Jason ColeVerified account
& #8207;@JasonColeBR
Records Specialist w/ King County Shrf said Josh Brown docs weren't available before Wed. They hadn't been cleared & it was ongoing invest
This is important as it proves the NFL/Giants aren't lying about not being aware of these recent documents. Link - ( New Window )
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
They never should've re-signed him. Didn't they know about this before March/April?
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
They never should've re-signed him. Didn't they know about this before March/April?
What part is you miss about "the documents were just released?"
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
They never should've re-signed him. Didn't they know about this before March/April?
What part is you miss about "the documents were just released?"
THESE documents were just released. They knew about the allegations and the other stuff prior to this, hence the initial 1 game suspension.
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
They never should've re-signed him. Didn't they know about this before March/April?
What part is you miss about "the documents were just released?"
THESE documents were just released. They knew about the allegations and the other stuff prior to this, hence the initial 1 game suspension.
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
So if he WAS Vinatieri in his prime, it would have been OK if they stood by him, then?
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: They still should have cut him Â
There was enough proof and evidence before this that they could've (IMO, should've) moved on from him. Granted, even putting the DV stuff aside, I would've moved on from Brown this offseason. Don't think his on field performance is worth his salary/cap hit.
There was enough proof and evidence before this that they could've (IMO, should've) moved on from him. Granted, even putting the DV stuff aside, I would've moved on from Brown this offseason. Don't think his on field performance is worth his salary/cap hit.
Exactly how do you know what info was available?
I don't
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: They still should have cut him Â
There was enough proof and evidence before this that they could've (IMO, should've) moved on from him. Granted, even putting the DV stuff aside, I would've moved on from Brown this offseason. Don't think his on field performance is worth his salary/cap hit.
Exactly how do you know what info was available?
I don't
Because it's been reported on since his suspension was first announced...
career is done. Sunday will be his last game as an NFL player. The Giants will cut him, and no one will sign him. He's 37 with a record for domestic violence, in a league that has not in many cases handled that subject matter appropriately.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: They still should have cut him Â
There was enough proof and evidence before this that they could've (IMO, should've) moved on from him. Granted, even putting the DV stuff aside, I would've moved on from Brown this offseason. Don't think his on field performance is worth his salary/cap hit.
Exactly how do you know what info was available?
I don't
Because it's been reported on since his suspension was first announced...
Wrong....that was speculation, based on hearing only one side of the story....not fact
2 different things.....now that we know for a FACT....his ass should be thrown the out the door
but I disagree with the whole notion that a player should be de facto barred from playing in the NFL because of off the field criminal conduct. Brown should face whatever criminal penalties he has coming to him...but not an NFL ban.
He committed a terrible crime, yes, but why does that mean he shouldn't be allowed to keep his job? If he was an accountant should be forced to stop being an accountant? And what job should he be "allowed" to have now? Or is he no longer allowed to make a living at all?
Believe me I hate domestic violence as much or more than anyone....but I just don't see the logic of banning players from the NFL for this type of stuff.
So the Giants couldn't have interviewed Brown's ex-wife? Â
Or perhaps the Giants and NFL needed documents to inform them that their own security personnel had to intervene at the behest of Brown's wife to protect her and her children from the pschyo at the Pro Bowl? Yep, that stands to reason. Seems like some real thorough due diligence...
Keep burying your head in the sand. The Giants and the NFL have acted in a disgraceful fashion throughout this entire ordeal.
Or perhaps the Giants and NFL needed documents to inform them that their own security personnel had to intervene at the behest of Brown's wife to protect her and her children from the pschyo at the Pro Bowl? Yep, that stands to reason. Seems like some real thorough due diligence...
Keep burying your head in the sand. The Giants and the NFL have acted in a disgraceful fashion throughout this entire ordeal.
I think she refused to speak with them. I don't understand why the absence of evidence was viewed as positive for Brown by the Giants. This is not a criminal trial. They had enough to decide to not re-sign him.
but I disagree with the whole notion that a player should be de facto barred from playing in the NFL because of off the field criminal conduct. Brown should face whatever criminal penalties he has coming to him...but not an NFL ban.
