On 3/19/2022 at 10:52 AM, X said:

 

 

Also, we're sending away the long term future of our team to make this run with Watson.  The lack of 1st round draft picks means we won't be bringing in young, top flight talent while they're still cheap.  And Watson's cap hit means we're going to have to shed our veterans over the next few years.  Just from a football perspective, I really wish we'd try to build a perennially competitive team.  Not a one and done Superbowl lunge.

Things have changed, and first round draft picks are not the same as they were 10 years ago. Trading three first round draft picks for Watson it’s not trading away the future. If you have Consistent all pro quarterback, they are certainly worth a few years of first round draft bustsBecause of what they bring to the table. Everyone wants the franchise quarterback. Over the last 10 years, the Browns have drafted the likes of Cory Coleman, Johnny Manziel, Justin Gilbert, Danny Shelton. 
some have been serviceable but none have been memorable for the right reasons.  From that perspective, giving up three first rounders for a sure thing is worth it. 

I thought I'd already posted this thread but perhaps not. This is an angle that I've not heard before. And the link between the Texans owner and the lawyer who represented all 22 women is pretty intriguing...

 

 

It's all a massive conspiracy by a bunch of elites!

 

But seriously, no actual evidence in that thread.

2 hours ago, X said:

It's all a massive conspiracy by a bunch of elites!

 

But seriously, no actual evidence in that thread.

 

Because there's no racists in Texas? Because none have destroyed the lives of African-Americans who have spoken out against powerful, racist white people? There's more there than in the hearsay of he-said-she-said of the 22 lawsuits Buzbee has filed. Buzbee and McNair say they don't know each other despite being neighbors. Buzbee ran for mayor of Houston. You mean to tell me that he didn't hit up McNair as one of his first campaign contributors? BS. And Buzbee even went so far as to claim he didn't even pay attention to the Houston Texans football team. And yet he paid for 10 billboards in the Houston area urging the Texans to draft Johnny Manziel in 2014. Why is he lying? What is he trying to hide? Then you've got the stuff I posted yesterday in which the accusers said they wanted money from Watson and even outwardly said they wanted to blackmail him. It's not a good look for the accusers.

 

Maybe this started out with a legit complaint from one of the early accusers and Buzbee jumped on that opportunity. Maybe. The more I learn about this thing, and that Watson has no prior history of immoral acts and that everyone around him, from teammates and coaches in Houston and Clemson all say he's a good guy, makes me question all of the accusers and their ringleader(s) and consider all angles as to why he is accused of these crimes -- including that he might have actually done them.

 

How would any of us feel if we were innocent, get accused of the stuff Watson is, and yet be found guilty by the court of public opinion? Everyone is innocent until proven guilty in court -- nowhere else. And to see so many people act with ironclad certainty that he's guilty at this stage is very troubling to me. I'm not going to personally convict a guy of anything until I hear/see a legal judgment or some indisputable visual evidence of Watson being anything more than a top-5 NFL quarterback. Because so far, that's all I've seen. I don't know if he's good guy or a bad guy. When I see more than hearsay accusations that produce a legal judgment against him, I will add to/amend my opinion of Watson. Until then, like his predecessors at the QB position, I look forward to seeing the on-the-field play by the Browns' latest attempt at finding the franchise's QB.

Believe all women (unless I don’t want to).

Yeah - met up with my buddy for drinks over the weekend. 

 

Here's the takeaways from what was shown to our FO:

 

- Deshaun Watson regularly paid women for sex acts.

- There are at least two separate text chains by groups of the plaintiffs, both group texts reference the fact that bigger settlement amounts can be reached if the class grows in size. 

- Both group texts make allusions to extorting Watson prior to filing suit, including multiple women volunteering to have another "interaction" with him to get a/v recording

- More than half of the women had an "interaction" with him after the group texts discussed the possibility of a lawsuit. 

- The grand jury did not allow Watson's team to present their rebuttal evidence (which isn't unusual), and an indictment was still not obtained. 

 

There were also claims made about the Plaintiff's attorneys, but those were made by Watson's team without corroborating evidence. 

 

Finally, Berry and Stefanski were not shy about questioning Watson's character, to his face, and the Haslam's played "good cop" in the situation. From what I was told, Watson didn't get indignant, and spoke about how ashamed he was to get in this situation - acknowledging the immorality of his own actions (the biggest point of contention for which there isn't rebuttable evidence [*from what I'm told*] is that Watson was presumptuous in assuming what he was paying for on a number of occasions - but in these instances he had repeat interactions with these women). 

