PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Tyreek Hill Investigation


The two are interchangeable. An employee’s freedom to live his or her life outside of work should be much more important than branding.

Back in my working days our employer had to pay us just to be on call. If anything happened that required our attention we'd make even more. Our time with our family is valuable.
 
The two are interchangeable. An employee’s freedom to live his or her life outside of work should be much more important than branding.

The operative word being should.
Outside of whatever might be in individual contract language all players are subject to the CBA in which such 'freedom' was bargained away.
 
Agree. Imo for the past few issues we've seen a kinder, gentler Goody since Zeke Elliott. Hill, Josh and there were a couple of others.

I think the reasoning is twofold. First is what you say. Goody doesn't want to exacerbate an already acrimonious relationship with Dee Smith.

The other reason I believe some owners told Goody to cool it with the ad-hoc , inconsistent dispensing of justice because he sucks at it and unnessarily exposes the league.
I think there is a third reason. Everything Goodell does is a PR move. On most cases he waits, floats something to the media to get the pulse on the majority then acts.
He does this with rule changes (which by the way he has made a mockery of) with discipline and with less subtle moves such as the patriots not being the Thursday night opener because his pollsters tell him that people are sick of the patriots.
Hill is getting a pass because of general Mahomes love and to enforce the policy would take away a weapon from Mahomes. If bill were a patriot we would have gotten a suspension, increased for being a repeat offender.
 
He must mean adultery. The Eagles were livid when they found out about that. Winning seems to have changed their minds though.
He means Brady because Brady did absolutely nothing wrong, and in fact was punished for science existing.
 
Goody is not policing a player's life outside of work. He is punishing players who's off-the -field behavior is damaging the brand of the league and player.

When Joe Namath was hanging out with mafia bosses and Rozelle told him to stop, that was policing.
Yes. This isn’t a guy digging ditches to feed his family. It’s a guy who has chosen a very lucrative very public profession where your personal life, right or wrong is under the microscope and your actions in your personal life absolutely can hurt your employer. People literally pay money, big money, to watch you work. People literally set you up as a role model. People (as you see here) literally attach themselves to you being a beacon of honor because you can play a game.
It’s the people putting money in the owners pocket that necessitate action to discipline players.
Anyone who doesn’t get that only needs to look at protest revolving around Vick, hardy, various domestic abusers and even the vitriol toward Brady when they made up something to accuse him of. Then look to the national anthem dispute and the boycotts of advertisers etc.
The personal conduct policy is mandated by the fans, or at least the general public, because the protesters are not necessarily fans, who are telling the owners the value of their product depends upon it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh, look at that… of course the homers here will twist it any way they can.
Also, she said “where did the bruises come from?” once, then deflected to his response. She didn’t deny him saying he “picked her up and put her out of the door” and never hit her.
Since you are hard of hearing, the deflection is clear:
“We’re not talking about that, we’re talking about our son.”

Also, nothing you quoted about what he said was child abuse, he talked about discipline and respect. You can not conclude child abuse from him saying he wants to teach his son respect (unless you are a “guilty until proven innocent” type, of course).

What you can conclude is that he said he never hit her or did anything she said he did. “Where did the bruises come from?” was her only response to him. A question in answer to a question — that is called deflection. He asked her multiple times “did I hit you?” She never said “yes.” She responded with:
1. A question.
2. “We aren’t talking about that right now.”

That isn’t deflection?

If he was a patriots player, you would be up in arms defending him right now. It’s people like you who make politics what they are: blind support of one side, blind hatred of the other. No logic or reason or objectivity.

You can be a fan of the Patriots and also not hate every person who wasn’t drafted by the Patriots. Shocking, I know.

Her refusing to answer whether he hit her or not, responding with a question, saying “we aren’t talking about that right now” — that doesn’t scream deflection? :rolleyes:

If someone claims you raped them, then you ask “did I rape you?” and they answer, “where did the marks on my body come from?” And then, again, you ask, “did I rape you?” And they answer, “we aren’t talking about that right now.” That wouldn’t imply there’s some truth to what you are saying? Or any doubt to whether you actually raped her or not? She couldn’t even say “yes, you did choke me, you did punch me” — that isn’t odd to you? Not at all?

Now, if she lied about him hitting her and he pleaded guilty for PR, then why should she be believed for this child abuse case?



From the shared article:

Rapoport joined Dale & Keefe to explain why he wasn't baffled.

“Honestly, I am not [baffled]," he said. "This is something that we have been working on for a long time and I would say over the course of the last 48 hours trying to nail down that he was not going to be suspended or fined was probably what I did the most. I was expecting no suspension. I was expecting no fine. It basically read how I thought, honestly. There’s a couple things that went into it. Obviously, we know the audio that was released around the time of the draft was not good, and nothing good about that at all.

"Someone called me two days ago and said make sure you listen to the entire 11-minute audio. I said, ‘OK.’ So, I listened to the entire 11-minute audio that Crystal Espinal secretly recorded her and Tyreek Hill going through an airport and his comments come off very differently in that. She doesn’t deny when Hill said she basically made up the 2014 incident and she also admits that she knows Hill did not break the arm of her son.

There’s a lot in there. The NFL talked to Hill, they talked to people on both sides. They did not talk to Crystal Espinal, who did not make herself available for comment. The end result of all this was he wasn’t suspended."

