Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.

[NoSaint]

2 minutes ago, haroldwaide said:

Rosters are locked untill Monday, I believe. They are just making sure it's out there so he can't c on me after them for cutting him early...

hint: reporters would just say rosters are locked at 8am this morning, not give breaking news when the daily roster is confirmed late afternoon. 
 

the chiefs cut 5 guys today. 

[BillsFanForever19]

3 minutes ago, Mango said:

The roster gets released daily before practice. Part of submitting an injury report. 
 

The Bills already released the roster for today about an hour before practice. 
 

They proactively let reporters know Araiza wouldn’t be at practice today.

 

Yes, but they also told the media that they should let it be known he is still on the roster as of practice. Would seem odd that they'd tell them to say he's still a member of the team and then an hour later say he's not a member of the team.

[Beck Water]

5 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

They don't have to explain every decision that went into where they find themselves today but a candid statement on a coherent timeline would be entirely appropriate imo.

 

We may get one, but McDermott and Beane owe it to the guys who were playing for their careers yesterday to put some focus into reviewing the film, making their analysis, doing the corrections for the players who played yesterday, maybe holding a practice for the players who didn't play yesterday.

 

Patience.

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I'm not really in a position to say what we as fans are owed, but I'm pretty confident that continuing to repeat 'we have more work to do' doesn't serve their short or long term goals.

 

Saying it may not help, but DOING it may. They only said it because it was asked repeatedly in as many different ways as possible. Nothing changes if you mix up the words asking the same question. 

[NoSaint]

3 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

The Bills apparently told them they could tweet it out during practice whereas normally they are limited to tweet post practice 

I was subtly ribbing you a little with that, honestly. We had already had the news, and the follow up explaining that shared here from sal 

[mannc]

1 minute ago, Mango said:

We had a similar (but different) situation at our UK office a year or two ago. It was just a single sales rep with a law suit and made national new in the UK. 
 

Our COO quickly got in front of the public with statements and articles. And we are a company with much more revenue/value than the Bills and have much less notoriety and smaller headlines. 
 

Not a great look from Terry. 
 

Tangentially. Is Kim OK?

It's pretty obvious that the lawsuit and ensuing sh*t-storm caught the Bills completely by surprise.  They aren't handling it real well so far... 

[Believer]

3 minutes ago, Augie said:

The owners owe you nothing on this, even if you want to see an even more awkward, painful and useless display for your amusement. IMO

Doubt many of us find anything amusing about this sordid situation… or the Bills fumbling its resolution…

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, Augie said:

 

Saying it may not help, but DOING it may. They only said it because it was asked repeatedly in as many different ways as possible. Nothing changes if you mix up the words asking the same question. 

Just speaking personally, if any situation warranted a candid response it would be this one. For a variety of reasons.

[NoSaint]

Just now, Augie said:

 

Saying it may not help, but DOING it may. They only said it because it was asked repeatedly in as many different ways as possible. Nothing changes if you mix up the words asking the same question. 

Bingo. 
 

we are used to instant gratification. They don’t need to jerk their knee here. 
 

They don’t owe me a timeline while they are still in the active development of this. Not that long ago we’d get once daily updates and the team would be able to actually manage the situation without me demanding to be a part of the experience too. 

[Mango]

3 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Yes, but they also told the media that they should let it be known he is still on the roster as of practice. Would seem odd that they'd tell them to say he's still a member of the team and then an hour later say he's not a member of the team.

I think you’re over complicating it. The Bills gave them approval to report that he isn't practicing. Him being on the roster was already reported. Sal is just piecing the two bits together. He doesn’t say “they told us to report he is on the roster but isn’t practicing”.

 

I understand the confusion. But I really don’t think that’s the intent.  

[SCBills]

2 minutes ago, mannc said:

It's pretty obvious that the lawsuit and ensuing sh*t-storm caught the Bills completely by surprise.  They aren't handling it real well so far... 

 

Honestly… aside from the clunky statement they put out initially, they’re handling everything pretty well, imo.  
 

Didn’t dress him last night.  Are keeping him away from the team.  McDermott gave a heartfelt press conference.  
 

Now they remain tight lipped as they do their due diligence.  
 

We’ll see what McDermott says later, but so far… they’ve handled this “almost” as well as I could hope for. 

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, Believer said:

Doubt many of us find anything amusing about this sordid situation… or the Bills fumbling its resolution…

 

Please tell us why you want to hear more “I can’t comment on that at this point” from the owners who are not public speakers and have hired people to deal with “all situations football”.  Nothing is to be gained by putting them at a podium right now. Only a complete idiot would even consider that. 

 

The resolution is not available NOW. This instant gratification stuff is out of control! 

3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Just speaking personally, if any situation warranted a candid response it would be this one. For a variety of reasons.

 

A candid response would be “I don’t know yet”, but that will only lead to the being badgered to death. ZERO point in that at this point. 

[Mango]

1 minute ago, SCBills said:

 

Honestly… aside from the clunky statement they put out initially, they’re handling everything pretty well, imo.  
 

Didn’t dress him last night.  Are keeping him away from the team.  McDermott gave a heartfelt press conference.  
 

Now they remain tight lipped as they do their due diligence.  
 

We’ll see what McDermott says later, but so far… they’ve handled this “almost” as well as I could hope for. 

It’s been like 36 hours and this is page 241 of this thread. Likely the longest thread in the history of this site. 
 

The Bills are the lead story on nearly every (sports) news org in the country. 
 

They are either thoroughly unprepared. Or they’ve botched the entire thing. Probably a little bit of both. 

