Matt Araiza

[JoPoy88]

3 minutes ago, dorquemada said:

 

My point is that it was a reaction to the mob.  The mob was mysteriously muted when the accusations against Von Miller came out.  The double standard is "can we score cheap points by doing something that costs us nothing?" versus "damn we might actually need that guy later, let's sweep this under the rug"

 

 

Uh, plenty of media people and regular folks were saying the Bills should try to find a way out of Von’s contract after his arrest last year. The fact that you didn’t hear about that (or chose to ignore it) doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. 

[dorquemada]

Just now, K-9 said:

 

As for the creation of that expectation, I can’t agree with that in the least. For several reasons. So I will just agree to disagree on that point.

 

You don't agree that the Bills would do the same thing again in the same situation?  So if someone comes out and says that Joe Andressen or however he spells it was involved in a gang rape in college, the Bills will take a measured approach this time, adn wait for actual evidence beyond an accusation? Or they'll cut him the next day?  If it's the former, it's tacit acknowledgement that they caved to the mob with zero evidence of wrongdoing on MA's part.  If it's the latter, it's a solid sign that they've learned nothing and every player is a baseless accusation away from being cut.

[DrDawkinstein]

4 minutes ago, dorquemada said:

 

My point is that it was a reaction to the mob. 

 

 

 

It really wasnt. I understand you are neck deep in your narrative and wont change your mind because it gives you something to rail against. But it had nothing, NOTHING, to do with "the mob" or public opinion.

 

It was a legal and business decision on what was best for the team, poised to make a SB run, with a kid barely signed to a rookie contract who couldnt be stashed on any exempt list. Any and every other team would have done the same thing, even if social media had never been invented.

[dorquemada]

Just now, JoPoy88 said:

Uh, plenty of media people and regular folks were saying the Bills should try to find a way out of Von’s contract after his arrest last year. The fact that you didn’t hear about that (or chose to ignore it) doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. 

 

A tiny, tiny fraction of what was said in the wake of the MA false accusation.  Or are you claiming there was the same level of outrage but the Bills didnt react because of what, exactly?  Too much money tied up in the player?  That's not really a good look either.

1 minute ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

It really wasnt. I understand you are neck deep in your narrative and wont change your mind because it gives you something to rail against. But it had nothing, NOTHING, to do with "the mob" or public opinion.

 

It was a legal and business decision on what was best for the team, poised to make a SB run, with a kid barely signed to a rookie contract who couldnt be stashed on any exempt list. Any and every other team would have done the same thing, even if social media had never been invented.

 

You know it was a legal decision?  You have some insider info you want to share?

[DrDawkinstein]

2 minutes ago, dorquemada said:

 

You know it was a legal decision?  You have some insider info you want to share?

 

None needed when based in reality.

[Returntoglory]

38 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

First, I was one of the biggest Araiza defenders during that time citing a complete lack of evidence of any kind linking him and a ton of evidence suggesting maybe he was not involved.  I pointed out her lawyer posted screen shots of her diary the day after that literally said she didn't even know how she got in the room, did not know who was in the room, and questioned her own behavior in playing a role.  I pointed out that her own friends gave official statements saying he was not at the house when the incident happened.  I can keep going...but the point is, I thought it was ludicrous to convict this kid off nothing other than a civil law suit anyone can file when there were not even any charges filed.  And his lawyer made it so obvious their case was weak and desperate in the media.  Did not mean he was innocent, but it did mean there was no evidence at suggesting he was guilty either that had come out.  I urged everyone to WAIT until we have real information, not "claims" by someones civil attorney whose only job is to pursue money conveniently after one of the kids from the party made it to the NFL.  Especially since she wrote in her own words 24 hours later that she didn't know who was involved and then conveniently only filed a civil suit against the guy in the NFL.  

 

Second, none of that matters.  The fact I had to argue with so many people here those things who were ready to hang the kid is the point.  The media wanted blood, the fans wanted blood...I had a poster here threaten me physically because he said I was supporting a rapist.  He later apologized and it was all good, but that is how charged up people were.  

