Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, Dr.Mantis_Toboggan said:

1-Due process fails sexual assault victims on a regular basis, hence why so many are found not guilty in criminal court but then liable in a civil suit.

 

2- clearly you’re not staying as up to date on the details as you should be, ie pictures of the victim that have been released… 

 

3- once again, see one, most rapists never serve a day in prison for their crime.

 

4- so which virtue do I hold true? Defending those who are almost always skewered as having “ulterior motives”, when that’s almost always not the case?  I.e. Ben & Kobe off the top of my head. Any time a high profile case hits the wires, everybody starts screaming “cash grab”, people drag the victims through the mud only to find out these individuals settled out of court. As if this mentality in public has no effect on other women coming forward. Oh and why do I focus on women, bc 9/10 rape victims are women… is that good enough for you? The victims skew super heavily to the female population. 1/3 women is victim of some form of sexual assault in their lives, that number is just unacceptable and attitudes like yours do nothing to help drive that number the opposite direction.

 

5- once again, rape victims are women an overwhelming majority of the time. These are hard facts.  Sick of hearing let the courts sort it out. So what happens if there is no criminal conviction but he’s found liable in a civil suit, as so often is the case with these matters, or he settles out of court?  Then we just look the other way.  I myself don’t want the Mike Vick, Adrian Peterson, Tyreek Hills of the world on my team, why would I want this piece of garbage representing Buffalo in any way shape or form?

 

6- The NFL is a privilege, not a right. Araiza knowingly withheld this information from the Bills in the pre draft process. That alone is grounds to cut him, as this is the last thing a team with it’s eye on the Super Bowl needs less than two weeks fro, the start of the regular season.

 

I’m just applying what I know combined with statistics.

 

He admitted he had sex with a minor, at a party with alcohol

He contacted her to tell her she should get tested for STDs

Her idiot lawyer released pictures showing her bruising/physical trauma

He withheld this information in the pre draft process

Only 2-10%, with the number being believed to be around 6-8% of accusations are false.

That means over 90% of rape accusations are in fact true.

Given the information we do know, combined with the numbers supporting accusers, and him withholding information, I don’t get how he deserves to keep his roster spot.

 

 

 

 

Yet you still DONT know if he was even on the property at the time the rape happens.  Oh those pesky facts...

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

So he decided not to wear the Bills issued clothes that every other player wore?


Perhaps think about my question first…they cut him but they allowed him to travel with the team to the game… and he actually agreed to do so..

Posted
4 minutes ago, djp14150 said:

Do we know for a fact it was him who replied?

 

if he knew this girl and knew this number he coukd have said I’m not answering this. But one of his buddy did the talking.


we don’t know anything for a fact re: the phone call, just what has been alleged by plaintiff in the filing suit. 

Posted
Just now, MClem06 said:

Sorry I couldn't help it , i'm sitting at work , not at the game.  I wish it were true. 

 

Don't do that again

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, mannc said:

No, but they needed to have a strong public relations strategy in place to counter the so-far unrebutted story put out there by Gilleon and his client.  They should have had a strong counter-narrative ready, even if it wasn't much more than just denying the allegations.  They've had months to come up with one and every hour that they don't rebut the Gilleon's story will make it more difficult to win hearts and minds, which is ultimately what this is about.  That goes for the Bills, too. 

 

Seriously? You expect the Bills to get in the middle of this?? Wow, I'm glad you aren't in charge of team PR. This is a s###show. There is nothing to be gained by descending into the pit. Don't be influenced to act by the hair-on-fire takes on Twitter. 

  • Agree 2
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

He’s out tonight.

 

I presume we are going for every 4th down then? 

 

On a serious note I am not against the Bills holding him out until there is some resolution. Ideally the Commissioner would put him on the exempt list. But he didn't do that for Watson so not holding my breath.

Edited by GunnerBill
Posted
1 minute ago, Simon said:

 

Don't do that again

👀 jokes man, jokes. No one believed me , 80 yard punt from a place kicker? cmon man.

  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Billsflyer12 said:

Comparing cutting an NFL punter to lynching is just a horrible take.

How is it any different? 
 

youwant someone fired because he’s being accused of something without knowing if this is even true

Posted
Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

I presume we are going for every 4th down then? 

 

On a serious note I am not against the Bills holding him out until there is some resolution. Ideally the Commissioner would out him on the exempt list. 

Apparently he can't be put on the exempt list because this occurred prior to him being drafted. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, transient said:

It hasn't happened yet, but the PR fallout from this only started yesterday when the civil suit was filed. My point is, irrespective of the issues with Araiza, if your alternative is Haack, cutting him and replacing him with equal value off the street in a pinch probably isn't that hard. In addition to the blocked punt in Pittsburg, he was a disaster down the stretch last season.

 

Oh I don't disagree, I had fully expected Haack to not be on this roster going back to the end of last year.  I was just saying, if they had planned on also cutting Matt, it would have already been done.  They clearly felt good enough about Matts case at the time they cut Haack to also keep him, praise him publicly, and not bring in any other punters, despite how close to the season we are.  

 

But again, all that can change at any moment like I said.  Public pressure or new info could sway their stance and they could cut him at any time.  My main point was they had 6 weeks to investigate the situation and decide if they felt comfortable with Matts side of the story or not before this story came out.  

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:


Perhaps think about my question first…they cut him but they allowed him to travel with the team to the game… and he actually agreed to do so..

They might have cut him on the bus ride to the stadium I don’t know. It makes sense not to announce it tonight because they have to answer questions.

 

Every player wore the same team issued apparel getting on the plane and then entering the stadium. We didn’t see Araiza getting on the plane. Only Araiza was dressed in all black arriving to the stadium.

Edited by Buffalo_Stampede
  • Eyeroll 1
Posted

After checking other boards today, I've gotta admit - I do hate how everyone rushes to judgment.  It's how America has been since the internet really took off (probably before, too - but it's much more evident now).

 

America has decided that this guy is guilty, without doubt.  And that may be true - but man, do we need to let the wheels of justice roll and the truth to come out.  I really hate how a jury of twitter addicts decides these things now.  It's like Duke Lacrosse never happened.

 

  • Agree 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
Posted

Bottom line is he's going to get cut eventually. Likely next week. Everyone knows it. It's unfortunate and it's weak, but it's the political climate with this stuff. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

The Bills are too good for a punter to be the news.  What is a good punter worth anyway on a team that moves the ball.  A guy who is a directional punter is a better fit than a strong legged punter for our offense.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

But again, all that can change at any moment like I said.  Public pressure or new info could sway their stance and they could cut him at any time.  My main point was they had 6 weeks to investigate the situation and decide if they felt comfortable with Matts side of the story or not before this story came out.  

 

The worst reason to do anything. 

  • Agree 4
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...