Mr. WEO

yeah he always says it “starts with me”. Coaching cliche. They all say it. then he quickly shifted to “execution”—clearly leveling blame at the players.

yeah anyone can file a suit. At least the Jets guy is claiming damages. The suit will get tossed. no one can claim Ross’s bribe altered any games so there really wouldn’t be a basis for a suit. I never disagreed that if Flores claims are true, Ross is exposed to criminal charges. Not sure why you keep repeating that.

Mc D called 2 TOs. If he (and his DC) can't figure out what he is seeing on the field after that, it's hardly on some down-list coach. McD seems content to let the public infer, from his comments and moves, that the fault lies with others, not him.

I'm only asking because you didn't answer the simple question--who will sue and what will thy sue for? What would be a claim or damages?

lol: Herbert at 2 and Stafford at 3. Acho with full blown CTE right now.

If McD is cleaning house by letting these coaches go "to explore other opportunities" over the 13 seconds than that's pretty alarming. As a DC by training, if he can't, after 2 TO's, figure out what Defense is appropriate in that scenario, then these issues with his decision making will never go away. Position coaches didn't screw that up...

Who would be the plaintiff in a civil lawsuit and what will be their claim?

this discussion wasn't about criminal jeopardy. Poster Rew brought up a civil lawsuit. I said it was baseless--especially because there was no impact on the outcomes of games (his argument). You went off on his tangent.

the other poster brought up a lawsuit, which is a civil legal action.

LAMP

No, there is no grounds for a lawsuit. a plaintiff would have to state a claim. What claim would they make? Ross bribed Flores to tank...but there was no actual bribe and no tank? What damage would a plaintiff claim. What relief would they be seeking? Filing a lawsuit is just that. Ross would have much better lawyers than Joe Blow plaintiff and would get this dismissed on these grounds.

You clearly above mentioned a public lawsuit could be possible based on his relationship with a gambling company, Flores’’s claims and the effect “on the outcome of games”. You try explain how Ross’s rebuffed alleged bribe could possibly affect the outcome of a game and therefore be the basis for a “public lawsuit”…..by saying Ross may have committed a crime. Makes no sense. No one is going to sue Ross for offering a bribe (except Flores) to tank.

. By “public case” do mean as in The People vs Ross—a criminal case? if not, and you are talking about a law suit, who is the plaintiff? What damage would they claim?

I’m still not understanding how a rejected “bribe” of a coach would affect any games outcome. Yiu are now referring to the criminal legal jeopardy Ross may be in for even making the offer, which may be true, but a different matter. none of that could possibly affect the outcome of any game. Maybe you are claiming he successfully bribed another coach? Players? Is this what you are referring to with “the investigation “, and what it will reveal?

lol…might as well be

lol, the pipeline

Good for him. How many QB coaches do the Bills need?

What's the surprise?: only 4 losing seasons and half of the seasons had 9 or more wins, no seasons more than 6 losses.

hmmmm...where to start? The Travis Scott lawsuit is obviously unrelated as he is being sued for putting on a production that had a litany of security problems AND he continued to perform while fans were being crushed to death and the staff was aware. None of this in any way applies to the Stafford scenario. And several of your other links refer to the same famous nonmedical Good Sam case in Cali. The last one you cited on it says this: "After the infamous car accident involving a good Samaritan in 2008, California’s good Samaritan law changed once and for all. In its 2008 ruling, the California Supreme Court upheld that as long as a rescuer renders medical or nonmedical care or assistance at the scene of a car accident and does so in good faith, that person cannot be held liable for injuries or damages resulting from his or her actions. Therefore, if you are represented by an experienced car accident attorney in Los Angeles, rendering medical or non-medical aid at the scene of a car crash cannot make you liable for the victim’s injuries." You didn't read your links. Anyway, nothing you posted has anything to do with the simple act of asking if the person who was injured was OK and calling 911. So your insistence that even doing that little would expose Stafford to a lawsuit is mind-bendingly ridiculous.

Since it would be impossible for something that never happened ("games thrown") to impact the outcome of any game, there are no damages. Who would be the plaintiff is such a suit? The "public", which suffered no harm or losses in such an alleged scheme? Your explanation doesn't make sense. Maybe as a criminal matter (if allegations are true).

I see this as a green light to start a third thread!

didn't know them thanks

Ok but none of that answers my question to the poster…

they Div 1?

"Charlotte"?