Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 71255
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004
Sand$: 312,268.49
So tired of this fool
_______________________________________

Image Image

Image
Great White Shark
Posts: 2804
Joined: Thu Sep 7, 2017
Sand$: 6,874.82
The sad thing is that Brown does have a point about the way contracts are handled in the NFL. He's also right to call out the NFLPA for not doing their job (or doing it well).

However, he's not the figurehead the NFLPA needs to push the owners for any concessions at the next CBA.

But the times have changed from 2010, society generally is much more like to take the side of the accusers, even before all the facts are known. Personally I think that's better than what we had in the past, and until we get a massive spate of false accusations rolling in the league is going to bow to that public pressure.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 48783
Joined: Sun Aug 2, 2009
Sand$: 40,580.29
I’m a little surprised by these tweets

I thought he was going to take responsibility for his actions.
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 28716
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008
Sand$: 76,809.48
ubertaco wrote:The sad thing is that Brown does have a point about the way contracts are handled in the NFL. He's also right to call out the NFLPA for not doing their job (or doing it well).

However, he's not the figurehead the NFLPA needs to push the owners for any concessions at the next CBA.

But the times have changed from 2010, society generally is much more like to take the side of the accusers, even before all the facts are known. Personally I think that's better than what we had in the past, and until we get a massive spate of false accusations rolling in the league is going to bow to that public pressure.



He right, but for him he’s wrong.


I’m not sure the league can act on an accusation.
Last edited by rugger48 on Sun 09.22.2019, 12:58, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Honorary Mod (powerless)
Posts: 31654
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005
Sand$: 2,825.94
endzoneview wrote:I’m a little surprised by these tweets

I thought he was going to take responsibility for his actions.

:lol: :lol:
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 26300
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006
Sand$: 32,448.94
endzoneview wrote:
I thought he was going to take responsibility for his actions.


:lol:

He hasn't hit rock bottom yet which is sad and scary.
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 24325
Joined: Sat Nov 5, 2005
Sand$: 63,358.28
ubertaco wrote:The sad thing is that Brown does have a point about the way contracts are handled in the NFL. He's also right to call out the NFLPA for not doing their job (or doing it well).

However, he's not the figurehead the NFLPA needs to push the owners for any concessions at the next CBA.

But the times have changed from 2010, society generally is much more like to take the side of the accusers, even before all the facts are known. Personally I think that's better than what we had in the past, and until we get a massive spate of false accusations rolling in the league is going to bow to that public pressure.



I'll admit, I was surprised that the Raiders were able to nullify his guaranteed money. I haven't seen that happen before, and I don't think that is a typical issue in the NFL -- so while the way guaranteed money is handled in general may need to change, Brown brought that on himself by giving them a contractual "out."

As for the rest, I don't think that the NFL should base anything off of accusations or allegations alone, unless there is substantial evidence to back them up. I don't care if public opinion supports villifying them based on the accusations, you can't let someone wield that kind of power.

I am fine with having a lower burden of proof for the league to act, however. A potential sexual assault victim doesn't need to prove that it happened beyond a reasonable doubt, but just preponderance of the evidence, shifting the burden on the NFL player to avoid situations that could be seen in a bad light. That burden isn't met in a he said/she said situation, so a victim still needs to report crimes or provide additional evidence in order for the player to be suspended.
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 58825
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009
Sand$: 24,654.54
Not to start an argument, but him texting her and making veiled threats just wasn't the non-issue you attempted to make it. Even giving the benefit of the doubt, it's just an extremely bad look.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 48783
Joined: Sun Aug 2, 2009
Sand$: 40,580.29
Elmagister wrote:Not to start an argument, but him texting her and making veiled threats just wasn't the non-issue you attempted to make it. Even giving the benefit of the doubt, it's just an extremely bad look.


Yep. The intimidation text was the sole thing that spurred the Pats to act.

I have to assume he was signed with the understanding that he would be on the team with a zero tolerance policy.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 1819
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014
Sand$: 2,166.34
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 21264
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006
Sand$: 43,674.22
Cyguy84 wrote:
ubertaco wrote:The sad thing is that Brown does have a point about the way contracts are handled in the NFL. He's also right to call out the NFLPA for not doing their job (or doing it well).

However, he's not the figurehead the NFLPA needs to push the owners for any concessions at the next CBA.

But the times have changed from 2010, society generally is much more like to take the side of the accusers, even before all the facts are known. Personally I think that's better than what we had in the past, and until we get a massive spate of false accusations rolling in the league is going to bow to that public pressure.



