This is the second nonsense post you've made about how the Pats handled the AH situation. Stop.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
TMZ: New England Patriot Antonio Brown accused of rape by former trainer in federal lawsuit
- Thread starter ElectricBlanketFire
- Start date
This is the second nonsense post you've made about how the Pats handled the AH situation. Stop.
He was arrested meer hours after the murder occurred. It was a real quick turn around. In the mean time he tried to come to the stadium and they told him to get the fuck away and go home.
This isn't true actually. He wasn't arrested until 8 days after they searched his house. The Pats released him that day.
However, the poster you're replying to is being disingenuous about the situation. Hernandez was banned from Gillette Stadium two days after his house was searched (and six days before his arrest).
They just didn't officially release him until the arrest, which is a strange thing to attack the team for. Facts matter and the team shouldn't fire a person immediately when all of the information isn't available.
Can't believe people actually thought they'd cut him without him actually getting arrested. No one will care in a week or 2 unless/until that happens.
As a Pats fan I'd be ok with cutting him or at the very least benching him until the NFL makes a decision.
But I fully agree with the NFL's decision to not put him on the exempt list. It would be a stupid precedent to set if you could bench players from a civil suit without the NFL even talking to the parties involved.
Once the NFL talks to both parties, and they find the accusers evidence damning enough. They put him on the exempt list pending the actual lawsuit/investigation. If the evidence is REALLY damning, they can outright suspend him indefinitely.
He benched his #1/#2 CB for the Superbowl partly because Butler violated a minor rule and had some discipline issues. He didn't play a single defensive snap and the Patriots lost that superbowl due to a horrendous defensive performance.
Jamie Collins demanded "Von Miller" money and the was subsequently traded to the 0-16 Browns for a measley third round pick
Chandler Jones had a police incident where he showed up at a police station shirtless. Allegedly with synthetic marijuana in his system. Next season he was traded away.
Bill does not tolerate shit.
But I fully agree with the NFL's decision to not put him on the exempt list. It would be a stupid precedent to set if you could bench players from a civil suit without the NFL even talking to the parties involved.
Once the NFL talks to both parties, and they find the accusers evidence damning enough. They put him on the exempt list pending the actual lawsuit/investigation. If the evidence is REALLY damning, they can outright suspend him indefinitely.
Bill is no nonsense but that goes both ways.
He benched his #1/#2 CB for the Superbowl partly because Butler violated a minor rule and had some discipline issues. He didn't play a single defensive snap and the Patriots lost that superbowl due to a horrendous defensive performance.
Jamie Collins demanded "Von Miller" money and the was subsequently traded to the 0-16 Browns for a measley third round pick
Chandler Jones had a police incident where he showed up at a police station shirtless. Allegedly with synthetic marijuana in his system. Next season he was traded away.
Bill does not tolerate shit.
You're either forgetting how it actually went down or are willfully misrepresenting it.
But a team source said that the top members of the organization — and that of course includes Robert Kraft and Bill Belichick, both out of the country on vacation — quietly decided last week that they would part ways with Hernandez if and when an arrest happened, even if it was for obstruction of justice.
I get shitting on the Pats for little things but they did the right thing in the Hernandez time.
Relax my man, Im just exagerating when it comes to Bill wanting to win, I dont really believe he wanted to break out AH from jail.
No, there was a investigation going on regarding the Murder and after a few days then he was arrested with the charges on Murder, at a point Bill or Kraft even went directly to Hernandez in the team facilities and asked him if any of this was true. Hernandez was cut like an hour after he was arrested. Murder happened June 18 or 17 and Arrest happened the 26th. and take in mind this was a criminal investigation and not a civil lawsuit.
Where does my post quoted is saying different than what you posted have? He wasn't cut before he got arrested.
If I were the owner of a team that was still dealing with the fallout from my own sex worker see scandal. A team that is playing very well and that has a very soft portion of the schedule coming up; I'd bench him until the league investigation finished. It's going to take only a couple of weeks at best and the league probably wouldn't have enough to put him on the exempt and it would be the right thing to do and it would cost me nothing.
The NFL and the Patriots are doing the right thing. If it is found that Antonio Brown did indeed sexually assault the accuser, then he should (and probably will) go down for it. For now since investigations have yet to take place, it would be unwise for the NFL or Patriots to suspended/cut/exempt Antonio Brown because then they a prematurely saying he is guilty and also because it would set a terrible precedent that organized crime would exploit to the fullest.
I don't like that people rush to judgment in these cases so fast. One just needs to look at the Duke Lacrosse players case and its aftermath to see that really is worth waiting to get all the facts before casting judgment.
