2022 NFL regular season through Super Bowl LVII

[GDAWG]

 

[GDAWG]

 

[crashcarson15]

Yeah, I mean on the Watson suspension, I think there are a million things to criticize the NFL on, but the best protection for the league is Watson not playing this year, if ever again — the NFL would get some good PR for looking tough on sexual assault, and Watson and Cleveland are both pretty disposable from a public interest standpoint. This is about as bad of a spot as the league could actually be in — there's plenty of other AFC teams that could make the playoff instead of the Browns and not make the story about things other than football.

[oldschoolvikings]

edit - wrong spot

[dont care]

What does a suspension mean for an owner? Does that mean he can’t go to the stadium or team facilities he owns? Does it mean he doesn’t get his share of the pot for revenue sharing during that time.

[DoctorWhom]

3 hours ago, GDAWG said:

 

Why is it that Brady seems to be involved in nearly every situation where a team loses their 1st round draft pick? 

[Dynasty]

Ross is dumb. I feel like the Dolphins have a pretty good front office, but the owner just wants to meddle into things and do it his way... despite there being others that know far more about how a football team should be ran. It could be worse though... like being the owner, president, and general manager worse. *wink*

[Cosmic]

The owner wanted them to lose... they never drafted higher than 5th overall.

They tampered with at least two different people... neither of which came to Miami.

 

1st and 3rd round picks well spent!

[Sport]

21 hours ago, crashcarson15 said:

Yeah, I mean on the Watson suspension, I think there are a million things to criticize the NFL on, but the best protection for the league is Watson not playing this year, if ever again — the NFL would get some good PR for looking tough on sexual assault, and Watson and Cleveland are both pretty disposable from a public interest standpoint. This is about as bad of a spot as the league could actually be in — there's plenty of other AFC teams that could make the playoff instead of the Browns and not make the story about things other than football.

 

The language in the judge's statement reads like she thinks this is serious, but can't give longer than 6 games because of precedent, which is dumb. Almost as dumb as the oxy-moronic "non-violent sexual assault". Set the precedent right now! Make an example. A year suspension is what I was hoping for. Not because I'm a Cincinnati Bengals fan, but because it sends the message that illicit behavior with women isn't tolerated, it shows female fans that they're trying to care, and it punishes the Browns for giving the most money to the worst character in the league. 

 

6 games, even if Goodell extends it, which I think he will because the backlash has been loud, is a joke. Might as well be a  high ankle sprain. Any team in the league can stomach losing their starter for six games, especially the team who happens to have the easiest first six games in the entire league. Not to root for injury on a guy, but if he gets hurt in training camp and has to sit out the whole season it'll be a ball don't lie situation. 

[MJWalker45]

18 hours ago, dont care said:

What does a suspension mean for an owner? Does that mean he can’t go to the stadium or team facilities he owns? Does it mean he doesn’t get his share of the pot for revenue sharing during that time.

It means he's not supposed to have any contact with the team, but Dan Snyder was able to call in to team meetings and talk with Ron Rivera without pushback from the league. 

22 hours ago, crashcarson15 said:

Yeah, I mean on the Watson suspension, I think there are a million things to criticize the NFL on, but the best protection for the league is Watson not playing this year, if ever again — the NFL would get some good PR for looking tough on sexual assault, and Watson and Cleveland are both pretty disposable from a public interest standpoint. This is about as bad of a spot as the league could actually be in — there's plenty of other AFC teams that could make the playoff instead of the Browns and not make the story about things other than football.

 

44 minutes ago, Sport said:

6 games, even if Goodell extends it, which I think he will because the backlash has been loud, is a joke. Might as well be a  high ankle sprain. Any team in the league can stomach losing their starter for six games, especially the team who happens to have the easiest first six games in the entire league. Not to root for injury on a guy, but if he gets hurt in training camp and has to sit out the whole season it'll be a ball don't lie situation. 

Someone just brought up that if the NFL slaps him with a one year suspension it's probably going to court. And I hope that's the case. Because I feel like a judge has to tell the NFL, "Get this stuff sorted and actually show you care about what these players and owners are doing". because they've shown that they won't give out heavy punishment unless the crowds tell them they're not doing the right things. 

 

[Cosmic]

What a nightmare to have in the locker room. He's not an incel... he obviously got off on the power imbalance with the masseuses. Now, he's being mandated to use team personnel who will know their team's MVP-level QB will be out of the game if they report anything inappropriate. You need like three unrelated observers following him at all times.

[BBTV]

9 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

Someone just brought up that if the NFL slaps him with a one year suspension it's probably going to court. And I hope that's the case. Because I feel like a judge has to tell the NFL, "Get this stuff sorted and actually show you care about what these players and owners are doing". because they've shown that they won't give out heavy punishment unless the crowds tell them they're not doing the right things. 

