2023 NFL Regular Season Through Super Bowl LVIII

[BBTV]

1 hour ago, VDizzle12 said:

The only other option is to trade for one

 

That's not the only other option.

 

1 hour ago, VDizzle12 said:

They had no choice

 

They did have a choice.  They chose to ask their fan base, which includes thousand of women, to cheer for a man that was accused of sexual misconduct by more than two dozen women.  Very few athletes are spotless, but putting people in a position where their kids are going to ask for #4 jerseys or even look up to him is irresponsible.

 

You act like they did the only thing they could do to get a franchise qb in house, but the irony in your statement is that what they did only serves to highlight the incompetence that's put them in the position to have to do it in the first place.  It's a circle of crap, and it's disgusting that there's people that support bringing him in under the circumstances at the time.

 

The Browns are poorly run from the top down.  It's that simply.  Nearly every other team (other than the Lions) accidentally backs into a year where they at least reach a championship game, or find a franchise QB in the 2nd round or later, or is smart and builds their lines doesn't waste money on running backs, but the Browns can do none of this.   

 

I feel for fans - I really do.  But they had choices.  And the ones they made make it impossible to wish anything other than 3-14 seasons on them until that contract is up.

 

 

[Fowler]

9 minutes ago, BBTV said:

 

That's not the only other option.

 

 

They did have a choice.  They chose to ask their fan base, which includes thousand of women, to cheer for a man that was accused of sexual misconduct by more than two dozen women.  Very few athletes are spotless, but putting people in a position where their kids are going to ask for #4 jerseys or even look up to him is irresponsible.

 

You act like they did the only thing they could do to get a franchise qb in house, but the irony in your statement is that what they did only serves to highlight the incompetence that's put them in the position to have to do it in the first place.  It's a circle of crap, and it's disgusting that there's people that support bringing him in under the circumstances at the time.

 

The Browns are poorly run from the top down.  It's that simply.  Nearly every other team (other than the Lions) accidentally backs into a year where they at least reach a championship game, or find a franchise QB in the 2nd round or later, or is smart and builds their lines doesn't waste money on running backs, but the Browns can do none of this.   

 

I feel for fans - I really do.  But they had choices.  And the ones they made make it impossible to wish anything other than 3-14 seasons on them until that contract is up.

 

 

 

Are you Philadelphia fat boy?

[BBTV]

25 minutes ago, Fowler said:

 

Are you Philadelphia fat boy?

 

Here's my LinkedIn profile pic.  You tell me:

[Sport]

13 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

That's not the only other option.

 

 

They did have a choice.  They chose to ask their fan base, which includes thousand of women, to cheer for a man that was accused of sexual misconduct by more than two dozen women.  Very few athletes are spotless, but putting people in a position where their kids are going to ask for #4 jerseys or even look up to him is irresponsible.

 

You act like they did the only thing they could do to get a franchise qb in house, but the irony in your statement is that what they did only serves to highlight the incompetence that's put them in the position to have to do it in the first place.  It's a circle of crap, and it's disgusting that there's people that support bringing him in under the circumstances at the time.

 

The Browns are poorly run from the top down.  It's that simply.  Nearly every other team (other than the Lions) accidentally backs into a year where they at least reach a championship game, or find a franchise QB in the 2nd round or later, or is smart and builds their lines doesn't waste money on running backs, but the Browns can do none of this.   

 

I feel for fans - I really do.  But they had choices.  And the ones they made make it impossible to wish anything other than 3-14 seasons on them until that contract is up.

 

 

 

Also, the fans have choices too. You can be a Browns fan without being one of these weird Watson hard-ons. 

 

I don't think normal people Browns fans deserve this because it wasn't their fault. That is, you don't deserve this if you're a normal person who was correctly outraged at your team signing this creep to the most money ever and who has only ever begrudgingly cheered him on because you're stuck. If you're one of those then you didn't deserve Watson foisted upon you in the first place and I truly feel bad for the position the team has put you in. If, however, you're one of these weird Watson Truthers who bought his #4 jersey, who think all the women are gold-diggers and the Browns did nothing wrong, who's said things like "never convicted!" like you're a f***ing Steelers fan - If you're one of those fans you absolutely deserve this. Karma isn't real, but occasionally justice is served accidentally and I do feel bad for the good Browns fans who are collateral damage to that. 

 

You can't control who your team signs, but you can control how you fan. Don't be weird. Don't wear his jersey. Don't do the mental gymnastics required to reach the take that giving 230 million dollars and a draft haul to a guy credibly accused of predatory sexual behavior to the tune of 40 million dollars in settlements wasn't an unbelievably bad idea. It's the worst trade in NFL history because of football reasons, draft reasons, PR reasons, money reasons, cap reasons, and that's all before he ever took a snap with the team. His injuries, crappy answers to well-earned questions, and his poor play have only made the trade worse. I don't know how you can argue it isn't the worst trade ever. 

 

 

 

Now, as a Bengals fan, after last night I'm gonna spend this weekend drinking and trying to convince myself the season isn't over. What a disaster. 

 

 

 

[crashcarson15]

The truly incredible thing is how the Browns would be a very genuine Super Bowl contender if they had just … kept their first-round draft picks and tens of millions of dollars in cap space. The Mayfield situation had probably gotten to an untenable point — which is in part a failure of the organization — but this Browns team as otherwise assembled, plus two first-round draft picks, plus a free agent signing or two and even like, Jacoby Brissett or Josh Dobbs at quarterback would be a much better team than what they're rolling out now.

 

(It all ignores what @infrared41 pointed out as well, which is that the Browns made a "win now" trade in April 2022 that effectively tanked the 2022 season with. Wild management.)

[throwuascenario]

On 11/16/2023 at 8:26 AM, Cujo said:

Q: Would you allow your girlfriend or sister in a locked room with Watson?

 

I wouldn't leave my girlfriend or sister in a locked room at all. By themselves or with anyone. What would anyone have to gain from that?

[throwuascenario]

23 hours ago, infrared41 said:

 

Even if Watson were a model citizen, it's still an idiotic trade. Any QB short of Mahomes (and I'm not sure I make that deal even for him) isn't worth anywhere near what the Browns gave up for Watson. People act like the Browns were one player away from a Super Bowl when the Watson deal was made. They weren't. Not even close. No one saw this defense being what it is now when the Watson deal was made. Long story short, the smart move would have been to give Mayfield one more season then take a look at available QBs. Instead, the Browns panicked, made a deal with the devil, and trashed the future of the franchise for a good long while. If the...ahem...brain trust of the Cleveland Browns weren't such morons, this whole mess could have (and should have) been Atlanta's problem. But here we are...as usual.

 

I 100% agree with this. They went about this in the dumbest way. They had a QB they had shown they could win with. No one has ever won in the NFL with a QB on a contract like this. Giving up the picks as well just made sure they couldn't even bring in good players on rookie deals either.

 

I see it the opposite way. They weren't one player away. They were zero players away. They were already a contender and likely would've been a serious threat in 2021 if Mayfield hadn't gotten injured. They completely didn't need this.

 

From an off-the-field standpoint, I don't agree with the witch-hunting and don't have any problem giving someone with no criminal convictions a spot on their team.

 

On the field, the trade was a disaster from the start. They gave a record setting deal to a guy who had most recently taken his team to a 4-12 record before trying to whine his way into forcing a trade. For the trouble, they gave away a ton of draft picks and set a 3-year window on a team that was already contending and was going to be contending for years.

 

I still think the Wilson trade was much worse though. Similar scenario but if Watson was 10(?) years older and was playing like the worst QB in the NFL.

 

Lots of draft trades have turned out just as bad pick-wise but the contracts are what set those two apart.

 

15 hours ago, infrared41 said:

Oh, if it was only going to be four games then I guess trading for a guy with all that baggage was the right thing to do. As I said earlier in this thread, there is a difference between being found innocent and being found not guilty. The same can be said for being "cleared legally." I don't think people have a true understanding of how much evidence is needed to take a legal case to court. If Watson were truly innocent, no lawyer with a brain would have taken the civil cases. As a rule, lawyers don't waste their time on a case that has absolutely no merit. So spare me the "women chasing money" argument.

 

 

Actually, in a society where innocence is presumed, "innocent" and "not guilty" are the same thing. You are innocent until you are guilty. If you are not guilty, you are innocent.

 

And you don't think that having a civil lawsuit of this nature being dragged out and affecting his ability to play might tip the scaled toward him settling even if he was innocent? Don't you think a lawyer would know that going in?

[infrared41]

1 hour ago, throwuascenario said:

Actually, in a society where innocence is presumed, "innocent" and "not guilty" are the same thing. You are innocent until you are guilty. If you are not guilty, you are innocent.

 

Actually, they're not the same thing.

 

Quote

A not-guilty verdict does not mean that the defendant is innocent, but rather that the prosecution has not met its burden of proving guilt. Innocent, on the other hand, refers to the actual state of the defendant. It means that the defendant did not commit the crime they are being accused of.

 

Presumed innocent is not the same thing as actually being innocent.

 

Quote

And you don't think that having a civil lawsuit of this nature being dragged out and affecting his ability to play might tip the scaled toward him settling even if he was innocent? Don't you think a lawyer would know that going in?

 

If you were truly innocent, would you settle multiple lawsuits that are going to ruin your reputation and leave everyone thinking you're some sort of pervert just so you could go back to work?

[Cujo]

Season over for Cincy.

 

[Dynasty]

Burrow being hurt to start the season, along with starting 1-3 (0-2 in their division), really provided the sign that this was not the Bengals season to contend. How brutal.

 

It might be best to just tank from here, getting a higher pick in the draft and a potentially easier schedule for next year.

