Image is what trumps here and be a blow if Watson only got 6-8 games then next off season he lose one or more suits. Why would the NFL risk that when they can give an indefinite suspension at no risk.
