Deshaun Watson Off the Field Thread v3: 11 games, $5M

[Sebastian]

Quitting the NFL because they are trying to punish a guy who, in the judges ruling, is an unrepentant serial sexual assaulter... Interesting hill to die on. Carry on.

Sone people are going to see it as a hill worth dying on only because of the NFL's rather inconsistent application of "justice."

I mean, an organization that seems rather arbitrary in its handing out of punishment for similar crimes, that just happens to land on a racial divide, might appear, to some, a prima facie case of discrimination and corruption.

But I see your point.

And let's be clear, if the NFL actually gave a damn about the malfeasance conducted by its players and owners, and behaved consistently toward them, I think the Watson case, and many of the others, would be well and done.

 

[CBBI]

Your referring to the bonus for this year only that he already got. They can’t technically void the bonus for this or any other suspension yes. They gave him a ton of money upfront already, but it was entirely allowed, but it really does not protect him from having to use and lose it when and if fines go well beyond his minimum salary . If he did something horrible and got suspended. or kicked out, it would not limit the Browns or league after going after his future base salary which increases greatly after this year. Just a note , thé Browns likely plan to restructure Again in the off-season to further give them even more flexibility

Yes it would. That's my point.

Deshaun Watson's contract is fully guaranteed. The Browns cannot void any of his guarantees or recoup any of his bonus money for future disciplinary reasons for the life of the contract.

And if they restructure him again in 2023, that converts more base salary into more untouchable bonus money.

He would lose base salary on a suspension, yes, but that's the extent of it.

 

[Sebastian]

I think he means Institutional rather than industrial.

Industrial justice might involve pouring molten steel over Watson.

But his point is a good one and why the notion that a lawsuit has no chance of success is off the mark.

But I think this is all window-dressing.

They'll settle because the NFL has nothing to gain by being dragged into court.

Any gain from looking tough on Watson will be returned 10-fold when the dirty laundry about how the NFL has internally handled all the other incidents comes to light in discovery and when Goodell is dragged into Congressional hearings.

 

[chrisrich91]

Hypothetically, if Watson's options end up being...

A. 1 year suspension and no fine
B. 12 game suspension and $10M fine

I think he's taking option A

Which is fine. The Browns won’t be able to withstand any more than 8 games while maintaining a shot at the playoffs anyway. 8 games is probably being generous too.

Not sure I’d even want Watson out there risking injury in weeks 13-17. I guess I’d like him to get some football in so that he’s not going like 3 full years without playing a game…but that’s about it.

 

[CBBI]

Which is true for essentially every contract in the league... Not sure what you're getting at.

If he's suspended any amount of time, they don't have to pay him for that amount of time.

Except not. The vast majority of NFL contracts contain some variation of the following language....

“Guaranteed money can be voided if a player takes any action that materially undermines the public's respect for, or is materially critical of, Club, Player's teammates or Club's ownership, coaches, management, operations or policies.”

NFL teams almost always have the option to attempt to recoup bonus money or void future guarantees in the event of disciplinary action against the player.

Deshaun Watson's contract does not feature this ability.

 

[MirORich]

I think he means Institutional rather than industrial.

Industrial justice might involve pouring molten steel over Watson.

But his point is a good one and why the notion that a lawsuit has no chance of success is off the mark.

But I think this is all window-dressing.

They'll settle because the NFL has nothing to gain by being dragged into court.

Any gain from looking tough on Watson will be returned 10-fold when the dirty laundry about how the NFL has internally handled all the other incidents comes to light in discovery and when Goodell is dragged into Congressional hearings.

It is an interesting point though in that past NFLPA lawsuits(DeflateGate, Zeke) were due to the player trying to reduce the leagues initial punishment.

This would be the player/NFLPA taking the league to court because the league is not just trying to get the arbitrators recommendation upheld, but trying to increase the punishment. While it is true that that power/option is granted the league in the CBA, these past court cases that ended up with the player still serving the suspension were based on the judge ruling in favor of the league and upholding their initial penalty, not the judge ruling in favor of the league raising the penalty from an arbitrators initial ruling.

That said, I'm the furthest thing from an expert on arbitration, law, etc. and the point I just made may be incorrect or may have zero bearing on how a judge in a lawsuit would rule.

 

[Sebastian]

It is an interesting point though in that past NFLPA lawsuits(DeflateGate, Zeke) were due to the player trying to reduce the leagues initial punishment.

