Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, Buffalo03 said:

I'm saying that if they investigated this story and found out this stuff did happen or is even worse than being reported, then I can see why they took the action they took. I'm sure they investigated the Watson thing, looked at the fact that 2 grand jury's basically threw it all in the trash and saw there was absolutely no definitive proof other than these women all saying what happened. They felt it was worth taking 

 

Or they could have just concluded that they didn't need to look into it--the guy is a scrub and they didn't need more bad press and simply cut him, just like that.

  • Agree 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Or they could have just concluded that they didn't need to look into it--the guy is a scrub and they didn't need more bad press and simply cut him, just like that.

That is also possible. But the people who despise Watson on hearsay are gonna think the way you do lol. Those are the same people that call Watson a "rapist" when he was never once accused of raping anyone 

  • Dislike 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

That is also possible. But the people who despise Watson on hearsay are gonna think the way you do lol. Those are the same people that call Watson a "rapist" when he was never once accused of raping anyone 

 

I think you are redefining "hearsay".

 

take it to PPP, bro

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Nextmanup said:

Were you thinking he was particularly intelligent prior to this?

 

 

 

Touche

 

LOL, no, but not necessarily quite that dense either.  

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Buffalo03 said:

That is also possible. But the people who despise Watson on hearsay are gonna think the way you do lol. Those are the same people that call Watson a "rapist" when he was never once accused of raping anyone 


firsthand accounts from alleged victims are hearsay now? Didn’t know they changed the definition. Must’ve missed that.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
3 hours ago, BUFFALOBART said:

Watson is gettin' paid, even if he stinks up the joint for 5 years.

WTF, does a 'character issue' guy like that, care about achievement, otherwise?

Good point and solid reason to suspect he will not improve from his awful showing last year.  Good chance this will go down as one the worst trades and the worst contracts in NFL history.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
59 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:


firsthand accounts from alleged victims are hearsay now? Didn’t know they changed the definition. Must’ve missed that.

There is no proof anything happened. So yes, it's all hearsay and he said she said. 

 

Posted
6 hours ago, Buffalo03 said:

There is no proof anything happened. So yes, it's all hearsay and he said she said. 

 

That is not hearsay, though.  

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, CNYfan said:

That is not hearsay, though.  

information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

 

That is the definition of hearsay. The women made accusations but there was no evidence of 100% proof he did anything. How is it not hearsay? It's their words vs his. That's all it was

Edited by Buffalo03
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

 

That is the definition of hearsay. The women made accusations but there was no evidence of 100% proof he did anything. How is it not hearsay? It's their words vs his. That's all it was


Jesus. When the accusers themselves are giving their own account of what happened to them, that’s not “information received from other people,” 

 

FFS. Where’d you get your law degree? Do they offer refunds?

Edited by JoPoy88
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
19 hours ago, BillsShredder83 said:

Dude was basically on the Josh Allen trajectory for a minute there, had a individually good year on an awful team, then took a full year off.... in no way am i rooting for the guy, but they had to expect that rust after 18mos off. From strictly a talent stand point, you cant evaluate him on a half season.... even if you could e v a l him, that deal is inexcapable for a looooooooong time.  They knew the risk they were taking on, they have no choice but to ride it out

image.thumb.png.ef64d2e91ea26abecbc9843a64bf48ae.png

 

EDIT: LOLZZZZ $220m dead cap hit...... cap is $225m..... obv not happening, but even if they were dead set on it, LITERALLY CAN NOT. they'd have to cut the rest of the team and hire from grocery store, except that doesnt account for the other 52 players dead cap hit. Haslem is pretty shady, maybe could hire a hitman?

 

All true statements, they are going to run into an issue fielding a team even with him on the roster at his cap hits. They are basically saying he will single handedly win a SB lol.

Posted
23 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:


Jesus. When the accusers themselves are giving their own account of what happened to them, that’s not “information received from other people,” 

 

FFS. Where’d you get your law degree? Do they offer refunds?

I'm not saying that they are giving information from other people, I'm saying that "they" are the other people. There's Watson and the women are the "other people"

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted

Nobody in that division can talk -

 

Bengals - Joe Mixon extension. Pacman works in their media dept.

 

Browns - Watson sexually assaults 26 women and gets the most guaranteed $ in NFL history.

 

Steelers - Big Ben forced his Big Ben on at least 2 women we know of.

 

Ravens - Ray Lewis accomplice to murder and they built a statue of him in front of the stadium minus the bloody suit coat.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

I'm not saying that they are giving information from other people, I'm saying that "they" are the other people. There's Watson and the women are the "other people"


there’s no “other people,” there’s the accusers and the accused. They are all parties. You’re not getting it. Don’t use legal terms you don’t know the meaning of. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:


there’s no “other people,” there’s the accusers and the accused. They are all parties. You’re not getting it. Don’t use legal terms you don’t know the meaning of. 

Whether or not it's hearsay or not. Even if it's not, there is still no proof he did anything other than meet with them for massages. So, it really doesn't matter

Posted
3 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

Whether or not it's hearsay or not. Even if it's not, there is still no proof he did anything other than meet with them for massages. So, it really doesn't matter


yeah I guess if there’s no stained dress, it didn’t happen. Doesn’t matter. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:


yeah I guess if there’s no stained dress, it didn’t happen. Doesn’t matter. 

Lol dude, ejaculating on a dress only means he got too excited. It doesn't say he did anything

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...