[78thealltimegreat]

3 hours ago, Chaos said:

So your saying the real concept is "you have the right to remain silent, anything you say may be used against you... , but if you stay quiet we will all assume that is an adminsion of guilt".  Very Orwellian. Which is sadly where are society is at these days. 

Yes if he says nothing in the public he is guilty 

2 hours ago, Herc11 said:

He made a press release yesterday during the game saying he was going to clear his name.

Ok I didn’t listen to the game as it seemed pointless but glad a statement was made

[Albany,n.y.]

I wonder if this still exists & offers the best solution until they can get all the legal stuff figured out:  

 

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/9/17/6333759/nfl-exempt-commissioners-permission-list-explanation-adrian-peterson-greg-hardy

 

The Minnesota Vikings took advantage of a rarely-used NFL protocol Wednesday, placing Adrian Peterson on the exempt/commissioner's permission list while the running back goes through the legal process after being indicted for child abuse last week. The list, used to allow players who are dealing with significant off-field situations, will allow the Vikings to remove Peterson from their 53-man roster.

Peterson will be barred from all team activities in the meantime, which sounds like a suspension except that Peterson will be paid during his leave. The decision whether to pay the player falls on the team. Players placed on the exempt list can be held with or without pay at the team's discretion.

Players must consent before being placed on the list, allowing the NFL Players Association to call Peterson's placement a "voluntary leave with pay."

As the name of the list suggests, players can only be placed on the exempt/commissioner's permission list with clearance from Roger Goodell. From the NFL Player Personnel Policy Manual:

The Exempt List is a special player status available to clubs only in unusual circumstances. The List includes those players who have been declared by the Commissioner to be temporarily exempt from counting within the Active List limit. Only the Commissioner has the authority to place a player on the Exempt List; clubs have no such authority, and no exemption, regardless of circumstances, is automatic. The Commissioner also has the authority to determine in advance whether a player's time on the Exempt List will be finite or will continue until the Commissioner deems the exemption should be lifted and the player returned to the Active List.

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by Albany,n.y.

[Beck Water]

5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

To me I would assume it means they aren't going to officially cut him until they know more. I guess they could just be waiting until McDermott's press conference to announce he's cut though.

 

 

This is just me totally spitballing, but I would have expected no different. 

 

McDermott could not credibly make a repeated point "we have a lot of work to do" on this, then turn around and cut Araiza the following day.

 

I don't know if it's at all feasible, but if it is, I would expect the Pegulas to reach out to Goodell about putting Araiza on the Commissioner's Exempt List.  This would be the fairest to everyone IMHO.  It would be fair to the team, by pulling a distraction away from them and giving them a roster slot for a new punter.  It would be fair to the league, by saying they took action against a source of hella bad publicity.  And it would be fair to Araiza, by giving him a continued paycheck while the lawsuit plays out.

 

However, while it would be a slam-dunk if he were facing criminal charges, in the past the league has argued against using it for civil charges.  But perhaps due to the gawdawful optics of this one, they'll choose to do so.

 

BUT if that option is pursued, I would expect it to wait until Monday when all the lawyers can get consulted.

[Boatdrinks]

5 minutes ago, mannc said:

I have to believe they are going to release Araiza...it's just too much of a distraction and the difference between him and a guy they could sign off the street isn't great enough to continue to endure this, especially with so much at stake this season.  They cut a sixth round pick; big deal.  It's not fair to Araiza, but if he's at least somewhat exonerated, he'll get another chance to play in the league. 

Perhaps McD and Beane (with the blessing of the Pegulas) actually believe in doing the right thing- namely standing by the young man they drafted if he is not responsible for this alleged incident. It’s hard to believe in this day and age, I know but they seem to have principles. The savage and psychopathic media makes it difficult to let the investigation play out, but I’m impressed by the Bills handing of this to date. I’m confident when the truth is known as best it can be under the circumstances that they will do the right thing . Maybe they’ll prove me wrong and cave in,  but as a fan I’m proud of their response thus far. 

[Reks Ryan]

40 minutes ago, TC in St. Louis said:

I don't believe anybody right now.  Least of all the alleged victim.  I just read something in her "journal" where she says that, after several people took turns having sex with her, she was flipped over and someone performed oral sex on her.  

 

First of all, I don't know any people who would take turns having sex with anybody.  But I don't know that there is a person on the planet who would have oral sex with a woman who has been having sex with several men.  That particular embellishment, in my opinion, is nonsense. 

 

Her lawyer strikes me as a scumbag.  He's blaming everybody.  Is it possible that his client is lying?  

 

This whole thing is funky.

You severely underestimate some people’s sexual deviance.   

[NoSaint]

1 minute ago, Augie said:

 

Please tell us why you want to hear more “I can’t comment on that at this point” from the owners who are not public speakers and have hired people to deal with “all situations football”.  Nothing is to be gained by putting them at a podium right now. Only a complete idiot would even consider that. 

 

The resolution is not available NOW. This instant gratification stuff is out of control! 

 

A candid response would be “I don’t know yet”, but that will only lead to the being badgered to death. ZERO point in that at this point. 

Yup. Until there is more to share, stick to less, right?

 

I can chat with y’all on here about it, but I am not part of the process and it’s not for me to be included step by step. They will gather and at some point make a commitment to a path forward. At that time we can seek answers for the decision made. It’s not a race to be first, but instead to get it right.

[Herc11]

1 minute ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

Yes if he says nothing in the public he is guilty 

Ok I didn’t listen to the game as it seemed pointless but glad a statement was made

Wasn't aired on the game that I know of. I just know it was released during the game. Also doesn't appear McDermott knew he was going to do it as he appeared upset about it during the post-game interview.