Jump to content

Judge Sue Robinson recommends 6 game suspension for Watson; NFL will appeal


YoloinOhio

Recommended Posts

I will be surprised if the original decision is not upheld. This new system allows the NFL to strut around all righteous, while at the same time ending up with another revenue drawing star QB playing.  Best of both worlds. I expect the appeal is simpy a marketing charade. 

  • Vomit 1
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chaos said:

I will be surprised if the original decision is not upheld. This new system allows the NFL to strut around all righteous, while at the same time ending up with another revenue drawing star QB playing.  Best of both worlds. I expect the appeal is simpy a marketing charade. 

What are you talking about, it's already been appealed and Goodell has picked his guy to make a different decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chaos said:

I will be surprised if the original decision is not upheld. This new system allows the NFL to strut around all righteous, while at the same time ending up with another revenue drawing star QB playing.  Best of both worlds. I expect the appeal is simpy a marketing charade. 

I will be surprised, because the designee that goodell appointed is not neutral and doesn’t need to be. He only appointed someone because he’s busy and he wants it expedited. This judge is in the NFL’s pocket and is going to rubber stamp goodell’s desired punishment. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

What are you talking about, it's already been appealed and Goodell has picked his guy to make a different decision.

We will see. Surprisingly, the players union (who has a contract) is going to have an opinion on all of this. 

Edited by Chaos
  • Vomit 1
  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chaos said:

We will see. Surprisingly, the players union (who has a contract) is going to have an opinion on all of this. 

The contract says both sides can appeal, only one did, and that goodell has final say. So I’m sure they have an opinion but all they can do is sue at this point. I doubt federal court wants to intervene with a collectively bargained agreement/labor law. 

Edited by YoloinOhio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

I will be surprised, because the designee that goodell appointed is not neutral and doesn’t need to be. He only appointed someone because he’s busy and he wants it expedited. This judge is in the NFL’s pocket and is going to rubber stamp goodell’s desired punishment. 
 

 

So now it's not the NFL that wants this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DCbillsfan said:

Can Watson be suspended indefinitely or does it have to be specific number of games?

I think it can be indefinite now, but sue Robinson told them at the outset of the hearing that she was not going to rule indefinite. I assume goodell can rule that if he wants. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Chaos said:

We will see. Surprisingly, the players union (who has a contract) is going to have an opinion on all of this. 


that union agreed to this process, mind you. Their only recourse after the appeal decision is made is federal court. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chaos said:

I will be surprised if the original decision is not upheld. This new system allows the NFL to strut around all righteous, while at the same time ending up with another revenue drawing star QB playing.  Best of both worlds. I expect the appeal is simpy a marketing charade. 

 

No. Not by a longshot 

20 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:


that union agreed to this process, mind you. Their only recourse after the appeal decision is made is federal court. 

 

Which will likely be thrown out of court quickly.

59 minutes ago, DCbillsfan said:

Can Watson be suspended indefinitely or does it have to be specific number of games?

 

Yes he can be. I believe Gordon was suspended indefinitely at one point

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m pleasantly surprised that the NFL is not giving in to the original decision.

 

I wonder if they are being pressured by the other Owners to punish the Browns indirectly for that absurd contract.

 

I also wonder if they know more about the cases than the general public and are afraid more stuff could come out at some point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think someone made a great point in that there is No way Watson plays at the earliest until after the Houston Game. The Nfl doesn’t want that gong show. So a minimum of 12-but then let’s say Cleveland is in the hunt, does the Nfl want this story of Watson possibly coming back into playoff crunch and leading the headlines.. 
 

It seems to me that with Godell’s most recent comments that they are going to come down hard on him. Maybe it will be a full year? I can’t in any way see this as a marketing charade. I actually see it as a time when the Nfl can now make a statement as to future punishment down the road. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Chaos said:

I will be surprised if the original decision is not upheld. This new system allows the NFL to strut around all righteous, while at the same time ending up with another revenue drawing star QB playing.  Best of both worlds. I expect the appeal is simpy a marketing charade. 

Not a chance in hell that it will still be 6 games and no fine

 

My guess is at least 12 games and a big fine. The NFL (a) sends out a message that they will be tough on this sort of behaviour (which they should be) and gets to look like the good guys for once; (b) sets a precedent that supersedes the ones that Robinson used when setting the number at 6 and (c) sends the message to people that contract shenanigans of the sort that the Turds engaged in are a no-go

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An indefinite suspension is warranted but I don't see it happening. It should be for the duration of his contract with the Browns but I don't see that happening either.  

 

I'm just hoping for at least a season.  I've said it before, the whole thing is gross.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Chaos said:

I will be surprised if the original decision is not upheld. This new system allows the NFL to strut around all righteous, while at the same time ending up with another revenue drawing star QB playing.  Best of both worlds. I expect the appeal is simpy a marketing charade. 

no way, the NFL is going to come out looking like the “white knight” in all of this.   He’ll get a year.

Edited by RiotAct
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watson & the Browns deserve every bit of crap that lands on their heads.

