Beck Water
-
Posts
11,712 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Beck Water
-
-
Just now, UKBillFan said:
Araiza went into the draft with doubts about his holding and hang time. On most mock drafts he was the third or fourth punter to be picked, and he went third. There is nothing to indicate whether the two who chose before us had a clue about any of the allegations or not.
I don't think @SectionC3 was referencing the two teams that picked punters before Araiza. I think he was referencing the AP report that two teams (who did not draft punters) learned there were allegations of some sort around SDSU football players and possibly involving Araiza.
-
2 minutes ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:
Very disappointed in Sal M. and Jay Skurski this morning.
Why? What did Sal M and Skurski tweet/say/publish?
Spill the Tea!
-
16 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
There's no hard evidence of that. Just conjecture. Also no evidence of what was known.
Dude, AP has its detractors, but they do require that anything they publish be backed up by two independent primary sources.
Which goes quite a bit beyond "conjecture" to most of us, even if the sources are anonymous and thus not "hard evidence". The statement was these teams weren't interested in drafting a punter and that they didn't have details, but just uncovering such a report would be cause for a team that IS interested in drafting a punter to dig deeper and press harder.
-
6 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:
Agreed. Maybe they were and maybe they were not. The victim probably doesn’t know whether they were. The SDPD is not going to share any of this with a football team.
August 5 LA times article, police spokesman states the case they forwarded to the DA includes 3 terabytes of digital evidence. That's a lot of terabytes if there aren't videos/photos.
28 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:Section C3 stole my kittens is evidence?
Section C3 states under oath that he had kittens, and he remembers seeing 4merper4mer putting them in a basket and walking away with them, is, in fact, evidence. I believe it's called "eyewitness testimony" FWIW.
-
12 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Maybe they should employ psychics? People keep asking "why didn't they know?"
It's quite plausible to me what someone suggested, that perhaps the Bills weren't expecting to draft Araiza in the round where they had him slotted, so they didn't put much of their horsepower into vetting him.
But it's not "psychic needed" levels of implausible to believe that some info was out there and able to be uncovered, because reportedly at least two teams DID uncover it (AP report, two primary sources needed)
There was an active police investigation. Teams employ former LEOs to research whether there are any police actions against a prospect - maybe not the details, but the fact that there is an open investigation. If the LA times is correct (and they are a paper that confirms primary sources), this was not a cursory investigation. It involved 20 personnel. That's enough people that it seems fairly likely an insider police source would be able to find out an investigation was ongoing and it involved members of the SDSU football team.
There were student reports last fall of a gang rape in an off campus house, involving 5 football players including "Matt", stating that the football team all knew and rumors were spreading throughout the athletic department.
That is the sort of thing that area scouts, student-ish age assistants, and deep background investigators are employed to find out, and in fact per AP, at least two teams (who weren't interested in a punter) did uncover something.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
It's been about nine months and no charges though they have a girl who suppossidly was covered in blood and bruised. That's strange, I'd say.
They also have a girl who stated her memory of the events was incomplete because she was in and out of consciousness. She couldn't even state definitively whether the bruises on her neck were from strangulation or hickies.
I believe those are hard cases to prosecute, and require that the detectives painstakingly work around the gap in credible victim testimony. I'm not surprised that it's taken this long.
-
1
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, Doc said:
It's an allegation at this point. One that wasn't even followed-up by the SDPD. If Araiza wasn't involved with it, what information did you want him to provide?
Um....how do you know it was not followed up by the SDPD? They sent their investigation to prosecutors August 5th. It sounds comprehensive.
:
QuoteMore than 20 investigative personnel worked on the case, resulting in nearly 200 hours of overtime, said police spokesperson Lt. Adam Sharki. Detectives obtained and executed 10 search warrants, interviewed multiple witnesses, examined physical evidence, and reviewed more than three terabytes of digital evidence, he added.
The "more than 3 terabytes of digital evidence" has a rather ominous ring to those involved, given the alleged victim's statement that she saw a light at times, as though someone were videoing or taking pictures.
When cases like this have been successfully prosecuted, it's because the doofuses involved created digital evidence, which police were able to recover and introduce at trial.
-
Just now, RunTheBall said:
One thing that hasn’t been mentioned - I bet McD met with the vet leaders of the team to get the temperature of the locker room. I suspect there wasn’t any pressure to stick by a rookie punter which helped with the decision to cut him.