 

Third, soooo many people were not satisfied with cutting him, they attacked Beane and McD for taking "too long" and "only doing it because the story was leaked".  McD and Beane handled the situation perfectly, they didn't dodge questions, they spoke candidly to the media and for long periods of time, they made themselves available and gave the kid a chance before making a decision to cut him.  And when they cut him, there was a LOT not yet known and the kid had to go defend his life and there wasn't room for football.  

 

To now flip the script and fault them for cutting him is crazy.  

 

PS:  HE IS A PUNTER.  Lets not pretend he is the missing SB piece.  

PS: He's a human being that deserved a fair shake.

[DrDawkinstein]

1 minute ago, Returntoglory said:

PS: He's a human being that deserved a fair shake.

 

And he's getting that right now.

[JoPoy88]

5 minutes ago, dorquemada said:

 

A tiny, tiny fraction of what was said in the wake of the MA false accusation.  Or are you claiming there was the same level of outrage but the Bills didnt react because of what, exactly?  Too much money tied up in the player?  That's not really a good look either.

It’s not a “look” good or bad. It’s a team living in the real world with real financial considerations that need to be balanced with image and PR concerns. As far as calculating the “fractions of outrage” I’ll leave that to you and this head canon you’ve concocted to fill us in on the numbers. 
 

You were originally implying some sort of bad precedent being set with MA’s release and now were swiftly on to something else entirely after people helpfully replied how you were dead wrong. How many more times are you planning on moving the goalposts here it’s getting difficult to keep up.

Edited August 19 by JoPoy88

[chongli]

But we have MVS, so all is made up for.

 

Take that Kansas City!

[RiotAct]

1 minute ago, chongli said:

But we have MVS, so all is made up for.

 

Take that Kansas City!

Schlemiel, Schlemozzle, Hassenpfeffer Incorporated!

[GunnerBill]

12 minutes ago, dorquemada said:

 

You don't agree that the Bills would do the same thing again in the same situation?  So if someone comes out and says that Joe Andressen or however he spells it was involved in a gang rape in college, the Bills will take a measured approach this time, adn wait for actual evidence beyond an accusation? Or they'll cut him the next day?  If it's the former, it's tacit acknowledgement that they caved to the mob with zero evidence of wrongdoing on MA's part.  If it's the latter, it's a solid sign that they've learned nothing and every player is a baseless accusation away from being cut.

 

They would do the same again. Because the terrible choice they have is the same. Spend a year answering questions at every presser about your backup linebacker or cut him. Because for a rookie who hasn't played they are the two options. 

 

I think the league needs to think about how blunt the rules are in these cases. 

[K-9]

1 minute ago, dorquemada said:

 

You don't agree that the Bills would do the same thing again in the same situation?  So if someone comes out and says that Joe Andressen or however he spells it was involved in a gang rape in college, the Bills will take a measured approach this time, adn wait for actual evidence beyond an accusation? Or they'll cut him the next day?  If it's the former, it's tacit acknowledgement that they caved to the mob with zero evidence of wrongdoing on MA's part.  If it's the latter, it's a solid sign that they've learned nothing and every player is a baseless accusation away from being cut.

In the exact same situation? Of course the Bills and their attorneys would make the same decision. And so would ecery other team.
 

You’re forgetting their was actual evidence that Araiza may have been involved in something nefarious; not the least of which are the fact that the SDPD recorded him admitting to having sex with the girl at that party and that the SDPD had an open criminal investigation of Araiza and the others at the time. And the filing of the civil suit naming Araiza as one of the accused in August, 2022 only made the situation worse.  And that’s all the Bills and every other team had to go on at the time. 
 

But hindsight trumps foresight every time, I guess. 

[Returntoglory]

11 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

And he's getting that right now.

Just from the wrong team. Good try though.

[The Firebaugh Kid]

If Worthy is incredible and Coleman sucks, heads will roll. 

[The Jokeman]

1 minute ago, The Firebaugh Kid said:

If Worthy is incredible and Coleman sucks, heads will roll. 

