Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, YoloinOhio said:

 

Kudos to the Browns management for being complicit scumbags throughout the entire process 

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Agree 4
Posted
8 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't know what this means. All I know is in Life of Brian he has a speech impediment. 

Bwian, eh?

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, inkman said:

Kudos to the Browns management for being complicit scumbags throughout the entire process 

That's why I don't understand how it makes any difference that he gets his massages from team personnel. Haslem will personally hire him a hooker if he wants it. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, muppy said:

Holy cow "Non violent sexual conduct"...THAT  is the kind of verbage that is going to P O women. How about YOU be violated and say that. grrrrrrr

 

so you want to hear an opinion of a woman? What a crock of BS ......SMH

It’s really bad

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, FrenchConnection said:

That's why I don't understand how it makes any difference that he gets his massages from team personnel. Haslem will personally hire him a hooker if he wants it. 

 

But based on his conduct I'm assuming that sort of arrangement takes the fun out of it for Watson.

  • Agree 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Means the person with actual control washes their hands of the situation.

 

 

Well not quite because it can still end up back in Goodell's hands. The reason they introduced this new system is because the case law especially in deflategate, even when the NFL eventually came out on top, had been critical of the Goodell as judge, jury and executioner setup that was in place previously. The NFL recognised it was at risk eventually of having a court rule that old system was unlawful. That is why they tried to bring some independence to the process, but Goodell retains the 'final' say. He will now have to decide whether to increase the punishment (on the basis I think the NFL will appeal) and if so, by how much as to not completely undermine his shiny new system that has been so proud of in its first test. 

Posted

I know this isn't the NFL's decision, but I can't imagine they're happy with "nonviolent sexual conduct" being the key takeaway from the ruling. What a disturbing choice of words.

  • Agree 3
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:


I get it, I feel this way too. But at the end of the day, feeling like an institution is scummy means nothing if we don’t financially punish said institution. The unwanted behavior will just continue. It is hypocritical, I’m guilty of it, we all are. But I’m not going to pretend to act all outraged about it if I’m not prepared to personally boycott it otherwise it’s just hot air. 

 

I don't feel outraged.  I'm simply disgusted.  I'm just not disgusted to the point of it affecting my viewing/attendance habits.  Those are personal/individual decisions we all choose (or don't choose) to make.

 

I can't even figure myself out.  The Mets once re-signed Jose Reyes (wife beater) and I never skipped a beat watching them.  But when news came out that Alex Rodriguez was trying to buy the Mets, I was fully prepared to jump ship if that had gone through.

 

We've all got our own limits and thresholds.  

 

And to your point ... the NFL knows damn well that the miniscule number of fans who may boycott the NFL won't even come close to being felt.

 

Posted

That seems awfully light discipline for the amount of those that have made the accusations against him . Usually where there is so much smoke if you look you will find fire if ti were only 1 or 2 maybe the guy isn't that guy but i'm thinking because of the amount of those with the same accounts of his behavior i believe he is a scum bag & the punishment should be according to the crime or at least to the over abundance of it .

Posted
13 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

Repeating this non-salient point over and over doesn't make you sound any smarter.

Ahhh why isn’t Goodell putting Watson behind bars??!!!

 

Oh, because he can’t.

 

Ahhh why isn’t Goodell banning Watson for life???!!!!

 

Oh, because he can’t.

 

Noooo Goodell sucks you don’t get it!!!!!!!!!!111!1!1!1!1!

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Is Warren Sharp insinuating Sue Robinson doesn’t care about sexual misconduct?

Maybe her wallet is a little fatter this morning.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...