Houston and Miami could have Deshaun Watson deal (update - no deal prior to trade deadline)

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, mannc said:

So you’re saying Doc is wrong because Rappaport, who’s wrong all the time, has reported something?

He works for nfl.com and/or NFL network. Not the same thing. And he’s been reporting (apparently) false Watson trade rumors for months.

 

I agree he gets things wrongs about trades etc. He does not get things wrong about league procedure and discipline. When he opines on that stuff it is generally because it has come straight from the horses mouth. Maybe Watson doesn't get traded. That is still a possibility in my mind. But that he gets traded and then goes on the exempt list? Yea, I didn't think it was happening before and now the league's main internal reporter says it is not. I don't believe that is happening. 

[Mr. WEO]

6 minutes ago, mannc said:

So you’re saying Doc is wrong because Rappaport, who’s wrong all the time, has reported something?

He works for nfl.com and/or NFL network. Not the same thing. And he’s been reporting (apparently) false Watson trade rumors for months.

 

Do you have another report today saying the opposite of what Rapoport is reporting?

 

And do you really believe that all reports over the past months regarding potential trade partners for Watson are "false"?  No, of course you don't, so why fall on your face in such a way just to make a point?

[mannc]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Do you have another report today saying the opposite of what Rapoport is reporting?

 

And do you really believe that all reports over the past months regarding potential trade partners for Watson are "false"?  No, of course you don't, so why fall on your face in such a way just to make a point?

The Watson trade rumors appear to have been put out by the Texans.  Watson is still a Texan so yes, the rumors have been false, just like the one that he would be traded by the end of last week. I don’t believe anyone is trading multiple first round picks for him until there is a positive resolution of his legal situation.

[Gugny]

1 minute ago, mannc said:

The Watson trade rumors appear to have been put out by the Texans.  Watson is still a Texan so yes, the rumors have been false, just like the one that he would be traded by the end of last week. I don’t believe anyone is trading multiple first round picks for him until there is a positive resolution of his legal situation.

 

I don't even think it needs to be a positive resolution .. just some sort of clarity/defined closure so an interested team can plan accordingly.

[mannc]

3 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

I don't even think it needs to be a positive resolution .. just some sort of clarity/defined closure so an interested team can plan accordingly.

“Positive” as in no criminal charges and the lawsuits all go away.  As long as criminal charges are a real possibility, no one is trading for him. 

[Gugny]

6 minutes ago, mannc said:

“Positive” as in no criminal charges and the lawsuits all go away.  As long as criminal charges are a real possibility, no one is trading for him. 

 

My point is that even if there are criminal charges, it won't matter.  An interested team just needs to know when he'll be eligible to play again.  We all know the NFL "punishes," marquee players minimally - especially when it comes to crimes against women.  If the resolution is that he is suspended for the remainder of the year, then what would a team like Miami care?  The only potential suitors it might scare away are teams who think they're in "win now," mode.

[Scott7975]

34 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think based on what Rapoport is saying Doc's theory is pretty much disproven at this point. There is no gentleman's agreement that they are all in on that he won't be put on the exemption list as long as he is inactive but would if there was any chance of him playing. That is not the case. The NFL does not intend to put him on the list even if traded. 

 

I don't claim that this proves my theory that the legal advice would be that is risky for them to do so.... it might be that but it might also, based on what Rapoport says, just mean the NFL don't feel that the allegations justify the exempt list unless and until criminal charges are brought. 

 

 

So you think Rapoport is wrong? I mean he literally works for the league. 

 

Rapoport is wrong all the time.  

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Gugny said:

 

My point is that even if there are criminal charges, it won't matter.  An interested team just needs to know when he'll be eligible to play again.  We all know the NFL "punishes," marquee players minimally - especially when it comes to crimes against women.  If the resolution is that he is suspended for the remainder of the year, then what would a team like Miami care?  The only potential suitors it might scare away are teams who think they're in "win now," mode.