I'll admit, I was surprised that the Raiders were able to nullify his guaranteed money. I haven't seen that happen before, and I don't think that is a typical issue in the NFL -- so while the way guaranteed money is handled in general may need to change, Brown brought that on himself by giving them a contractual "out."

As for the rest, I don't think that the NFL should base anything off of accusations or allegations alone, unless there is substantial evidence to back them up. I don't care if public opinion supports villifying them based on the accusations, you can't let someone wield that kind of power.

I am fine with having a lower burden of proof for the league to act, however. A potential sexual assault victim doesn't need to prove that it happened beyond a reasonable doubt, but just preponderance of the evidence, shifting the burden on the NFL player to avoid situations that could be seen in a bad light. That burden isn't met in a he said/she said situation, so a victim still needs to report crimes or provide additional evidence in order for the player to be suspended.

It's not entirely unheard of for guarantees to be voided like that.

I can think of a few instances where it happened. It is pretty rare like you said. He may have a case on appeal, the Pats made the argument that he was cut for the texts. The clause they are citing for not paying him has to do with not telling them about something that may affect his availability, the texts happened after the contract was signed, and he's still not suspended.

I think a lawyer could make the argument that he fulfilled his side of the bargain, he's still available to play currently so nothing has affected his availability.
Great White Shark
Posts: 2804
Joined: Thu Sep 7, 2017
Sand$: 6,874.82
und2006 wrote:
Cyguy84 wrote:
ubertaco wrote:The sad thing is that Brown does have a point about the way contracts are handled in the NFL. He's also right to call out the NFLPA for not doing their job (or doing it well).

However, he's not the figurehead the NFLPA needs to push the owners for any concessions at the next CBA.

But the times have changed from 2010, society generally is much more like to take the side of the accusers, even before all the facts are known. Personally I think that's better than what we had in the past, and until we get a massive spate of false accusations rolling in the league is going to bow to that public pressure.



I'll admit, I was surprised that the Raiders were able to nullify his guaranteed money. I haven't seen that happen before, and I don't think that is a typical issue in the NFL -- so while the way guaranteed money is handled in general may need to change, Brown brought that on himself by giving them a contractual "out."

As for the rest, I don't think that the NFL should base anything off of accusations or allegations alone, unless there is substantial evidence to back them up. I don't care if public opinion supports villifying them based on the accusations, you can't let someone wield that kind of power.

I am fine with having a lower burden of proof for the league to act, however. A potential sexual assault victim doesn't need to prove that it happened beyond a reasonable doubt, but just preponderance of the evidence, shifting the burden on the NFL player to avoid situations that could be seen in a bad light. That burden isn't met in a he said/she said situation, so a victim still needs to report crimes or provide additional evidence in order for the player to be suspended.

It's not entirely unheard of for guarantees to be voided like that.

I can think of a few instances where it happened. It is pretty rare like you said. He may have a case on appeal, the Pats made the argument that he was cut for the texts. The clause they are citing for not paying him has to do with not telling them about something that may affect his availability, the texts happened after the contract was signed, and he's still not suspended.

I think a lawyer could make the argument that he fulfilled his side of the bargain, he's still available to play currently so nothing has affected his availability.


It's going to be ugly if both sides want to make it ugly, but the Pats precedent in cutting him for not revealing the civil suit pending against him (at the time) is probably all they need. When they cut him after that, or for whatever straw, likely will not matter.

Brown did not help himself either with his comments on Kraft, apparently Kraft was completely incensed after that, and told his legal guys that Brown will never see any money from him (or the Patriots) no matter the findings. Meaning, his lawyers will do their best to tie this crap up forever until Brown gives up.

Sounds like it's going to be stupid and ugly for a while.
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 24325
Joined: Sat Nov 5, 2005
Sand$: 63,358.28
TheJayCutlers wrote:



That's a good and level headed response. He really is a class act.

I was hoping just being around Tom would reign in AB's crazy, but too little too late I guess.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009
Sand$: 7,860.76
I really can't stand people that are kind, philosophical, empathetic and happen to be the best at their jobs. I hate you Tom Brady!

I don't but I try really hard to
_______________________________________

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument.
William G. McAdoo
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 6856
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010
Sand$: 23,959.12
Cyguy84 wrote:
TheJayCutlers wrote:



That's a good and level headed response. He really is a class act.

I was hoping just being around Tom would reign in AB's crazy, but too little too late I guess.

Gag me with a deflated football