McDermott/Beane press conference 8/27: Matt Araiza released

[MasterStrategist]

Just listened to the press conference (Beane/Coach), and a few immediate thoughts:

1. This is as about the toughest press conference that either will endure, Coach had it even tougher Friday night.  Not an easy thing to sit there and handle this.

 

2. That said, I'm used to hearing more "conviction" from Beane, about roster decisions and such.  Just my opinion, and admittedly it would be difficult for all, but it just didn't sound like he was fully 100% behind his own words.  Not saying he didn't agree or ultimately decide to release Araiza, just felt like certain parts of that interview displayed less confidence in his decision than I'm used to hearing (but again, see #1 point and I can understand).

 

3.  Deciding now VS July, to cut Matt: this might have been the part of the press conference I'm leaving most confused with.  Beane said the "boulders" were known in July, but the case obviously had not been filed yet. So when asked what changed between then and now, best he could offer was that it was an "allegation" then and an actual civily suit now.  Which is true.  But something clearly changed their mind on how to move forward, and it couldn't have been just that a civil suit was filed (Bills and Araiza knew that was coming down the pike).  Was it public/media pressure, some detail in the Civil suit, distraction they saw forthcoming for the season, etc (or maybe a mix of some/all of the above).  Bottom line, they don't have all the info yet, and Beane did say they were using as much time as possible to collect more information, so can respect that.

 

Ultimately, I think both have tried to "do the right thing" for Matt, victim, organization and fans.  They didn't want to be, and are not, the judge/jury over this situation.  But they came to a decision that will likely benefit the organization, Matt (giving him a chance to focus on this and not face additional scrutiny at games, until this is potentially resolved), and the fans/public opinion.  I was initially all for keeping Matt on the team, until more info came forth, but the magnitude and impact was very clear on Friday night/Coach's interview.  

 

Hopefully, the victim can find justice.  And if Matt is innocent, he can as well.

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Vic who?

 

 

Vic tem I assume

[Ralonzo]

31 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

He may have gotten a bad deal. We just don't know yet. Ultimately this was still the right move for the Bills to make. We can't have a dark cloud hanging over the entire season because of our punter. I hope Araiza is able to get his name cleared and if he does I would welcome him back if he would be willing to.

 

I would hope that if he's totally exonerated and the Bills approached him to resume his role as punter, that he'd tell them to ***** right off the foot of Ferry. Beane's own statement on the team feed affirmed that for the Bills, "culture is more important than winning."  Ok. So I'm going to assume that means, to do the right thing even if it lessens your chance to win. Or even, the whole "Bills are a family" thing. How would a family react to a member accused of something awful, which he claimed he didn't do? Would you toss him on the street? No, you'd find out what really happened, and if he did what he was accused of then deal with it appropriately.

 

If the guy is accused of something where "you can't put together all the facts" (according to Beane) and has been entirely consistent with he's told you (according to Beane) and you know of nothing disproving that (inferred by Beane) then you're doing it solely for the reason of winning. That's fine by me, only don't tell me about how "culture is more important than winning" while you're doing it. The goal of the team should be to win, that's what your job as GM depends on. Just say that. "The media won't leave us alone, and our goal of winning a Super Bowl is diminished by the extra attention." That, I can believe.

 

Hopefully the sleazebag lawyer throwing Beane immediately under the bus after acceding his demands is educational on some level.

Edited August 28, 2022 by Ralonzo

[BillsShredder83]

2 hours ago, rpmfla said:

Beane stated several times that they were letting Matt go because they "thought it was best for Matt"...not once stating that they were doing what was best for the Bills organization. While I have always liked and respected Beane from what little I've seen and heard, that seems at the very least an obviously disingenuous statement.

lol wtf is he supposed to say. in GM speak everyone with a pulse can read between the lines. also, dont forget he has to be careful on what he says from a legal standpoint, especially with possible NFLPA possibly involved. imagine hes 100% cleared of this in 6 mos, what might that lawsuit look like? both from a $$ standpoint, and the time/energy it would sap from being a football GM. unlikely, but possibly even a personal liability suit. all unlikely, but stupid risk to be that candid.

2 hours ago, BuffaloBud17 said:

Glad they released him but don't want to hear nothing about Bills culture from them again. They knew of these accusations before they released Haack and were hoping it would never see the daylight 

did you watch mcd presser after the game yesterday? 

[HappyDays]

5 minutes ago, Ralonzo said:

No, you'd find out what really happened, and if he did what he was accused of then deal with it appropriately.

 

The Bills don't have the time or resources to "find out what really happened." They have decided to remove themselves from the situation and get the team totally focused on the upcoming season. The allegation clearly affected the locker room.

