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

[oldmanfan]

I am pretty sure the Bills legal counsel was very involved and as such they were not going to make a snap decision.

[ganesh]

1 hour ago, Matt_In_NH said:

Not every team does a full deep dive on every player.  In this case beane says he has talked to double digit teams and no one said they knew.  I do think it is possible this was out locally at SDS and could have been known.   But even then you only would have had rumors.  He was worth a 6th round pick.  I am diss appointed we don’t get to see what he could have become but they did the right thing.  

I assume some of this falls on the scout who is presenting the player to the organization. At the least, the scout's job is to get the name to the Bills Internal Investigation organization for their background verification.   I am sure the scout would have talked to the local football coaches, who in turn may have hid the whole issue.   Again, no point in putting the blame game...the responsibility lies with Beane.  

[Dr. Who]

Just now, stevewin said:

I think it probably was some of all of the above that you mention.  Also, with regard to end of July, I can only imagine what the exchange with the psycho lawyer was like, we've all seen how he operates.  Even if he did give details, the Bills at that time were prob like wtf? - then asked Araiza about it, who apparently stuck by his version of the story which obviously didn't have all the same detail.  So at that point it was still Araiza's story vs psycho lawyer's "allegation" - so they continued to "have the back" of the player with the info they had at the time.  I think the civil case made it real - even if the lawyer had mentioned some of the details in July, they could have thought he was bluffing/lying (again dont forget to take into account how this lawyer has presented himself - and that Araiza's story remained unchanged).  Once the lawyer's allegations in July were in an actual civil suit, they were "real" now.  And of course then then it hit the fan and they saw what a sh!tstorm this would be, and frankly at that point probably started doubting Araiza's version - or at least had to be concerned there were elements in the civil case that were very different from his account of what happened.  It then became apparent it would drag out as a distraction and only get worse- and I also think the possibility that it was really true started to weigh more heavily on McD and others. It was simply an untenable situation to try to deal with this, both in the present and who knows how far into the future,  and be 100% committed/focused on football

I think this is perfectly stated. The fella who apparently started an account to crusade on this can reiterate ad nauseum. It won't change anything. 

[LeGOATski]

17 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

It’s so annoying when people write clickbait headlines and then contradict themselves in the actual story. 
 

 

and they're completely anonymous...

 

Anonymous: "Oh, yeah. We totally knew!"

 

Reporter: "What did you know?"

 

Anonymous: "Well, nothing really. Also, don't tell anyone it's us."

[Giuseppe Tognarelli]

1 hour ago, UKBillFan said:

no franchise is classier than any others.

I disagree with this completely. I think the Bills have proven this is not true.

[Shake_My_Head]

6 hours ago, BuffaloBob said:

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. 

IDK.   He may have 'known' what was coming.   But no one, including MA, may have been prepared to see the detailed blow-by-blow account contained in that civil suit document.    That was written for shock and awe destructive purposes and appears to have accomplished that with the Bills, the public and I suspect MA as well.   

.

Edited August 28, 2022 by Shake_My_Head

[Since1981]

6 hours ago, BuffaloBob said:

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

Yep. This part is really not in dispute. easy cut ties.  Not sure why BB didn’t know this in July+
 

KP TP (3 daughters in 20’s) may have helped BB SM firm up their own opinions and totally cut ties. 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Since1981

[UKBillFan]

1 minute ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

I disagree with this completely. I think the Bills have proven this is not true.

 

Don't think we can be sure either way. It was an easy decision as he was a rookie and a punter.

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

why did the Ps attorney contact the Bills before filing the complaint? What would be the purpose of that? 
 

To put the heat on Araiza and facilitate a settlement.  Araiza didn't want to play ball, so Ps atty escalated by nudging the employer (which in turn, in theory, would nudge Araiza).  It didn't work, so it was on to plan B.  Destroy Araiza and achieve justice in that way.  The first plan had the benefit of allowing P to avoid testifying at trial.  But since Araiza didn't want to cooperate there, and P would have to testify, she decided to make things as painful as possible for him.  (Just like, in her view, he did to her.)  Hence where we are today.  

 

(And FWIW, it's exactly what I would have done.  He said there was no chance at settlement, and he took her dignity, so on behalf of my client I'd take his, and then his job. The next step is to threaten his freedom, and the media releases surely have been noticed by the SD prosecutor's office.)

[MAJBobby]

9 hours ago, muppy said:

Are you serious or is this sarcasm I can't tell. Im not okay with your comment here. How about not doing anything to cause you to be sued regardless of player position.  smh

That too. But I am serious here. 
 

just look at Rothesberger, QB. Watson QB I can name more. I am Sorry you cannot handle and accept the REALITIES of the NFL. 

[Ralonzo]

7 hours ago, Beck Water said:

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?

 

The Bills themselves have used the "family" descriptor to differentiate themselves, to make themselves a more attractive destination for players. You'd like to believe that, but at the end of the day management caved to the media mob to protect their product in lieu of action with prudence while the facts are yet to be known. In doing so they abdicate this superiority of "moral high ground" that seems to be part of the Bills branding. The business of the NFL is winning, which means circling the wagons for the Von Millers of the world and not so much for a replaceable cog. I get it. It just means everything I've listened to and bought into the last 5 years about the Bills' "culture" and "process" means something other than what I was led to believe. What I won't swallow is the claim by Beane that this move came for the sake of that "culture."

 

[MAJBobby]

11 hours ago, pennstate10 said:

He was dishonest with the Bills?

 

Is there any evidence to support this statement or are you simply making ish up?

Sure did he tell the Bills about this incident that happened in October during the scouting prep

for the Draft?  

[muppy]

6 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

 

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.  

 

 

I want to preface my post by admitting I am a Buffalo Bills homer. I will choose to take their word over any and all conjecture and spin we fanbase can come up with. 

 

Having said that  I think that the organizational failure would have been to sit on this an fester and distract rather than take decisive action when they knew more post lawsuit filing.  I thought the bolded was a very good take. It sounds very plausible to me. Araiza clearly doesnt want to jeopardize his chance of being drafted by an NFL team.  So his camp spun this in their favor of course.  Could the Bills  have known of the seriousness of the allegations before this lawsuit occurred?  It sounds like yes possibly. But what I DO know is if the Bills had any inkling as to how serious this would have all become he would have never been on their draft board come draft day in the first place.

 

The Bills may have not vetted this guy properly but they did better when they knew better. That to me is much more important. I really appreciated the youtube clip @Lost posted just up thread. Made  a Lot of sense in regards to this entire situation

 

I am ready to move on and know that the Bills WILL vet their draft boards candidates with greater scrutiny in the future. It was a very tough lesson they learned from araiza . Let's  hope something like this never happens again!

Edited August 28, 2022 by muppy

[Tiberius]

This case reminds me of the Brock Turner rape case at Stanford. Everyone was totally wasted on hard liquor that was drank fast and then it all got blurry. They ended up outside in the dirt with him on top of her and someone saw them and called the cops. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Turner

 

Too much alcohol leads to some really destructive life decisions. He admitted having sex with her on a taped phone message, he's so screwed. There must be other details the police are trying to piece together or he would of been arrested by now. 

[Matt_In_NH]

43 minutes ago, Fabio9000 said:

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2022/8/27/23324566/some-teams-knew-of-matt-araiza-gang-rape-allegations-before-2022-nfl-draft

Not surprised

[LeGOATski]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

There must be other details the police are trying to piece together or he would of been arrested by now. 

Yeah, we already know there is.

[UKBillFan]

12 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

To put the heat on Araiza and facilitate a settlement.  Araiza didn't want to play ball, so Ps atty escalated by nudging the employer (which in turn, in theory, would nudge Araiza).  It didn't work, so it was on to plan B.  Destroy Araiza and achieve justice in that way.  The first plan had the benefit of allowing P to avoid testifying at trial.  But since Araiza didn't want to cooperate there, and P would have to testify, she decided to make things as painful as possible for him.  (Just like, in her view, he did to her.)  Hence where we are today.  

 

(And FWIW, it's exactly what I would have done.  He said there was no chance at settlement, and he took her dignity, so on behalf of my client I'd take his, and then his job. The next step is to threaten his freedom, and the media releases surely have been noticed by the SD prosecutor's office.)

 

In brackets. ALLEGEDLY. 200+ posts on on the other thread, 25 pages on this thread and still it's a case of guilty before being proven innocent.

[Since1981]

I started to think about this more as a family small business. After wide knowledge spread. So, picture conference call with Terry Kim Sean Brandon. 

 

KP TP (3 daughters in 20’s) totally cut family ties with a person that has admitted to sex with intoxicated 17 yr old. 

[Doc]

6 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

I’ll disagree on that one. It appears she lied and said she was a college student at a nearby university. I guess that can be used as a defense in CA, but I’ll admit my legal knowledge is limited. However, that’s not the primary basis for my disagreement. It’s much more of a real world one. A 17 year old girl can easily look 19 or 20. College students are often looking to party and hook up. It’s not like they ask to see ID. Doesn’t matter anymore as he’s gone but I can see how young people can look very similar at a party and this girl probably didn’t stand out as younger. 

 

It can be used as a defense in California and should get him out of trouble as far as that part of the incident is concerned because I do not for one second believe she told him she was 17.  What I want to know is if he was one of the guys gang-raping her, by asking the other guys who were named or any witnesses who saw him somewhere else but the room while it was happening.  If he was there, he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[Tiberius]

7 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

Yeah, we already know there is.

Can you catch me up to speed, I was not following this that closely