Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, Pasaluki said:

Nah not for a punter. A punter isn't valuable enough to be patient with. 

I could care less about it being Araiza, or the water boy.  It's about doing the right thing for the individual, let more info come out

Posted
1 minute ago, Steptide said:

Lots of people on Twitter calling to cut him immediately. Not sure what to think 

I'm going to do the prudent thing and reserve judgement until more facts come out.  A few years ago the Bills had a player who was accused of sex crimes in the off season (I think it was peeping tom) & it turned out he was completely innocent.   

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

*if* the Bills knew and they should have known.. this is bad. The investigators hired by NFL teams are not slouches and an active police investigation is not hard to find. They have made a very large blunder for.. a punter. Guilty or innocent, this was a bad move for the Bills and they need to get a lot of information very quickly. If it looks like he was involved, they need to make the right decision very quickly and give a good explanation to the fans. 


FWIW the “punt god” was passed on by two other teams who chose punters. Makes you wonder.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

Good news…if this was going to happen to any starter, punter would be at the top of the list. 
 

Bad news…not a good look for a team with a female co-owner/team president. 
 

My guess is that come game time tomorrow, he will be an ex-Bill. 

Posted
Just now, L Ron Burgundy said:

No.  What if it turns out to be bs?  Need more detail. 


Then he signs with another team. He’s a punter.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Beck Water said:

 

Yes, marks were shown although the Halloween costume was blurred out

 

But it's still a question: who put the bruises there?

 

I don't like the idea that in this day and age, it can be 10 months between an alleged sexual assault crime and only just now are decisions being made about charges.

But I also don't like the idea that in the absence of criminal charges, the mere filing of a lawsuit causes people decide guilt and call for immediate consequences.

 

I think I read that the city of Portland hasn’t even evaluated rape kits for years due to lack of personnel.

Posted
2 minutes ago, 716er said:

Cut this moron and don’t look back. He’s a freaking punter and we barely punt.

I generally hate the idea of rushing to judgement, but I agree with you.  This is not a story the Bills want hanging over them heading into a very promising season.  Cut him and if this eventually gets dismissed in his favor, then you can circle back and re-sign him.

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Turbo44 said:

From the article, it seems the civil suit was only filed cuz the police were dragging their feet on the criminal case.

This totally works to her benefit though and I am very happy that it does. Had this been public back in October, Araiza would have never of been drafted. Now she can go after his rookie bonus/gtd money.

Posted
2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

All potential draft picks are investigated by both league and team private investigators during the draft process. I’m confident the Bills did their due diligence given the information available at the time. My concern is that information was less than candid and reliable. 

 

This.

 

There's also the point that even if the Bills decided there was no evidence of a crime, there can still be league consequences.

 

For example, the Bills investigated Tyrell Dodson and concluded he was not guilty of domestic violence, which is why they signed him.

But Dodson was still suspended for 6 games by the NFL after he pled guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Chicagobills said:

What happened to innocent until proven guilty? 

 

Social media, public opinion, tribal pressure, cancel culture, victimhood, self-righteousness, greed, et al.  

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted

Lots of posters here must feel pretty secure in their career to just call for people to be fired within five minutes of hearing about an allegation. 

  • Like (+1) 6
  • Eyeroll 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted

Well this certainly isn't good; although is she angling for money due to the fear of not winning a criminal case? Seeing as a civil case is easier to achieve restitution with than a criminal case. 

 

Why was his college sitting on it for 10 months?

 

Well, I guess we should start working out some more punters.

Posted
1 minute ago, Beck Water said:

 

This.

 

There's also the point that even if the Bills decided there was no evidence of a crime, there can still be league consequences.

 

For example, the Bills investigated Tyrell Dodson and concluded he was not guilty of domestic violence, which is why they signed him.

But Dodson was still suspended for 6 games by the NFL after he pled guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct.

But for a team and a front office that likes to preach culture, that they would draft someone with this type of accusation floating with an ongoing criminal investigation is dissapointing to say the least.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
Just now, SCBills said:

Lots of posters here must feel pretty secure in their career to just call for people to be fired within five minutes of hearing about an allegation. 


What is the benefit of having an an accused rapist barely punt when a person who was not accused of rape can also barely punt?

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Beck Water said:

 

This.

 

There's also the point that even if the Bills decided there was no evidence of a crime, there can still be league consequences.

 

For example, the Bills investigated Tyrell Dodson and concluded he was not guilty of domestic violence, which is why they signed him.

But Dodson was still suspended for 6 games by the NFL after he pled guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct.

 

It would be impossible for the Bills to conclude at this time that there is no evidence of a crime.  The DA hasn't concluded that yet.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Yes, marks were shown although the Halloween costume was blurred out

 

But it's still a question: who put the bruises there?

 

I don't like the idea that in this day and age, it can be 10 months between an alleged sexual assault crime and only just now are decisions being made about charges.

But I also don't like the idea that in the absence of criminal charges, the mere filing of a lawsuit causes people decide guilt and call for immediate consequences.


His attorney feels pretty confident about his witnesses and there are witnesses at the party. If she was drunk and also given a drug her memory could be very spotty unfortunately. That’s the problem in general with these types of cases. Often times they can be he said she said which doesn’t bode well if there was a rape and no physical proof. Matt could have had sex consensually and she could have been rapes in the room. 
 

on the exempt list until it’s sorted out and cut if he is charged. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, SCBills said:

Lots of posters here must feel pretty secure in their career to just call for people to be fired within five minutes of hearing about an allegation. 

 

I'd be out on my ass the minute this was alleged

  • Agree 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...