I can't find an interview, but there were some tweets from Micah Hyde which rather implied that he had. I wouldn't be surprised if allowing such a meeting might have been one reason why practice was delayed yesterday, and that perhaps meeting with the team after practice and before the presser was one reason the presser was delayed.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, SectionC3 said:
I didn't hear it asked as specifically as I framed it. As in, was one of those "double digit teams" a franchise that drafted a punter ahead of Araiza in this year's draft. The point there is that there may be many teams that didn't know of this because they had no interest in drafting a punter. But a few, including two who drafted punters ahead of the Bills, may have been aware of the issue in advance of the draft. So I'd like to know if those two teams knew of this allegation before the draft. Much more material than asking whether, say, the Seahawks (who employ Michael Dickson) were aware of this issue.
A point. You should PM or tweet at one of the Bills Beat reporters. Maybe they can ask Beane that specifically.
Wawrow and another AP writer (they have to have 2 independent primary sources for everything they write) also state that they spoke with 3 teams who didn't know, but two teams who DID - can't be the teams who drafted a punter ahead of Araiza, as it was stated they didn't draft a punter.
I would think the Bills would like to know what was different about their pre-draft process that they uncovered something the Bills and other teams missed.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, The Red King said:
Araiza was tried and found guilty in the court of public opinion. The Bills organization was under siege from the press about keeping such a monster on the team, even though nothing had been proven. There is no way they could funtion under those circumstances. As such, they didn't have a choice. For their own good they had to cut him, and I agree with the move.
What disgusts me are the people that immediately assumed he's guilty, referring to him as trash and worse, before anything comes to light. I also hate when people who don't want to jump to conclusions are accused of defending him. It's not the same!
What's done is done. The Bills didn't have a choice. Time to move on.
I agree with your disgust towards the immediate assumption of guilt. There have been some tweets and some posts that are hard for me to read assuming guilt.
That said, there's the opposite claque which says his "fundamental rights" are being violated and his life ruined because he's been fired from his job, which is poppycock - no one has a fundamental right to work for a specific employer, or to play in the NFL, and he's got a lot of life in front of him - including, potentially, in the NFL once this gets resolved.
I guess my main thing with Beane's presser where I found it disingenuous (though I guess maybe Beane has to frame it this way for PR and legal reasons) is implying that something factual changed between July 29/30 and yesterday - that they learned more details from the lawsuit, or that they were working hard night and day to "do their own research" and uncover the facts. I don't buy that. The details came out in the 29 July LA Times article and were linked to Matt Araiza the next day by his lawyer's call to the Bills. They are allegations. The lawsuit is still allegations.
I agree with you that the Bills released him because they were under seige, not just from the press, but from social media - but also because reading the allegations laid out in the lawsuit is painful, and it seemed to be causing distress to McDermott and in the locker room. This would inevitably create division and controversy between players who likely hold the same spectrum of opinions we've seen on this board.
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, JerseyBills said:
For the Brand , yes they did.
For the team , heck no. We have no punter with 12 13 days to go on a national stage. We just drafted him.
If social media didn't exist he'd 100% be playing.
Everybody wants to act like they were never 20 years old at a college party and haven't made mistakes
A "mistake" is something like "last night under the booze I hooked up with someone who is not attractive to sober me and is now pursuing me. Dang! How'd I do with that?" or "Dammit I wore my Canada Goose instead of my Thrift Store last night, it's been stolen"
Ripping a girl's piercings out and leaving her bruised and bleeding is something else. Even if Araiza didn't do that himself, if he had a part in setting it up or even in looking the other way while it went on, he's culpable to me. Decent men ####-block rapists, they don't enable them.
All that aside, for the team, I think McDermott and Beane 100% did righto. Part of claiming to build a high-character culture is that they've brought in high-character guys who (judging by Keenum and Barkley, and the whole team's demeanor Fri actually) were appalled by reading that lawsuit. Having Araiza continue on the team, as their brother, in their locker room while this hung over his head and could neither be proven nor disproven was going to be incredibly distracting and divisive - to the team.
If this sort of "energy suck" kept up, it would disadvantage the team far more than missing some boomer punts (at the expense of hang time and directionality) will.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
Yeah but her journal directly contradicts her civil suit and claims.
That's not necessarily information the Bills had in July, though (unless the lawyer sent it to them)
16 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:I recommend people watch the press conference because they cover all of this. In fact, they were asked this questions multiple times, and gave thorough answers each time.
I watched the press conference twice, I listened carefully to Beane's answer, and they do not make sense to me. Which is what spurred the post you're responding to.
If it makes sense to you, Great.
16 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:Prior to the civil suit...it was just an accusation which is drastically different than an actual criminal case or civil suit. The Bills at that time, while knowing this is serious, still don't know if it will actually go to a civil suit, are her accusations substantiated by any evidence, is this a jaded ex doing a money grab, or is this player a monster that no one realized. There is a lot that is not known at the stage of just being accused.
