McDermott/Beane press conference 8/27: Matt Araiza released

[JESSEFEFFER]

1 hour ago, JoPoy88 said:

When you say “no one in the media knew about it” I’m assuming you mean NFL media? Because I agree with you there. But the LA Times (also media) have been looking into this for several months at least.

When did Matt get connected to it in any published account?  Where was the info to be had?  If a rumor like this were posted here, it would quickly get removed as have others.  Who are the people in the know who are willing to talk?   Most have reasons to keep quiet.  Investigators, prosecutors, coaching staff, college administration.  The LA Times June story did not connect names to the incident.

[Sierra Foothills]

6 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

This is really good.  Thanks for taking the time to put it together.  

 

I do have some quibbles.  By putting "or not" in parentheses, you're suggesting that it probably was willful.   There is no evidence that they willfully ignored any information, and that's exactly contrary to what Beane has said.   They did not know anything about this before the end of July, at which point they didn't ignore it.  

 

Yes, they could have had more regular contact with plaintiff's counsel, but what was that supposed to be?  A phone call asking if there was more information?   I agree, that would be a good thing to do, but in this case (and most) it would not have turned up anything new.   There wasn't any reason to believe that this long after the event, new information would arise.  But if that's the best criticism you can come up with, then I'd say the Bills did a pretty good job.  

 

I agree completely that cutting Araiza was the expedient and correct thing to do.  It will end the media circus.  And I agree that it wasn't done, as Beane said, because it was the best thing for Araiza.  It wasn't.  But it was done for culture.  There had to be players (or wives) who were troubled by the allegations and who were troubled to have deal with having the guy as a teammate.  McDermott is promising these guys an ideal environment in which to become better football players, and having that kind of distraction goin on is not conducive to an ideal environment.  So, culture was one of the reasons they did what they did. 

Hey Shaw.

 

I always enjoy your posts.

 

To the first bolded, No I was not suggesting it was willful. I was suggesting it was possibly willful but I do believe the Bills were unaware of the situation. They have a great track record. If it were another team I might be more skeptical of what was known.

 

To the second bolded, the Bills could have asked to speak to the victim. They might have been denied access but at least they could have said "we wanted to speak to the victim" which is a whole lot better than not asking to speak to the victim. They could also have asked to speak to any witnesses. Did they ever follow up with law enforcement?

 

To the final bolded I can concede that preserving the culture was aided by cutting Araiza however it wasn't like the team had any choice because they didn't.

[Shaw66]

12 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

Hey Shaw.

 

I always enjoy your posts.

 

To the first bolded, No I was not suggesting it was willful. I was suggesting it was possibly willful but I do believe the Bills were unaware of the situation. They have a great track record. If it were another team I might be more skeptical of what was known.

 

To the second bolded, the Bills could have asked to speak to the victim. They might have been denied access but at least they could have said "we wanted to speak to the victim" which is a whole lot better than not asking to speak to the victim. They could also have asked to speak to any witnesses. Did they ever follow up with law enforcement?

 

To the final bolded I can concede that preserving the culture was aided by cutting Araiza however it wasn't like the team had any choice because they didn't.

Thanks for clarifying the willful thing.  I don't think they knew more and ignored it. 

 

Yes, they could have done those things, but my point is that they were all pretty low probability things.  Plaintiff's lawyer is unlikely to permit contact with the Bills, at least not under any conditions the Bills would accept, and the police aren't going to be sharing the results of an ongoing investigation.  So, sure, there were things that the Bills could have done that they didn't, and it would have helped in their media relations this week if they could point to all those things if they had done them, but at the end of the day it doesn't really matter.   No publication is going to go to the mat over why the Bills didn't pursue the lawyer.  It just isn't a story that has legs.  

 

The real bottom line is that the whole thing is just like a football play.  Ask everyone to perform as well as they can, run the play, and then move on.  Avoid turnovers, sacks, tackles for loss.   That's exactly what happened here.  Beane and McDermott and others did their jobs.  Some guys didn't execute perfectly, but on plenty of successful football plays guys don't execute perfectly, and the play still succeeds.  This was a situation where there wouldn't be a touchdown, but they avoided a turnover, a sack, and a tackle for a loss  Move on the next play.  

Edited August 29, 2022 by Shaw66

[JESSEFEFFER]

18 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

To your first point (numbered above), it was reported in the Associated Press that there were teams that were aware of the Araiza situation pre-draft. The AP is a very credible news organization not least of all because they are a not-for-profit. 

