redrum52
Hall of Famer
Court of public opinion can suck a dick. The public is a gang of idiots for the most part. This won't be liked but I'm happy he only got 6. Should have been less.
-
Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.
The Random Thought Thread
- Thread starter The Greek
- Start date
Tbh i dnt even know what he really did ans
Dnt care.. none of the headlines read that he raped or knocked women out so i never bothered reading..
rmcjacket23
Ravens Ring of Honor
Basically he has a "want to get a BJ from a masseuse" fetish. Uses power and influence to coerce them into doing sex acts on him (or him on them) that they wouldn't normally do for other clients.
Everything after that is basically a grey area of "consensual or not". But at a minimum, basically, he's had dozens of instances of solicitation, basically.
redrum52
Hall of Famer
Basically, feel like this. From what I've seen it looks like he solicited IG hoes. Some weren't about it but some were.
BoredMarine13
Ravens Ring of Honor
Why should it be less? The NFL conduct policy seems to align with his punishment
I think only Watson, the girls, and the lawyers know what really happened. Hard to tell either way if this was legitimate sexual assault, a money grab by the girls, or something somewhere in the middle. My guess is the girls were forced into an awkward situation, needed the money so they did it anyways, and then later realized they could take him to civil court for a pay day.
redrum52
Hall of Famer
The conduct policy is bullshit. Ray Rice was handed down discipline. Ray was honest from the beginning. Then the video is leaked and the punishment is changed. The NFL doesn't give a shit about the crime if it can be silenced. And this is also why the court of public opinion is bs because of how quickly views can be swayed. If the media is wrong about a case the apology never matches the accusations.
BoredMarine13
Ravens Ring of Honor
Yea but why should it be less than 6 games? What should it be?
That makes sense to me. If your a suspect of a crime and new evidence comes to light, it should and can be used against you. The NFL should never have tried to bury his video in the first place.
Well the media does not represent the public. I think that's why the large majority of citizens look at Fox, CNN, MSNBC etc and easily ID its as propaganda.
redrum52
Hall of Famer
I personally think 4 tops but again I'm not fully informed. That's also with me thinking the length of the suspensions for other offenses is too severe as well.
rmcjacket23
Ravens Ring of Honor
I mean you could make an argument that zero games is the correct punishment, given that a) it doesn't impact the integrity of the game, b) he wasn't even charged with a crime, much less convicted of one and c) the NFL, much like the general public, isn't even remotely qualified to be the morality police, nor should they be responsible for covering for a failed criminal justice system.
I personally don't think no punishment is correct, but that's just me.
The reality is this... the NFL's personal conduct policy is, in no way, designed because the NFL cares about the victims of any of these transgressions. That's wildly outside the scope of what any for-profit business is responsible for. Especially when it doesn't occur on their watch. The policy exists to act as a deterrent and punishment process of employees who make the employer look bad.
And so then the question becomes, OK, why does the employer look bad? In this case, they only look bad because the general public wants them to do what the criminal justice system didn't or couldn't. That's the wind up and the pitch. This doesn't appear to be a case where the NFL actually did anything wrong as an entity. They didn't conspire, cover up, or were even involved in any of the transgressions. They just have to suspend him because, if they don't, the public will blame them for not taking a stance, when it's not their job to do so.
Hence why, if you don't buy into any of that BS, and think the business should act precisely as a business should, which is to protect its own interests, you could make an argument that punishing employees for acts that aren't proven to be illegal and for acts that occur outside the scope of the business, is, itself, immoral.
redrum52
Hall of Famer
Yeah... what this guy said
Not football related but last night I had a mutual breakup from a 2 1/2 year relationship. Tough shit, but thankfully football season is right here to keep my mind fresh. I’ll probably be posting a ton more lol
Tank
Hall of Famer
Don’t hold back, how do you really feel? lol
Tank
Hall of Famer
I think what is being missed is suspension from league play isn’t and shouldn’t be meant to be criminal punishment. Putting myself in the shoes of an NFL owner the last thing I want is to have guys working for me that are getting caught getting a bunch of blowjobs/hand jobs at massage parlors, or beating the shit out of their wives/girlfriends. And like it or not, right or wrong, there are certain responsibilities and levels of discretion that come with being employed in a job making millions of $.
rmcjacket23
Ravens Ring of Honor
I mean... they're two dramatically different things. Getting a hummer from a masseuse in a consensual act shouldn't really be a big deal at all. No different than two people having sex with each other consensually. Even if they paid for it, it's almost impossible to argue that prostitution is immoral these days anyway.
Beating up a spouse or a girlfriend breaks a shit load of really good laws, so of course that should be treated differently.
The concept is based on whether or not the NFL should be in the business of punishing employees for legal acts, just because the general public doesn't like it? There's obviously some grey area and arguments here about whether or not what Watson did was legal or not, but the legal system doesn't think what he did was illegal (or at the very least, doesn't have enough evidence to make a case that it is).
BoredMarine13
Ravens Ring of Honor
Obviously having no idea what really happened ,six arbitrarily feels appropriate only for the fact it could cost the NFL some revenue. Which is the only thing the NFL cares about.
I don’t think many, if any male fans are going to stop watching the NFL becuase of the NFL’s level of punishment. Even the simps will make a stink on social media but they’ll be tuned in Sunday all the same. I do believe the NFL will lose a small section of female viewers because of this. 4-6 games ,for giving the company a temporary black eye and possibly a small loss in revenue , feels appropriate to me.
BoredMarine13
Ravens Ring of Honor
Fuck her , or him . Just play “ boys are back in town “ and go have some beers with the fellas
Gotta get hammered for the preseason game lol. I’m going into my senior year so it’ll be nice to get alone time and black out for the ravens with no remorse of effecting her lol
you used the word coerce and then said it's a grey area of "consensual or not" - i'd say "coerce" makes that not a grey area at all
i think both those plays they showed were fine
1st one it was the defender who got riled up and hit him late
2nd one was absolutely fine, defender didnt have any issue with it after... just a finish
im glad we didnt pick him because i wasnt his biggest fan but ive got no issues with his aggression and nastiness at all