 

I hope the highlight of their season is when Mayfield and the Panthers pound them.  

Then downhill the rest of the year.  Empty stadium by December.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't the NFL have to approve every trade? Why would they approve it only to complain about the contract later on? The way Cleveland structured it was obvious in trying to reduce a financial hit due to suspension. The NFL should have not approved it from the start

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

His contract is exhibit A and it’s the most damning to Watson’s case. It means that the Browns knew, whether or not he settled all of the lawsuits against him, he would be suspended.

 

The Browns did the equivalent of putting on multiple pairs of underwear before a spanking they know is coming when Dad gets home.

 

The NFL can’t let the Browns go unpunished or other teams will try their hand at it as well.

 

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off Watson and the Browns make me a sick over this whole distasteful incident.

My choice would be an indefinite suspension.

 

However, if I was Watson and the Browns, I would want a full year suspension.  By the start of next season, a lot of this will blow over and be forgotten.

Having him come back after 12 games could end up being worse than just losing the year IMO.

 

He certainly wouldn't start the following week on the road in CIN so the earliest he would see the field would be at home against the Ravens.

That could be a tough game to start after all the time off.

Going on the road to Washington DC and Pittsburg I believe would be a bit of a circus while everything is fresh for the media.

 

Factor in his not playing in almost 2 years the chance of him playing poorly would just add fuel to his opposition.  If he does only get

a 12-game suspension my hope is that his return to end the season is a disaster. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KDIGGZ said:

Doesn't the NFL have to approve every trade? Why would they approve it only to complain about the contract later on? The way Cleveland structured it was obvious in trying to reduce a financial hit due to suspension. The NFL should have not approved it from the start

The trade isn't the contract, and not liking the contract isn't the same as being able to stop it.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bruffalo said:

An indefinite suspension is warranted but I don't see it happening. It should be for the duration of his contract with the Browns but I don't see that happening either.  

 

I'm just hoping for at least a season.  I've said it before, the whole thing is gross.

I want 16 games, 20 million dollar fine, and mandate the only massages he gets are from Larry the Cable Guy.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, KDIGGZ said:

Doesn't the NFL have to approve every trade? Why would they approve it only to complain about the contract later on? The way Cleveland structured it was obvious in trying to reduce a financial hit due to suspension. The NFL should have not approved it from the start

A low base salary in the first year of a contract is pretty common.  It's the unawareness of what the optics makes it look like is why the Browns are the Browns.

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Chaos said:

I will be surprised if the original decision is not upheld. This new system allows the NFL to strut around all righteous, while at the same time ending up with another revenue drawing star QB playing.  Best of both worlds. I expect the appeal is simpy a marketing charade. 

 

Prepare to be surprised then.  I don't believe anyoone associated with the situation thinks the NFL's appeal will be denied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RiotAct said:

no way, the NFL is going to come out looking like the “white knight” in all of this.   He’ll get a year.

 

I think that was the goal all along with them. The arbitrator is nothing more than a temperature test for the publics reaction. Not saying it isnt an independent decision but like you said, now the NFL can take a look at public reaction and adjust accordingly and let the arbitrator take the heat.

 

If they blow it and give him anything less than a year, then it was all for nothing.

 

 

Edited by What a Tuel
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they don’t do a full season, I’m hoping for 16 games.
 

They’re going to get eaten alive in their division, Demolester can’t change that. It’ll totally mess with the way they structured the contract and it will blow up their cap next year. 
 

Eff the browns for that deal, it should bite them hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JDubya76 said:

If they don’t do a full season, I’m hoping for 16 games.
 

They’re going to get eaten alive in their division, Demolester can’t change that. It’ll totally mess with the way they structured the contract and it will blow up their cap next year. 
 

Eff the browns for that deal, it should bite them hard.

 

If he is suspended 16 games, the contract will bump to next year. It won't toll to year 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

A low base salary in the first year of a contract is pretty common.  It's the unawareness of what the optics makes it look like is why the Browns are the Browns.


low is one thing, but Watson is making almost nothing in base salary, that’s not common.  (For example, when Josh signed his extension they lowered his 2022 cap hit to 16mil but he’s still making 4mil base salary)

 

Another thing I just put together is the fact that Cleveland has the most cap space in the league by about 20mil. Wouldn’t it benefit them to front-load a big contract at this point?

 

Its indefensible from every angle I can think of. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rock-A-Bye Beasley said:


low is one thing, but Watson is making almost nothing in base salary, that’s not common.  (For example, when Josh signed his extension they lowered his 2022 cap hit to 16mil but he’s still making 4mil base salary)

 

Another thing I just put together is the fact that Cleveland has the most cap space in the league by about 20mil. Wouldn’t it benefit them to front-load a big contract at this point?

 

Its indefensible from every angle I can think of. 

 

Allen last year made 920k base salary, so yes, it is common. The Browns signed Garrett to a huge contract with low base salary early. 

 

I agree with the optics looking bad though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...