Just so I have this right, they want answers from Goodell on what type of suspension he may be facing, even though Goodell couldn’t possibly answer that at this point? Alrighty then!
How can anybody give clarity on the legal situation
Goodell doesn't control the judicial system, nor does he know what other shoes will drop. This trade isn't happening until after the season at the earliest.
are we allowed to play him or will he be suspended? Right now the NFL is letting Houston just sit him- inactive- week after week. The question is what if he were to suit up, would the NFL allow him to play
RE: It makes sense if the question is- if we trade for him
are we allowed to play him or will he be suspended? Right now the NFL is letting Houston just sit him- inactive- week after week. The question is what if he were to suit up, would the NFL allow him to play
There's no way. The NFL would suspend him indefinitely immediately.
Miami once seemed like a team with a plan but it looks like they don't.
I thought the rumor was Tua was going to Washington. Miami probably actually needs that pick because Houston no doubt wants a 2022 first rounder as part of the deal and Miami doesn't have one.
it would be nice to see Watson come in and win a few games so Philly doesn't end up with a top 10 pick.
But, I also remembered the Giants have Miamis pick in the 3rd round so maybe not too many wins...
It’s the 3rd round, I would much rather have the pick be in the late teens even if that means the giants pick is later. It would be very bad if that pick ends up being a top 10 even top 5 pick.
Regarding "clarity" on Watson's status, the article simply states:
Quote:
Like other teams that have shown interest in Watson, the Dolphins preferred his legal issues be resolved before getting serious about the negotiations, and, hopefully, finalizing a trade.
and
Quote:
Obviously, Ross would want to know from Goodell if a suspension would be forthcoming after the trade.
It doesn't say anything about wanting his legal issues resolved. The article seems to simply be saying, as jvm suggested, the Dolphins want to know if they acquire him, and want to play him right away, would he be suspended or put on the exempt list blocking that. (It makes sense that they might also want to know, if, based on what the league knows now, Goodell has a sense of what suspension might be coming in time. But nothing in the article suggests they need a resolution, or even clarity, on that to move forward). lonk - ( New Window )
is willing to take the PR heat from rights groups for alleged, at this point, sexual assault charges of over 20 women? And apparently so is the NFL, that Congress is asking for re the release of 650,000 e-mail of the WFT front office alleged or admitted sexism, et. al.?
is willing to take the PR heat from rights groups for alleged, at this point, sexual assault charges of over 20 women? And apparently so is the NFL, that Congress is asking for re the release of 650,000 e-mail of the WFT front office alleged or admitted sexism, et. al.?
can the NFL just leave him in limbo while nothing is happening on the legal front? Watson should either be allowed to play or be suspended. This defacto suspension via being inactive is beyond stupid. The Texans are essentially doing the NFL's dirty work for them.
can the NFL just leave him in limbo while nothing is happening on the legal front? Watson should either be allowed to play or be suspended. This defacto suspension via being inactive is beyond stupid. The Texans are essentially doing the NFL's dirty work for them.
It sounds like he can play for the Texans but either he doesn’t want to or they don’t want him to (likely both). The trade is their problem (player and team).
I think the NFL constantly usurps itself; it is an entertainment business and not a vehicle for implementing social change or consciousness.
250 million to combat "systemic Racism".
Refusal to give the sovereign state of Texas the superbowl unless transgender bathrooms are included in public places.
Whether i agree with these policies or not, is it an entertainment businesses job to promulgate controversial social policies?
Should a corporation be commissioning (and spending millions) to independently investigate a potential criminal act or is that usurping the role of the justice Dept.?
In my very tentative judgment, the NFL is badly exceeding itself. Let the investigation remain with the criminal depts and the judgments from the Justice system. Until and if they convict, he should be free to earn a living. And I'd extend it: The NFL has no right to take away that basic right (to earn a living falling under the constitutional "right to the pursuit of happiness").
I think we're seeing something awful and dangerous happening and we're cloaking the loss of basic freedoms under the banner and moment of "social improvement"; and maybe entering the world of the Red Queen...." off with his head, sentence first, judgment (guilt or innocence) later...