 

In the end, the Browns were satisfied that: 1) Watson wasn't going to face any crippling legal actions, 2) He acknowledged that he was to blame for getting himself into the situation, and 3) His mental state hadn't been destroyed by the controversy. 

 

 

DISCLAIMER: I'm not agreeing with or advocating for the Browns decisions, I'm just explaining what I was told by someone closely involved. 

 

 

It's pretty sad that a famous, good-looking, wealthy athlete feels the need to pay for sex. That tells me he has some serious insecurity issues. Those don't just go away when you say you're sorry.

4 minutes ago, KJP said:

It's pretty sad that a famous, good-looking, wealthy athlete feels the need to pay for sex. That tells me he has some serious insecurity issues. Those don't just go away when you say you're sorry.

As Charlie Sheen famously pointed out. He was not "paying for sex" he was "Paying so they would go home afterward" 

 

But to your point, it does scream of an empty existence if he views his sex life as nothing but transactional. 

I think a lot of what @YABO713alluded to was outlined in an SI piece from last year.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/05/21/new-information-proper-context-for-deshaun-watson-sexual-misconduct-lawsuits-daily-cover

 

It may not meet the legal threshold for assault in Texas, but very objectionable behavior by any standard. Seems like he made a habit of propositioning therapists on Instagram. He went through 40+ massage therapists in a few years. Very odd and very gross.

Edited March 21, 20223 yr by bumsquare

3 minutes ago, bumsquare said:

I think a lot of what @YABO713alluded to was outlined in an SI piece from last year.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/05/21/new-information-proper-context-for-deshaun-watson-sexual-misconduct-lawsuits-daily-cover

 

It may not meet the legal threshold for assault in Texas, but very objectionable behavior by any standard. Seems like he made a habit of propositioning therapists on Instagram. He went through 40+ massage therapists in a few years. Very odd and very gross.

Very odd and gross, yes. But does that make him a sexual predator??

 

There are a lot of layers to the story here and often times what is reported in the press tends to skew more to the sensational and leaves out important facts of the story.  I think what is to be taken from this is that Watson is not a boy scout, he is a flawed individual just like every other player in the NFL. His flaws are exposed more because the position that he plays is in the spotlight and that his perversions are sex related.  However, I think a lot back to Rothlisberger from a number of years ago. While he never repaired his image completely, he still had a productive career and led his team to the playoffs multiple times including playoff victories. More importantly, he seemed to learn from his past  indiscretions and changed his life for the better and became a pretty decent citizen instead of a frat boy.  Wouldn't it be reasonable for someone like Watson to follow the same path, and if he does, shouldn't he be celebrated for that?

 

Look at Watson, you have a young guy who comes into a lot of money but not quite mature enough to handle it. Makes stupid decisions because of it and almost cost his career and opportunity to make the difference he originally set out to make. As he grows and matures, he recognizes that such behavior that his influencers helped encourage, because he had a lot of money, is not acceptable and that he needs to change his life and perspective to become a better person. To me, I think that is much more inspirational than a robotic personality like Tom Brady that is essentially always doing the right thing. I would not be surprised if Watson changes his life and becomes a model human after this, but I also suspect that a lot of people will never notice because they have already written him off. Only time will tell.   

It makes him a predator if he was putting women into positions where they felt threatened or uncomfortable. Like I said, not assault by the standards of Texas law, but it certainly seems like some awful behavior.

Edited March 21, 20223 yr by bumsquare

I'm no fan of Skip Bayless, but I thought this exchange was spot on -- including the “guilty until proven innocent “comments from Shannon Sharpe who also had allegations made against him during his playing days.

 

 

21 hours ago, KJP said:

I thought I'd already posted this thread but perhaps not. This is an angle that I've not heard before. And the link between the Texans owner and the lawyer who represented all 22 women is pretty intriguing...

 

 

Technically, Grand juries do not clear anyone of charges ---- they may decide not to charge an individual based upon the evidence, thus no indictment would come from the grand jury.  

59 minutes ago, bumsquare said:

It makes him a predator if he was putting women into positions where they felt threatened or uncomfortable. Like I said, not assault by the standards of Texas law, but it certainly seems like some awful behavior.

The key word is "IF" right now, all we have are allegations but nothing has been proven yet and whatever allegations there are, they are not sufficient to rise to the level of charging him with a crime.  