[Beck Water]

35 minutes ago, Ralonzo said:

I would hope that if he's totally exonerated and the Bills approached him to resume his role as punter, that he'd tell them to ***** right off the foot of Ferry. Beane's own statement on the team feed affirmed that for the Bills, "culture is more important than winning."  Ok. So I'm going to assume that means, to do the right thing even if it lessens your chance to win. Or even, the whole "Bills are a family" thing. How would a family react to a member accused of something awful, which he claimed he didn't do? Would you toss him on the street? No, you'd find out what really happened, and if he did what he was accused of then deal with it appropriately.

 

Look, I see what you're getting at, but anyone who believes that any employer is "family" and not a business, which will pursue its business interests first and formost, is highly naive.

 

I do agree with your take that Beane's statement "culture is more important than winning" seems like BS.  This is indeed about reducing distraction and controversy for the team so that it can focus on winning; and where was culture 3+ weeks ago when the LA Times printed details and named the lawyer, then the lawyer called the Bills the next day?

 

35 minutes ago, Ralonzo said:

Hopefully the sleazebag lawyer throwing Beane immediately under the bus after acceding his demands is educational on some level.

 

?? (Edit: never mind, I found it)

 

33 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

lol wtf is he supposed to say. in GM speak everyone with a pulse can read between the lines. also, dont forget he has to be careful on what he says from a legal standpoint, especially with possible NFLPA possibly involved. imagine hes 100% cleared of this in 6 mos, what might that lawsuit look like? both from a $$ standpoint, and the time/energy it would sap from being a football GM. unlikely, but possibly even a personal liability suit. all unlikely, but stupid risk to be that candid.

 

IMHO that's what all the delay prior to the presser must have been about - crafting possible responses to possible questions and clearing them with Legal

Edited August 28, 2022 by Beck Water

[BillsShredder83]

2 hours ago, Nelius said:

 

It's actually also my name but hey heck of a jump. I'll change the pic if it bothers you that much.

Damn, and ppl said the Bills caved to media pressure. Do you have a bat farm in your cave? lol dont let a troll change your name

Side not on alleged victims attorney... he really screwed this up, and shouldve took the $$. money isnt gunna fix her pain, but a crazy attorney bill, mental health/embarassment might keep her from earning, none of that stuff is doing her any favors.  he gets the press he wants which is probably worth more than his % of a settlement... shes left with $0 or a bill, and Matts out of football.

 

hes the only one that comes out of this ahead, and the other 2 moved backwards. scum

[Big Blitz]

1 hour ago, Meatloaf63 said:

The easy  path was to just release him. The hard path would have been to stand up to the cancel culture and wait for this to be settled in a court of law, not the court of public opinion. How fast would Bean released Josh if the accusations were pointed at him? How many here would be singing a different tune if it was? It should not be any different for the punter than from the qb. Everyone should be considered innocent until proven guilty. There has to be be a better way to deal with these situations.

 

 

I think the Bills did this and the best they could since learning about it July 28.   

 

I don't think holding on to him for now would have been the wrong thing and I don't think cutting him loose is the wrong thing either.  

 

I hope the players respect management not rushing to judgement just based solely on allegations but that the Bills have made the most INFORMED not EMOTIONAL decision possible.  

[The Red King]

Araiza was tried and found guilty in the court of public opinion.  The Bills organization was under siege from the press about keeping such a monster on the team, even though nothing had been proven.  There is no way they could funtion under those circumstances.  As such, they didn't have a choice.  For their own good they had to cut him, and I agree with the move.

 

What disgusts me are the people that immediately assumed he's guilty, referring to him as trash and worse, before anything comes to light.  I also hate when people who don't want to jump to conclusions are accused of defending him.  It's not the same!

 

What's done is done. The Bills didn't have a choice.  Time to move on.

[Forlorn hope]

14 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

The Bills don't have the time or resources to "find out what really happened." They have decided to remove themselves from the situation and get the team totally focused on the upcoming season. The allegation clearly affected the locker room.

100% agree.

 

Again the Bills are not a police department. Not only that, the timing and investigation part is above beane and McDermotts paygrade. If anything the longer you pause as a corporate body in situations like this the more you magnify potential risk with literally no upside outside of looking in the mirror. 

 

It was check mate for arazia once the civil suit became a real legal liability

 

It is what it is 

[Bangarang]

The whole it was just an allegation in July but now it’s a civil suit logic BB gave was weird. The civil suit is still just an allegation. The only difference is now it’s public and the world hates your team for employing a guy accused of raping a minor. 

[Beck Water]

4 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

The whole it was just an allegation in July but now it’s a civil suit logic BB gave was weird. The civil suit is still just an allegation. The only difference is now it’s public and the world hates your team for employing a guy accused of raping a minor. 

 

I am glad I am not the only one who found that explanation weird and inconsistent.

 

Agree, the Times article July 29th (which did not name Araiza) and the lawyer's phone call July 30th were allegations.

The civil suit is also an allegation.

 

The only difference is the firestorm of negative PR

 

And of course that the entire team can read the lawsuit and quite possibly react in as polarized a fashion as we have on this board.

