Beck Water
-
Posts
12,336 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Beck Water
-
-
Just now, phypon said:
I know, right! Have their site open and they just made an announcement about it coming soon. This is the first time in quite a while that they mentioned it happening soon. *fingers crossed it's soon. Just want to get this over with finally, one way or the other...
Do you have a link? I went to the wibv.com site and couldn't figure out where the presser was.
-
Just now, YoloinOhio said:
😬
*****, why can't we have Nice Things?
-
1 minute ago, stevestojan said:
So, he will end his NFL career with the all time highest punt average. So, he’s got that going for him, which is nice.
Assuming he stays in shape and motivated (and avoids prison), he'll get another chance once he gets his baggage checked.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
Welp, Then.
-
18 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:
I read in an article that I posted in this thread that the NFL already said they wont do anything because this happened before he was drafted.
The NFL can't discipline him - they won't suspend him without pay or such. Neither can the club.
But the commissioner's exempt list description is deliberately vague, so it isn't totally clear to me that they couldn't be applied.
-
7 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
I don’t doubt that something happened
But a rape kit should be able to get DNA and everything… Especially if she went to the cops right after
There should be a Lot of evidence
The problem with DNA evidence alone, being blunt here, is that it doesn't tell the jury whether or not the actions that put it there were consensual.
If the young woman says "I can't remember what happened" while (sorry to be graphic) the alleged rapists say "she was saying "Oh yeah give it to me baby!" we had no reason to think she didn't consent" what's the jury gonna do? Even bruises and strangulation marks can be explained away by "she said she wanted it rough".
Retrograde amnesia is a Thing with certain drugs. Drugging someone is a crime, but then you get into the question of "who gave her the drugs and did the alleged rapists have knowledge she was drugged and couldn't give meaningful consent?"
It's a mess to prosecute. It's far more likely that's why the DA is sitting on this, than that they're just ignoring it.
-
2
-
-
Just now, sven233 said:
Presser still hasn't happened. Not surprising, though. I don't think there is any way they can send McDermott back out there with no updates or new information from last night. While it's his job, he drew the short straw there and was kind of just thrown to the wolves with no way to say much of anything. I can't imagine them doing that to him again. Bet they are tying some things up so he at least has something to say, but who knows. Would not be surprised at all if they announce a cut or suspension. They have to at least take some action at this point.
I would bet you a box of donuts that McDermott comes out and talks 100% about yesterday's game.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Right. McDermott can't come out and say Araiza was cut for this controversy because being sued by someone (even for an alleged rape) is not cause to cut a player. Araiza may well be on the team till cutdowns. It's obvious he won't be a Bill.
I think it's more nuanced than that? The Bills (to my understanding) could cut a player for "conduct detrimental to the club" for being sued over something that happened while they were an NFL player, or for a criminal investigation while they are an NFL player. The Bills could have parted ways with Shady McCoy over the nightclub brouhaha and subsequent civil suit.
I think the problem in this case is that the conduct in question happened before Araiza was drafted, and the CBA prohibits NFL or club discipline for that.
-
1 minute ago, UKBillFan said:
Which goes back to Tuesday again. Had we cut him over Haack because of concerns over experience (for example), the NFL PA wouldn't have been able to do a thing.
That's my understanding. The Bills could have said "you've been improving with the holding Araiza, but holding is more important than punting to us and we're gonna go with the experienced hand here" and no one could blink.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, NoSaint said:
they do not. Because there is zero consequence for doing whatever they want and cutting him today. Beane could get drunk and cut 4 guys for looking at him funny at practice today.The only thing I can think of is, per the CBA it's not allowed for the NFL or a team to discipline or cut a player for actions that took place before he got drafted.
So the Bills may have to put together a slow case that Araiza concealed information he was contractually bound to provide, gave them misleading information, or lied, during the draft process or afterwards.
They can cut him for skill, but that's a hard argument to make when they cut Haack and there isn't another punter on the roster.
Once they try out a bunch of other punters, I guess they can say "we're going in a different direction for *reasons*, Matt - See ya!
