Alphadawg7

You guys are not alone, I have firmly been of the same mindset this entire thing. You have to keep a level head at times like this. I see a lot of outrage here often posting about things that are not actually factual or accurate. That is what always happens with outrage though, the story takes on a life of its own and gets skewed. Not everyone is doing that, but its been prevalent in this thread. Keeping a level ahead, respecting the victim, and waiting to hear more to understand how Matt may or may not be connected to the attack is where I prefer to be. I have no doubt this woman's accusation of being sexually assault is credible, all of it seems very credible and I do not personally doubt it happened. But I have reservations that Matt participated because there is reportedly things such as eyewitness sworn statements that contradict the plaintiffs claim he was involved. Totally agreed, you can respect her and the tragic event and still be undecided if he is accurately being named or not as a participant. And the actions of her lawyer are really puzzling too. I mean he posted that full page rant about justifying trying this case in the court of public opinion, which he always does on his cases if you look at his twitter. And why does he do that, because he is civil attorney whose only job is to obtain the most money for his client. So he is using public pressure to try and force a settlement and at the highest amount he can. But what I found really bizarre is her attorney posting the screen shots of text messages proving he was pushing for a cash settlement, and threatening Matts lawyer to do so or else, and also messaging both Matt and the Bills direct, something he really had no business doing other than to apply pressure to Matt to pay them. Then the lawyer also posts her private journal pages from the day after the attack and the days following which completely contradict his own civil suit filing. She repeatedly writes she does not know who took her to the room or who was in the room. But in the civil suit, they suddenly know every detail, exactly who took her there (claims Matt) and exactly who was in the room assaulting her (Matt and the 2 other football players). Even more odd, the number of attackers has not even been consistent, where I have seen it referenced as 3, 4, and 5 attackers. None of this means the victim is lying about the event, but none the less, it shows contradiction between the victims direct account the day after and days following with the civil attorneys filing of what he is saying happened 10 months later. And it may be accurate, but I don't know why any attorney would put info out there that would put into question the version of events they are claiming in a case.

Honestly, while that all makes sense...I don't think there was any scenario Matt played last night. Lets say Matt was in good spirits and really wanted to play, I still do not see McD allowing that to happen. McD is 100% about the game is just a game, life is bigger than football, and he is absolutely sincere in that. McD felt the right decision was for him not to play because he knows the players in that locker room also are confused and don't have all the info, fans are hurting and confused, and all the families involved are as well. There was just no way McD was going to let him on the field while so much was still unknown. Maybe he lets him play if some news broke that strongly helped Matt's case, but that had not occurred yet and still has not. Under the circumstances of yesterday of what limited info was known, there was just no way that the high character of McD who values life more than the game was going to let him being on the field cause more hurt or confusion to anyone affected by this story.

I will be honest...I don't really care. Matt was exciting because he could do stuff other punters could not. Remove him, and well, I don't really care because any punter we bring in likely won't be any worse than Haack was last year. So it Matt is cut, and that looks probable at this point, then I am going to back to not really caring who the punter is, just as long as it wasn't Haack, who sucks. Although, I reserve the right to yell "We need to draft a punter" when that inevitable first shank comes though 😂

I think you are misreading what has been said. First, I think I can say confidently that really no one is questioning that she was attacked, that all seems credible and tragic. But, the question is did Matt have any involvement with the attack either as someone who helped facilitate it by taking her to them or participating in the actual attack. The word consensual is being used strictly in regard to the information out there that seems to point to a private encounter involving only Matt and the victim outside the house, where by all accounts so far, seems to have been non forceful and both parties willfully participating in it. I get where you are coming from, you are saying its still not consent if she is wasted. But, the issue is, there is a lot we do not know at this time still. We don't know the factual details of what they did or did not do outside the house. We don't know her intoxication level at the time of the first encounter. We know she was wasted, possibly drugged even, when she was being assaulted. But that does not also automatically mean she was in the same state when her and Matt allegedly had a prior encounter earlier in the night. I will say that both sides seem to have in some way acknowledged the prior encounter and it being consensual from what I gathered. Nothing I have seen has the plaintiff accusing Matt of a non consensual assault prior to the actual assault that occurred in the room. So for all practical purposes, until we know any definitive information about the alleged first encounter, consent was presumed because the plaintiff has not stated anything refuting that yet. I think all of us feel horrible for this woman, and no one here that I have seen is "slut shaming" her like you said previously.