[Forlorn hope]

8 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

The whole it was just an allegation in July but now it’s a civil suit logic BB gave was weird. The civil suit is still just an allegation. The only difference is now it’s public and the world hates your team for employing a guy accused of raping a minor. 

An actual civil lawsuit filed with ridiculous media scrutiny opens up terry pegula to all kinds of proprietary/legal liability. 

 

It also allows potential subpoena power. Do you really think Terry pegula wants to be given a subpoena and asked all kinds of questions about what you knew and when and where and how???

 

They had no choice. 

[BillsShredder83]

5 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I am glad I am not the only one who found that explanation weird and inconsistent.

 

Agree, the Times article July 29th (which did not name Araiza) and the lawyer's phone call July 30th were allegations.

The civil suit is also an allegation.

 

The only difference is the firestorm of negative PR

 

And of course that the entire team can read the lawsuit and quite possibly react in as polarized a fashion as we have on this board.

the possible perception of mat being innocent to a vague accusation, versus a document discussing a violent 90m gang rape straight out of 'I Spit On Your Grave" are very different, regardless of if they admit to it or not.

 

all r word is bad, but theres a difference between a - couldnt consent due to an extra drink or two, and the specifics released. these guys are human too, if it affected my sleep last night, it affected theirs much more directly.

Edited August 28, 2022 by BillsShredder83

[John from Riverside]

1 hour ago, Ralonzo said:

 

It's his nature.

This Lawyer Aiden is a complete jerk and an incompetent one at that he’s just taking shots at everyone damned if you do damned if you don’t

[BuffaloBob]

4 hours ago, Shake_My_Head said:

He may not have lied from his perspective.   It's very likely that even he didn't know the details included in the civil suit.   That document was written entirely from "Jane Doe's" perspective.

The kid has had a lawyer and the girl’s counsel  has been trying to negotiate with him for some time. They knew what was coming. 

[Beck Water]

24 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

the possible perception of mat being innocent to a vague accusation, versus a document discussing a violent 90m gang rape straight out of 'I Spit On Your Grave" are very different, regardless of if they admit to it or not.

 

all r word is bad, but theres a difference between a - couldnt consent due to an extra drink or two, and the specifics released. these guys are human too, if it affected my sleep last night, it affected theirs much more directly.

 

I "get" that effect!   *shudder*

 

My point that I made upthread was that a lot of those violent details were published in the LA Times July 29th, with the lawyer for the alleged victim but not the suspects named.  Then the lawyer called the Bills and added Matt Araiza's name to the article.

 

I don't think you need to be terribly imaginative to figure out how that is gonna read in a civil suit.

 

But maybe they needed the experience of actually reading it in print.

 

 

[BuffaloBob]

2 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

We already know that Araiza admitted they had sex. That part is not a fabrication. The details and particulars are a case of he said -she said and we will probably never really know. 

Also, was she not too young at the time to legally consent, not even considering her ability to consent based on her level of intoxication. The age of consent in Cali is 18. She was 17 at the time. This alone is an admission of statutory rape.  That’s reason enough for me to send him on his way. 

Edited August 28, 2022 by BuffaloBob

[Richard Noggin]

I don't think it's been shared here, but this is a long thread already: how many of us think this organizational blind-spot in drafting a player who clearly had such a serious off-field time bomb is the unfortunate result of Araiza being projected to go much higher in the draft than the Bills were willing to consider taking a punter?

 

What I mean is that the Bills probably didn't do a DEEP dive on a nicknamed, award-winning punter projected to be drafted possibly on day two or at worst EARLY day three. Araiza clearly fell, and by the 6th round the Bills likely couldn't ignore the value prop of such a high-ceiling prospect. But that means they probably hadn't invested pre-draft resources in vetting him off the field because they reasonably expected him to be gone before they were willing to consider a punter. 

 

Like most organizational failures, it's often a combination of oversights and unfortunate circumstances. I'll bet Araiza was not a serious pre-draft target for the Bills, and the decision to draft him was less informed than their usual selections.

 

At least, this is a plausible rationalization.  

[McDeerInTheHeadlights]

55 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

the possible perception of mat being innocent to a vague accusation, versus a document discussing a violent 90m gang rape straight out of 'I Spit On Your Grave" are very different, regardless of if they admit to it or not.

 

all r word is bad, but theres a difference between a - couldnt consent due to an extra drink or two, and the specifics released. these guys are human too, if it affected my sleep last night, it affected theirs much more directly.

 

Wow, man. Don't get me wrong, I agree with most of your takes on this situation, but I have to admit I slept like a baby last night.

 

Not sure if that makes me thick skinned or a bad person.

 

I guess it all start with knowing that horrific things happen thousands times every single minute somewhere in this world. You have got to come to terms with that and realise that this situation is neither different nor more relevant to you than the other thousands, or your life is gonna be miserable.

 

Take care.