No, but the NFLPA whould.
The moment they do that without any solid evidence the NFL will turn in to a shitshow, more that already is.
-
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.
TMZ: New England Patriot Antonio Brown accused of rape by former trainer in federal lawsuit
- Thread starter ElectricBlanketFire
- Start date
No, but the NFLPA whould.
The moment they do that without any solid evidence the NFL will turn in to a shitshow, more that already is.
My issue is with the word alleged. What does it take even file a civil suit? Get the paperwork done and server the defendant. The bar seems way too low regardless of what they are being accused of.
Now if there is evidence that comes out that proves or shows the defendant is guilty, then go for it. I don't feel in this case there is enough to make that call.
Sexual assault is one of the most difficult crimes to prove. Especially after time has passed. It's probably why she went for a civil suit instead of a criminal case. They are easier to win because they don't require as much evidence. But even if she loses the case it doesn't mean that it never happened. It just means she couldn't prove that it did. Which isn't the same thing.
But I'm also not saying anyone and everyone who gets a civil case brought against them be permanently suspended from play. I'm saying that players who are accused of something like domestic violence or sexual assault should at the very least be put on the exempt list until the NFL gets more information. Even if they just put him there for a few weeks while they do their own investigation then that would be infinitely better than just letting back on the field at this point.
If he is innocent? Then literally nothing was lost. He still gets paid millions of dollars regardless. Sure he didn't get to play for a few games, but that's nothing when you consider how important and how sensitive an issue like this is.
If he is guilty? Then you kept a piece of shit off the field and out of the public eye.
What do you mean nothing was lost. Team stuff aside, he would look guilty. Kareem Hunt had a video that was made public, Greg Hardy had criminal charges, AP was arrested and confessed. You don't get on the exempt list unless there is a good reason. To go on there while they investigate is not fair, unless there is more than just the accusation itself.
I do acknowledge how hard it is to prove these crimes and how shitty of person AB is. I just think that if someone was crazy enough they could do this to say Patrick M to take him out for a few weeks until the truth comes out and doesn't sit well with me.
A few games? Civil suits can last years. If the burden of proof is the civil suit to be settled or thrown out then you're basically just saying "pay this to go away and you can play again".
And his status as a foot ball player is damaged, his stats for the season are busted and his next contract which will be negotiated as a free agent next year will be extremely damaged which impacts his pay. It's not "nothing was lost".
Not without a good reason? Idk aboit you, but I would call a civil suit accusing him of rape is a good enough reason to at least sideline him until more information comes out in the next couple of weeks.
And no it would not "make him look guilty". It would look like the Patriots and the league are playing it safe. Which they should be doing anyway give the severity of the accusations.
Did you even read what I said? I said while the NFL does their own investigation. Not until the civil case is done. And I assume the NFLs "investigation" would not take that long.
And yeah that is still nothing being lost to me. I'm not gonna cry over a multi-millionaire professional athlete having a few less TDs for his seasonal stats. And no him missing a handful of games would not affect his next contract AT ALL so long as he balls out for the games that he does play. Look at Jimmy G. The guy didn't even play half a season and was made one of the richest QBs in the league. Great players get paid.
Last edited:
It doesn't take much to file a civil suit in the US. So just being accused doesn't even mean there is evidence.
To begin a civil lawsuit in federal court, the plaintiff files a complaint with the court and "serves" a copy of the complaint on the defendant.
That is all it would take to place a player on the exempt list. Like I said, regardless of the nature of the crime, it would take a few hundred bucks to file the paperwork to take out a player.
To begin a civil lawsuit in federal court, the plaintiff files a complaint with the court and "serves" a copy of the complaint on the defendant.
That is all it would take to place a player on the exempt list. Like I said, regardless of the nature of the crime, it would take a few hundred bucks to file the paperwork to take out a player.
Nobody is saying that anyone and everyone involved in a civil suit should be placed on the exempt list though. He shouldn't be on the exempt list because of the civil suit. He should be on the exempt list because of what he is being accused of in the civil suit.