 

It is easy to start a whisper campaign to destroy someone's reputation, especially if it involves a sex matter. I am not saying that Watson is a good person. He may be a scumbag, but he is entitled to at least having the facts out there before people pass judgement. 

How many crimes was Jim Brown convicted of? I believe one, with virtually no sentence. Hell of a price to pay for a lifetime of beating and violating women. 

 

Donald Trump. Zero convictions.

 

Bill Cosby is walking free due to prosecutorial malpractice.

 

OJ was acquitted.

 

Charges were dismissed against Saint Kobe.

 

The law fails all the time; life is messy. Doesn't mean this sicko should be rewarded with $230 million and be the face of a sports team. 

22 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

The key word is "IF" right now, all we have are allegations but nothing has been proven yet and whatever allegations there are, they are not sufficient to rise to the level of charging him with a crime.  

 

It is easy to start a whisper campaign to destroy someone's reputation, especially if it involves a sex matter. I am not saying that Watson is a good person. He may be a scumbag, but he is entitled to at least having the facts out there before people pass judgement. 

 

Yes he is.

 

2 minutes ago, TBideon said:

How many crimes was Jim Brown convicted of? I believe one, with virtually no sentence. Hell of a price to pay for a lifetime of beating and violating women. 

 

Donald Trump. Zero convictions.

 

Bill Cosby is walking free due to prosecutorial malpractice.

 

OJ was acquitted.

 

Charges were dismissed against Saint Kobe.

 

The law fails all the time; life is messy. Doesn't mean this sicko should be rewarded with $230 million and be the face of a sports team. 

 

Yes it does fail a lot. But it doesn't mean that the public should pass judgment on him in the absence of a legal judgment. For some people, saying "I don't know" is the most difficult phrase to say in the English language.

4 minutes ago, TBideon said:

How many crimes was Jim Brown convicted of? I believe one, with virtually no sentence. Hell of a price to pay for a lifetime of beating and violating women. 

 

Donald Trump. Zero convictions.

 

Bill Cosby is walking free due to prosecutorial malpractice.

 

OJ was acquitted.

 

Charges were dismissed against Saint Kobe.

 

The law fails all the time; life is messy. Doesn't mean this sicko should be rewarded with $230 million and be the face of a sports team. 

 

I agree with you. I'm just saying it's the metric we currently have for assessing our ability to strip an individual of his ability to make a living. 

 

I know in most instances, where there's smoke, there's fire. 

 

But there are also instances like Shawn Oakman and Jovon Robinson in which serious accusations were made, derailing those individuals lives, and they were later proven to be fabricated or completely made up. 

 

Again, I'm NOT saying that Watson is without fault, without moral wrongdoing, or that these women made everything up. All I'm saying is that the system we have - though very flawed at times - has yet to provide us with anything concrete that I could use to say "okay, ban this man from his career".

 

if these accusers continue to go after him like they did oj in civil court where the standard is much lower, what happens if that court finds that he really was wearing those uglyazz bruno magli shoes after all?

 

that is, if they find him liable, then what?

 

i would assume that possible outcome is addressed in a contract somehow?

 

and would the browns get rid of him then, or no?

On 3/17/2022 at 11:19 AM, 646empire said:

ESPN is reporting Watson has informed the Browns he is not Interested.

 

This aged like a Trump tweet.   :)

On 3/18/2022 at 5:31 PM, YABO713 said:

For some insight - I don't know the information precisely, but the Browns FO was privy to evidence presented by the defense to prosecutors, which changed their initial thoughts on Watson. 

 

And I'll echo this again. I know Andrew Berry, and we became friends with him during his first stint in Cleveland when my wife worked for the Browns. My trust in him as a high character individual is marrow deep. It morally doesn't make sense to me right now, but I trust that he knows more than the rest of us. 

 

I initially looked askance at all the accusers having the same attorney, even before it transpired that Buzbee is McNair's close neighbor (yet claims he didn't know who he was) and the accusations only began after the impasse between DW and the Texans began.   Cosby's accusers, for example, had different ones.   A couple lawyer friends agreed, one said it wasn't that unusual.   The guy seems like an Avenatti to me.  

54 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

But there are also instances like Shawn Oakman and Jovon Robinson in which serious accusations were made, derailing those individuals lives, and they were later proven to be fabricated or completely made up. 

 

 

 

And Brett Kavanaugh.