They dont want to lose all that money if Hill gets canned by the Chiefs.

Hill is a thug. The Chiefs are a thug team coached by a Marshmallow named Andy Reid. What Kevin Kietzman said was 101% true.

Hill is walking because his baby mama is lying and the kid cannot testify to what happened.
 
The two are interchangeable. An employee’s freedom to live his or her life outside of work should be much more important than branding.
You’re making it sound like this is a lifestyle choice or something like that. You don’t have the “freedom” to break the law.
 
I just remembered...didn’t Edelman get suspended for “taking a PED”, yet the NFL couldn’t prove it?
 
I just remembered...didn’t Edelman get suspended for “taking a PED”, yet the NFL couldn’t prove it?


0*1S1XRaZM-WRs_due.gif
 
Would the corrupt 32 still have to pay the rest of his contract? Are the details available? This is important to assessing when that would happen. Since it's all about the $$$$$ for the corrupt 32.
Yes I believe Goodell's contract - unlike the players' - is guaranteed. Although they could always make the argument he is being fired for cause, though I don't know how much water that would hold....
 
You’re making it sound like this is a lifestyle choice or something like that. You don’t have the “freedom” to break the law.

You’re conflating his obligation to the community with his employment. Not the same.
 
When I was an exec at a large company I needed to sign a morals clause. It's not just sports teams which expect their employees to adhere to a clean lifestyle and stay out of trouble

That usually doesn’t extend to criminal allegations. A plea bargain or conviction is usually required, a least in the EAs I’ve negotiated.

I get why they want it. I just think it’s unfair to the employee. It one thing to suspend or terminate employment because the employee can’t do the job; it’s quite another to have the power to do so for acts the occur outside the workplace.
 
That usually doesn’t extend to criminal allegations. A plea bargain or conviction is usually required, a least in the EAs I’ve negotiated.

I get why they want it. I just think it’s unfair to the employee. It one thing to suspend or terminate employment because the employee can’t do the job; it’s quite another to have the power to do so for acts the occur outside the workplace.
When I was at said company it was grounds for termination if I was caught by company security at a strip club or soliciting prostitutes.

Id have to back and look at my EA to see if convictions were the determining factor. It was 9 years ago
 
The NFL is really stupid. This is what they should do.
1. Only test for performance enhancing drugs. Who cares what else the players do.
2. Only punish players for their convictions, get out of the investigation game, you suck at it.
3. Group crimes into a couple of categories, violent crimes, domestic abuse, drug and alcohol related, etc. Set up a simple chart that takes into account the severity of the crime, misdemeanor/felony and the number of times a player has been convicted in the past and have a set punishment based upon those criteria.
4. If a team releases a player based upon a morals clause, other teams can't pick him up for 1 year, and the team that does pick them up has to forfeit a draft pick back to the team that released him.
 
The NFL is really stupid. This is what they should do.
1. Only test for performance enhancing drugs. Who cares what else the players do.
2. Only punish players for their convictions, get out of the investigation game, you suck at it.
3. Group crimes into a couple of categories, violent crimes, domestic abuse, drug and alcohol related, etc. Set up a simple chart that takes into account the severity of the crime, misdemeanor/felony and the number of times a player has been convicted in the past and have a set punishment based upon those criteria.
4. If a team releases a player based upon a morals clause, other teams can't pick him up for 1 year, and the team that does pick them up has to forfeit a draft pick back to the team that released him.

Plenty to agree or disagree with here, but I think the larger point that they’ve got to decide on a set process instead of making #%! up as they go is an excellent one.
 
The NFL is really stupid. This is what they should do.
1. Only test for performance enhancing drugs. Who cares what else the players do.
2. Only punish players for their convictions, get out of the investigation game, you suck at it.
3. Group crimes into a couple of categories, violent crimes, domestic abuse, drug and alcohol related, etc. Set up a simple chart that takes into account the severity of the crime, misdemeanor/felony and the number of times a player has been convicted in the past and have a set punishment based upon those criteria.
4. If a team releases a player based upon a morals clause, other teams can't pick him up for 1 year, and the team that does pick them up has to forfeit a draft pick back to the team that released him.
#4 is a can of worms.
 
#4 is a can of worms.

it is, but you do have to consider the fact that players can corrupt the rule as a means of shooting their way out of town.......I think part of this is leeway on behalf of the chiefs who didn't hesitate to dump hunt. not right, but it should not have been easy for thr browns to grab him......it should be the kind of suspension at least where the player is not allowed to sign with anyone until the suspension is completed
 
the pats and brady will still be hated more....why? because they're winners
 


Patriots Kraft ‘Involved’ In Decision Making?  Zolak Says That’s Not the Case
MORSE: Final First Round Patriots Mock Draft
Slow Starts: Stark Contrast as Patriots Ponder Which Top QB To Draft
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/24: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/23: News and Notes
MORSE: Final 7 Round Patriots Mock Draft, Matthew Slater News
Bruschi’s Proudest Moment: Former LB Speaks to MusketFire’s Marshall in Recent Interview
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/22: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-21, Kraft-Belichick, A.J. Brown Trade?
MORSE: Patriots Draft Needs and Draft Related Info
Back
Top