Antonio Brown

QuantumMechanic said:

You missed my point. Even if he easily wins in court and pays nothing, it’s gonna cost him way more than $2mil in lost endorsements, etc. Would have been better to pay her the $2mil with a “if you tell anyone you have to pay back the $2mil” rider, no matter how galling it would have been to pay if he didn’t do anything.

Click to expand...

That’s true, but he’ll get it back from someone else if it blows over.

TomPatriot said:

You don’t get it. Cases can be distinguished because the facts are different. Different panels with different judges can yield different results. This happens all the time.

Click to expand...

If the facts are different enough to be able to distinguish things (“Goodell acted so arbitrarily THIS time the award must be overturned”), sure. But regardless of facts they can’t use a different standard, can’t say Goodell gets less deference, can’t reduce his power under Article 46, etc.

QuantumMechanic said:

Refused to agree to pay $2mil? Huge mistake. Even if he didn’t do it, this becoming public is gonna cost him way way more than $2mil.

Click to expand...

Are you questioning the financial acumen of a guy who pissed away $30M from the Raiders?

Regards,
Chris

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

.

I believe they said they “will be” filing in a statement.

Click to expand...

maust1013 said:

Not quite, his attorney almost immediately said they plan to which is hardy the same thing as actually filing it. That could just be a tactic or it could mean they wanted to see her hand before going all in against it and their countersuit is forthcoming.

Click to expand...

Thanks guys, I must’ve misread then. That makes sense - the NFL may be doing Brown a favor in a sense by having Taylor give Goodell all of her most incriminating evidence right away, at which time Brown’s team can decide whether it’s enough to be wary or to say “nah man this has no basis, let’s counterfile and make her go away when her legal fees start stacking up.”

NYCPATS4LIFE said:

I believe he has made over 70 million dollars in his career. We shall see what happens.

Click to expand...

Gross ≠ Net ≠ Available

Ross12 said:

Thanks guys, I must’ve misread then. That makes sense - the NFL may be doing Brown a favor in a sense by having Taylor give Goodell all of her most incriminating evidence right away, at which time Brown’s team can decide whether it’s enough to be wary or to say “nah man this has no basis, let’s counterfile and make her go away when her legal fees start stacking up.”

Click to expand...

You have to weigh that with the public perception of being the accused only, rather than having a rebuttal ready. I think it’s different when there’s a public figure involved and the allegations alone are a massive blow to him. In the NYFL, the allegations and PR are all that matter, unless you’re a Giant/Jete.

QuantumMechanic said:

If the facts are different enough to be able to distinguish things (“Goodell acted so arbitrarily THIS time the award must be overturned”), sure. But regardless of facts they can’t use a different standard, can’t say Goodell gets less deference, can’t reduce his power under Article 46, etc.

Click to expand...

Actually, believe it or not, they can. They can use a different set of cases that places review of arbitration decisions in a different light. Or they create an exception. Or they use a summary order that’s not to be cited. Or they hold on these facts only. Or they use other methods. It’s not as clear cut as you suppose,

TomPatriot said:

Actually, believe it or not, they can. They can use a different set of cases that places review of arbitration decisions in a different light. Or they create an exception. Or they use a summary order that’s not to be cited. Or they hold on these facts only. Or they use other methods. It’s not as clear cut as you suppose,

Click to expand...

The Brady precedent makes it much harder to do so. In that case, you had an alleged rule violation that was already covered within the rule book, and Article 46 was cited, even though the actual language of Article 46 defined “Integrity of the Game” as things like betting on games, etc., and not normal competitive advantages that players often try to get (stickum, equipment tampering, PEDs, etc.). That is a pretty massive precedent to set, that Article 46 had no limitations, unless, as you’ve pointed out, there is something very unique about the challenge to that ruling. They also ruled that Goodell wasn’t bound to even arbitrate with any type of good faith or fairness, or at least that wasn’t up to a court to decide.

The ruling was a direct referendum for the NFLPA to actually negotiate different wording, rather than drag the federal court system into it each time. The CBA is upcoming, so you’d think the NFLPA would negotiate Goodell’s powers, but that probably won’t happen. It’s about the revenue sharing and health care benefits foremost.

A man that refuses to settle for chump change in relation to what he gets paid, is a man that is determined to prove his innocence.

This is a pure money grab.

Todd Bradley said:

A man that refuses to settle for chump change in relation to what he gets paid, is a man that is determined to prove his innocence.

This is a pure money grab.

Click to expand...

It is. She wanted to steal 2 million with that settlement. Was not going to fly with Brown.

Todd Bradley said:

A man that refuses to settle for chump change in relation to what he gets paid, is a man that is determined to prove his innocence.

This is a pure money grab.

Click to expand...

100% and the timing is seriously impeccable

NYCPATS4LIFE said:

I believe he has made over 70 million dollars in his career. We shall see what happens.

Click to expand...

Ok 70 mil that is what 40 after taxes, fees, dues, etc?

Todd Bradley said:

A man that refuses to settle for chump change in relation to what he gets paid, is a man that is determined to prove his innocence.

This is a pure money grab.

Click to expand...

2 mill isn’t chump change

I read through the filing again. I tried to go into this time with the mindset that Brown did it and then work my way out to see if I could make a compelling argument to...myself (anyone have anything for me to do?)

The biggest problem to me is the story leading up to the night she claims she was raped. It just doesn’t make sense.

If she did in fact have a document signed by Brown acknowledging a professional relationship, it just seems so incredibly strange that she would accept an invitation to a social gathering with Brown, drive him home, and then go inside to use the bathroom. What kind of impaired judgment would she have to use, and how would her long-term boyfriend really be okay with this, considering she had already expressed concerns about Brown’s behavior?

Another point is that if Brown did sign that document about their relationship going forward, it is also incredibly poor judgment if he invited her out. How can you not see this coming from a hundred miles away?

If she is telling the truth, or at least this is her perspective, I get the sense that she wasn’t entirely sure what she wanted with Brown, and whether or not she she wanted a sexual relationship with him. That this relationship was a gray area with mixed signals is the only thing that can plausibly explain their meetup (with the evidence available now, which isn’t much) after a legal document was exchanged to clarify their relationship.

AndyJohnson said:

2 mill isn’t chump change

Click to expand...

For you it isn’t.

Todd Bradley said:

For you it isn’t.

Click to expand...

For no one.

203Pat said:

Corey Dillion and Albert Haynesworth I would say were worse people.

Click to expand...

Wait. What?

Dillon has had personal problems not uncommon with people with similar backgrounds.

He had an unusual respect for the game, and he also cared about winning more than most - a big reason he came here.

He was treated like sh*t by local media, which is what they do, in 2005 when he didn't have another historically dominant season, and that he responded slightly less positively than Pete Carroll to it only indicates that he's a normal person.

If he’s truly innocent he shouldn’t settle for 2 million regardless of the subsequent legal fees.

AndyJohnson said:

For no one.

Click to expand...

Yeah I’m sure Antonio Brown isn’t going broke anytime soon.

If he was guilty he would’ve paid it. He’s not and he has no interest to give money to a liar defaming him.

NYCPATS4LIFE said:

Well that likely was the plan wasn’t it? It’s almost like revis all over again. Hopefully Brown learns a lot from being here and carries himself a lot better than he has.

Click to expand...

he meant one game, league steps in once she speaks with them tomorrow