The Bills knew when the story broke in the LA times and the lawyer called that it wasn't a "jaded ex doing a money grab"
Unless they gained information they didn't mention, they still don't know if her accusations are substantiated by evidence
What's different, as we both agree, is that there's an actual filed lawsuit which is generating a firestorm of widespread negative publicity
But both with the LA Times story (which gave pretty explicit details)/Lawyer's call and with the civil suit, we're still dealing entirely with allegations in both cases.
So given that, why does Beane's explanations in his presser make sense to you?
It doesn't matter really, it's a done deal and I hope the team can move on and McDermott can go back to being a football coach and no longer look traumatized.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Cheektowaga Chad said:
Is the lawyer really coming after the buffalo bills?
Was that his actual goal the whole time?
In his statement the first sentence is aimed at the team
He's a Grandstander playing to the audience.
It's also not impossible that he's pissed at the Bills because they were supposed to put pressure on Araiza to settle before he filed the suit, or at worst after the suit - not cut him. That's my inner cynic talking.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:
the possible perception of mat being innocent to a vague accusation, versus a document discussing a violent 90m gang rape straight out of 'I Spit On Your Grave" are very different, regardless of if they admit to it or not.
all r word is bad, but theres a difference between a - couldnt consent due to an extra drink or two, and the specifics released. these guys are human too, if it affected my sleep last night, it affected theirs much more directly.
I "get" that effect! *shudder*
My point that I made upthread was that a lot of those violent details were published in the LA Times July 29th, with the lawyer for the alleged victim but not the suspects named. Then the lawyer called the Bills and added Matt Araiza's name to the article.
I don't think you need to be terribly imaginative to figure out how that is gonna read in a civil suit.
But maybe they needed the experience of actually reading it in print.
-
4 minutes ago, Bangarang said:
The whole it was just an allegation in July but now it’s a civil suit logic BB gave was weird. The civil suit is still just an allegation. The only difference is now it’s public and the world hates your team for employing a guy accused of raping a minor.
I am glad I am not the only one who found that explanation weird and inconsistent.
Agree, the Times article July 29th (which did not name Araiza) and the lawyer's phone call July 30th were allegations.
The civil suit is also an allegation.
The only difference is the firestorm of negative PR
And of course that the entire team can read the lawsuit and quite possibly react in as polarized a fashion as we have on this board.
-
35 minutes ago, Ralonzo said:
I would hope that if he's totally exonerated and the Bills approached him to resume his role as punter, that he'd tell them to ***** right off the foot of Ferry. Beane's own statement on the team feed affirmed that for the Bills, "culture is more important than winning." Ok. So I'm going to assume that means, to do the right thing even if it lessens your chance to win. Or even, the whole "Bills are a family" thing. How would a family react to a member accused of something awful, which he claimed he didn't do? Would you toss him on the street? No, you'd find out what really happened, and if he did what he was accused of then deal with it appropriately.
Look, I see what you're getting at, but anyone who believes that any employer is "family" and not a business, which will pursue its business interests first and formost, is highly naive.
I do agree with your take that Beane's statement "culture is more important than winning" seems like BS. This is indeed about reducing distraction and controversy for the team so that it can focus on winning; and where was culture 3+ weeks ago when the LA Times printed details and named the lawyer, then the lawyer called the Bills the next day?
35 minutes ago, Ralonzo said:Hopefully the sleazebag lawyer throwing Beane immediately under the bus after acceding his demands is educational on some level.
?? (Edit: never mind, I found it)
33 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:lol wtf is he supposed to say. in GM speak everyone with a pulse can read between the lines. also, dont forget he has to be careful on what he says from a legal standpoint, especially with possible NFLPA possibly involved. imagine hes 100% cleared of this in 6 mos, what might that lawsuit look like? both from a $$ standpoint, and the time/energy it would sap from being a football GM. unlikely, but possibly even a personal liability suit. all unlikely, but stupid risk to be that candid.
IMHO that's what all the delay prior to the presser must have been about - crafting possible responses to possible questions and clearing them with Legal
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Mike in Horseheads said:
Vic who?
Vic tem I assume
-
46 minutes ago, Ralonzo said:
Beane and McDermott did the expedient thing, which gets the media off Beane and McDermott's backs. It certainly is the best thing for them.
I think it seemed pretty evident Fri night that the team as a whole was probably having trouble processing the allegations and dealing with it. The shot of the team in the tunnel waiting to come out seemed subdued, the sideline seemed subdued, Keenum and Barkley seemed kind of shell-shocked. As Barkley (I believe) said, "some of the things in that suit are hard to read and process"
I think Beane and McDermott did what they had to do for the mental health and focus of the team.