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:
Not yet
Has Vorse, or can anyone else, commented on the "speed forced on them by the NFLPA" aspect?
What aspects of the NFLPA/CBA prevent the Bills from just saying "See Ya!" and cutting Araiza?
I don't disagree but I'd love to hear someone who knows something spell it out.
-
2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
I would lose complete faith In everything if our judicial system was covering up the gang rape of a woman
Like just turned a blind eye despite overwhelming evidence
I think the young woman's journal, which her lawyer made public, tells the story of this case. She was very intoxicated. She has only a hazy memory of the events and can't clearly identify who was involved or who did what when. She can't even testify as to whether the marks on her neck are hickeys or strangulation marks, she doesn't recall. And now that her journal has been made public and presented by her attorney as something she wrote at the time, any defense attorney can subpoena it and enter it as evidence of that.
I'd be pretty surprised if the detectives and DA didn't believe that something seriously bad, a gang rape, happened to this woman.
But cases like this are notoriously difficult to prosecute.
The only way the Vanderbilt rape case succeeded is because the fools involved took pictures and videos, which the police recovered.
-
25 minutes ago, SCBills said:
If we didn’t release him today, that pretty much (imo) confirms the Bills have info we don’t have.. and it’s likely compelling information that corroborates whatever Matt Araiza is telling them.
Obviously an assumption, but I don’t really see how this can be interpreted any other way. If they believe he’s at all potentially implicated, he’s cut today.
Doesn’t mean he won’t be cut, I think he will … but it does seem like they’re giving him time to come up with anything that exonerates himself.
I don't at all take Araiza not being released today as indicating compelling info that excuplates Araiza. Even if he does have that....it's going to be months while this thing works its way through the courts.
The Bills may be hanging back waiting to explore if there are other solutions, such as the Exempt List, available to them, while the legal process (civil and criminal) sorts out to what degree he's implicated.
I think the Bills were also "pantsed" here, and want to be sure they have all their info and their timeline of info correct now. They may prefer to avoid CBA/NFLPA concerns by laying out a clear timeline if/when Araiza either lied or misled or withheld information from them. That will take time to collect and verify.
There's a civil lawsuit, pending criminal case with the DA, and a social media shitstorm around Araiza. I'm not sure exactly what he could possibly come up with as exonerating evidence until the civil lawsuit is settled or resolved, the DA announces they won't file charges, and the shitstorm goes back in the septic tank.
-
1
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:
Yeh I agree. It seems to me they learned about the details of the case about when the rest of us did. And I'm very willing to believe that a 6th round punter doesn't get much in the way of allocation of background resources.
I think you're probably correct on that last
But the Bills may need to apply the inverse of the trouble vs talent ratio that's used when deciding whether to keep a guy on the roster - they may need to say there has to be a routine sweep for "red flags" in all draft rounds and UDFA.
-
34 minutes ago, aristocrat said:
The bills attorney spoke to the victims attorney. Do you think he left info out when talking to the bills? Doubt it
I don't think the victim's attorney left stuff out.
But I think it's less clear that the Bills attorney, said to be Assistant General Counsel Kathryn DeAngelo, communicated directly and completely with McDermott or Beane.
The Bills, like most football teams, have sort of 3 parallel reporting tracks with dotted line connections.
Beane is the general manager and supervises the football FO and the scouts.
McDermott is the coach and supervises the assistant coaches. The training staff slots in there somewhere.
Ron Raccuia is the Chief Operating Officer. People like the Bills general counsels report up through him along with finance, ticket sales, marketing etc.
Obviously there are going to be judgement calls about what should get communicated to whom and when, and communication breakdowns may occur.
I think it's possible that DeAngelo listened to the victim's attorney and took notes. She may have then spoken to Araiza or Araiza's attorney and taken notes. Then she or someone else in her reporting structure may have decided that it sounded like it was going to be handled (settled?) or like it was going to be dealt with adequately by Araiza's team, and it didn't need to go to Beane and/or McDermott.
Or, an edited version may have gone to them. McDermott/Beane might be like "anything that should preclude us from keeping him on the roster?" and got "No, not as far as we've learned" for an answer.