18 hours ago, KJP said:

 

. Buzbee and McNair say they don't know each other despite being neighbors. Buzbee ran for mayor of Houston. You mean to tell me that he didn't hit up McNair as one of his first campaign contributors? BS.

 

People that know Cal McNair wouldn't consider him to be as sleazy as david modell, but would expect him to last as long as "honey boy" without somehow bringing up who he is.  So yeah, there's NFW.   Plus both were active Trump supporters, Bob McNair contributed more than any other NFL owner.

24 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

This aged like a Trump tweet.   :)

It aged like milk left out in the sun.

16 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

And Brett Kavanaugh.

Totally ruined his life 

17 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

This aged like a Trump tweet.   :)

Haha not exactly. From everything reported including info from Watsons camp, The Browns in fact was told he wasn’t moving forward with the team but then for some reason (230 Million Guaranteed HA!) changed his mind over the next day or so. I’ve also heard a lot this morning about both the Saints and or Falcons getting a bit of cold feet at the end. Everyone in the NFL/sports media industries do confirm no other franchise wanting Watson was even remotely close to offering a contract of that much guaranteed money.

45 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

And Brett Kavanaugh.

Brett Kavanaugh sits on the Supreme Court. His legal career is not ruined. So no. 

1 hour ago, mrnyc said:

 

if these accusers continue to go after him like they did oj in civil court where the standard is much lower, what happens if that court finds that he really was wearing those uglyazz bruno magli shoes after all?

 

that is, if they find him liable, then what?

 

i would assume that possible outcome is addressed in a contract somehow?

 

and would the browns get rid of him then, or no?

 

From what I've heard. Watson isn't settling. He'd rather bleed the plaintiff's attorneys dry. 

 

From my experience, everyone postures like that... but we'll see how true it is

17 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

 

From what I've heard. Watson isn't settling. He'd rather bleed the plaintiff's attorneys dry. 

 

From my experience, everyone postures like that... but we'll see how true it is

Even if he does settle, does that really tell us that he committed a crime? Not really. Sure we can supposed that there was wrong doing going on. However, even then, we don't know, and sometimes it is much easier to pay someone off to go away then to engage in a case that will take additional years and much more money to prove a point. If he settles, and the settlement requires confidentiality and no admission of wrongdoing, which it almost certainly will, it does not really tell us any more than Watson settled with the accuser.

 

1 hour ago, 646empire said:

Everyone in the NFL/sports media industries do confirm no other franchise wanting Watson was even remotely close to offering a contract of that much guaranteed money.

It's behind a paywall, but J. Lloyd writing in The Athletic is reporting a bit of an opposite response from other teams in that the contract offer from Cleveland wasn't shopped for other teams to beat.   So, none of us are certain.  Probably should remove "everyone" and "confirm" in your statement.   😉

Edited March 21, 20223 yr by DO_Summers

1 hour ago, DO_Summers said:

It's behind a paywall, but J. Lloyd writing in The Athletic is reporting the opposite of this sentence.   So, remove a bit certainty of "everyone" and "confirm" in your statement.   😉

I’ve never heard of J. Lloyd and don’t know much about “The Athletic” besides hearing about the New York Times just purchased them…… but point taken lol.

 

Below is a great new article from SI that sums up what has been the consensus among the major networks and writers.

 

https://www.si.com/.amp/nfl/2022/03/21/mmqb-how-browns-got-back-in-deshaun-watson-chase

“Deshaun Watson eliminated the Browns on Wednesday night, and the Panthers on Thursday, and back and forth he went Thursday night and Friday morning over whether he should go to his hometown Falcons or a Saints team that had been in the playoffs the last five years in a row and remained loaded for bear.

After a year away from the NFL, he wanted a familiar place that might make his reentry into the sport smoother, according to a source close to the quarterback. He loved the idea of playing in Atlanta in particular, and the South in general, and the thought of being around the people who cheered for him as he grew up. And yet, there was something else he realized, with the two options in front of him, he wanted more.”

 

Further in the article reads:

 

“It’d become clear that Watson’s camp was looking for new money and new guarantees as part of a trade. And the Browns, upon learning they were Watson’s pick, pushed the trade over the goal line with an unprecedented, fully guaranteed five-year offer worth $230 million that offers him protection against a suspension in its structure (His 2022 base is just $1 million, and that’s where the money he’d lose during a suspension would be coming from).”

 

Edited March 21, 20223 yr by 646empire

30 minutes ago, 646empire said:

I’ve never heard of J. Lloyd and don’t know much about “The Athletic” besides hearing about the New York Times just purchased them…… but point taken lol.