 

 

I'm not sure I understand this.  If the league gives out a heavy punishment, you want them to get sued so a judge can tell them to "get this stuff sorted out"?  Isn't that what they would be doing by doling out a longer suspension?  It's like, if they give a weak suspension people are pissed, but then when they push for a longer one, people are still pissed.

[MJWalker45]

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

 

I'm not sure I understand this.  If the league gives out a heavy punishment, you want them to get sued so a judge can tell them to "get this stuff sorted out"?  Isn't that what they would be doing by doling out a longer suspension?  It's like, if they give a weak suspension people are pissed, but then when they push for a longer one, people are still pissed.

I want them to lay out what the punishments are for everything that they hand out fines and suspensions for. If an unproven charge gets you 6 games, proven actions should get more than that. An expectation that a minimum of 12 games for gambling, 4 games for DUIs and a year out for anything that results in the injury of another person should be spelled out. If fans want to get mad that Watson is sat out for a year due to multiple civil charges that are proven, I'd rather that be the case instead of him getting a slap on the wrist of 6 games, because the NFL has not set these potential suspensions out ahead of time. The judge basically said, "The NFL makes it up as they go and that's not how this stuff should work". I also want them to hold owners to the same level of punishment as the players. Snyder was "suspended" for a year, but as long as no one saw him at the office or the stadium, he could be, and was, still involved by communicating daily with the head coach, GM and other members of the organization. He was not supposed to be doing those things. Miami got slapped harder for trying to get Tom Brady and Sean Payton to come to the Dolphins than Snyder got for permitting, and possibly committing misogyny in his organization. 

[dont care]

5 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

I want them to lay out what the punishments are for everything that they hand out fines and suspensions for. If an unproven charge gets you 6 games, proven actions should get more than that. An expectation that a minimum of 12 games for gambling, 4 games for DUIs and a year out for anything that results in the injury of another person should be spelled out. If fans want to get mad that Watson is sat out for a year due to multiple civil charges that are proven, I'd rather that be the case instead of him getting a slap on the wrist of 6 games, because the NFL has not set these potential suspensions out ahead of time. The judge basically said, "The NFL makes it up as they go and that's not how this stuff should work". I also want them to hold owners to the same level of punishment as the players. Snyder was "suspended" for a year, but as long as no one saw him at the office or the stadium, he could be, and was, still involved by communicating daily with the head coach, GM and other members of the organization. He was not supposed to be doing those things. Miami got slapped harder for trying to get Tom Brady and Sean Payton to come to the Dolphins than Snyder got for permitting, and possibly committing misogyny in his organization. 

But you can’t do that, even in a real court of law sure there are minimum and maximums sentences but that changes based on circumstances. If a judge decides that minimum is too hard of a punishment he can always drop the charge down to something else, or vice versa based on the totality of the circumstances. Then you have different sentencing requirements for different states and districts. 

[MJWalker45]

3 hours ago, dont care said:

But you can’t do that, even in a real court of law sure there are minimum and maximums sentences but that changes based on circumstances. If a judge decides that minimum is too hard of a punishment he can always drop the charge down to something else, or vice versa based on the totality of the circumstances. Then you have different sentencing requirements for different states and districts. 

That's what I mean, there should be some type of minimum. Granted, it won't necessarily change how players and owners act but it'll alleviate some of the BS that happens every time someone gets in trouble. 

[dont care]

18 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

That's what I mean, there should be some type of minimum. Granted, it won't necessarily change how players and owners act but it'll alleviate some of the BS that happens every time someone gets in trouble. 

But as I said there are plenty of instances where even with the minimum based on circumstances judges can go below the minimum by “knocking down” the charge. I see it happen nearly every day in my work

[DCarp1231]

Calvin Ridley getting suspended for a full year for betting and Deshaun Watson only getting 6 games for his situation still just does not make any sense.

[Glover]

28 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said:

Calvin Ridley getting suspended for a full year for betting and Deshaun Watson only getting 6 games for his situation still just does not make any sense.

Athletes gambling on the sport they play is a whole different can of worms. It brings into question the legitimacy of the on-field product, and sports leagues simply cannot allow that to happen. 

 

Watson is a complete POS and deserves at least a year suspension in my opinion, but that doesn't mean Calvin Ridley should get a lesser punishment. 

[DG_ThenNowForever]

Oh, so Aaron Rodgers is allowed to take psychotropic drugs but Josh Gordon can't smoke a little weed?

 

How else do you explain this?

 

 

 

[DCarp1231]

4 hours ago, Glover said:

Athletes gambling on the sport they play is a whole different can of worms. It brings into question the legitimacy of the on-field product, and sports leagues simply cannot allow that to happen. 

 

Watson is a complete POS and deserves at least a year suspension in my opinion, but that doesn't mean Calvin Ridley should get a lesser punishment. 

I’m not saying Ridley should get a lesser punishment. It just baffles me that Watson only gets a slap on the wrist.