This is cool Lyman... I agree with the Nick Chubb mention, and we have to be getting close to Joel Bitinio being on this squad.
Brain fart. He's now in there. I also thought about Alex Mack. But he now has more years elsewhere than he did in Cleveland.
If you can’t win in court, try the court of public opinion. If Watson broke a law, he’d be in jail. He’s not in jail. In fact, not a single police report was ever filed. Not one of the 22 women involved called the police to report a crime. Are we just making it up as we go? Have we become a third world nation? We used to be a nation of laws. A civilization of law and order. Did we quit that? If we can’t win in court, can we just try to win in the media, and then try to win a civil case after brainwashing the public? If a guy has money, can we just try to steal it? Getting a bit weird out there. -anonymous
I dont have a good feeling about this. Meaning; its probably going to be damning at the least towards Watson or they wouldnt have a show.
Agreed.. I'm curious if they reached out to his lawyer to appear, or at least make a statement based on the content. I'm also curious to see if any of these women were part of the criminal cases that were thrown out of court..
FWIW... here's a piece from PFT... On Tuesday night, HBO’s Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel will debut a story that includes interviews with “several” of the women accusing Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson of sexual misconduct during massage therapy sessions. Watson’s lawyer, Rusty Hardin, does not have high expectations for the finished product. “I don’t know what it’s going to be like, but I’m not optimistic,” Hardin told Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. “I believe they’ll air the accusations of the women without attempting to look behind it to see what kind of merit do they have.” Hardin has tried in the past to get the media to focus on the merits, or lack thereof, of the specific allegations. His efforts didn’t take. He eventually stopped trying. “My approach all along was that we were not going to win the battle of public opinion,’’ Hardin told Cabot, not mentioning the fact that did indeed tried to sway media and fans Watson’s way in 2021, with multiple press conferences and the release of evidence that potentially undermines the allegations, such as text messages. “And my goal has always been to have these cases examined by law enforcement and I strongly believed that trained investigators would ultimately conclude that there was nothing to them from a criminal standpoint and that’s where my focus has always been.” The problem was, frankly, that attorney Tony Buzbee seized the early momentum in the court of public opinion. By the time Watson’s camp tried to join the battle, the battle had in many respects already been lost. So now the story has become that the strategy has always been to forget about public opinion and focus on the strict legal principles that determine whether misconduct did or didn’t happen. “I thought that’s what the NFL teams cared most about and with the exception of Miami, that’s true,” Hardin told Cabot. By singling out Miami, Hardin is alluding to the fact that the Dolphins refused to trade for Watson in 2021 unless all 22 civil cases were settled. Regardless of the reasons for Hardin’s abandonment of any effort to win in the court of public opinion, the fact remains that public opinion ultimately fuels every decision made by the NFL under the Personal Conduct Policy. The vast majority of American businesses don’t take action against employees for off-duty misconduct, especially if there is no arrest or conviction. Even then, most employers as to most offenses allow the employee to remain employed, as long as the employee is physically able to show up for work. The NFL’s effort to police the private lives of players comes entirely from P.R. considerations. Fans and media expect real consequences for certain type of behavior, regardless of whether it’s irrelevant to the player’s work responsibilities. Thus, at the end of the day, public opinion and fan/media expectations will influence the decisions made by the league. For example, Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliott was never arrested or even sued. He was still suspended six games in 2017, based on allegations of domestic violence. Why? Because it happened three years after the Commissioner nearly lost his job due to the perception that he was not aggressive enough in punishing former NFL running back Ray Rice. The Commissioner, as explained in detail in Playmakers, won’t make that same mistake again. Thus, regardless of what happens in a court of law, the verdict in the court of public opinion will greatly influence the Commissioner. Anyone who doesn’t realize that doesn’t understand how the NFL metes out its specific brand of gridiron justice.
Not always wrong either... dismissing allegations simply based on whether they go to jail or not is negligence in my opinion. People in the public eye, whether right or wrong, influence those outside the public eye. Giving someone a pass simply because the evidence wasn't substantial enough for a criminal case may give some high school kid the wrong idea that these activities are ok, if said hero gets to do it. The only reason these players make as much as they do is because the influence they have over those who can't. If those of us who can't play in the league follow and spend our hard earned money on things based on those players performance don't do something about our teams negligence, then they will continue to do it. I for one am glad the NFL has the conduct policy. It could make an athlete in the future think twice about making a bad decision. To some, indecent exposure isn't a hard enough crime to be punished in the NFL. I have even heard some arguments that he had a reputation and some of these women signed up with him anyway. Anyone that has a daughter should be ashamed if they think it isn't a big deal that a woman goes to do a job and a grown man exposes himself. These are heinous even if he didn't grope them or try to make them touch his genitalia. Exposing himself is enough for me to agree with any suspension the league decides is worthy.