The civil suit part of this is completely meaningless. It's the accusations that matter.
Here is where we disagree, I say based on the evidence you say based on the accusation. It is cool, just where we differ.
Her side of the story IS evidence. Or are you trying to say witness testimony isn't evidence?
I am saying to be placed on the exempt list, is just an accusation and it isnt strong enough. Multiple witnesses or multiple women, he should be on it without question.
I disagree. A guy shouldn't have to sexually assault multiple women and have all of them come forward in order to get himself on the exempt list. One potential victim coming forward should be plenty given the severity of the allegations. Especially considering the exempt list isn't even really a punishment.
Now if we were talking about being suspended? Then yes I would agree we would need more information. Because at that point you would actually be punishing the player by taking away their money.
Imagine a team made the superbowl, and a week before the big game, someone accuses the team QB of sexual assault with no evidence, they are put on the comish exempt list...now the team is severly handicap in the superbowl. This is why I think it would be a very bad precedent to set, specially with betting made legal, this would be abused for financial gain.
Also for the accuser, she claimed their relationship was "Strictly Business", while AB claimed there relationship was much more then that.....after watching the videos on twitter.....does not seem "strictly business" at all.
Also for the accuser, she claimed their relationship was "Strictly Business", while AB claimed there relationship was much more then that.....after watching the videos on twitter.....does not seem "strictly business" at all.
Man remember big ben raped a woman and is still playing I got no faith in this turning out well
Goodell could easily place him on the exempt list by using the laundry list of other shit AB's done and just say he's there until the investigation on this particular instance is done.
Frankly, I'm surprised something like this hasn't happened to Brown before. Dude's been tiptoeing the line for years.
Frankly, I'm surprised something like this hasn't happened to Brown before. Dude's been tiptoeing the line for years.
Unfortunately in cases of sexual assault there's usually only two eye witnesses with conflicting stories. It's part of what makes prosecuting sexual assault so difficult.
I mean what else is he supposed to say? He has absolutely zero involvement with AB beyond playing against him sometimes and all of 3 days as his prospective teammate
Do you guys honestly think team mates are going to shit talk and comment on allegations like this?
Rule 0 is shut the fuck up and don't cause more headlines.
Well, now they are teammates lol
Rule 0 is shut the fuck up and don't cause more headlines.
Well, now they are teammates lol
The rare move where both the players and the owners would hate the same action.
I'm not trashing Brady, just thought it was interesting...surprised he said anything at all.
I loathe Big Ben, but he was cleared.
Edit: apparently this was his second accusation.
I honestly thinks mods should shut this thread down until more facts are released. It's not turning out good at all.
Last edited:
"Sexual assault is a despicable thing and my heart goes out to any victims and that they are allowed to come forward and be heard"
I dunno, something along those lines would be pretty cool tbh, obviously I wrote that in more time than he prob took to think it, but not a ton more, just getting that message across as someone with a platform would be beneficial.
You know that was the second sexual assault case against him and the victim wrote a letter not to prosecute to protect her and her family. and the first one he was not convicted in criminal court but had a settlement out of court in the civil trial. NFL even suspended him at one point for all this shit
Though it could badly affect the Patriots & their reputation if they let AB continue to play with them.
So they should care. If he's innocent, then he should continue to play.
Last edited:
I didn't know that. Thanks for clearing it up for me. I'll make sure I edit my comment to reflect your statement.
yup
not a single player is going to comment on this, let alone an actual teammate.
Haha no worries. It was my fault, my first post was a drive by hahah
It's extremely unlikely that it would affect their reputation with anybody who matters to their bottom line. They can get dragged for it but they'll get away with it until it affects the money.
Lol Tom Brady is friends with Trump who is an accused rapist amongst other things. This isn't going to impact the Pats.
That's the best thing he can say. Taking sides right now is the worst thing he can do. If he sides with AB, he gets publicly scrutinized. If he sides with the victim, he's throwing his teammate under the bus before he knows everything.