 

Are you now aware of their reports or do you choose to ignore them.

 

To your second point, I don't believe the Bills knew about the rape story pre-draft but other teams did know, thus the Bills fell short in this regard. It is binary, they either passed or failed. They failed. Is this too difficult to understand?

 

To your third point, Do you believe it's the job of a Bills beat reporter to scour for theoretical news surrounding the San Diego State Football program? If Microsoft hires an executive is it a newspapers job to vet him?

The story was vague about what they knew.  It implied it was a general sense of a problematic incident involving him but not knowing the details.  

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, BillsFanSD said:

I haven't seen any evidence at all that any NFL teams knew about this allegation or that Araiza was connected to it.  No team has indicated that they knew about this allegation during the draft.  No scouts, no GMs, nobody. 

 

Maadi is an AP writer for Tampa, similar to Wawrow here.  Like other AP employees, they're required to have two independent corroborating sources before publishing (including twitter when presenting as themselves, an AP employee).

 

This was in the Lawsuit thread and I think upthread here, but people do miss these things.

 

1 hour ago, BillsFanSD said:

Nobody in the media knew anything about it either.  

 

Let me say up-front that if one of your points is that there's a bunch of holier-than-thou second guessing of the Bills going on with some members of the media right now, I would agree.  But as far as the story being out there in the media:

 

Before the draft?  Probably not.

Before the lawsuit came out:

June 3 https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-06-03/sdsu-san-diego-state-football-players-claim-rape-girl

July 29 https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-29/teenager-recounts-alleged-rape-by-san-diego-state-football-players

 

Let's review the details that were in that latter:

Quote

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.

 

Now, the story doesn't name Matt Araiza specifically.  But it includes a lot of specific details:

-Player gave her drink and brought her to room where she was gang raped (unclear if player participated)

-Gang rape left her bruised and bloody

-Police report was filed and rape exam performed

 

So when the alleged victim's lawyer called the Bills and spoke with Kathryn D'Angelo then emailed, Matt Araiza's name could be subsituted for "player" in the LA Times story and handed off to the PR/Communications department for their "take" on how that would come across.

 

1 hour ago, BillsFanSD said:

If you really think the Bills knew that Araiza was credibly connected to a gang rape and drafted him anyway, I think your priors are way off.

 

I don't think the Bills knew any of this prior to the draft.  They have said they did not know, and that if they did, it would have taken him off their board.

I think it's a good question if they left any actions not taken through which they could have known.

 

I agree with Shaw66 that likely the Bills are asking themselves this question and some of their procedures will likely change.

[Wayne Arnold]

35 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

I'm the first to criticize the current state of the news media with their shyt disturbing and prioritizing of clicks, traffic, visitors, and ratings above actual journalism.

 

You could've just said "profit".

[BillsFanSD]

34 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

To your first point (numbered above), it was reported in the Associated Press that there were teams that were aware of the Araiza situation pre-draft. The AP is a very credible news organization not least of all because they are a not-for-profit. 

Can you provide a link?  The only story I've seen is one that suggests that two teams might have been vaguely aware that there was something about Araiza but had no idea what it was.  I haven't seen any stories indicating that any teams knew that he was accused of drugging a girl so that she could raped. 

6 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Maadi is an AP writer for Tampa, similar to Wawrow here.  Like other AP employees, they're required to have two independent corroborating sources before publishing (including twitter when presenting as themselves, an AP employee).

Yeah, this is exactly the story I was talking about.  It doesn't say that anybody knew these allegations.  In fact, it says the opposite.

[JESSEFEFFER]

6 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Maadi is an AP writer for Tampa, similar to Wawrow here.  Like other AP employees, they're required to have two independent corroborating sources before publishing (including twitter when presenting as themselves, an AP employee).

 

This was in the Lawsuit thread and I think upthread here, but people do miss these things.

 

 

Let me say up-front that if one of your points is that there's a bunch of holier-than-thou second guessing of the Bills going on with some members of the media right now, I would agree.  But as far as the story being out there in the media:

 

Before the draft?  Probably not.

Before the lawsuit came out:

June 3 https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-06-03/sdsu-san-diego-state-football-players-claim-rape-girl

July 29 https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-29/teenager-recounts-alleged-rape-by-san-diego-state-football-players

 

Let's review the details that were in that latter:

 

Now, the story doesn't name Matt Araiza specifically.  But it includes a lot of specific details:

-Player gave her drink and brought her to room where she was gang raped (unclear if player participated)

-Gang rape left her bruised and bloody

-Police report was filed and rape exam performed

 

So when the alleged victim's lawyer called the Bills and spoke with Kathryn D'Angelo then emailed, Matt Araiza's name could be subsituted for "player" in the LA Times story and handed off to the PR/Communications department for their "take" on how that would come across.