 

 

the key quote in the article

 

"The Browns were one of 13 teams to express interest in Watson, who held a full no-trade clause. That left him in control of the proceedings. He reviewed the rosters of all 13 and submitted a list of five for which he was willing to waive his no-trade clause. The Texans eliminated one of his five teams because they were within the division. The four finalists were the Panthers, Saints, Falcons and Browns."

 

Also - the article further goes on to state that his only reason for turning Cleveland down at first was that he was not familiar with Cleveland where he knew the Southern cities. It said that when the Panther's balked at the guaranteed money, Barry sensed a crack to get back into the sweepstakes for Watson. Furthermore, it was stated that Watson's agent did not shop the Cleveland deal and one of the other suitors were upset they never had the opportunity to match the Browns offer and they would have if they knew it was all going to be guaranteed. 

2 hours ago, bumsquare said:

Totally ruined his life 

 

Came close to "derailing" it.   Good example of the same principle.

47 minutes ago, 646empire said:

I’ve never heard of J. Lloyd and don’t know much about “The Athletic” besides hearing about the New York Times just purchased them…… but point taken lol.

 

Below is a great new article from Sports Illiterated that sums up what has been the consensus among the major networks and writers.

 

https://www.si.com/.amp/nfl/2022/03/21/mmqb-how-browns-got-back-in-deshaun-watson-chase

“Deshaun Watson eliminated the Browns on Wednesday night, and the Panthers on Thursday, and back and forth he went Thursday night and Friday morning over whether he should go to his hometown Falcons or a Saints team that had been in the playoffs the last five years in a row and remained loaded for bear.

After a year away from the NFL, he wanted a familiar place that might make his reentry into the sport smoother, according to a source close to the quarterback. He loved the idea of playing in Atlanta in particular, and the South in general, and the thought of being around the people who cheered for him as he grew up. And yet, there was something else he realized, with the two options in front of him, he wanted more.”

 

Further in the article reads:

 

“It’d become clear that Watson’s camp was looking for new money and new guarantees as part of a trade. And the Browns, upon learning they were Watson’s pick, pushed the trade over the goal line with an unprecedented, fully guaranteed five-year offer worth $230 million that offers him protection against a suspension in its structure (His 2022 base is just $1 million, and that’s where the money he’d lose during a suspension would be coming from).”

 

 

A friend who used to write for Crain's Detroit writes for the Athletic, so they have some people on board with journalistic credibility.   

15 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

 

 

the key quote in the article

 

"The Browns were one of 13 teams to express interest in Watson, who held a full no-trade clause. That left him in control of the proceedings. He reviewed the rosters of all 13 and submitted a list of five for which he was willing to waive his no-trade clause. The Texans eliminated one of his five teams because they were within the division. The four finalists were the Panthers, Saints, Falcons and Browns."

 

Also - the article further goes on to state that his only reason for turning Cleveland down at first was that he was not familiar with Cleveland where he knew the Southern cities. It said that when the Panther's balked at the guaranteed money, Barry sensed a crack to get back into the sweepstakes for Watson. Furthermore, it was stated that Watson's agent did not shop the Cleveland deal and one of the other suitors were upset they never had the opportunity to match the Browns offer and they would have if they knew it was all going to be guaranteed. 

 

Berry probably (and shrewdly) told him the deal was on the table only for immediate acceptance. 

10 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

 

 

the key quote in the article

 

"The Browns were one of 13 teams to express interest in Watson, who held a full no-trade clause. That left him in control of the proceedings. He reviewed the rosters of all 13 and submitted a list of five for which he was willing to waive his no-trade clause. The Texans eliminated one of his five teams because they were within the division. The four finalists were the Panthers, Saints, Falcons and Browns."

 

Also - the article further goes on to state that his only reason for turning Cleveland down at first was that he was not familiar with Cleveland where he knew the Southern cities. It said that when the Panther's balked at the guaranteed money, Barry sensed a crack to get back into the sweepstakes for Watson. Furthermore, it was stated that Watson's agent did not shop the Cleveland deal and one of the other suitors were upset they never had the opportunity to match the Browns offer and they would have if they knew it was all going to be guaranteed. 

This actually proves both points, on one hand the article is claiming “one other” team was willling to match the money had they known but on the other hand it mentions how the Panthers balked at the huge guarantee which fits into other reporting that some of the finalists started to get cold feet for various reasons and Watsons team picked up on it. None of it matters now but the drama is great. I thought this kind of stuff was reserved for the NBA but the NFL is now in the mix lol.

