LETSGOBROWNIES Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 Just now, MWil23 said: I’m in the “soft boycott” camp. I’ll waste my time watching but not my money on merchandise, tickets, memorabilia, etc. I bought tickets…. to the game in Cincinnati. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 Thinking Watson is guilty in a football chat room is fine. (opinion) Knowing Watson is guilty in a football chat room is a serious logical defect. (delusional omniscience) Hating other people for not sharing your unwarranted certainty is an interesting way to conduct yourself. I have no idea either way. I'm just here telling people that they also have no idea. They still have no idea after 1, 10, or 100 bad logic arguments. There is no good logic that leads to certainty here. Here is one concept from this case. Police have a zero bar of innocence during investigation. Watson was able to be a guilty perp to them with no harm to the police. The second they forward their findings to a prosecutor or the prosecutor to the grand jury and now you have to worry about Watson's rights in the criminal justice system (burden of proof). So the police had lots of strong feelings and produced some less strong evidence (if any) One could make the huge leap that between police and grand jury must have been CONSPIRACY and FRAUD!!! Is it at least possible that the police had lots of feelings and hunches and gut instincts and stereotypes on assault cases in general (big rich famous man = guilty) that did not directly apply forward to a prosecution? Is it even possible? Its possible that Watson is both guilty of doing all this and that there was not enough evidence for a grand jury (this happens all the time) You can hope he loses in civil court You can hope the league hits him hard for lifetime or multiple year suspensions You can't logically assume the legal system was fixed through some level of fraud. Thinking "my side is right" is very common. Thinking "my side is so right that even the concept of the other side being right does not exist" is pathetic. Most of you just want an echo chamber anyway. Its also strange that so many lawyers are cool with Watson being called a rapist here on a public message board. Maybe they were all sick during the defamation classes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 I knew the bullet points would make an appearance eventually 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 33 minutes ago, Tk3 said: I know numerous Browns fans who are not buying jerseys, not going to games, stopping watching all together, etc over Watson Not a single fan is spending less money on the NFL as a result of Ridley's actions Get out of here if you think Ridley is more damaging to the league lol Its what they think and have thought for the last 50+ years. (I am basing this on their corporate history) You are trying to put your own morals into a corporation. Why are you doing this? Some people think gambling is evil and I'm not here to tell them they are wrong or fight that morality battle. I just know the NFL cares a lot about gambling and appearances of integrity. FYI. I fully support everyone's right to boycott and protest outside the games. Watson is going to have a miserable time of it when he does get on the field and this is your right to be loud and visible as long as no one breaks any laws. I'm not on his side here. I'm just opposed to social media lynch mobs using faulty logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 3 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: There’s proof of plenty of questionable behavior that would support their stories. It’s circumstantial, but that’s all you’re going to get most of the time. If you mean actual physical evidence, that occurs in like, one scenario. Dude assaults woman and denies it but there’s physical evidence to contradict him. Any other circumstance it’s some form of he said/she said. Even if there’s physical evidence it becomes a debate over whether it was consensual or not. In this case there’s not one smoking gun, no doubt. That said, the amount of smoke from different sources is pretty overwhelming. I completely agree with most of that. While I also agree with the bolded part, my only hangup is with the nature of the allegations. Again....I dont think anyone would deny that Watson engaged in some extremely pervy behavior....but is there any proof of actual violation of the law? I get what you're saying about proof, but how many cases alleged he FORCED any of these women against their will? Because most of what Ive read implies that many of the women simply felt PRESSURED to due to his status, but PRESSURED isnt the same as FORCING, especially if its just a FEELING due to who he was. And before someone melts down....in no way am I defending Watson or saying anything about the authenticity of the accusations. I readily admit that you and others know alot more about this ordeal than I do. I am simply trying to understand how many of the accusations implicate Watson of breaking the law, insomuch as physically forcing or threatening them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 18 minutes ago, SkippyX said: Its what they think and have thought for the last 50+ years. (I am basing this on their corporate history) You are trying to put your