 

Well per Rapoport he is eligible to play this year. The question is whether he is eligible to play next year after the civil case takes place in the off-season. Unless those charges fall he faces some sort of suspension even if criminal charges never come into play. That is why I'd argue he makes more sense at this point for Carolina (still alive in 2021) than Miami who are not. 

Just now, Scott7975 said:

Rapoport is wrong all the time.  

 

Not on this sort of stuff. On the league's discipline and legal processes he is almost always right, because he works in the same building as the people in charge of them. 

[mannc]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

RapSheet just said on GMFB that his understanding is Watson will NOT go onto the commissioner's exempt list if traded. As far as the NFL is concerned they are judging it on his situation and that situation is unchanged. He would go on the list if charged with a felony. 

 

Plenty of players have gone on the list without being charged with a felony—or any crime at all—with Kareem Hunt and Ben Roethlisberger being two notable examples.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

I don’t understand how the panthers have the draft capital to trade for Watson, unless the Texas are willing to take just lots of future picks.

[YoloinOhio]

5 minutes ago, mannc said:

Plenty of players have gone on the list without being charged with a felony—or any crime at all—with Kareem Hunt and Ben Roethlisberger being two notable examples.

Josina Anderson had reported that according to nfl source, he may not go on that list but would face suspension  for personal conduct if traded and the team intends to activate. If true would behoove any team who plans to trade for him to force the league to implement any suspension this year instead of next. 

5 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I don’t understand how the panthers have the draft capital to trade for Watson, unless the Texas are willing to take just lots of future picks.

Maybe packaging players 

[mannc]

19 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

Josina Anderson had reported that according to nfl source, he may not go on that list but would face suspension  for personal conduct if traded and the team intends to activate. If true would behoove any team who plans to trade for him to force the league to implement any suspension this year instead of next. 

 

I think one thing we can all agree on is that the Watson saga is a strange and unprecedented situation, where the publicly available information is probably less than half of the whole story…we’re all just guessing, at this point.

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Do you have another report today saying the opposite of what Rapoport is reporting?

 

And do you really believe that all reports over the past months regarding potential trade partners for Watson are "false"?  No, of course you don't, so why fall on your face in such a way just to make a point?

Rapoport has had numerous stories on Watson being traded, Watson has not been traded and somehow those reports weren’t false?  That’s quite a reality twist even for a Pats fan.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

RapSheet just said on GMFB that his understanding is Watson will NOT go onto the commissioner's exempt list if traded. As far as the NFL is concerned they are judging it on his situation and that situation is unchanged. He would go on the list if charged with a felony. 

 

Edit: on the basis this means he can play this year don't the Panthers who are still alive at 3-4 make a ton more sense than Miami who are dead at 1-6?

 

I still think Florio nailed it in the excerpt I transcribed above: "We Don't Know". 

 

"Not on the list" may legitimately be what the NFL feels today.  But we all have to bear in mind that the Commissioner's Exempt List and Personal Conduct Policy are at heart, PR tools for the league.  In the past, their use has NOT been limited to players charged with crimes at all, much less felonies.

 

If Watson is traded and active and there's a big public stink raised along the lines of what Rosenthal tweeted, the trade partner team better believe that Watson will go on the "Exempt List" so quick it will make their heads spin - unless he's just suspended.
 

 

[GunnerBill]

Florio might be right. But I'd trust Rapoport to be closer to the league on discipline matters. Gregg Rosenthal's tweet (while I share his general frustration with the situation) I would submit, is not quite right. Until criminal charges are brought he is not facing potential jail time. Could he be facing potential jail time at some stage in the future? Yes. But I think it is a slightly exaggerated way of expressing the current position. Again this may be nuance but it matters here.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree he gets things wrongs about trades etc. He does not get things wrong about league procedure and discipline. When he opines on that stuff it is generally because it has come straight from the horses mouth. Maybe Watson doesn't get traded. That is still a possibility in my mind. But that he gets traded and then goes on the exempt list? Yea, I didn't think it was happening before and now the league's main internal reporter says it is not. I don't believe that is happening. 