 

 

I don't think the Bills knew any of this prior to the draft.  They have said they did not know, and that if they did, it would have taken him off their board.

I think it's a good question if they left any actions not taken through which they could have known.

 

I agree with Shaw66 that likely the Bills are asking themselves this question and some of their procedures will likely change.

 

I think it's all about who you know and what they are willing to say.  I wonder if the SDSU coaching staff was under a gag order otherwise more NFL teams would have known.

[Beck Water]

9 minutes ago, BillsFanSD said:

Can you provide a link?  The only story I've seen is one that suggests that two teams might have been vaguely aware that there was something about Araiza but had no idea what it was.  I haven't seen any stories indicating that any teams knew that he was accused of drugging a girl so that she could raped. 

Yeah, this is exactly the story I was talking about.  It doesn't say that anybody knew these allegations.  In fact, it says the opposite.

 

? 

It says that at least two teams (where Maadi has contacts willing to talk anonymously) were aware

 

5 minutes ago, JESSEFEFFER said:

 

I think it's all about who you know and what they are willing to say.  I wonder if the SDSU coaching staff was under a gag order otherwise more NFL teams would have known.

 

I dunno about "gag order" but what coach worth his salt is going to lower the stock of his players by offering negative information that would deep-6 their draft stock, especially if it's rumors?

 

It is about who you know, and probably also where you hang out and listen.

Edited August 29, 2022 by Beck Water

[Wayne Arnold]

48 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

Based on the timing of Araiza's release it's clear the Bills were not standing on principle so much as they were bowing to public pressure.  Bills Head Coach Sean McDermott appeared on Barstool Sports on Tuesday 8/23/22 and said what a "great kid" Araiza was. This was 22 days after the plaintiff's attorney spoke to the Bills attorney and 2 days before the Bills said they had conducted a "thorough investigation. How much was McDermott kept in the dark about what was going on? Isn't this a mishandling of the situation?

 

When the Bills released Araiza they were not standing up for him or for due process nor were they supporting their "culture." Releasing Araiza became necessary and unavoidable (except in the opinions of a few delusional posters here).

 

When should they have released Araiza in your mind? Immediately after he received a text from this turd?

 

 

You can fault McDermott for getting emotionally attached to his players (obvious from Friday's post-game press conference) if you want. But I wouldn't.

 

The Bills didn't really need to release Araiza. Hell, the Browns just signed a guy who's been accused of raping 20+ women to a giant contract. Bills could've held on to Araiza as long as it took for this situation to be resolved if they really wanted.

 

But they did release him. Precisely when they should have. And I've never, ever had issue with calling the Bills out when they deserve it.

[UKBillFan]

2 minutes ago, Wayne Arnold said:

 

When should they have released Araiza in your mind? Immediately after he received a text from this turd?

 

 

You can fault McDermott for getting emotionally attached to his players (obvious from Friday's post-game press conference) if you want. But I wouldn't.

 

The Bills didn't really need to release Araiza. Hell, the Browns just signed a guy who's been accused of raping 20+ women to a giant contract. Bills could've held on to Araiza as long as it took for this situation to be resolved if they really wanted.

 

But they did release him. Precisely when they should have. And I've never, ever had issue with calling the Bills out when they deserve it.

Sorry to be pedantic, but wasn’t Watson charged with multiple accounts of sexual assault rather than rape?

[JESSEFEFFER]

2 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

? 

It says that at least two teams (where Maadi has contacts willing to talk anonymously) were aware

 

I dunno about "gag order" but what coach worth his salt is going to lower the stock of his players by offering negative information?

 

It is about who you know, and probably also where you hang out and listen.

Actually I think this happens often.  Sure they want to promote their program but they need good relationships with NFL scouts to do it.  Letting an NFL team get burned like this hurts their cause so they should be honest.

[DrDawkinstein]

 

Good insight and comments by Morse (continued in the Twitter comments too). Doesnt seem that it will have too bad of an impact on the team.