I think the NFL constantly usurps itself; it is an entertainment business and not a vehicle for implementing social change or consciousness.
250 million to combat "systemic Racism".
Refusal to give the sovereign state of Texas the superbowl unless transgender bathrooms are included in public places.
Whether i agree with these policies or not, is it an entertainment businesses job to promulgate controversial social policies?
Should a corporation be commissioning (and spending millions) to independently investigate a potential criminal act or is that usurping the role of the justice Dept.?
In my very tentative judgment, the NFL is badly exceeding itself. Let the investigation remain with the criminal depts and the judgments from the Justice system. Until and if they convict, he should be free to earn a living. And I'd extend it: The NFL has no right to take away that basic right (to earn a living falling under the constitutional "right to the pursuit of happiness").
I think we're seeing something awful and dangerous happening and we're cloaking the loss of basic freedoms under the banner and moment of "social improvement"; and maybe entering the world of the Red Queen...." off with his head, sentence first, judgment (guilt or innocence) later...
Since no Super Bowl venue has trans bathrooms I can only assume you are misrepresenting the issue with Texas, and you probably know it.
if I have the details wrong it is still the case (as I understand it) that the NFL used the superbowl and the subsidiary, revenue it generates as a wedge to foster social change on tansexual issue.
i will research and if wrong offer an apology.
The headlines read...NFL THREATENS TeXAS OVER TRANGENDER BILL
The National Football League — the subject of many controversies, particularly under the leadership of Commissioner Roger Goodell — has now needlessly injected itself into the transgender bathroom debate. The NFL has threatened to punish Texas if it forges ahead with a bill prohibiting transgender individuals from using bathrooms based on their “gender identity.”
Texas Senate Bill 6 would require transgender individuals to use bathrooms in public schools, in government buildings, and on public university campuses according to their biological sex, regardless of whether they identify with a different gender. The bill would also stop cities from passing ordinances that would allow transgender individuals to choose which bathroom to use.
Republican State Senator Lois Kolkhorst filed SB6 earlier this year, citing some of the state’s “divisive ordinances” having to do with transgender bathroom regulations, including a Houston ordinance that would have made it illegal to “discriminate” against someone based on 15 different “protected characteristics,” though that ordinance was nixed by voters.
“I filed this legislation not to start a controversy but to end one,” Kolkhorst explained.
But according to the NFL, it’s game on. NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy has threatened to bar the state of Texas from hosting future Super Bowls if the bill is passed into law.
“The NFL embraces inclusiveness. We want all fans to feel welcomed at our events and NFL policies prohibit discrimination based on age, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, or any other improper standard,” McCarthy said. “If a proposal that is discriminatory or inconsistent with our values were to become law there, that would certainly be a factor considered when thinking about awarding future events,” he added, speaking of the new legislation.
I repeat: The NFL is an entertainment industry, i don't think - whether i agree or disagreee with the specific policies - that they should be an advocate for controversial social change. Moreover, i don't think they should be judging a player's innocence or guilt and that should remain the job of the criminal and justice dept. Watson is innocent until proven guilty in A COURT OF LAW and by a jury of his peers...and anything else is a transgression of his constitutional rights.
"Sentence first, verdict later" is the exact quote of the Red Queen.
There's no way. The NFL would suspend him indefinitely immediately.
Miami once seemed like a team with a plan but it looks like they don't.
But, I also remembered the Giants have Miamis pick in the 3rd round so maybe not too many wins...
I thought the rumor was Tua was going to Washington. Miami probably actually needs that pick because Houston no doubt wants a 2022 first rounder as part of the deal and Miami doesn't have one.
But, I also remembered the Giants have Miamis pick in the 3rd round so maybe not too many wins...
It’s the 3rd round, I would much rather have the pick be in the late teens even if that means the giants pick is later. It would be very bad if that pick ends up being a top 10 even top 5 pick.
What’s it matter Tua ya?
Yup.
It doesn't say anything about wanting his legal issues resolved. The article seems to simply be saying, as jvm suggested, the Dolphins want to know if they acquire him, and want to play him right away, would he be suspended or put on the exempt list blocking that. (It makes sense that they might also want to know, if, based on what the league knows now, Goodell has a sense of what suspension might be coming in time. But nothing in the article suggests they need a resolution, or even clarity, on that to move forward).
lonk - ( New Window )
Dumb x Stupid = Idiocy.
Dumb x Stupid = Idiocy.
^this
Isn't his whole life currently pending legal review...forget about football????
or
the plaintiffs have concluded that having him play and generating millions in salary is better for them than having him suspended and earning nothing
or
these are allegations and nothing has been proven, and the union would fight an attempt to suspend a highly paid player over allegations
It sounds like he can play for the Texans but either he doesn’t want to or they don’t want him to (likely both). The trade is their problem (player and team).
250 million to combat "systemic Racism".
Refusal to give the sovereign state of Texas the superbowl unless transgender bathrooms are included in public places.
Whether i agree with these policies or not, is it an entertainment businesses job to promulgate controversial social policies?
Should a corporation be commissioning (and spending millions) to independently investigate a potential criminal act or is that usurping the role of the justice Dept.?
In my very tentative judgment, the NFL is badly exceeding itself. Let the investigation remain with the criminal depts and the judgments from the Justice system. Until and if they convict, he should be free to earn a living. And I'd extend it: The NFL has no right to take away that basic right (to earn a living falling under the constitutional "right to the pursuit of happiness").
I think we're seeing something awful and dangerous happening and we're cloaking the loss of basic freedoms under the banner and moment of "social improvement"; and maybe entering the world of the Red Queen...." off with his head, sentence first, judgment (guilt or innocence) later...
250 million to combat "systemic Racism".
Refusal to give the sovereign state of Texas the superbowl unless transgender bathrooms are included in public places.
Whether i agree with these policies or not, is it an entertainment businesses job to promulgate controversial social policies?
Should a corporation be commissioning (and spending millions) to independently investigate a potential criminal act or is that usurping the role of the justice Dept.?
In my very tentative judgment, the NFL is badly exceeding itself. Let the investigation remain with the criminal depts and the judgments from the Justice system. Until and if they convict, he should be free to earn a living. And I'd extend it: The NFL has no right to take away that basic right (to earn a living falling under the constitutional "right to the pursuit of happiness").
I think we're seeing something awful and dangerous happening and we're cloaking the loss of basic freedoms under the banner and moment of "social improvement"; and maybe entering the world of the Red Queen...." off with his head, sentence first, judgment (guilt or innocence) later...
Since no Super Bowl venue has trans bathrooms I can only assume you are misrepresenting the issue with Texas, and you probably know it.
i will research and if wrong offer an apology.
Texas Senate Bill 6 would require transgender individuals to use bathrooms in public schools, in government buildings, and on public university campuses according to their biological sex, regardless of whether they identify with a different gender. The bill would also stop cities from passing ordinances that would allow transgender individuals to choose which bathroom to use.
Republican State Senator Lois Kolkhorst filed SB6 earlier this year, citing some of the state’s “divisive ordinances” having to do with transgender bathroom regulations, including a Houston ordinance that would have made it illegal to “discriminate” against someone based on 15 different “protected characteristics,” though that ordinance was nixed by voters.
“I filed this legislation not to start a controversy but to end one,” Kolkhorst explained.
But according to the NFL, it’s game on. NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy has threatened to bar the state of Texas from hosting future Super Bowls if the bill is passed into law.
“The NFL embraces inclusiveness. We want all fans to feel welcomed at our events and NFL policies prohibit discrimination based on age, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, or any other improper standard,” McCarthy said. “If a proposal that is discriminatory or inconsistent with our values were to become law there, that would certainly be a factor considered when thinking about awarding future events,” he added, speaking of the new legislation.
I repeat: The NFL is an entertainment industry, i don't think - whether i agree or disagreee with the specific policies - that they should be an advocate for controversial social change. Moreover, i don't think they should be judging a player's innocence or guilt and that should remain the job of the criminal and justice dept. Watson is innocent until proven guilty in A COURT OF LAW and by a jury of his peers...and anything else is a transgression of his constitutional rights.
"Sentence first, verdict later" is the exact quote of the Red Queen.