[Sport]

FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCKKKKKK

[LMU]

On 11/15/2023 at 2:28 PM, infrared41 said:

 

Those two were not found innocent, they were found not guilty. It's an important distinction.

And let's also not forget that OJ was found liable in civil court for wrongful death.  We didn't almost have the chance of Fred Goldman taking a blowtorch to the Heisman on pay-per-view as some metaphoric modern art piece of justice and vindication.

[BBTV]

This is wild. 
 

Bernard Williams was the Eagles 1st rd pick in 1994. 
 

He was suspended for weed, and never bothered to apply for reinstatement. Just quit. 
 

Because he wasn’t released, and never applied for reinstatement, but was still eligible to, he has technically still been on the Eagles since 1994!

 

The league and Eagles just realized this the other day, so they had to do an official roster move to release a guy that hasn’t played in 30 years! Since he was technically part of the org in 2017, people are saying he should get a Super Bowl ring. 
 

 

 

[Kevin W.]

13 hours ago, throwuascenario said:

Actually, in a society where innocence is presumed, "innocent" and "not guilty" are the same thing. You are innocent until you are guilty. If you are not guilty, you are innocent.

If you are not guilty, that means that the prosecution wasn't able to prove its case against you to a jury. That doesn't mean that you're innocent.

[dont care]

15 hours ago, throwuascenario said:

 

I 100% agree with this. They went about this in the dumbest way. They had a QB they had shown they could win with. No one has ever won in the NFL with a QB on a contract like this. Giving up the picks as well just made sure they couldn't even bring in good players on rookie deals either.

 

I see it the opposite way. They weren't one player away. They were zero players away. They were already a contender and likely would've been a serious threat in 2021 if Mayfield hadn't gotten injured. They completely didn't need this.

 

From an off-the-field standpoint, I don't agree with the witch-hunting and don't have any problem giving someone with no criminal convictions a spot on their team.

 

On the field, the trade was a disaster from the start. They gave a record setting deal to a guy who had most recently taken his team to a 4-12 record before trying to whine his way into forcing a trade. For the trouble, they gave away a ton of draft picks and set a 3-year window on a team that was already contending and was going to be contending for years.

 

I still think the Wilson trade was much worse though. Similar scenario but if Watson was 10(?) years older and was playing like the worst QB in the NFL.

 

Lots of draft trades have turned out just as bad pick-wise but the contracts are what set those two apart.

 

 

Actually, in a society where innocence is presumed, "innocent" and "not guilty" are the same thing. You are innocent until you are guilty. If you are not guilty, you are innocent.

 

And you don't think that having a civil lawsuit of this nature being dragged out and affecting his ability to play might tip the scaled toward him settling even if he was innocent? Don't you think a lawyer would know that going in?

Being found not guilty isn’t the same as innocence, and never has been. Being found not guilty means that the prosecution couldn’t make a case to find the defendant guilty “beyond reasonable doubt” which is a much higher threshold to prove rather than civil cases that just need a “likely” level of proof to win a case

[infrared41]

On 11/17/2023 at 11:25 AM, Sport said:

You can be a Browns fan without being one of these weird Watson hard-ons. 

 

Other than feeling like I need to take a shower after every game Watson plays, it's not that difficult. I'd never wish an injury on a player, but I'm not going to lie, when I heard Watson was out for the season it didn't break my heart. If I'm being honest, I was relieved.

 

[Red Comet]

 

CBS 1:00 PM EST/12:00 PM CST 

 

Red: Steelers at Browns

Blue: Raiders at Dolphins

Green: Titans at Jaguars

Yellow: Cardinals at Texans

 

 

CBS 4:00 PM EST/3:00 PM CST

 

Red: Jets at Bills

Blue: Seahawks at Rams

 

 

FOX 1:00 PM EST/12:00 PM CST

 

Red: Cowboys at Panthers

Green: Chargers at Packers

Yellow: Bears at Lions

Orange: Giants at Commanders

 

FOX 4:00 PM EST/3:00 PM CST

 

Blue: Buccaneers at 49ers

[The_Admiral]

I have never been one to accuse the refs of giving calls to the Steelers, but I just watched them take a safety away from the Browns based on vibes.

[ManillaToad]

The ball was over the plane but most of his  body was in the field of play so not the easiest call to make in real time. It's on Cleveland for not challenging it

[Kramerica Industries]

Just now, ManillaToad said:

The ball was over the plane but most of his  body was in the field of play. Call on the field could have gone either way. It's on Cleveland for not challenging it

 

I agree with the second sentence...I'm pretty sure the rules of a safety are the opposite of a touchdown, right? If you're the ball carrier and any part of the ball is still inside the plane of the endzone, it's a safety; the entire ball needs to be outside the endzone.

 

Browns ended up scoring a touchdown on the ensuing drive set up by the good field position...I dunno, maybe it was a strategic gamble. I don't see the DTR-Browns doing the safety/touchdown double dip.