26 minutes ago, 646empire said:

This actually proves both points, on one hand the article is claiming “one other” team was willling to match the money had they known but on the other hand it mentions how the Panthers balked at the huge guarantee which fits into other reporting that some of the finalists started to get cold feet for various reasons and Watsons team picked up on it. None of it matters now but the drama is great. I thought this kind of stuff was reserved for the NBA but the NFL is now in the mix lol.

That is a reasonable take as well.

I will say though that there were 13 teams interested in bidding and 5 finalists willing to meet Houston's price in draft picks to get into the room to pitch Watson. Of those, the one team (probably Indy) was disqualified because Houston did not want to trade to a division rival. Therefore, you could say that 1/2 of the finalists were willing to guarantee the money. Carolina, was the only one who openly was quoted as having cold feet. Also, for what it is worth, the reasons for getting cold feet are not really mentioned. Yes, it could have been from his prior legal problems, or it could be because NFL teams rarely do full guarantees on money, it could be a combination of both. That is the one thing we do not know. 

baker to the ... the ... the ...

 

can you imagine?

 

 

https://nypost.com/2022/03/23/baker-mayfield-receiving-interest-from-seahawks-steelers/

28 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

baker to the ... the ... the ...

 

can you imagine?

 

 

https://nypost.com/2022/03/23/baker-mayfield-receiving-interest-from-seahawks-steelers/

The Mayfield problem is that teams do not want to give up a mid round pick for him AND be on the hook to pay him $18 million this season. The Browns wont cut him because they still need to pay him. If a team could get him in the $5-$8 million range, I think there would be a bunch of teams fighting for his services.

49 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

The Mayfield problem is that teams do not want to give up a mid round pick for him AND be on the hook to pay him $18 million this season. The Browns wont cut him because they still need to pay him. If a team could get him in the $5-$8 million range, I think there would be a bunch of teams fighting for his services.

 

They won't cut him precisely so he doesn't stay in the division as well.  The Stoolers would need to find a team that will trade for him then turn around and trade him to them.   The Browns would consider that bad faith dealing and teams try not do do that quite so blatantly.

15 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

They won't cut him precisely so he doesn't stay in the division as well.  The Stoolers would need to find a team that will trade for him then turn around and trade him to them.   The Browns would consider that bad faith dealing and teams try not do do that quite so blatantly.

No team is going to take him unless the Browns eat a big chunk of the contract. I think he gets traded either right before or during training camp as some other team suffers an injury to one of their QB's and needs a strong backup to come in. At that point, the Browns would have a lot more leverage in trading him but would still have to eat a chunk of salary for the year. Cap space wont be as big of an issue at that point since the year is mostly settled at that point, so whatever money the Browns save for him in the summer is just actual cash to the bottom line at that point.

 

Baker needs to be adjusting his attitude though and realize that he is not going to sniff a starting QB job in 2022 and if he does end up starting, it is going to be on a bad team from here going forward. 

 

 

50 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

 

While you can never tell, if the fact pattern is the same as what the other grand juries heard, you would think that they would come to the same conclusion. I think the Browns knew this before they traded him. Yes, there is still the 2% chance they get burned but It is pretty unlikely at this point. 

ESPN just put out that there will be no additional charges.
 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33585725/second-grand-jury-mulls-another-charge-cleveland-browns-qb-deshaun-watson

 

My guess is that Progressive is planning a big moving party with Watson showing up with his moving truck and kicking Baker our of his house. 

 

https://theathletic.com/3206116/2022/03/25/browns-sponsors-mum-on-deshaun-watson-signing-await-signals-from-team-on-what-to-say/

Whoa

 

 

 

the panthers star reciever robby anderson wants no part of baker:

 

 

https://nypost.com/2022/04/16/robby-anderson-doesnt-appear-to-want-baker-mayfield-as-panthers-qb/

Hue, you sucked. Deal with it.

 

Browns didn't need to incentivize tanking. To lose games, they hired Hue (and even extended him).

 

 

what does the lack of interest say about baker?

 

https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/33766051

Didn't the Browns say they didn't want to trade him, and they can't eat the $18 mill by releasing him.

 

Factor in his being somewhat injury prone, mayyyyyybe a slight headcase, and that he'll be a free agent in a year anyway... man, what a bizarre situation.