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Sierra Foothills said:

… I'm the first to criticize the current state of the news media with their shyt disturbing and prioritizing of clicks, traffic, visitors, and ratings above actual journalism. I hate the lack of objectivity by news outlets that began with the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987. …

Agreed. I would add that another big contributing factor has been the change in media ownership laws since the 80s as well. Use to be strict regulations on how many and what types of outlets could be owned by a single entity both nationally and locally. Consolidated corporate media ownership has hurt our ability to report and consume news. 

[Beck Water]

On 8/28/2022 at 3:24 PM, Sierra Foothills said:

My thought is that most people here seem to think the Bills either handled this very well or very poorly.

 

But again the truth doesn't always fit into a nice, tidy binary box.

 

The Bills did some things well and other things poorly. You could probably assign them a numerical grade. I dock them points for not doing better on the due diligence/vetting of Araiza. I also dock them points for not continuing the engagement between De'Angelo and Gilleon. They had nothing to lose and possibly something to gain by staying connected in this conversation... even if it's just for good optics. The Bills have not been flawless in this situation but I think overall they responded pretty well. 

 

I agree with this.  The Bills did some things well and some things poorly, and they didn't handle this in the most "ripple free" manner they probably could have (which would likely have been to cut Araiza and keep Haack, then look for an upgrade before the season).

 

I think the Bills seriously mis-read or mis-understood "how the Frog would jump", meaning what Gellion (victim's lawyer's) intended outcomes were.  Keeping a line of communication open to him could only have helped in this regard. 

 

I also think (and this is mapping what's been said onto some 'lessons learned' situations where I've been involved) there were probably a couple of communication SNAFUs, where cross-line communication between Legal/Business side and the Football side of the Bills organization was insufficient.

 

If I had one question I could ask Sean McDermott and Brandon Beane separately, it would be "Last week, when you discussed 80 man roster cuts, were you aware of the July 29 LA Times article describing the condition of a victim of an alleged gang rape by SDSU players and IDing her lawyer as Dan Gellion, and were you informed that in a phone call to the Bills on June 30th, Gellion identified one of the players involved as Matt Araiza?"

 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Beck Water

[Beck Water]

26 minutes ago, JESSEFEFFER said:

Actually I think this happens often.  Sure they want to promote their program but they need good relationships with NFL scouts to do it.  Letting an NFL team get burned like this hurts their cause so they should be honest.

 

I think you're absolutely correct when it comes to big programs that send a lot of players to the NFL like Alabama

 

But how many players have been drafted from SDSU (open question, I genuinely have no clue)?

I could see where if a program has very few players drafted, when they have a guy who seems like a sure-fire pick he's a bit of a "unicorn" to them and the temptation would be to polish his horn

 

That may be an ill-chosen metaphor....

[Shaw66]

7 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I could see where if a program has very few players drafted, when they have a guy who seems like a sure-fire pick he's a bit of a "unicorn" to them and the temptation would be to polish his horn

 

That may be an ill-chosen metaphor....

!!!

[JESSEFEFFER]

30 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I think you're absolutely correct when it comes to big programs that send a lot of players to the NFL like Alabama

 

But how many players have been drafted from SDSU (open question, I genuinely have no clue)?

I could see where if a program has very few players drafted, when they have a guy who seems like a sure-fire pick he's a bit of a "unicorn" to them and the temptation would be to polish his horn

 

That may be an ill-chosen metaphor....

I looked it up.  Here's the link.  One of 4 in the last draft.

 

San_Diego_State_Aztecs_in_the_NFL_Draft

[Beck Water]

9 minutes ago, JESSEFEFFER said:

I looked it up.  Here's the link.  One of 4 in the last draft.

 

San_Diego_State_Aztecs_in_the_NFL_Draft

 

Oh, wow.  OK.  But still - previous years 1-2 per year.  I dunno, I just think it may be a different way of thinking than the perennial contenders with multiple draft picks per year have.

 

And maybe it's stinkin' thinkin' and it's gonna change.  Sounds as though the coach and AD are starting to hear some music:

 

 

 

[Motorin']

35 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Oh, wow.  OK.  But still - previous years 1-2 per year.  I dunno, I just think it may be a different way of thinking than the perennial contenders with multiple draft picks per year have.

 

And maybe it's stinkin' thinkin' and it's gonna change.  Sounds as though the coach and AD are starting to hear some music:

 

 

 

 

They should have watched Sean and Beane. They were really dumb. They came out and condemned sexual assault and then said they'd only take questions about football.

 

One of the first questions was, "the Buffalo Bills said somethings are more important than football, and this is one of those things. Do you agree with them?"