He committed a terrible crime, yes, but why does that mean he shouldn't be allowed to keep his job? If he was an accountant should be forced to stop being an accountant? And what job should he be "allowed" to have now? Or is he no longer allowed to make a living at all?
Believe me I hate domestic violence as much or more than anyone....but I just don't see the logic of banning players from the NFL for this type of stuff.
I don't think the barring really exists, though. You just have to be a helluva lot better. Greg Hardy got another job, Big Ben played on after the rape accusations, etc. Marginal talent can't get away with it.
RE: So the Giants couldn't have interviewed Brown's ex-wife? Â
Or perhaps the Giants and NFL needed documents to inform them that their own security personnel had to intervene at the behest of Brown's wife to protect her and her children from the pschyo at the Pro Bowl? Yep, that stands to reason. Seems like some real thorough due diligence...
Keep burying your head in the sand. The Giants and the NFL have acted in a disgraceful fashion throughout this entire ordeal.
According to previous reports, Brown's ex-wife declined to cooperate with the NFL's investigation. The only thing they had to go was what he told them. If he didn't fully disclose everything then yup, he's done.
As for keeping his job, the NFL sells itself on a certain type of image, which is why they have (I believe) a standard morals clause in their contracts. (I'm not commenting on how well they do/don't handle these issues. I'm just addressing the comment about Brown keeping his job.)
If Brown wasn't convicted or charges where dropped what would be the grounds for the league to suspend him a second time? What would be the grounds to cut him? Looks like he'd have a nice law suit. What if the white has psych issues and makes failed allegations and provokes situations? He should be bashed and loose his ability to earn? If he can work the wife and kids loose out on $$ as well. Finally is it fair for all this to be in the public she dont he and his ex have a right to privacy. Seems like people don't know all the facts and it going off half-cocked expecially Mike Francesa that piece of s***
If he lied th the Giants front office
therealmf : 3:40 pm : link : reply
it is enough cause for termination regardless of The DV charges.
Either way they need to sign another kicker .
I always give a guy the benefit of the doubt . It's time
to end this thing no one player should be bigger than the
game . Sure every team in the NFL has taken chances on
players with sketchy past . They try to council and give
him morale support . He is no better than Greg Hardy at
this point . I always felt like the Giants were half
way decent in handling players but its not worth it at
this point . I defended him because I don't know all the
facts but it's becoming clear that he is a Bum that
hasn't paid or learned from his problem .
I want the team to do the right thing and cut ties .
Robbie Gould or whomever else should be signed .
I heard on wfan that in his journals he said he was Â
(sexually?)abused at a young age and this has caused him to have issues with anger and relationships throughout his life.
If this is true and he was a victim and in the past or currently he is trying to get well by going through the proper course of action (therapy, anger management,remorse etc)should he still be cut?
Were the journal entries part of his therapy, a way to face what he had done in order to rehabilitate himself? Prescribed as an exercise from a therapist? That's what they seem like.
Tough decisions.
RE: I heard on wfan that in his journals he said he was Â
(sexually?)abused at a young age and this has caused him to have issues with anger and relationships throughout his life.
If this is true and he was a victim and in the past or currently he is trying to get well by going through the proper course of action (therapy, anger management,remorse etc)should he still be cut?
Were the journal entries part of his therapy, a way to face what he had done in order to rehabilitate himself? Prescribed as an exercise from a therapist? That's what they seem like.
Tough decisions.
Your background can only excuse so much. There's a penalty to be paid for your actions, regardless of how you were treated in the past.
If he were to get treatment and atone, the background of his past abuse would make giving him another chance in the future on the table. But you pay a penalty first. And as his age, it's probably too late for second chances.
were part of the treatment. Admissions made in counseling, in asking for forgiveness and trying to move forward with the wife. The main question to me is how much abuse transpired after these sessions?
