BarleyNY

The problem with the Kraft situation is that the league didn’t even pursue charging him with a violation of the PCP.

That’s true about the NFL hoping the cases would all be settled. I think that they also expected Watson to negotiate a suspension with them. And they did run out of time. But I don’t think it will be as big of a story once the decision has been made and any suspension finalized. Lots of intrigue and uncertainty now to go along with salacious details to keep people interested. But that’s going to be over soon and there will be a lot of competing NFL storylines. Right now there’s nothing else NFL related to talk about.

I agree. Just in time for whatever the ruling is to be drowned out by the opening of training camps.

I think it’s more: We, the players, will let you, the league, retain final say over punishment for PCP violations if owners are held to at least the same standard. The NFL agreed and then totally disregarded that agreement three times. I guess I don’t understand people who get bent out of shape over Watson, but just shrug their shoulders at Snyder, Kraft and Jones. Especially Snyder.

I don’t know the process involved here so I can’t say for sure where this will go. How much does precedent factor into the decision? If it factors heavily and it has been set by the league’s inaction against owners who’s violations seem worse, then Watson will win this. But maybe that’s not how this will work. It’s a nebulous part of the PCP: Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL personnel. Thats pretty broad and open to interpretation, but I’d think it would be easy to say that Watson violated that - unless precedent is considered. I dunno. It depends on a process that hasn’t been spelled out.

Yup. It is the easiest outcome for the league. On thing I’ll say as far as coercion goes, I have seen no evidence to support those claims. Even the testimony has not pointed to coercion. It’s been stuff like “he’s a big guy” and “he said he could help my business”. That’s not the same as threatening violence or loss of income. Also the text exchange between masseuses that was released didn’t show any concern for anyone’s safety. It wasn’t “you’re in danger”. It was “Watson is getting a reputation”. And don’t get me wrong, the things I think he’s done do deserve punishment. I think he’s getting that in the form of being drug through the mud in front of the country as well as some serious financial penalties. IMO he deserves a little unpaid time off at work too. But I don’t have any sympathy for the league if he skates. Their written agreement with the NFLPA was that they had to keep their house in order. In return they retained the right to overrule punishments. And their house has been a mess since.

I think the NFL made its bed when they chose to do nothing to three owners who clearly violated the PCP. Snyder’s transgression became an issue again because it transpired that he was stealing from other owners, but before then he had no real consequences for things far worse than Watson has been accused of.

That definitely tracks to Watson skating. I can’t imagine how the league could justify an unprecedented penalty for a violation that did not include charges being brought against the player, much less a conviction. Previously I laid out the case that the neutral arbiter finding in favor of Watson was the best case scenario for the NFL. TL:DR on that is: the league gets to continue to feign outrage but has their hands tied. The Watson saga is over (save the lawsuit against the Texans). Incidentally, it would also be better for McNair and the Texans since a suspension by the NFL could be used against them in court.

Yes, pretty much any large contract has that basic structure. Some are tweaked for various reasons, but it’s standard practice. Oddly, Allen’s Y1 salary on his extension was $4.1M. I’m not sure why they didn’t take it all the way down to the minimum, but that’s the exception (and it’s still a pretty low salary compared to the AAV). here is a Spotrac link to the biggest contracts.

Again, the Watson contract is structured exactly the same way as almost all huge contracts are. A large signing bonus and minimum first year salary is standard practice. For example, Von Miller’s contract with the Bills has a large SB and a minimum Y1 salary.

The arbiter who decides whether or not Watson violated the Personal Conduct Policy is former U.S. District Court Judge Sue Robinson. If she determines that he did not, the process is over. If she determines that he did, then she also decides the penalty for the violation. Goodell - or his appointee - can overrule that and issue a different punishment, however. The terrible look is more about what the reaction of players and the NFLPA would be rather than what the general public thinks. This new process is supposed to be much more impartial. Goodell jumping in on the first one is a bad start to that - especially on a case with no criminal charges brought. The threatened lawsuit by the NFLPA would contend that the NFL did not adhere to the PCP’s clause that requires owners to be penalized more severely than players for similar offenses. The NFLPA obviously does not want to do that, but I think it’s in play if the league overrules the neutral arbiter with a much more severe penalty. As for the general public’s reaction, I’m sure that many won’t be happy with a result that is less than an indefinite ban. There’s not much difference to many people if it’s 0, 4, 6 or 8 games. All would fall well short of what they want. And let’s face it, the decision will not impact ticket sales or viewership. People will have their reactions and then keep right on watching the NFL. Heck, a bunch of outraged people will probably tune in to Browns games just to root against Watson.

That a fair point.

That is correct, but the NFL does not want to overrule the first decision of this new process. It would be a terrible look and could lead to the NFLPA taking the NFL to court. I think that they will have to feel like they don’t have any other choice if they overrule the decision.

The NFL calling for a indefinite suspension was mostly PR. They are trying to show the public that they want to be extremely tough on players who behave as Watson is alleged to have. I heard a tidbit regarding negotiations between the league and Watson’s team. It was that they already turned down a negotiated suspension in the much lesser range that the NFL recently leaked. That makes me think that 6-8 games is the worst case for Watson, with fewer or even 0 being possible. I do not know where it will land either, but some possibilities are much cleaner for the NFL than others. They do not want to overrule the arbiter’s decision. To do so on the very first case would be an awful look with the players and NFLPA - and it could lead to real court. They just don’t want it to be so few that they have to overrule it and open up that can of worms. One thing to remember is that if the arbiter finds in favor of Watson, then it’s over. The NFL can not overrule or modify that decision.

A special off-the-ball LB can make a very valuable impact on a defense. The Luke Keuchley’s of the world are certainly worth paying. The problem is that there are very few of those kinds of players and Edmunds is not one of them.

You bring up an interesting question. What does everyone think the arbiter’s verdict will be? Clarification: I am looking for a specific number of games and how you think she will rule, not how you’d rule. I say 6 games. Bonus question: Will there be a challenge from either side? No. Both sides will accept that.

Besides Type 2 Diabetes?

Oh no

Lamar Jackson, who is set to play on his 5th year option, chooses not to attend voluntary OTAs. Everyone’s reaction but you: It’s almost certainly a negotiation tactic for that nine figure contract he’s trying to work out with the Ravens. Your take: It’s not that, it’s for some other reason I can’t think of. And he’s not in contract negotiations with the Ravens. I have given this argument far more time than it deserves. I’ll leave it there.

It’s all your delusional posts are worth. I learned a long time ago that talking sense to crazy is nothing but a waste of time and energy.

You gotta give Buzbee credit for his overall strategy and his tactics. He’s working over everyone.

Lol. Yeah, I do think it would be helpful for Jackson to be at OTAs. He lost his favorite WR this off-season and never got in the same page as last year’s 1st round pick WR. As for putting him in the same class as Brady and Rodgers - it just shows how far you’re reaching here. He held out of voluntary OTAs because it’s part of contract negotiations. Everyone else understands that.

No, no, no. I absolutely never said that there wouldn’t be people that would be upset by that outcome. Or that it would be unreasonable to feel that way. I said that it would be a dead end. What could people who are still upset do?

No way do sponsors walk in this scenario. The NFL literally would be unable to suspend or otherwise penalize Watson. What could a sponsor say? That they are cutting ties with the NFL because a neutral arbiter didn’t suspend Watson? Or that they will cut ties with the NFL unless the NFL meets what demands exactly? Since they legally could not penalize Watson in this case, what would the sponsors demand?