18 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:I still don’t understand why the Bills didn’t ask for a copy of the draft compliant. Could have solved a lot of problems. Or could have allowed them to say that Ps attorney sandbagged them.
That is, I guess, one thing that calling the attorney back could potentially have gotten them? Although most of the details in the lawsuit came out in the LA Times on July 29th, just without Araiza's name attached.
46 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:did Bean mean civil or criminal case? Also unclear that Azzara would be named from that.
But it was clear Araiza was one of the players who would be named, once the plaintiff's lawyer called the Bills the following day.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:
Quick recap
I'll put this here, too, since people may be dead-threading the immense "lawsuit" thread.
LA times article on July 29. Lawyer called Kathryn D'Angelo July 30 and sent follow up email (?with pics?) Aug 1
QuoteThe young woman’s experience has continued to haunt her.
She arrived at the Halloween party dressed as a fairy. She had already been drinking with her friends, she said, when she met a San Diego State football player at the house just blocks from campus. The player gave her a drink and eventually led her inside the house to a bedroom where she said several of his teammates took turns sexually assaulting her, slamming her down on a bed and ripping out her piercings.
Covered in blood, she found her friends outside after what she believed to be more than an hour.
“I was just raped,” she told them.
The next day, with bruises across her neck and down her legs, she filed a report with San Diego police and underwent a rape exam at Rady Children’s Hospital. The arduous process lasted through the night as her body was swabbed and she was tested for pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Photos provided to The Times by her attorney, Dan Gilleon, show dark bruises across her neck, and on her knee and calf. One photo shows blood on part of her costume. Gilleon said he is preparing a lawsuit that would include names of known suspects.
That sounds like a lot of detail mapping out the boulder field, including the detail that Gilleon is prepping a filing.
I love me some Beane, but his explanation does not entirely add up to me.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, MJS said:
They are best friends, so that makes sense.
Yeah, Sam and Allen both train with Palmer and have houses near each other in Orange County, but the announcers kept slobbering over what a great close-knit QB room the Panthers have with Sam and Baker, so it looked a little ironic when Baker didn't wish Sam well but the opposing star QB did.
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Motorin' said:
Beane said they were wrong to say that had conducted a thorough examination. That they should have said it was an ongoing examination.
I have questions as to whether the Bills conducted any sort of examination including using Google for 5 minutes, or if they did, whether they actually shared a fair picture of the results, but I made that point elsewhere so, 'nuff said.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, billsfan1959 said:
When you go from accusations / allegations to actually having a civil suit filed or criminal charges brought, the situation has drastically changed. I’m not sure why I should have to explain that. I would think it would be self evident.
Fair enough. Once the lawsuit is in the public domain, it will draw a lot of public scrutiny and public reaction, which must be dealt with. In addition, the player will have the distraction of needing to prepare his defense.
Counterpoint: when the plaintiff's lawyer calls on July 30 and informs you he's preparing a civil suit that will name Araiza among others in the gang rape of a 17 year old girl, does it really take a lot of imagination to see that public scrutiny, public reaction, and distraction for the player are hurtling down the pike? Beane said they only had "the boulders" after the lawyer's phone call to DeAngelo, but not the details.
Yet the LA Times published the following as part of a story on the case July 29th:QuoteThe young woman’s experience has continued to haunt her.
She arrived at the Halloween party dressed as a fairy. She had already been drinking with her friends, she said, when she met a San Diego State football player at the house just blocks from campus. The player gave her a drink and eventually led her inside the house to a bedroom where she said several of his teammates took turns sexually assaulting her, slamming her down on a bed and ripping out her piercings.
Covered in blood, she found her friends outside after what she believed to be more than an hour.
“I was just raped,” she told them.
The next day, with bruises across her neck and down her legs, she filed a report with San Diego police and underwent a rape exam at Rady Children’s Hospital. The arduous process lasted through the night as her body was swabbed and she was tested for pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Photos provided to The Times by her attorney, Dan Gilleon, show dark bruises across her neck, and on her knee and calf. One photo shows blood on part of her costume. Gilleon said he is preparing a lawsuit that would include names of known suspects.
That article, which any "thorough examination" or investigation should have uncovered (ie Google) maps a lot of details onto those boulders, including the accusation that the player may have been an accessory to, if not involved, in the gang rape of a minor and the information that there's a police investigation underway:
QuoteIn a June letter to de la Torre, Assistant Chief of Police Paul Connelly said police had conducted interviews, executed search warrants and were evaluating more than 2 terabytes of data.