Also, seems a bit skelly to put them out there and air his being abused as a child. If it was done by him it seems self-serving, if it was done by anyone else it seems like an invasion.
Typical NFL. Claim a strong stance and then don't do anything until the public backlash gets ahold of some photos or docs. Then pretend it never happened if they guy is great or ban him from the league if he isn't.
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
I guess I don't really agree with the sentiments that the Giants have egg on their face here. Well, I know they do, but is this really something that's going to truly impact the franchise negatively?
Is it really so bad that the Giants stood behind an employee before all the facts came to the surface? Maybe I am just being apologetic but if this was another franchise I really think i'd be saying the same thing. This is not Greg Hardy who on the surface acts like an asshole and behind the scenes was and is a total turd. From all accounts Brown has a pretty good face or shine to him that seems to have fooled the Giants into believing he's solid.
IS it really that terrible that the Giants waited this thing out before finally cutting bait? Ok fine, they have egg on their face today. Something tells me they will recover and I won't lose sleep over this and lose faith that the Giants aren't one of the higher standard franchises going.
They made a mistake. Doesn't mean the Giants support domestic battery or violence against women.
Remember when the league said they didn't know about the ray rice tape, only to have it proven it was sent to their offices while they were claiming to have seen no evil? Yea, that was a thing
This 10 billion dollar industry and all their ex FBI investigators who could tell you the hair count and penis circumstance of every potential 1st round pick come draft time didn't know anything about this. Ok. They're just finding this out the same time as I do.
The league doesn't give a shit about domestic violence, they only care about the optics of it. And even if they are just finding out about these docs now, there was more than enough to get rid of him before this. And at this point now that the docs are out, his presence on the roster and any shred of public support is pathetic
Already contradicted a claim made by the NFL that they reached out in an official capacity for help with the investigation. Or maybe I'm confusing him with another official on this matter
He had this to say in addition about if the NFL asked for these docs in an official capacity, as the NFL claims they did
"“I would have said exactly the same thing, ‘We cannot release the case file.’ But since this is a hot-button item in the NFL, since it’s the NFL, we probably would have told them orally a little bit more about what we had.” he said. “But we don’t have them calling us here. We’ve got some goofus from Woodinville named Rob Agnew asking for the case file. We have no idea who he is.”
You would have to assume that they asked him what transpired.
So either they knew or Brown lied to them.
The irony of your handle and this post.
My handle and your misuse of irony notwithstanding, this post was spot on.
Mara said that Brown told them that he got physical with his wife. They knew before these docs came out.
So, you're saying the Falcons didn't say to Mike Vick, "We're thinking of letting Matt walk. If there's nothing to these dog allegations, we're going to do it. If there's more, we're going to resign him."
They never should've re-signed him. Didn't they know about this before March/April?
Quote:
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
They never should've re-signed him. Didn't they know about this before March/April?
What part is you miss about "the documents were just released?"
Quote:
In comment 13182678 MookGiants said:
Quote:
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
They never should've re-signed him. Didn't they know about this before March/April?
What part is you miss about "the documents were just released?"
THESE documents were just released. They knew about the allegations and the other stuff prior to this, hence the initial 1 game suspension.
Quote:
In comment 13182681 giants#1 said:
Quote:
In comment 13182678 MookGiants said:
Quote:
without these documents coming out. He's not Adam Vinatieri in his prime, they didn't need to keep him around. Instead now they wind up with a bunch of egg on their faces because they stood behind a guy who's a mediocre kicker to begin with.
They never should've re-signed him. Didn't they know about this before March/April?
What part is you miss about "the documents were just released?"
THESE documents were just released. They knew about the allegations and the other stuff prior to this, hence the initial 1 game suspension.
Allegations aren't proof
Now, there is proof
So either they knew or Brown lied to them.
So either they knew or Brown lied to them.
Exactly. Either the Giants knew and ignored it or Brown lied.
So if he WAS Vinatieri in his prime, it would have been OK if they stood by him, then?