He's arguably the best QB in the history of the sport. You really think he's going to risk his reputation on this? Nah, he's going to practice for the next game and let whatever happens happen.
I don't know that it would be throwing his teammate under the bus to say that he hopes the woman, or any woman has a chance to be heard and listened to, right? If it's something you believe you shouldn't be ashamed to say it, if AB has an issue with that, that's his problem. What's more important, football or using your platform to help out victims of sexual assault?
It's naive to call the exempt list not punishment. You aren't a football player, playing football is their passion. Taking someone's passion away, even for 3 weeks, is definitely a punishment.
Why are you saying football like it's just a hobby? It's their job. That's like me going to you "What's more important? Your financial security or this women's right to have a voice? If you don't put your job at risk for little Sally in Oklahoma, you're something else." You cant put these players in that position. It's unfair. This is AB's problem, no need to force other player's views on the subject.
Because compared to sexual assault I'm willing to say it's just football.
Tom Brady is a very rich privliged white man with a huge platform, him and his children will never have to work a day in their lives. His legacy is sealed. He's not going to be undone by saying women should be heard.
He's under no obligation to say anything, he chose to say that he would stay out of it, nobody can force him to do anything. I was offering something beneficial he could use his platform for, especially as a leading representative of the NFL to the average public due to his status.
He doesn't have to throw him under the bus, but even something like "It's a serious accusation and my heart goes out to anyone who has been a victim of rape or sexual assault. Anyone who has gone through something that devastating deserves justice, they deserve to have their story told. I don't know the facts of this case, I wasn't there, but Antonio says he didn't do it and I have no reason not to believe him. I won't make any further comments on the matter." Something like that where he can side with his guy but still be supportive of the countless victims who go unheard. That being said I'm not surprised at all that he refused comments, that's just how it goes in sports. You're not involved? Keep your mouth shut.
As for the commish list. I think it's a risky thing for Goodell to do. There have been a lot of accusations against players for several things that yielded no results or were proven false, I can't imagine the NFLPA would stand for one of their guys getting taken off the field without more evidence. It also sends a message to the public that the league thinks he's guilty, even if it's not true the court of public opinion will view him as guilty if he is on the commish list. The vast majority of fans will view it as a suspension with a different name and rule him guilty.
Why? Teachers, cops and other union employees are placed on paid leave while an investigation is taking place. No one is asserting blame. It is the most sensible thing for the league to do to protect its image.
It's a totally different thing based on the nationwide attention the profession gets. Teachers get the same treatment, but what is the perception of the other faculty, staff, students and parents if a teacher is on paid leave while they investigate claims? What about a cop when a shooting is being investigated? The majority of people assume guilt. Now multiply that by a million and you have what happens to a high profile athlete. The NFLPA won't stand for it without stronger evidence.
If he is put on the commish list, almost all fans will just view it as a suspension. News and media outlets will report on it and the public will assume he's guilty, which he very well may be, but the NFLPA is not going to let one of their people go through that without more substantial evidence.
Allowing the simple filing of a lawsuit to force a player to sit regardless of its merit might not be a great idea in a world where millions or billions of dollars are riding on game outcomes. It's unnecessary too, since some kind of evaluation of the claims can be done and it shouldn't take much time. If a cursory looks suggests fire, let him sit.
Teachers work around children. Cops work around the public. It makes sense to sit them during an investigation, and I don't know of a single teacher or cop who gets paid under suspension who is actually losing money due to not being able to meet performance-based kickers. The most sensible thing for the league to do is to abide by their contract with the players while also conducting an investigation of their own, which is what they're doing. Problem is this is a civil suit, so there's no PD for them to seek info from. All the evidence will come from the two parties involved.
The NFL does its own investigation regardless of what the police do. So this case is no different. The risk of allowing Brown to play is that his actions impact the NFL brand and it is the commissioners job to protect the league.
If the players don't want there to be ambiguity then they need to do a better job on their next CBA negotiations.