Lol thats crazy man

Thats a fair point, and a valid one I agree with. However, my only counter would be that if the politicians and mainstream media on both sides of the aisle had not politicized him, there would not have been much media management moving forward. Like when Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf would sit during the national anthem in the NBA. When it became known in the media, the coverage didn't last long and he was able to keep doing it without being a disruption to the team. But nobody politicized him and people moved on. So, totally agree that your point is valid in the reality of Kaps situation, and that is really why he was blackballed because it was not going to go away. Which is getting back to my initial point of how Watson situation having no political value will just fade once he plays some games. Kap, being politicize by both parties made his case never ending and nobody wanted to touch that.

Thats a bit dramatic lol. I mean a 17 year old hooked up with a college kid, happens every day in every state in this country. Of all the things with this case, this is the least of the concerns. Not like he was 35 years old or something here. Not to mention, there are sworn statements from eyewitnesses stating she said she was 18 and went the local college that had the same name as her HS.

Tell that to all the people who have been falsely accused. Not saying he is or isn't, remember I replied to someone who presumed innocence and reference poor choices made him vulnerable.

Literally laughed out loud...post of the day. Kudos

This above statement presumes innocence but infers he made bad choices that led to being falsely accused of sexual assault. So if he is innocent, what was the bad choice? Having consensual sex while in college at a college party where he was living? Are you alluding that college kids should just abstain while in college in fear they could be accused of sexual assault later?

To be honest, I don't understand the plaintiffs lawyers choices and antics on a lot of things he has done. He has posted text messages of him threatening Matt's attorney to settle or else. He has posted photos of all her journal entries that were written by the plaintiff the day after and the days following that she literally does not have any memory of who took her to the room or who raped her. Why he did this is puzzling to me because it completely contradicts his own filing and claims in the civil suit act that not only names exactly who did those things, but the exact manner it happened, all contradictory to her own journal entries before retaining a civil attorney. The civil attorney was direct text messaging Matt and direct contacting the Bills, all for the purpose of encouraging a settlement. His twitter is full of him trying to win his cases in the court of public opinion on all the cases he is involved in, obviously to create more leverage in doing his job to get the most money on behalf of his client. And he is getting a lot of backlash over it and put out this long full page statement ranting and justifying him trying to do this all in the court of public opinion. And we do not actually know if anyone form the Bills investigation spoke to the plaintiff. Her attorney just said the Bills directly did not call him or ask him any questions...but the Bills did not do the investigation, a 3rd party did and we do not know who he has or hasn't spoken to yet. And quite honestly, her statement is just going to repeat what was published in the civil suit now. None of this means she wasn't assaulted or makes her less credible. I am only discussing why the Bills did not go through her civil attorney...again civil not criminal...to conduct any investigation into the matter. And honestly, no one doing any proper investigation would work with any civil attorney on any matter. If he was a criminal attorney I suspect there would be more dialogue between the team and said attorney.

No disrespect at all intended here, but you seem to be making assumptions here on what was or wasn’t found before we know what Bills PI discovered. I agree with pretty much everything else you said, all valid comments.

You can’t interview the plaintiff if it’s not disclosed to you. And the you keep saying the Bills investigation was not thorough because they didn’t talk to the plaintiff. But: 1. You don’t know if the 3rd party PI spoke at all to the plaintiff. 2. The plaintiff has already submitted conflicting versions of the events. She repeatedly stated in her own journal and in statements that she does not know who led her to the room or who was in the room. Then files a civil suit naming 3 specific people and who exactly led her in and raped her. 3. The lawyer has complained on social media that the Bills didn’t run the investigation through him. He didn’t want the Bills talking directly to his client, he wanted the Bills to talk to him and he had personally contacting the Bills for weeks trying to incentivize a cash settlement. 4. The plaintiffs statements at this stage are going to just be the claims in the civil suit. Point is, he is not a criminal attorney, he is a civil attorney. Big difference. It’s not in his best interest to let anyone talk to his client, he isn’t building a case, he’s trying to win money and the best way to do that is incentivize all parties into settling, something her attorney has been doing and has on his own accord out things on social media confirming that. So, you can’t talk to a Jane Doe if that person isn’t disclosed. And you don’t do an investigation and involve a civil attorney in said investigation. So I think people need to cut the Bills a little slack here. They are getting blamed for a lot of things they really shouldn’t be getting blamed for IMHO.