You could say the same for Legette. 

[DrDawkinstein]

Just now, K-9 said:

In the exact same situation? Of course the Bills and their attorneys would make the same decision. And so would ecery other team.
 

You’re forgetting their was actual evidence that Araiza may have been involved in something nefarious; not the least of which are the fact that the SDPD recorded him admitting to having sex with the girl at that party and that the SDPD had an open criminal investigation of Araiza and the others at the time. And the filing of the civil suit naming Araiza as one of the accused in August, 2022 only made the situation worse.  And that’s all the Bills and every other team had to go on at the time. 
 

But hindsight trumps foresight every time, I guess. 

 

If anything, folks like @dorquemada should be mad at San Diego St University and the local SD Police. This "story" had been out there for MONTHS before the ***** hit the fan with the Bills. SDSU was on the verge of  being asked to join the PAC-12 and didnt want any bad publicity about their football team. Had SDSU/SDPD not tried so hard to squelch the investigation/story, then more likely, the police would have completed their investigation and everything would have been wrapped by draft time, let alone training camp.

 

Instead, they tried to ignore it to make it go away in the pursuit of more TV money, which only dragged it out longer for both the girl and Araiza. Could have cleared his name much sooner, but they were afraid to investigate just in case it was true. Disgusting on all levels there.

[dorquemada]

1 minute ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

If anything, folks like @dorquemada should be mad at San Diego St University and the local SD Police. This "story" had been out there for MONTHS before the ***** hit the fan with the Bills. SDSU was on the verge of  being asked to join the PAC-12 and didnt want any bad publicity about their football team. Had SDSU/SDPD not tried so hard to squelch the investigation/story, then more likely, the police would have completed their investigation and everything would have been wrapped by draft time, let alone training camp.

 

Instead, they tried to ignore it to make it go away in the pursuit of more TV money, which only dragged it out longer for both the girl and Araiza. Could have cleared his name much sooner, but they were afraid to investigate just in case it was true. Disgusting on all levels there.

 

That's fair.  If anything, MA has a lot more evidence for a lawsuit against SDSU and the SDPD, discovery would be fascinating.  A college football player having sex with a woman isn't illegal, dare i say there wouldn't be very many players in the NFL if it was.  The fact that this woman absolutely tried to get rich by lying should cost her something but I guess that just not how things work.

[Alphadawg7]

19 minutes ago, Returntoglory said:

PS: He's a human being that deserved a fair shake.

 

And he got one...they don't happen over night when you have a lunatic falsely accusing you of a sex crime an hour after you actually had a confirmed sexual encounter with her.  

[K-9]

Just now, DrDawkinstein said:

 

If anything, folks like @dorquemada should be mad at San Diego St University and the local SD Police. This "story" had been out there for MONTHS before the ***** hit the fan with the Bills. SDSU was on the verge of  being asked to join the PAC-12 and didnt want any bad publicity about their football team. Had SDSU/SDPD not tried so hard to squelch the investigation/story, then more likely, the police would have completed their investigation and everything would have been wrapped by draft time, let alone training camp.

 

Instead, they tried to ignore it to make it go away in the pursuit of more TV money, which only dragged it out longer for both the girl and Araiza. Could have cleared his name much sooner, but they were afraid to investigate just in case it was true. Disgusting on all levels there.

You raise a great point about the SDPD and the SDSU police. I believe they withheld vital information from the Bills and the league when the Bills and league were doing their usual due diligence prior to the draft and your explanation about the PAC-12 and the potential revenue infusion makes a ton of sense now.

[JoPoy88]

6 minutes ago, dorquemada said:

 

That's fair.  If anything, MA has a lot more evidence for a lawsuit against SDSU and the SDPD, discovery would be fascinating.  A college football player having sex with a woman isn't illegal, dare i say there wouldn't be very many players in the NFL if it was.  The fact that this woman absolutely tried to get rich by lying should cost her something but I guess that just not how things work.

Not to nitpick - an adult having sex with a 17 year old woman is illegal in CA (although he had defenses available to him.)