I don't like that people rush to judgment in these cases so fast. One just needs to look at the Duke Lacrosse players case and its aftermath to see that really is worth waiting to get all the facts before casting judgment.
He was planned to be cut no matter what. Bill and Kraft both spoke to him few days before and knowing Bill his mind was already made up.
Like a poster said above Bill really doesn't tolerate nonsense when it happens on his team. He will cut or bench anyone on his team.
But, the fact remains that he wasn't cut before the arrest, that they decided on doing so beforehand is irrelevant. and thats were AB situation fall the same, there is no reason to cut him right now, and even more because this isnt even a criminal case.
The Patriots cut Hernandez before he was charged. Police investigated Hernandez' house the day after Odin Lloyd's body was found, but did not say whether he himself was being investigated for the crime. Later that day, according to testimony, Belichick and Kraft sat with Hernandez and asked him directly if he was involved in that crime, he said "absolutely not" (according to court testimony from Kraft). Kraft barred him from Gillette Stadium and Patriots facilities that day. 6 days later, Hernandez was arrested at his house and the Patriots cut him, and then about 2 hours later he was charged. Kraft testified for the prosecution against Hernandez.
There was a lot of wrong information in the press about the original investigation. His questioning by police was widely unreported, except for a Sports Illustrated article that said that police said Hernandez was not a suspect, and that the death was not being investigated as a murder. Both of those things were ultimately wrong. Police, as is usual, did not provide any information, so whoever in the Attleboro Police provided that info to SI was very wrong.
Figured the NFL wouldn't take any action until they do the interview with the accuser, which is some time next week isn't it? So this decision makes total sense.
Makes sense to me. The accusation just came out, and you can't suspend a player based on accusations. The woman is off getting married, so I think it's going to be a couple of weeks before we get anymore news unless the investigation starts earlier.
Fuck AB either way. I still don't think he's worth the headache.
Fuck AB either way. I still don't think he's worth the headache.
Wtf is that gibberish?? Reads like it was made by an AI bot
I wouldn't single out a team.
The NFL has a discipline problem namely because the CBA is stupid and Roger has 100% full discretion.
Big Ben had 2 accusers.
Ray Lewis was involved in a murder.
Tyreek Hill was never suspended
Yeah it's league wide for sure, but I'm mainly mentioning the Patriots here because this is their call to make and instead of soing the right thing and making the call themselves they intentionally left it up to the NFL so they could hide behind whatever decision they made.
Yeah it really comes down to this. An NFL job frankly isn't like most other jobs (right to work) where a company is happy to shit can you at the slightest sniff of improper outside of work conduct especially if you have a prominent profile at the company.
Why shouldn't they hear from both parties and look at the evidence first? How should teams going forward tell the difference between legitimate and illegitimate civil suits?
It just doesn't make sense to expect him NOT to be allowed to play. If he isn't liable but was suspended then what? How does he get that hypothetical 6 weeks back? This is the best case scenario, allow for investigations to continue and the minute the NFL has a smoking gun THEN you banish him from the NFL, not beforehand.
They absolutely should. They are meeting with Brown and the potential victim next week.
But Brown shouldn't be allowed to take the field until they meet with the victim at the very least.
But...why? That's punishing him before even establishing if there's anything to the whole situation. This isn't like a 9-5 job. There's all kinds of performance based pay incentives that you could deny him.
The exempt list is not a punishment like a suspension would be. He still gets paid.
He gets his salary. But he doesn't get to play, so he limits his stats and therefore ability to achieve performance based incentives. It also punishes the team by forcing them to pay someone that isn't even playing.
you really are not understanding the problem there is with doing this are you?
The issue is essentially punishing a player/team before anyone hears from both sides.
I think it can absolutely be teams discretion, and the patriots for sure don't need him against the Dolphins for a regular season game. But honestly the only thing benching him would do for the patriots is social brownie points for playing it safe. And they are honestly a privileged team in their current position.
They had one of the strongest if not THE strongest receiving corps before Brown. They have a great run, the GOAT QB, and a very good defense.
Playing against what is likely the WORST team in the NFL at the moment.
The patriots CAN bench him and be fine. But if it was a star player on another team with a tougher match up? I don't think I'd expect them to bench at this juncture to be honest.
If they do that it sets a precedent. The NFLPA would get an upper hand in the next CBA negotiations. The most Pat's could do is make AB a healthy scratch for Sunday and say he's not up to speed on the playbook yet. But we won't know that until Sunday morning.
Of course it's a punishment. Most player contracts have performance goals. You bench them, you're taking their money. The exempt list is a punishment without question.
Oh no I understand it perfectly. People are afraid this will be abused that suddenly there will be a flood of false allegations and players will suffer as a result.