This would be the player/NFLPA taking the league to court because the league is not just trying to get the arbitrators recommendation upheld, but trying to increase the punishment. While it is true that that power/option is granted the league in the CBA, these past court cases that ended up with the player still serving the suspension were based on the judge ruling in favor of the league and upholding their initial penalty, not the judge ruling in favor of the league raising the penalty from an arbitrators initial ruling.

That said, I'm the furthest thing from an expert on arbitration, law, etc.

I think I said in one of my long posts that the only way the NFLPA might actually have a chance in Court is if the NFL was dumb enough to do the very thing Sue Robinson said in her holding would be beyond the pale: Indefinite Suspension.

And here we are!

I really think it is a bad idea for the NFL, and Goodell, to actually do that.

They get zero benefit. Discovery and the optics will kill them once the saga is spun into one of racial discrimination and the NFL as a Good 'Ole Boys club where Owners are above the law.

Both sides need to agree to a settlement because both could emerge from a battle crippled. And the NFL has more to lose than any single player does.

 

[col63onel]

I think I said in one of my long posts that the only way the NFLPA might actually have a chance in Court is if the NFL was dumb enough to do the very thing Sue Robinson said in her holding would be beyond the pale: Indefinite Suspension.

And here we are!

I really think it is a bad idea for the NFL, and Goodell, to actually do that.

They get zero benefit. Discovery and the optics will kill them once the saga is spun into one of racial discrimination and the NFL as a Good 'Ole Boys club where Owners are above the law.

Both sides need to agree to a settlement because both could emerge from a battle crippled. And the NFL has more to lose than any single player does.

I keep on hearing that the nfl wants an indefinite suspension of at least 1 year.

Forgive my ignorance, but can the nfl suspend someone for a year, but not make it indefinite? Or does a suspension that long have to have a “must apply for reinstatement” part to it?

 

[Sebastian]

I keep on hearing that the nfl wants an indefinite suspension of at least 1 year.

Forgive my ignorance, but can the nfl suspend someone for a year, but not make it indefinite? Or does a suspension that long have to have a “must apply for reinstatement” part to it?

They could suspend him for a year.

But "Indefinite" would give them some discretion. They could lengthen or shorten the suspension.

And I imagine, and it seems hinted at, that applying for reinstatement would depend on a metric like his attending therapy or whatever those classes are some are saying is part of the package along with a hefty fine.

 

[col63onel]

They could suspend him for a year.

But "Indefinite" would give them some discretion. They could lengthen or shorten the suspension.

And I imagine, and it seems hinted at, that applying for reinstatement would depend on a metric like his attending therapy or whatever those classes are some are saying is part of the package along with a hefty fine.

So why wouldn’t the nfl just suspend him for a year without making it indefinite? Wouldn’t that close some of their liability if it goes to court? Still gets what they want.

Or am I way off?

 

[DJTJ]

So why wouldn’t the nfl just suspend him for a year without making it indefinite? Wouldn’t that close some of their liability if it goes to court? Still gets what they want.

Or am I way off?

I’m not sure on the specifics, but I vaguely remember any suspension of a year plus is indefinite because the player has to apply for reinstatement with the league for good standing.

I think thats the part that becomes indefinite, not the levyed punishment.

May be very incorrect, but remember it on the drug offenders who got an indefinite- punishment guaranteed of 1, plus must apply for reinstatement.

The second is indefinite because Roger just says no.

 

[bushwick_bill]

#2 should have always been what Watson's team should have been looking for. I don't know how they honestly can feel he wasn't getting suspended... I really do believe if he would have played along a little bit earlier on and acknowledged he needs treatment/therapy we would not be here... But whatever...

 

[Selby]

If he tried to play he would have been immediately placed on the exempt list.

But…he didn’t try to play. He volunteered to sit out, so the NFL didn’t have to punish him at the time. This really isn’t that difficult to comprehend.

 

[CBBI]

Kevin Clark pretty much nailed it.

The NFL Had No Choice But to Appeal the Deshaun Watson Suspension

On Wednesday, the NFL appealed the six-game suspension that Judge Sue L. Robinson gave the Browns QB. But while the league will likely get the longer punishment it wants, nobody will win in this case.

www.theringer.com

 

[CBBI]

A lot of interesting stuff here.

NFL was warned about Deshaun Watson's suspension length in June, giving league month to consider taking control of outcome

It was a revelation that arbitrator Sue L. Robinson delivered, sources said. It instantly established an eyebrow-raising blow to the NFL’s effort to impose a landmark suspension of Watson.

sports.yahoo.com