Jump to content

Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.


bill8164

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Dan said:

The team should give him as much time as needed to deal with this personal issue and suspend him until such time that that it is resolved in a court of law.  


As soon as the LA Times story broke, I posted he should be cut within days… I like your solution better… Suspend him…Get him away from the team and the city this week… Let him resolve his legal situation … Decide later about his future with the Bills…

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

3 minutes ago, Yobogoya! said:

 

Honestly the most disturbing part of this thread for me is the notion that "he's just a punter" -- and of course, the implication thereof that if he were of a position more important to winning games, we could afford to weather the media storm until the truth came out or potentially even after. 

 

Just goes to show most people's moral high ground is directly proportional to how useful someone is to their needs. Funny how that works. 

My point with saying.. he’s just a punter, is only to imply that its immensely easier to replace him.    If this all happens with your franchise QB,  honestly I’d make the dame statement.  But you then recognize that that decisions completely tanks your season and perhaps many more seasons.   So, yes, it would be a far more impactful decision.  

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

39 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

C'Mon man. 

 

There are differences between re-tweeting some TV show quotes in HS, and allegations that a player participated in a gang-rape of a young woman which left her with photos of marks on her neck and legs and blood on her clothing.

And what player is supposed to have "beat up his GF"?  If you mean Tyrell Dodson, that's a big stretch from what's described in the police report, and he took a 6 game suspension for it despite the charge being dismissed.  So what's "fair" about leaving Araiza on the team getting paid while this plays out?

 

Be that as it may, the NFL is a business, it's not about being "fair".  That's all spelled out in the Player Conduct Policy.  And truthfully, it's the unwritten law in every business where PR matters: the first law is Don't Make Your Employer Look Bad.  the second law is Don't Make Your Boss Look Bad.

What's fair is the truth. You don't have it yet. I don't have it yet. The Bills/employer doesn't have it yet. Araiza may not even have it, to be honest. 

 

I 100% hope he remains on the team until if or when criminally convicted.

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

3 hours ago, SDS said:

 

I woke up to two complaints on my Saturday:

 

1. Is no where safe from the rape accusations talk?

2. We need 25 (or 137) different topics all talking about nuanced aspects of this issue. (Which, in my experience, is totally realistic given this community's self-discipline to stay on topic and love of nuanced discourse.)

 

The only thing I know for certain, is we are handling it wrong.

 

I get preventing the LAMP threads. We are on page 227 of a story that is 2 or 3 days old. There is no conversation because it is just a bunch of different topics. A thread about “which punters may be available” is certainly appropriate IMO. I watched good conversation get thrown into here immediately. I’m not reading 227 pages to piece together those thoughts. I’ll follow along on twitter I guess. 

Edited by Kirby Jackson
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

The chiefs drafted a guy who was convicted of throwing his pregnant GF down the stairs. No one in the media cared. He’s a celebrated player now. I’m just saying, why was that. 
 

https://www.sportscasting.com/tyreek-hill-brutally-beat-and-choked-his-pregnant-girlfriend-in-college-but-never-saw-any-jail-time/

 

 

Everything changed after the Kavanaugh hearings.  

 

This is fact and not to be political.

 

Despite Duke Lacrosse and countless others - if you don't believe the woman you support rape.

 

Irrational virtue signaling and a need to sound morally superior when all they are is emotional ignorant people.  

 

Everything in this country is **s backwards.  

 

 

I understand the problem in sexual assault and how traditionally its difficult to first of all women to come forward.....and then get charges let alone convictions.  

 

That absolutely does not mean you just "believe all women."  I want to, but we need evidence. 

 

 

 

In the case of Watson, we have evidence pointing directly to him of assault and harassment.  Criminal?  I don't know.  Face of your franchise?  Nope.  

 

In the case of Araiza we have an allegation of him having sex with a woman claiming she was raped by other men at a party where apparently no one knows anything?

 

No Criminal charges.  No day in court.  Too many questions still.  

 

All this being said, it doesn't matter if McD believes they were lied to about any major detail.  

Edited by Big Blitz
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 4
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dan said:

My point with saying.. he’s just a punter, is only to imply that its immensely easier to replace him.    If this all happens with your franchise QB,  honestly I’d make the dame statement.  But you then recognize that that decisions completely tanks your season and perhaps many more seasons.   So, yes, it would be a far more impactful decision.  

 

I think it goes without saying that a team can find a serviceable punter far easier than a franchise QB. 

 

Most of the people who are taking the "wait and see" stance right now are doing so because a man's life and reputation are at stake, not because we're concerned with punting the ball in 2022. 

  • Agree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just had a random thought…

 

If the Bills cut Araiza, there’s a good chance they could stash him on their practice squad until the details are fully vetted.