Which is completely ridiculous and unrealistic. False allegations are OBSCENELY rare. To think that suddenly women will be lining up to lie about sexual assault just to punish the teams they don't like is absurd.
Exactly. I still haven't seen a good reason why he shouldn't be on the exempt list.
It's rare but in terms of the general population it happens to famous people/athletes at a higher rate.
To make matters worse, with sports betting now being legal, you can have some shady shit going down.
Because there's no reason to punish him or the patriots before they at least talk to both parties? A civil suit is trivially easy to file and it's mere existence isn't an indication of anything. Simply talking to both parties and evaluating what they have to say should be a bare minimum before doing anything.
It doesn't just have to be sexual assault. The commissioner can use the exempt list for any number of reasons, and opening up the mere existence of a civil lawsuit to placement on the exempt list is not a good precedent for the players.
I have zero faith in the NFL to properly see this through, I think their number one priority is to keep their own hands clean, rather than to actually find out if AB is a rapist or get justice for this woman, but I can understand their stance here.
If anything it's the Patriots who can get an easy PR win by sitting AB themselves. They could easily cruise through the next few games without him, and give themselves time for the league investigation to play out, but Bill seems like a miserable prick who isn't interested in PR wins and probably is more emboldened to play AB just to spite people.
this is Football were you have fans that are to invested too the point of cult following (without even considering the fact about gambling on games in the sport), you doubt that someone will not do this if they know thy have the power to basically change the outcome of a game, imagine someone doing this to P. Mahomes in the AFC championship games against the Pats, you think it would be fair to bench him based on a civil suit? I would agree with you if this was a criminal indictment tough.
It's a hypothetical problem that doesn't exist and yet people are still trying to use it to argue against keeping a potential rapist off the field.
I'm not saying ban the guy for life. I'm just saying put him on the exempt list while the NFL looks into it. If nothing is found then he still gets his money. But if something IS found then we kept a rapist off the football field. And to me that is something that everyone should want.
Not only that but most NFL players are in the NFL because they love to play football. Being put on the exempt list also takes away their ability to do what they love.
Nobody has ever been put on the exempt list for a civil case. It's always been criminal cases.
Maybe there's not much of a morally good reason. But the business reason is the NFLPA will have a field day with this new precedent during the next CBA negotiations.
Why are you ignoring everyone pointing out the flaws in this argument? He misses out on playing which endangers his performance incentives and it punishes the patriots by forcing them to pay someone who isn't playing.
It's an incredibly poor reason because straight up fuck the NFLPA as well since he should not be allowed to play until after the interviews and depending on the evidence, I don't see any good reason why he should play.
that's not flaws in the argument those are poor reasons.
What do you mean its unrealistic? The Mob 'organized crime' will jump all over this (along with other bookies and sports betters). Points shaving in sports is a huge money maker for organized crime (they invented point shaving schemes). If you suspended players based on solely on allegations before investigations are completed, it sets a terrible precedent that people will take advantage of.
Do you not understand that people in general suck and there are some that will take advantage of any system? Most people in this thread can imagine a scenario where an accuser files a lawsuit against a QB or other star player on a team before a game or Super Bowl on behalf of organized crime. If the NFL then exmepted or suspended that player, orgazined crime wins.
Don't say that couldn't happen because organized crime already has their claws in Boxing, Soccer, Basketball, Baseball, etc (having players throw games/matches, or paying off refs). You really want to give them another outlet to screw over people, teams, and a whole entire game?
Let the investigations take place and if Antonio Brown is guilty, then he should be punished and go down for it. The problem is that we don't currently know if he is guilty, until then, nothing should happen to him.
I'm ignoring it because those are not things that I care about.
Oh no the poor billion dollar organization has to pay their player!
Oh no the multi-millionaire professional athlete might only make 11 million dollars instead of 12 million dollars!
Yeah sorry if I am not beside myself with worry over that stuff. I'm more interested in the sexual assault allegations that have been thrown at the player in question. That should be the most important factor here. Not whether or not the player gets good stats or that the billion dollar organization has to pay him for the weeks he would miss. The fact that some of you are more worried about that stuff that the allegations themselves is frankly disgusting imo.
"Fuck the NFLPA aswell" is not a good reason to put someone on the exempt list. If they put AB on the exempt list it opens up putting more players on the exempt list with no proof of anything, just accusations. This is not only about ABx it's about protecting future players too.
And a strike might be happening next year. So all of this will come into play.
Wow. Yeah who gives a shit about the truth, these folks have money. Fuck em. It's not punishment if I decide they can afford it!
You both have a terrible argument here and I hope you realize no one is buying it.
Nope! I enjoy learning about and discussing the law but am not a lawyer.