Allegations aren't proof
Now, there is proof
There was enough proof and evidence before this that they could've (IMO, should've) moved on from him. Granted, even putting the DV stuff aside, I would've moved on from Brown this offseason. Don't think his on field performance is worth his salary/cap hit.
Quote:
Allegations aren't proof
Now, there is proof
There was enough proof and evidence before this that they could've (IMO, should've) moved on from him. Granted, even putting the DV stuff aside, I would've moved on from Brown this offseason. Don't think his on field performance is worth his salary/cap hit.
Exactly how do you know what info was available?
I don't
Quote:
In comment 13182704 phillygiant said:
Quote:
Allegations aren't proof
Now, there is proof
There was enough proof and evidence before this that they could've (IMO, should've) moved on from him. Granted, even putting the DV stuff aside, I would've moved on from Brown this offseason. Don't think his on field performance is worth his salary/cap hit.
Exactly how do you know what info was available?
I don't
Because it's been reported on since his suspension was first announced...
Quote:
In comment 13182735 giants#1 said:
Quote:
In comment 13182704 phillygiant said:
Quote:
Allegations aren't proof
Now, there is proof
There was enough proof and evidence before this that they could've (IMO, should've) moved on from him. Granted, even putting the DV stuff aside, I would've moved on from Brown this offseason. Don't think his on field performance is worth his salary/cap hit.
Exactly how do you know what info was available?
I don't
Because it's been reported on since his suspension was first announced...
Wrong....that was speculation, based on hearing only one side of the story....not fact
2 different things.....now that we know for a FACT....his ass should be thrown the out the door
He committed a terrible crime, yes, but why does that mean he shouldn't be allowed to keep his job? If he was an accountant should be forced to stop being an accountant? And what job should he be "allowed" to have now? Or is he no longer allowed to make a living at all?
Believe me I hate domestic violence as much or more than anyone....but I just don't see the logic of banning players from the NFL for this type of stuff.
Keep burying your head in the sand. The Giants and the NFL have acted in a disgraceful fashion throughout this entire ordeal.
Keep burying your head in the sand. The Giants and the NFL have acted in a disgraceful fashion throughout this entire ordeal.
I think she refused to speak with them. I don't understand why the absence of evidence was viewed as positive for Brown by the Giants. This is not a criminal trial. They had enough to decide to not re-sign him.
He committed a terrible crime, yes, but why does that mean he shouldn't be allowed to keep his job? If he was an accountant should be forced to stop being an accountant? And what job should he be "allowed" to have now? Or is he no longer allowed to make a living at all?
Believe me I hate domestic violence as much or more than anyone....but I just don't see the logic of banning players from the NFL for this type of stuff.
I don't think the barring really exists, though. You just have to be a helluva lot better. Greg Hardy got another job, Big Ben played on after the rape accusations, etc. Marginal talent can't get away with it.
Keep burying your head in the sand. The Giants and the NFL have acted in a disgraceful fashion throughout this entire ordeal.
According to previous reports, Brown's ex-wife declined to cooperate with the NFL's investigation. The only thing they had to go was what he told them. If he didn't fully disclose everything then yup, he's done.
As for keeping his job, the NFL sells itself on a certain type of image, which is why they have (I believe) a standard morals clause in their contracts. (I'm not commenting on how well they do/don't handle these issues. I'm just addressing the comment about Brown keeping his job.)
with a bad hip?
therealmf : 3:40 pm : link : reply
it is enough cause for termination regardless of The DV charges.
Either way they need to sign another kicker .
I always give a guy the benefit of the doubt . It's time
to end this thing no one player should be bigger than the
game . Sure every team in the NFL has taken chances on
players with sketchy past . They try to council and give
him morale support . He is no better than Greg Hardy at
this point . I always felt like the Giants were half
way decent in handling players but its not worth it at
this point . I defended him because I don't know all the
facts but it's becoming clear that he is a Bum that
hasn't paid or learned from his problem .
I want the team to do the right thing and cut ties .