own morals into a corporation. Why are you doing this? Some people think gambling is evil and I'm not here to tell them they are wrong or fight that morality battle. I just know the NFL cares a lot about gambling and appearances of integrity. FYI. I fully support everyone's right to boycott and protest outside the games. Watson is going to have a miserable time of it when he does get on the field and this is your right to be loud and visible as long as no one breaks any laws. I'm not on his side here. I'm just opposed to social media lynch mobs using faulty logic. Show me where I put morals into this? I straight up said that of the two situations (Watson/Ridley) The Watson transgression is costing the NFL in fans, revenue, etc. and the Ridley one is not. That isn't a moral argument, that's a financial one. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 56 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: Great, another idiot who thinks he’s a lawyer It's much better to be an idiot who is a lawyer, like me. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ_Eaglesfan Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 19 minutes ago, jrry32 said: It's much better to be an idiot who is a lawyer, like me. I prefer being not a lawyer and an idiot personally. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 1 hour ago, 43M said: I completely agree with most of that. While I also agree with the bolded part, my only hangup is with the nature of the allegations. Again....I dont think anyone would deny that Watson engaged in some extremely pervy behavior....but is there any proof of actual violation of the law? I get what you're saying about proof, but how many cases alleged he FORCED any of these women against their will? Because most of what Ive read implies that many of the women simply felt PRESSURED to due to his status, but PRESSURED isnt the same as FORCING, especially if its just a FEELING due to who he was. And before someone melts down....in no way am I defending Watson or saying anything about the authenticity of the accusations. I readily admit that you and others know alot more about this ordeal than I do. I am simply trying to understand how many of the accusations implicate Watson of breaking the law, insomuch as physically forcing or threatening them. I mean, they’re not suing him for being persistent in asking for flavors or whatever, they’re suing him for things like exposing himself purposefully, touching them with his dong, and in one case yanking his sausage and “finishing” on her. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 27 minutes ago, AZ_Eaglesfan said: I prefer being not a lawyer and an idiot personally. Glad I’m the most intelligent being associated with this site 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tk3 said: Show me where I put morals into this? I straight up said that of the two situations (Watson/Ridley) The Watson transgression is costing the NFL in fans, revenue, etc. and the Ridley one is not. That isn't a moral argument, that's a financial one. I have zero confidence in that math. The Browns may see a dip for a bit. The NFL will likely not see a dip but may in the very short term (like for the 2017 protests and fan boycotts). In an example earlier a fan did not buy a Browns ticket (which is shared revenue for the visiting team) but did buy a Bengals ticket (which is shared revenue for the visiting Browns) Do Bengals and Steelers fans buy the tickets the boycotting Browns fans don't? How about other traveling fans? I could see some empty seats for the Texans, Dolphins, and Commanders home games, I guess. Now compare this to the sport no longer being viable for gambling if the public trust in their integrity is lost. Do you really think random criminal players would cost them more money? More importantly, do you think the NFL thinks that? In the last 50 years they act like they don't think that. Edited June 23, 2022 by SkippyX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted June 23, 2022 Author Share Posted June 23, 2022 In a different universe, this is the Deshaun Watson trial. I'd pay to see this universe play out. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted June 23, 2022 Author Share Posted June 23, 2022 1 hour ago, AZ_Eaglesfan said: I prefer being not a lawyer and an idiot personally. ...one out of two ain't bad. (J/k, you're one of the good guys!) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 12 minutes ago, ET80 said: ...one out of two ain't bad. (J/k, you're one of the good guys!) What if I believe Josh Dobbs is elite, Funchess is a number 1 WR, LT is overrated because he might get injured, Guice will rush for 2k yards, and Keith Rivers is the best ever Play Boi 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 14 minutes ago, ET80 said: In a different universe, this is the Deshaun Watson trial. I'd pay to see this universe play out. They could really sell this (in that alternate universe) Watson is suspended for 25 games. All of 2023 and 8 games of 2024. He plays in 2022 If they win the 2022 division its reduced by 4 games. If they win a playoff game its reduced by 4 more. If they make the SB its dropped another 4. If they win the SB the gods have spoken and the suspension is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts