Antonio Brown

I know this has already been posted but it's me just replying to it

Sports Illustrated’s Robert Klemko, who detailed Brown’s strange off-the-field behavior in a bombshell report published Monday, indicated Tuesday on WEEI’s “Dale & Keefe” that more criminal charges might be coming against the 31-year-old. “He has a history now of hiring people to do a job and then creating some sort of division when the pay is due and then not paying,” Klemko said, as transcribed by WEEI.com. “At some point, that becomes illegal. A lot of people (are) under verbal contracts with Antonio Brown because they don’t have any suspicion that he’s not going to pay them because he is worth this amount of money. “We did hear over the course of the reporting that there were a couple people considering criminal charges against Antonio Brown. We weren’t able to report on any of those specifically because they haven’t gathered all of their evidence and made the filings and all that. I think that is going to be coming in the next few weeks.”


How full of himself is this guy?

more criminal charges
There hasn't been one criminal charge against Brown

He has a history now of hiring people to do a job and then creating some sort of division when the pay is due and then not paying. At some point, that becomes illegal.
We did hear over the course of the reporting that there were a couple people considering criminal charges against Antonio Brown. We weren’t able to report on any of those specifically because they haven’t gathered all of their evidence and made the filings and all that. I think that is going to be coming in the next few weeks.”
What the f**k is this guy on? That's a monetary civil dispute. If people got arrested for not paying bills everyone in the world would have an arrest record. They could try to file criminal charges all they like, cops are going to tell them it's a civil matter.

Mack Herron said:

Click to expand...

Translation she's a lying *****.

Bleedthrough said:

Translation: we will **** the Patriots over around December/January

Click to expand...

Assuming Gordon stays clean would it matter? Clearly having him is a whole different beast but we have a whole unit lined up plus an elite defense.

Edelman
Gordon
Harry
Dorsett
Meyers

...
Monday’s lengthy meeting between the NFL and Britney Taylor was confirmed by a person familiar with the case, who said there was “nothing imminent” as of Tuesday afternoon on the league’s decision about whether to place Brown on paid leave.

It’s unclear whether that decision will be made this week. The person with knowledge of the deliberations said there is “no timeline” for the decision to be made because it depends on what the league’s investigation finds.

Click to expand...

https://beta.washingtonpost.com/spo...io-browns-accuser-hours-monday/?noredirect=on

JMC00 said:

How full of himself is this guy?

more criminal charges
There hasn't been one criminal charge against Brown

He has a history now of hiring people to do a job and then creating some sort of division when the pay is due and then not paying. At some point, that becomes illegal.
We did hear over the course of the reporting that there were a couple people considering criminal charges against Antonio Brown. We weren’t able to report on any of those specifically because they haven’t gathered all of their evidence and made the filings and all that. I think that is going to be coming in the next few weeks.”
What the f**k is this guy on? That's a monetary civil dispute. If people got arrested for not paying bills everyone in the world would have an arrest record. They could try to file criminal charges all they like, cops are going to tell them it's a civil matter.

Click to expand...

This is the type of story where the reporter seem more invested in the outcome rather than reporting the story. Brown can’t go to jail for not paying his bills.

Froob said:

He did suspend Ellliot though.

Click to expand...

That was before CBA negotiations started. Does anyone think Hill gets nothing or Gordon gets reinstated if this were year one of the current CBA?

Actual Pats Fan said:

Conservative majority would have backed Republican Goodell.

They, like the appeals court, would have ignored the fact that abusing one's authority based entirely upon personal prejudice, in this case against the Patriots, or for example blatant racism, is illegal.

Click to expand...

Back then, Anthony Kennedy was on the Court, and you never know with him...

Bradyking12 said:

Assuming Gordon stays clean would it matter? Clearly having him is a whole different beast but we have a whole unit lined up plus an elite defense.

Edelman
Gordon
Harry
Dorsett
Meyers

Click to expand...

It matters. Harry and Meyers are nothing but question marks until proven otherwise (no offense intended top them, but that's the reality of most rookie WRs). So, unless/until those two show out, we'd essentially just be replacing last year's Edelman/Dorsett/Gronk with Edelman/Dorsett/Gordon.

venecol said:

My understanding is that these provisions were always there in the CBA, but no other commissioner prior to Goodell had used it and abused it the way he has. Its all Goodell.