The lawyer also does not seem shy about distributing photos of his client and her journal, so I wouldn't bet that they didn't get sent to the Bills.
Once the lawyer tells you one of the players named will be Matt Araiza, I don't think you have to have a great imagination to see that the above is going to be a giant PR fiasco if it goes down and the player is still on the Bills roster.
So from the POV of the Bills organization internally, what was the drastic change?
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, Warcodered said:
I think that's a bit much he didn't play in the game that day and was cut the following day, not sure I'd call that standing by him.
Heh. Fair point. They did stand by him initially with that "thorough investigation" team announcement, but they reversed course PDQ
I think either the investigation was total weak sauce OR McDermott wasn't fully in the loop with the details, and was genuinely horrified reading the lawsuit. I think he said "I don't think we can have this on the team. At the least, we have to separate him from the team while we review what we know and make a decision"
-
1
-
-
Wawrow's story a bit more critical in tone:
I can't say he's unfair.
QuoteIn the face of a major public backlash and internal questions over the decision to award Matt Araiza the punting job, the Buffalo Bills reversed course by cutting the rookie on Saturday, two days after a lawsuit was filed alleging the player and two college teammates gang-raped a teenager last fall.
“The last 48 hours have been very difficult for a lot of people. It’s been tough. And you know, we sympathize with this whole situation, all the parties involved, this young woman, what she went through,” general manager Brandon Beane said during a 26-minute news conference alongside coach Sean McDermott.
“But at this time, we just think it’s the best move for everyone to move on from Matt and let him take care of this situation and focus on that. So, we’re gonna part ways there,” Beane added.
QuoteBeane said the Bills were not aware of the allegations made against Araiza at the time they drafted him. And had they known, Beane said, they would have removed him from consideration.
The decision to cut ties with their sixth-round draft pick out of San Diego State comes after Buffalo cleared the way for Araiza to take over the punting duties by releasing returning veteran Matt Haack on Monday.
The Bills opted then to keep Araiza even while being aware of the allegations made against him since late July. The team then stood by the player by announcing it “conducted a thorough examination” into the matter a day after the lawsuit was filed.
QuoteAsked about the decision to cut Haack, who subsequently was picked up by the Indianapolis Colts, Beane said:
“That’s a tough one. You can second guess whether that was the right move. We’ll definitely look at that going forward if this situation or a similar situation happens.”
QuoteBeane said the team did as much as it could in getting as many details as possible, while noting many of the allegations were unavailable because the results of the San Diego police investigation has not been released. He said the team decided not to “rush to judgment” based on the information it had, while noting Araiza never changed his version of what happened.
“You want to give everyone as much due process as you can. Again, we’re not a judge and a jury,” Beane said.
McDermott then interjected by saying the team did consider the victim’s version of events as contained in the lawsuit.
“We did take those very seriously. I want everyone to understand that. That’s a serious deal right there,” McDermott said.
Araiza’s release begins to ease a crisis which has shaken the team as reflected by McDermott having difficulty containing his emotions while discussing the situation following a 21-0 preseason loss at Carolina on Friday night.
QuoteIn Buffalo, the focus shifts to why the Bills weren’t aware of the allegations against Araiza when selecting the San Diego State player in the sixth round of the draft in April. Though he was college football’s top punter last year, and earned the nickname “Punt God” because of a booming left leg, Araiza was the third punter selected in the draft.
This is from an earlier AP article and Beane has since clarified when the Bills became aware
QuoteIt’s unclear whether Araiza informed the NFL about the allegations in the months leading up to the draft.
Executives from two different teams told The Associated Press they became aware of Araiza’s involvement in an incident during the draft process, but neither person knew the extent of the allegations. Executives from three other teams said they had no knowledge of the allegations against Araiza before the draft and only learned of the incident Thursday. All the people spoke to The AP on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.
Though it’s unclear when the Bills first became aware of the allegations, they knew by the end of July when Dan Gilleon, the lawyer representing the alleged victim identified in the lawsuit as “Jane Doe,” contacted the team’s legal counsel, Kathryn D’Angelo, by email.
McDermott/Beane press conference 8/27: Matt Araiza released
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I believe if you go here
https://bfy.tw/TTj6
you can find some answers to that question.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324436104578581772197037576
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/patriots/2013/06/20/aaron-hernandez-investigation/2443091/
"And the message Thursday from around the NFL was simple: They were warned."
Sometimes the issue isn't lack of information or problems vetting players. It's that teams know there are problems, and choose to take a chance on drafting the player anyway because of the player's high potential at football. Hernandez appears to meet those criteria.