Robbie Gould or whomever else should be signed .
If this is true and he was a victim and in the past or currently he is trying to get well by going through the proper course of action (therapy, anger management,remorse etc)should he still be cut?
Were the journal entries part of his therapy, a way to face what he had done in order to rehabilitate himself? Prescribed as an exercise from a therapist? That's what they seem like.
Tough decisions.
If this is true and he was a victim and in the past or currently he is trying to get well by going through the proper course of action (therapy, anger management,remorse etc)should he still be cut?
Were the journal entries part of his therapy, a way to face what he had done in order to rehabilitate himself? Prescribed as an exercise from a therapist? That's what they seem like.
Tough decisions.
Your background can only excuse so much. There's a penalty to be paid for your actions, regardless of how you were treated in the past.
If he were to get treatment and atone, the background of his past abuse would make giving him another chance in the future on the table. But you pay a penalty first. And as his age, it's probably too late for second chances.
Also, seems a bit skelly to put them out there and air his being abused as a child. If it was done by him it seems self-serving, if it was done by anyone else it seems like an invasion.
Typical NFL. Claim a strong stance and then don't do anything until the public backlash gets ahold of some photos or docs. Then pretend it never happened if they guy is great or ban him from the league if he isn't.
Link - ( New Window )
I guess I don't really agree with the sentiments that the Giants have egg on their face here. Well, I know they do, but is this really something that's going to truly impact the franchise negatively?
Is it really so bad that the Giants stood behind an employee before all the facts came to the surface? Maybe I am just being apologetic but if this was another franchise I really think i'd be saying the same thing. This is not Greg Hardy who on the surface acts like an asshole and behind the scenes was and is a total turd. From all accounts Brown has a pretty good face or shine to him that seems to have fooled the Giants into believing he's solid.
IS it really that terrible that the Giants waited this thing out before finally cutting bait? Ok fine, they have egg on their face today. Something tells me they will recover and I won't lose sleep over this and lose faith that the Giants aren't one of the higher standard franchises going.
They made a mistake. Doesn't mean the Giants support domestic battery or violence against women.
So either they knew or Brown lied to them.
The irony of your handle and this post.
Quote:
You would have to assume that they asked him what transpired.
So either they knew or Brown lied to them.
The irony of your handle and this post.
My handle and your misuse of irony notwithstanding, this post was spot on.
Mara said that Brown told them that he got physical with his wife. They knew before these docs came out.
This 10 billion dollar industry and all their ex FBI investigators who could tell you the hair count and penis circumstance of every potential 1st round pick come draft time didn't know anything about this. Ok. They're just finding this out the same time as I do.
The league doesn't give a shit about domestic violence, they only care about the optics of it. And even if they are just finding out about these docs now, there was more than enough to get rid of him before this. And at this point now that the docs are out, his presence on the roster and any shred of public support is pathetic
John Mara is an asshole
"“I would have said exactly the same thing, ‘We cannot release the case file.’ But since this is a hot-button item in the NFL, since it’s the NFL, we probably would have told them orally a little bit more about what we had.” he said. “But we don’t have them calling us here. We’ve got some goofus from Woodinville named Rob Agnew asking for the case file. We have no idea who he is.”
Seems like a little effort here could have went a long way. I'm not sure how to link. Here goes nothing (fingers crossed)
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/10/21/king-county-sheriff-blasts-nfl-over-josh-brown/ - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 13182705 ron mexico said:
Quote:
You would have to assume that they asked him what transpired.
So either they knew or Brown lied to them.
The irony of your handle and this post.
My handle and your misuse of irony notwithstanding, this post was spot on.
Mara said that Brown told them that he got physical with his wife. They knew before these docs came out.
So, you're saying the Falcons didn't say to Mike Vick, "We're thinking of letting Matt walk. If there's nothing to these dog allegations, we're going to do it. If there's more, we're going to resign him."
No misuse of irony.
One could say that my handle is ironic, if they wanted to use the word incorrectly.