Not according to her attorney whose complaining he was not involved in the Bills investigation on social media.

Yet it wasn’t. And I would not classify it as “common knowledge” because some students were aware. It’s pretty unreasonable to think teams should interview the entire student base on every player at every college. That’s not common knowledge and not something that’s ever going to come out in any teams due diligence on a player. The School and the Coaches did not disclose the story, no charges were filed, there were no law suits filed or even in motion, and no news outlets were aware. Matt’s record at the time was squeaky clean by all accounts. So, it’s just incredibly unreasonable to expect any team to uncover a story like this that could only be uncovered if they conducted individual interviews of the entire student base attending the same college to see if there is any other dirt or rumors that no other part of their due diligence process would ever discover. And then do that at every college in the country for every athlete they are evaluating. So hard disagree this is on the Bills front office for not knowing before the draft.

You don’t contact a civil attorney, whose 100% biased and being paid by a client to win money for said client, to do your investigation. Especially one that has been contacting the team in an effort to spur and push for a cash settlement. A third party PI was hired to do the investigation which is 100% the proper path to take in any situation like this. And the Bills decisions were based on that investigators findings. IMHO they did it the right way by taking it to a 3rd party and steering clear of a civil attorney looking for money for his client. Her attorney has released text messages already showing he was pushing for a settlement and emailing the Bills and the Bills attorney.

How is Matt even a miss though? This was not known before the draft by anyone. Can’t blame Beane for also not knowing what wasn’t known by anyone. This isn’t Beanes fault what so ever just like it’s not the Pats fault for giving a contract extension to a murderer. Not like the Pats knew he murdered people and then gave him an extension. Just like Beane didn’t draft Matt knowing he was going to be accused of gang rape.

I’ve been firmly in the let more info come out first crowd before we rush to judgement. And I still believe that. But seeing McD at the presser and even some of the players quotes has also given me a 180 that this is too heavy of a situation to carry into the season. So for me, there needs to be a very strong piece of information that comes to light immediately that supports Matt’s case or I don’t know how they can keep him on the team while his case plays out. And honestly, sounds like the opposite may have happened where they may have gotten new info that makes his case worse. I think he will be cut this weekend.

Yeah, I think that seems to be the case too. Tomorrow will be very telling, if Matt is cut then it pretty much confirms they found some stuff out that they are not comfortable with at the very least and that will definitely be more damning to Matt’s case in his claims of being innocent. I honestly don’t see how they can keep him on the team past tomorrow if they have any new information that is damning to Matt’s claim of innocence. I suspect we will know pretty early in the morning if he is going to be cut tomorrow.

People keep saying this, but it’s not true. He was not at all the highest rated punter in the draft, Stout was. Many teams didn’t have Matt in the top 2 even. In the NFL, hang time and accuracy are far more important than distance. And Matt had legit questions about those areas. He had a catchy nickname and the media covered his long punts…that is why fans thought he was the best punter, because he was the only one they heard of. But actual GMs didn’t care as much about punting 80 yards as they do about accuracy and hang time. He had the most intriguing skill set, but he was not the country’s best punter last year nor the most NFL ready.

I think tomorrow will be a pivotal day. If Matt is still on this team 24 hours from now, then I think it was more about it’s just an awful situation and difficult spot for McD in the press conference to field questions about such a horrific event a young woman went through. If Matt is cut tomorrow, I think it’s a safe guess that there was some new information exposed to them today that they were not comfortable with and probably didn’t previously know.

But the concern becomes can he get separation. Duke Williams used to gobble everything up in practice and preseason too, just couldn't get separation against starters in the same way.

How many snaps did he have against backups and scrubs who won't be on NFL rosters?

3 rec for 13 yards. He is averaging under 9 yards per catch over 3 preseason games despite leading the team in targets and receptions. I am rooting for the kid, but you won't make a team averaging under 9 yards per catch as a backup WR unless you can prove you can contribute on ST.

This