Apparently the civil suit is surprisingly specific and graphic in its claims for a civil suit, and specific beyond what the alleged victim's journal supports, so it may have taken them by surprise and the subsequent PR ***** storm may have taken them by surprise. That's not a Good Look, but then, this probably isn't an everyday occurrence. I think it's fair to say they were "Pantsed" by this.
Now we'll see what their recovery plan is.
-
1
-
-
Joe Buscaglia's 53 man
A few surprises:
-Hodgins gets cut in favor of Kumerow, Stevenson to IR
-we keep 4 TE (he thinks Sweeney and Morris would be poached on PS and we won't cut Howard)
-Van Roten over Mancz, Doyle to IR
-
1 minute ago, fergie's ire said:
Can we agree to use Araiza and Barkley? "Matt deserves Attaboys" does not sound great applied to Araiza. About 4 times in the last 24 hours my brain has misapplied a Matt and given the story, it's not good.
Fair! I don't think of Araiza as "Matt" but good point that others do.
-
5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
To me I would assume it means they aren't going to officially cut him until they know more. I guess they could just be waiting until McDermott's press conference to announce he's cut though.
This is just me totally spitballing, but I would have expected no different.
McDermott could not credibly make a repeated point "we have a lot of work to do" on this, then turn around and cut Araiza the following day.
I don't know if it's at all feasible, but if it is, I would expect the Pegulas to reach out to Goodell about putting Araiza on the Commissioner's Exempt List. This would be the fairest to everyone IMHO. It would be fair to the team, by pulling a distraction away from them and giving them a roster slot for a new punter. It would be fair to the league, by saying they took action against a source of hella bad publicity. And it would be fair to Araiza, by giving him a continued paycheck while the lawsuit plays out.
However, while it would be a slam-dunk if he were facing criminal charges, in the past the league has argued against using it for civil charges. But perhaps due to the gawdawful optics of this one, they'll choose to do so.
BUT if that option is pursued, I would expect it to wait until Monday when all the lawyers can get consulted.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:
They don't have to explain every decision that went into where they find themselves today but a candid statement on a coherent timeline would be entirely appropriate imo.
We may get one, but McDermott and Beane owe it to the guys who were playing for their careers yesterday to put some focus into reviewing the film, making their analysis, doing the corrections for the players who played yesterday, maybe holding a practice for the players who didn't play yesterday.
Patience.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Beck Water said:
I just think Matt deserves some Attaboys. According to his press conference, he had never punted nor practiced punting, until the Bills came to him an hour before the game and asked him to punt.
2 minutes in is when he talks about the punting. Says the 53 yarder took a "Bitcoin Bounce". It was nice to see him crack a smile at the end when asked about his "career best" punt.
21 minutes ago, Limeaid said:Does that me he should be kicking the PAT (Point After Touchdown)?
? that's place-kicking not punting?
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, NoSaint said:
I’ll echo an earlier post that this incident is a real challenge for headlines/graphics and the social media age news reporting/consumption. There are just enough layers to the accusations that a 6 word headline can’t be enough to frame it fairlyVery fair point
-
3 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
Yeah every Bills reporter on Twitter is making it a point to mention that he's still on the team. That means something.
It means...he's still on the team, even though he wasn't at practice?
I'm not sure what it's supposed to mean, clue me?
-
17 minutes ago, TC in St. Louis said:
I don't believe anybody right now. Least of all the alleged victim. I just read something in her "journal" where she says that, after several people took turns having sex with her, she was flipped over and someone performed oral sex on her.
First of all, I don't know any people who would take turns having sex with anybody.
You should have stopped right there.
Unless you should have stopped before you started this post, which, upon reflection would have been 👍
-
1 minute ago, nedboy7 said:
Gang rape is usually funky. I suggest not posting.
I wish I could give this post 10,000 awards.
Geeze Louise (to the op you're responding to)
-
1
-
1
-
Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.
in Off the Wall
Posted · Edited by Beck Water
Thanks Bro! They're playing McDermott's yesterday's press conference after the game right now, is that what you get....
As thanks I give you this lovely picture of reporters waiting in front of an empty podium....