I may be wrong.

Click to expand...

You are not wrong, the basic terms of Article 46 have been in every CBA going back to the first one

Bradyking12 said:

Assuming Gordon stays clean would it matter? Clearly having him is a whole different beast but we have a whole unit lined up plus an elite defense.

Edelman
Gordon
Harry
Dorsett
Meyers

Click to expand...

Please stop it with Harry over AB you can't be serious.

PatsFan2 said:

Please stop it with Harry over AB you can't be serious.

Click to expand...

OP never said Harry is better than Brown.

Bledsoehasaring said:

You maybe right. But I think given the fact there is no criminal charges it makes it easier to release a statement saying that the nfl will take a wait and see approach as the legal process plays out. It’s a terrible precedent. What happens if some nut files a civil lawsuits before a Super Bowl and it turns out to be a false allegation months later?

Click to expand...

Do you really think Goodell or the other Jets loyalists in the NFL front office are capable of thinking of how decisions today influence future decision? They have no principles. They are guided by a wet finger to the wind or being swayed by those whispering in their ears. If they were truly principled and smart, we would have seen evidence prior to this. I can't think of any such consistency.

Mack Herron said:

Click to expand...

So glad it's over for now so AB can concentrate on Football.

dreighver said:

OP never said Harry is better than Brown.

Click to expand...

I know that.

MassPats38 said:

The amusing question here will be if the NFL intends to investigate every unsworn allegation against a player facing a civil tort claim of some sort. The smart play would be no police report, no video of the incident, then leave it to the legal process to sort out. I don't expect he will be intelligent. From there, he takes his first step down the slippery slope and finds the NFL investigators subpoenaed and deposed for every conflict that arises with a NFL player - current or former.

Click to expand...

Good post, but don't you think he has attorneys advising him to avoid doing that?

Sure, the public and social pressure is one thing, but this would make no sense exactly because of what you say. I assume most men would not agree with this, for sure the players won't. The CBA is coming up. We shall see.

PatsFan2 said:

IF Roger takes action into his own hands and do the unthinkable *puts AB on the Exempt list* We know it couldn't be indefinite and we would have AB back.

Click to expand...

It won't be indefinite, but it can immediately followed by a standard (i.e. without pay, not involving the exempt list) suspension once the investigation is finished.

Mack Herron said:

Click to expand...

If true i'd imagine the accuser didn't have definitive evidence for the nfl or else it wouldn't be "no timeline" they would have immediately put him on the exempt list. When that video of Hunt was released he was placed on the exempt list within hours.

JJC said:

Do you really think Goodell or the other Jets loyalists in the NFL front office are capable of thinking of how decisions today influence future decision? They have no principles. They are guided by a wet finger to the wind or being swayed by those whispering in their ears. If they were truly principled and smart, we would have seen evidence prior to this. I can't think of any such consistency.

Click to expand...

No but I think the players union will have a say. I know godell rules with an incompetent iron fist but he is treading a little more lightly right now cause new contract negations with the union are upcoming. A serious false step would put him and the nfl in a weaken spot for those negotiations. If this happened two years ago I believe Antonio might already be suspended but not this year.

PatsFan2 said:

So glad it's over for now so AB can concentrate on Football.

Click to expand...

????
"No timeline" doesn't mean "might be weeks, if ever". It means "we're not going to tell you when". It could be Thursday. Or, yes, it could be weeks.

They're going to want at least a couple of days to think it over I bet and (since this is Goodell and he doesn't care about fairness) gauge the public sentiment. Also, I can imagine that there's an in-house conflict between "we have to look good to the public" and "This isn't a great time to piss off the NFLPA".

Bledsoehasaring said:

You maybe right. But I think given the fact there is no criminal charges it makes it easier to release a statement saying that the nfl will take a wait and see approach as the legal process plays out. It’s a terrible precedent. What happens if some nut files a civil lawsuits before a Super Bowl and it turns out to be a false allegation months later?

Click to expand...

The "christine blasey ford" play.