 

Dude, I respect you a lot, but this line of argument is really disappointing me.  It's analogous to saying Chris Brown isn't wrong on one of his takes because he's the Bills main internal reporter and works in the same building as the people who make these decisions.  Highly fallacious line of reasoning.  Rapaport may be correct, but if he is, it's not because of the building he works in.

 

The point also remains, that he may be right *as of now* and yet wrong, depending on what ***** gets stirred with a trade and a decision to make Watson active.

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Dude, I respect you a lot, but this line of argument is really disappointing me.  It's analogous to saying Chris Brown isn't wrong on one of his takes because he's the Bills main internal reporter and works in the same building as the people who make these decisions.  Highly fallacious line of reasoning.  Rapaport may be correct, but if he is, it's not because of the building he works in.

 

The point also remains, that he may be right *as of now* and yet wrong, depending on what ***** gets stirred with a trade and a decision to make Watson active.

 

Your line of argument equally disappoints me. I think some people have so bogged themselves down to this "he is going on the list as soon as he is traded" they are now jumping through loopholes to avoid credible reporting to the contrary. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Florio might be right. But I'd trust Rapoport to be closer to the league on discipline matters.

 

Florio's point is that the Personal Conduct Policy is a PR tool for the league and has nothing to do with legalities (and bear in mind that Florio is a former litigator and understands US law and legalities).  Rapoport may be correct as of 11:40 am today, and wrong as of 11 am Sunday - BECAUSE the PCP and the Exempt list are PR tools for the league, and will be used in accord with "how the frog jumps". 

 

This has been shown Over.  and Over.  and Over.  under Goodell.

 

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Your line of argument equally disappoints me. I think some people have so bogged themselves down to this "he is going on the list as soon as he is traded" they are now jumping through loopholes to avoid credible reporting to the contrary. 

 

You do recognize that is not my argument, and that I am acknowledging the credible reporting?  Or are you bending your own self into such a pretzel that those "minor points" elude you?

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Florio's point is that the Personal Conduct Policy is a PR tool for the league and has nothing to do with legalities (and bear in mind that Florio is a former litigator and understands US law and legalities).  Rapoport may be correct as of 11:40 am today, and wrong as of 11 am Sunday - BECAUSE the PCP and the Exempt list are PR tools for the league, and will be used in accord with "how the frog jumps". 

 

This has been shown Over.  and Over.  and Over.  under Goodell.

 

 

You do recognize that is not my argument, and that I am acknowledging the credible reporting?  Or are you bending your own self into such a pretzel that those "minor points" elude you?

 

I didn't necessarily say you. Look you might be right, Florio might be right that the NFL just wants to use this as a PR play. I think that is wrong. I have explained ad-nauseum why. You disagree with it. That's fine. Rapoport (not necessarily for any of the reasons I have articulated) reported that the NFL does not intend to put Watson on the exempt list if traded. And yet somehow we still have people in this thread making arguments about some sort of secret agreement to keep him inactive with the Texans and the league and Watson that everyone is party to. It is incredible - in that word's true meaning.

• Watson isn't on the list because the NFL took a decision at some point that the allegations did not justify him being on the list. I don't agree with that decision but that is the decision they took. 
• If he gets traded they will either reverse that decision, or they won't. The NFL's senior reporter says they won't. I have said repeatedly I think it is legally dubious if they do. 
• And yet the balance of this thread remains "they will". You guys might all be right. I'm not sure the odds look all that good right now though. 

Of course all this might be moot if he isn't traded. I have never sought to argue that he would be traded. Just that if he does the NFL are in a difficult position because of that first decision taken in March and then revisited before the season. A decision I think they got wrong. 

[Doc]

Rap's report doesn't say that the trading team won't inactivate him as well.  Again obviating the need for exempting him.  And again, as everyone agrees, he should be on the exempt list and isn't because...

 

Not that I trust anything cRapoport says after the Antonio Brown fiasco.