The "Court of Public Opinion" has no place in determining a person's ability to follow their chosen profession or lifestyle. If people are influenced by a person in the public eye, then those people need to take a hard look at themselves and how they act in similar situations. In today's world, what you or I have heard or read about has absolutely little to no bearing on the actual facts. What we read or hear about is based more on clicks and views. Just follow the money. For those that say, "where there's smoke - there's fire" let me remind you of the Salem Witch Trials. The Court of Public Opinion at it's finest.
We will agree to disagree when it pertains to those CHOOSING a profession in highly public domain. Athletes, actors, political figures, etc.. are absolutely subject to public opinion. They chose do be there as well. You are naive if you don't believe, in today's social media world that public figures influence everyone from children to adult. If they didn't influence people, there wouldn't be as many apparel deals, commercials, TV contracts for sports entities, etc. Right or wrong, athletes especially are the hero's of today's youth. Without parental interaction, kids today are influenced more by athletes and social influences than in home factors. Short of banning all phones, computers and any other social media devices.. Throwing out your TV and only allowing your children to read books. There is no other way of curtailing just how influence is out of your control these days. Time to wake up to what our world it like today Lym. Exactly!! That is the essence of the court of public opinion. In many cases in the past, the public didn't have access to any facts either.. At least in today's world, access to information is endless. Being able to sort through and find out which is opinion vs facts is the harder issue. How much did you know about Jim Brown's issues as they happened back in the late 60's early 70's/80's? Would have changed your opinion of him if you had? If these things happened in today's society, he might not have been the icon that he is today. Really Lym? You are saying that someone like Deshaun Watson is in danger of losing his life, based on what is being stated in the media? Livelihood and life are VERY VERY different things. Taking away someone's $3M paycheck because of impropriety doesn't take away their ability to make a living or live in general. It could take away their ability to influence young men and women, which is more important in cases like this. On the other hand.. Making light of situations based on 22 women, excusing those accusations based on the fact a guy can help your team win a few extra games, just empowers these athlete's (and other public figures/influencers) to continue to live above the morals based on never being held accountable for their actions.
For a long time famous athletes and celebrities used to get the star treatment from the police. A drunk celebrity would get a ride home from the cops when you or myself would have been taken to the holding tank and given a $250 fine with barely more consequence than a speeding ticket. If a woman was raped by a celebrity the best she could hope for was a payoff to keep her mouth shut. The police were not going to arrest a big star. Now that kind of thing is of the past, no free rides anymore. So the point is that it’s easier to get a lawsuit settlement these days especially if you can pile on the complainants
Hmm, look at the Milledgeville, GA police department and try to convince me this is a thing of the past..
I never said that public opinion doesn't factor in when choosing a profession. A public profession comes with the baggage of public opinion. That we agree on. My point is, once someone chooses to go into that profession, a jury of 300,000,000 people (the population of the USA) shouldn't decide if he or she can continue to follow their chosen profession. The key point in all of that is "Without parental interaction". I grew up with the Dewey Decimal System, Long Division, lifelong friends and two hard working parents that absolutely knew what I was or wasn't doing. Today's youth (in general) grow up with Google, cell phones, a fuzzy importance of how many "followers" they have and (if they're lucky) a single parent who may or may not have a job. I'll choose my world every time. Access to information doesn't equal access to facts. re: Jim Brown: To the best of my knowledge, none of Jim Brown's issues occurred while he was a member of the Cleveland Browns. And, when I did learn about them, it did change my opinion of him as a human being but not as a professional football player. Since then, I think the work he's done for inner city youth has improved my opinion of him as a human being. Pump the brakes there, Irish. I only brought up the Salem Witch Trials as an example of how "public opinion" can be twisted to fit one's moral compass. Just to be crystal clear . . . if ANY of these 22 accusations are proven to be FACTUAL, I'll be holding the door open when they boot his ass out of Berea. Until then, in my mind, a person is innocent until proven guilty.
I know the current topic is the court of public opinion, but I'm still stuck on Cleveland giving 100M+ of cap space to just 3 players for 3 years straight. Sheesh. Who are y'all gonna have to walk away from next year because of it?
Question is, what facts need to come to light for your opinion to sway in that direction? What is tolerable?