 

I doubt another franchise would be willing to put him on their practice squad or active roster, given the horrible optics. 
 

If there’s a good enough chance that he DIDNT do this, that might be a preferable options vs keeping him on the active roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess over time (I obviously have no idea and want justice served above all) is that he'll be acquitted of serious charges to the point where he'd be deemed employable by an NFL team.

 

Short of something like a commissioners  exemption, I'm not sure how he'll be a Bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

100% of the currently public info originated with the accuser.  It may indeed be the whole story.  If not, and somehow Araiza is telling truth to the Bills and they cut him for PR, how does that go over in the room when 3 months from now when more facts come out?  Yes, the press will drop it, but as McD pointed out there are people involved.  
 

The correct remedies are so simple to apply once the truth is known.  Personally I’d cut him even if he had nothing whatsoever to do with the incident but covered it up for his buddies.  If he lied at all to the Bills, bye.  Obviously anything beyond that he should rot in jail.  If he is exonerated but still cut, I think that is a bad look in the room.  People matter.  The truth matters.  

 

 

 

This is my concern with the Bills.  

 

If they cut him, after knowing what they knew, it looks like you did it solely because of public pressure - another reason I wanted this to play out in Court or however.  They determined that there is more then we know.  

 

We look bad.  I don't want my team to look bad.  I want it to have done the right thing.  They took the same approach with Shady but I don't know if that was Beane or Whaley.  It's not like we haven't been here before recently.  

 

 

So if they cut him it better dam well be because they learned details in the story they did not know.  

Edited by Big Blitz
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yobogoya! said:

 

I think it goes without saying that a team can find a serviceable punter far easier than a franchise QB. 

 

Most of the people who are taking the "wait and see" stance right now are doing so because a man's life and reputation are at stake, not because we're concerned with punting the ball in 2022. 


100% 

 

I don’t care if he’s the backup safety.. For me, this is about principle. 
 

Some view integrity as cutting a guy based on allegations.  Others view integrity as standing by a guy who proclaims his innocence, unless proven otherwise.  
 

We all have different moral compasses. 
 

It would have been cool to have a novelty punter who may also be an absolute weapon in Special Teams.  That’s it though … it would have been cool … not necessary, not important.. just kinda cool.  
 

We will be the same Super Bowl contender for years to come with him or without him.  

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

This is my concern with the Bills.  

 

If they cut him, after knowing what they knew, it looks like you did it solely because of public pressure - another reason I wanted this to play out in Court or however.  They determined that there is more then we know.  

 

We look bad.  I don't want my team to look bad.  I want it to have done the right thing.  They took the same approach with Shady but I don't know if that was Beane or Whaley.

 

 

So if they cut him it better dam well be because they learned details in the story they did not know.  

They (McD) have already said there is new information they did not know.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

Just had a random thought…

 

If the Bills cut Araiza, there’s a good chance they could stash him on their practice squad until the details are fully vetted.

 

I doubt another franchise would be willing to put him on their practice squad or active roster, given the horrible optics. 
 

If there’s a good enough chance that he DIDNT do this, that might be a preferable options vs keeping him on the active roster.

No other team but the Bills would want to “stash” him on their practice squad? If it would look horrible for other teams to sign him, wouldn’t the same apply to the Bills?

Edited by BTB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Its Gonna Be Chilly said:

 

Really? In San Diego? 

 

 

9-335190DSC_6619.jpg

 

Did you see the video of the student apartment as reported, or just playing devils advocate that it may have been at some resort? 

 

Araiza's attorney said he wouldn't go as far to charecturize the evening as a "party" it was more like a small gathering of friends.

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

7 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

Just had a random thought…

 

If the Bills cut Araiza, there’s a good chance they could stash him on their practice squad until the details are fully vetted.

 

I doubt another franchise would be willing to put him on their practice squad or active roster, given the horrible optics. 
 

If there’s a good enough chance that he DIDNT do this, that might be a preferable options vs keeping him on the active roster.

That’s an interesting thought.  I don’t think he’d clear waivers, but who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mike in Horseheads said:

They (McD) have already said there is new information they did not know.

 


If I had to guess .. it’s likely not having to do with whether they believe he’s innocent or guilty, but ancillary stuff they may feel misled on.  
 

Maybe they thought this was wrapped up.  Maybe they didn’t know she was 17 at the time.  Maybe there are details they feel Araiza should have informed them of that he didn’t.  
 

But I highly doubt they went from “we believe he’s innocent” to “holy **** we have a rapist on our team” overnight. 

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

18 minutes ago, Mrbojanglezs said:

Could the Bills be at risk of a libel lawsuit if they cut him for this and he is in fact innocent. 

 

 

 

Sure.  Anyone can sue anyone for anything.  But that's a lawsuit that undoubtedly would be quickly dismissed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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